The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 07/27/2010 Item #12AAgenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 1 of 124 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to approve a Resolution ordering and calling a Referendum Election to be held on November 2, 2010, within Collier County, to determine if the electors of Collier County, Florida, approve the issuance of Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds in an amount not exceeding 517,000,000.00, payable from an additional ad valorem tax not exceeding .1 mill, which bonds shall mature no later than five years from issuance, to be issued in one or more series, in order to finance the acquisition of approximately 22 acres of land adjacent to the Naples Zoo at Caribbean Gardens, for the purpose of expanding the Zoo. OBJECTIVE: To obtain the Board of County Commissioners (Board's) approval of a Resolution ordering and calling a Referendum Election to be held on November 2, 2010, within Collier County, to determine if the electors approve the issuance of Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds in an amount not exceeding $17,000,000.00, payable from an additional ad valorem tax not exceeding .1 mill, which bonds shall mature no later than five years from issuance, to be issued in one or more series, in order to finance the acquisition of +/- 22 acres adjacent to the Naples Zoo at Caribbean Gardens, for the purpose of expanding the zoo. CONSIDERATIONS: The Naples Zoo at Caribbean Gardens has been an important public, recreational, educational and economic resource in Collier County for many years, attracting both Collier County residents and visitors. Collier County obtained ownership of the Naples Zoo property, plus adjacent property, through a November 4, 2004 Referendum Election. At that time, a majority of Collier County electors approved an increase in ad valorem taxes in order to acquire these lands and assure the continued operation of the Naples Zoo at Caribbean Gardens. At its May 25, 2010 meeting, the Board gave its consent to a request by the Trust for Public Land to informally poll Collier County residents as to their interest in financing the Naples Zoo's proposal to acquire additional land north of its current location. The polling was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies and the "key findings" of the survey of Collier County residents (attached) was presented to Board on June 22, 2010. Overall the survey found that a majority of Collier County residents (55 %) would support a bond proposal to fund the purchase of additional lands for the Naples Zoo. Based on this report, the Board approved placing this issue on the November 2, 2010 ballot. The Board also directed that the proposed Resolution ordering and calling a Referendum Election accurately reflect the amount of Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds based on the property's appraisal(s). FISCAL IMPACT: Adoption of the Resolution will incur a nominal referendum cost at the November General Election. If a referendum is approved by the voters and implemented by the Board, ad valorem tax revenues would be required to finance the Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 2 of 124 LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The proposed Resolution was prepared by the County Attorney and is legally sufficient for Board action. — JAK RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approves the attached Resolution ordering and calling a Referendum Election to be held on November 2, 2010, within Collier County, to determine if the electors approve the issuance of not exceeding $17,000,000.00 Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, payable from an additional ad valorem tax not exceeding A mill, which bonds shall mature no later than five years from issuance, to be issued in one or more series, in order to finance the acquisition of +/- 22 acres adjacent to the Naples Zoo at Caribbean Gardens, for the purpose of expanding the zoo. PREPARED BY: Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney 2 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 3 of 124 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIOP Item Number: 12A Item Summary: Recommendation to approve a Resolution ordering and calling a Referendum Election to be held on November 2, 2010, within Collier County, to determine if the electors of Collier County, Florida, approve the issuance of Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds in an amount not exceeding $17,000,000 00, payable from an additional ad valorem tax not exceeding .1 mill, which bonds shall mature no later than five years from issuance, to be issued in one or more series, in order to finance the acquisition of approximately 22 acres of land adjacent to the Naples Zoo at Caribbean Gardens, for the purpose of expanding the zoo. Meeting Date: 7127/2010 9:00:00 AM Prepared By Jeff Klatzkow County Attorney Date 7/14/2010 3:38:25 PM Approved By Jeff Klatzkow County Attorney Date 7/1412010 3:46 PM Approved By ""- OMB Coordinator Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 711512010 10:26 AM Approved By Randy Greenwald Management /Budget Analyst Date Office of Management & Budget Office Of Management & Budget 7115/2010 11:23 AM Approved By Leo E. Ochs, Jr. County Manager Date County Managers Office County Managers Office 712112010 8:30 AM Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 4 of 124 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ORDERING AND CALLING A REFERENDUM ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 2, 2010, WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY, TO DETERMINE IF THE ELECTORS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT EXCEEDING SEVENTEEN MILLION DOLLARS ($17,000,000.00), PAYABLE FROM AN ADDITIONAL AD VALOREM TAX NOT EXCEEDING .1 MILL, WHICH BONDS SHALL MATURE NO LATER THAN FIVE (5) YEARS FROM ISSUANCE, TO BE ISSUED IN ONE OR MORE SERIES, IN ORDER TO FINANCE THE ACQUISITION OF APPROXIMATELY 22 ACRES OF LAND ADJACENT TO THE NAPLES ZOO AT CARIBBEAN GARDENS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPANDING THE ZOO; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on November 2, 2004, a majority of Collier County voters approved a referendum to increase taxes in order to raise $40,000,000 to acquire property which included the Caribbean Gardens and Naples Zoo (the "Zoo "); and WHEREAS, in furtherance of this referendum, by virtue of a Warranty Deed dated December 19, 2005, recorded at OR 3950, Pg. 2584 in the Official Records of Collier County, Collier County is the owner of the Zoo; and WHEREAS, the County has the opportunity to expand the Zoo by acquiring approximately 22 adjacent acres, which has an appraised value of $17,000,000; and WHEREAS, expanding the Zoo will create new, natural, humane habitats for animals, new and expanded exhibit areas, and is expected to increase tourism and employment; and WHEREAS, the Board wishes to condition its decision on purchasing this land on the approval of the electors of Collier County for the issuance of limited tax general obligation bonds not exceeding seventeen million dollars ($17,000,000), payable from an ad valorem tax not exceeding .1 mill, which bonds shall mature no later than five years from issuance, to be issued in one or more series, in order to finance the acquisition of this property; and Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 5 of 124 WHEREAS, Section 100.211 of the Florida Statutes authorizes County Commissioners to "call a bond referendum ... to decide whether a majority of electors participating are in favor of the issuance of bonds in the county..." and to order the bond referendum to take place by resolution; and WHEREAS, the ballot language for the bond referendum needs to be adopted and transmitted to the Collier County Supervisor of Elections; and WHEREAS, the Board finds that it is lawful and is in the public interest to order the bond referendum, to be placed on the November 2, 2010, ballot for the General Election, and direct the Collier County Supervisor of Elections to take appropriate action with respect to this Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION I. Findines. It is found and declared that: (A) This Resolution is adopted pursuant to applicable provisions of law. (B) It is desired to ask the electors of the County if they desire the Board of County Commissioners to authorize issuance of not exceeding $17,000,000 of bonds payable from an annual levy of an additional ad valorem tax not exceeding .1 mill, which bonds shall mature no later than 5 years from date of issuance, to help fund the acquisition of approximately 22 acres of land adjacent to the Naples Zoo to expand the Zoo and create new, natural, humane habitats for animals and new and expanded exhibit areas. (C) The expenditures authorized serve a paramount public purpose and benefit. (D) It is in the best interest of the County to issue such bonds as are necessary or desirable to finance this project as heretofore described. (E) The recitations of the preamble are hereby adopted as findings herein. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 6 of 124 SECTION II. Referendum Election Ordered. A referendum election be and is hereby ordered to be held in Collier County, Florida, on November 2, 2010, to determine whether issuance of limited tax general obligation bonds payable from additional ad valorem tax for the aforesaid purposes shall be approved by the electors of the County. SECTION I1I. Voting. The polls will be open at the voting places on the date of such election from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m, on the same day. All qualified electors residing within the County shall be entitled and permitted to vote at such an election as hereinafter provided. The referendum election shall be held and conducted in the place or places prescribed by law for general elections in the County. The referendum election shall be held and conducted in the manner prescribed by law for holding general elections in the County, and the County Manager and Supervisor of Elections are directed to take all necessary measures to conduct the election in all manner required by law. The returns shall be properly canvassed by the County Canvassing Board to be comprised by law and all procedures and requirements of state law and other applicable law shall be complied with for the purpose of conducting the computation of ballots and completion of election procedures. SECTION IV. Ballots. The ballots to be used in the referendum election shall be on plain white paper, or otherwise permitted electronic format, with a written description of the proposed issuance of the bonds and levy of the tax, and which will provide facilities for qualified electors to vote for or against the issuance of the Bonds paid for by the levy of the aforementioned tax. Voting equipment shall be used at such referendum election as the Supervisor of Elections deems appropriate and as permitted by law. The question appearing on the ballots to be used in the referendum election shall be in substantially the following form: Agenda Item No. 12A July 27. 2010 Page 7 of 124 BALLOT ISSUANCE OF BONDS BY COLLIER COUNTY TO FINANCE NAPLES ZOO EXPANSION SHALL COLLIER COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED TO ISSUE BONDS UP TO SEVENTEEN MILLION DOLLARS PAYABLE FROM AN ADDITIONAL AD VALOREM TAX NOT EXCEEDING .1 MILL, WHICH BONDS WILL MATURE NO LATER THAN FIVE YEARS FROM ISSUANCE, AND BEARING INTEREST NOT TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM LAWFUL RATE, TO ACQUIRE APPROXIMATELY 22 ACRES OF LAND ADJACENT TO THE NAPLES ZOO IN ORDER TO EXPAND THE ZOO? YES (FOR BONDS) NO (AGAINST BONDS) SECTION V. Absentee and Early Voting. Adequate provision shall be made for absentee and early voting. Ballots shall be used suitable for absentee voting at the election. The form of ballots to be used in the election for absentee voters shall be in substantially the form set out above and in accordance with the Florida Election Code. SECTION VI. Results of Election. Returns of the votes cast at the election shall be made to and canvassed by the Canvassing Board and the Canvassing Board shall declare the results and certify the same to the County Manager to be recorded in the minutes of the County. If a majority of the votes cast at such election in respect to the issuance of the bonds shall be "YES" (For Bonds), such bond issuance shall be approved, and bonds shall be issued by the County pursuant to the terms and Agenda Item No, 12A July 27, 2010 Page 8 of 124 provisions of applicable law, ordinances, or resolutions. Regardless of the results of the election, the Supervisor of Elections is hereby directed to submit such results to the Department of State pursuant to Section 100.351, Florida Statutes. SECTION VII. Publication of Resolution and Notice At least 30 days' notice of the election shall be published in the Naples Daily News, or any other newspaper of general circulation within the County, at least twice, once in the fifth week and once in the third week prior to the week in which the election is held, in the manner provided in Section 100.342, Florida Statutes. The notice of election shall be in substantially the following form: NOTICE OF BOND REFERENDUM COUNTY OF COLLIER, FLORIDA, ON NOVEMBER 2, 2010 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A COUNTY OF COLLIER, FLORIDA, BOND REFERENDUM will be held on the 2nd day of November, 2010, in the County of Collier, Florida, for the purpose of determining whether limited tax general obligation bonds of the County issued in one or more series, shall be issued in the aggregate principal amount of not exceeding $17,000,000, payable from an additional ad valorem tax not exceeding .1 mill, bearing interest, payable at such interest rate or rates not exceeding the maximum rate permitted by law and redeemable as shall be determined at or before the time of sale thereof, maturing over a period of not to exceed five years from the date of issuance of the bonds, to finance the purchase of approximately 22 acres of land adjacent to the Naples Zoo for the purpose of expanding the Zoo. The polls will be open at the voting places on the date of referendum election from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on the same day, all as provided in Resolution No. 2010- , adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier, Florida on July _, 2010, which is a matter of public record. All qualified electors residing within the County of Collier shall be entitled, qualified and permitted to vote at such election. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 9 of 124 The County of Collier, Florida Fred W. Coyle, Chairman Board of County Commissioners SECTION VIII. Effective Date. This Resolution shall go into effect immediately upon its passage and adoption. THIS RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote favoring same this day 2010. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK 0 , Deputy Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA to FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN Agenda Item No. 12A AgendiiLI6 .43� p, �j7fJ 0 0+ Page 1 of 4 PUBLIC; OPINION STRATEGIES TO: INTERESTED PARTIES FROM: LORI WEIGEL, PARTNER RE: KEY FINDINGS FROM A SURVEY OF COLLIER COUNTY RESIDENTS DATE: JUNE 15, 2010 Public Opinion Strategies is pleased to present these key findings from a statistically valid telephone survey of 300 voters throughout Collier County on June 7 -9, 2010. The margin of error associated with a sample of this type is + 5.66 %. Interviews were distributed proportionally throughout the county and are demographically representative of the electorate. Overall, the survey found that a majority of Collier County residents express a willingness to increase taxes in order to fund the purchase of 22 acres of land to allow for the expansion of the Naples Zoo. Fifty -five percent (55 %) say that if the election were being held today they would support such a $30 million bond proposal, while 41 % would be opposed. Voters point to personal and community connections to the Zoo as the main rationale in support of this proposal, while opposition is mostly focused on whether or not this is an appropriate time for such an investment given the state of the economy. After simulating some of the give and take which could occur on this issue, voters become even more supportive with 64 %o indicating they would vote Yes in favor of the zoo expansion bond proposal. .Among the specific key findings of the survey are: • Voters are very positive about how things are going in Collier County. Nearly two - thirds (64 %) say that things in Collier County are headed in the right direction, while only 21 % say they are off on the wrong track. This positive assessment is shared across the county and with most key sub- groups. • A majority of 55% indicate support for a bond proposal to acquire land foe the Naples Zoo to expand. Respondents were read the following proposal and asked whether they would vote Yes in favor or No against it: "Shall Collier County be author•i ed to acquire approximately 22 acres ofland adjacent to the Naples Zoo for new natural, humane habitats for animals and to expand exhibit areas, by issuing bonds up to thirty million dollars payable f om ad valorem taxes not exceeding.I (zero point one) mill for a period of 5 years, and bearing interest at a rate not exceeding the maximum lawfid rate, with annual public audits of how the %unds are spent? " Again, 55% indicate support while 41 % voice opposition. The intensity of these sentiments is evenly divided between those "definitely" voting Yes (24 %) and those "definitely" voting No (22 %). -t - Agenda Itemr2�No. 12A Ageviql, Page 2 of 4 ° • When asked about their reasons for the response, residents who indicate support for the proposal explain that they see this measure as a way to... • Improve a community attraction for a better experience, a good place for families, and as a tourist attraction that creates revenue; • Allow for larger habitats for the zoo animals; • Preserve this land from housing and commercial development; and • Benefit them personally or other residents who visit the zoo • Conversely, respondents who initially say "No" tell us a number of reasons with the main ones being that... o They do not want anew tax or think it is a good time to increase taxes; • There are other things to spend taxes on; • The zoo is fine as it is; and • The zoo should finance an expansion not county government. • Notably, county residents are overwhelmingly positive in their view of the Naples Zoo. More than four -in -five say they have a favorable impression of the Zoo, with 58% very favorable, A mere 7% say they hold an unfavorable impression of the Zoo. Among the 44% who have visited the Zoo in the last year, they are even more positive (89% favorable, 6% unfavorable). • Support for the bond proposal to expand the Naples Zoo remains solid once voters hear how this tax increase would affect them. When respondents are informed that this would increase taxes by $11.25 per year for each one hundred thousand dollars in assessed home value for five years, 55% indicate they would vote Yes in favor of the proposal, while 41% oppose it. Moreover, after bearing a_ number _of rationales both for and against this or000sal, sunnort increases significantly. Fully 64% indicate support after hearing a number of pro- and con- statements and then being asked to consider the proposal once more. Just 35% oppose the proposal after hearing more. Importantly, the intensity of support is much stronger by the end of the survey, as 38 0i6 say they would "definitely" vote Yes while 241/a say they would "definitely" vote No. In Conclusion Collier County residents express a willingness to increase taxes in order to acquire land to allow for an expansion of the Naples Zoo. That support remains solid after hearing the personal financial impact it would have on property owners, and increases significantly after hearing a number of rationales for and against the proposal. 2- Skew\ g t3 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 12 of 124 June 22, 2010 UPDATE FROM THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND REGARDING THE RESULTS OF THEIR POLL TO DETERMINE THE LEVEL OF SUPPORT FOR A BALLOT MEASURE IN NOVEMBER FOR EXPANSION OF THE NAPLES ZOO - ACCEPTED THE RESULTS OF THE POLL - APPROVED; RESOLUTION TO BE ADVERTISED AND BROUGHT BACK TO A FUTURE BCC MEETING — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to Item 9B on your agenda, which is an update from the Trust for Public Land regarding the results of their poll to determine the level of support for a ballot measure in November of expansion of the Naples Zoo. This item was placed on the agenda by Commissioner Fiala. MR. TETZLAFF: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. It's David Tetzlaff, Naples Zoo. I'm also going to hopefully navigate through the PowerPoint for you because John Garrison, Trust for Public Lands, had, unfortunately, a family emergency at his house. So I guess we can start by going through the PowerPoint that TPL arranged. This was done by a polling firm in Colorado. And this was 300 voters, and the margin of error is typical in these types of things, which is anywhere usually from 3 to 5- something percent. It was done two weeks ago over a two -day period, and supposedly it was randomly selected people across Collier County. You can see the overall mood of the county, despite concerns over the economy, is in -- going in the right direction, so I guess that's good news to some people. This is -- I believe you could almost call this draft bout (sic) language, if this does go to referendum at some point. And you can see the $30 million figure, which I realize that myself, and everybody in the room realizes, that there's probably no better time to buy land Page 114 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 13 of 124 June 22, 2010 than now, and that was simply worst -case scenario, high end. I don't know if there's anybody that thinks the property is worth that much, but that was worst -case scenario. So basically the survey was based on that worst -case scenario figure which, hopefully, for all our sakes, will be less. This is the first figure that we need to keep in mind, and that is the majority of the voters, 55 percent, would say yes to purchasing that 22 acres north of the zoo and, of course, 41 percent will say no. Now, mind you, this is at the very beginning of this survey, and we'll have a different figure at the end. Reasons for a yes vote. It's a way to improve the community, because the zoo is a community resource, would allow to expand all our themed areas that we plan in the future, and would preserve this land from housing and commercial development, and it would either benefit them personally or the other residents who would visit the zoo. It's also interesting, and hopefully we plan to use this for our marketing efforts, 82 percent of the people like the zoo. So that was good for us to know. Reasons for a no vote. Voters who oppose this say that they don't want a new tax or think it's not a good time to increase taxes, they believe there's other things to spend tax money on, they think the zoo is fine as it is, and they feel the zoo should finance our expansion, not the voters. Now, after people have heard a number of issues, you can see this does change somewhat. Initially it was 55 percent were in support of this. After more information, 64 percent of the people would support this. And mind you, this is without really a lot of education. If this did go to referendum, we'd basically have five months to educate the voters and let them decide. Does any of the commissioners have any questions on that particular item from TPL? Page 115 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 14 of 124 June 22, 2010 (No response.) MR. TETZLAFF: Okay. Barring none, I had a couple of my own comments if you would indulge me. Just based on a lot of questions and comments I'm getting personally, why are we doing this? Well, the zoo is a community resource for everyone. We are a melting pot. If you come to the zoo at any one of our 12 free days, you'll see everything from people struggling to make car payments to Jaguars and Mercedes and BMWs coming in, so we are that melting pot for everyone. And for a lot of our zoo guests, even though South Florida's a great place to go out and view nature in the wild, for a lot of people, the zoo is their only contact with nature. Of course, why not? Well, it is a buyer's market. Land will never be more affordable, and if the zoo did not explore this opportunity and land is lost for a commercial /residential development, we'd probably be criticized in the future for not exploring this opportunity, so we have a concern of that. And six years ago when we were here talking about saving the actual zoo itself, people wanted a bigger and better zoo. This is just a way to continue and fulfill that desire. The zoo's increased popularity since the historic '04 referendum proves that the public /private partnership does work. In the last five years, over a million dollars of improvements have been made, and if anyone has not been to the zoo in the last few years, you just haven't been. And mind you, if this does go to vote and you haven't been to the zoo lately, please come out on that monthly Saturday. First Saturday of the month is free. People ask, well, why doesn't the zoo just buy it itself? Right now there's about 220 accredited or AZA zoos across the country. Most do not own the land that they sit on. Zoos are simply not in the, what we call, dirt business, buying land. Zoos generate enough income Page 116 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 15 of 124 June 22, 2010 through basically your memberships, your tickets; fundraisers are what make new exhibits and opportunities for our visiting guests. And a lot of zoos actually get an annual millage every single year for operating, and Naples Zoo is fortunate that we've run in the black now for 41 years off memberships and tickets. The vote six years ago was for land. It was not for operations, and that still seems to be a matter of confusion with some people. So we're not asking for operating. We're only asking to look at a rare opportunity to grow the physical space of the zoo. This opportunity would increase the zoo land by 50 percent, would make a 65 -acre zoo. All of it would be on public land. And this potential growth would allow us to expand all the themed areas we're planning on for the future. And mind you the zoo, by the TDC's model, brings in 25 to $27 million of economic impact. A bigger zoo would draw more people and increase that benefit to other local businesses. In this case, the zoo, the Trust for Public Lands, the zoo board, simply asks you to repeat your'04 decision and let the voters decide on this matter. Thank you for your consideration. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you, David. Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think it's time to be asking the voters for any increase of taxes, no matter what it is. People are making choices on whether to put groceries on the table or gas in their car. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So you don't want to make -- have them make a choice on this one either, huh? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I know that we've -- at many times we've just said, well, we don't want to make that decision, we Page 117 Agenda Item No, 12A July 27, 2010 Page 16 of 124 June 22, 2010 want you to make that decision, which is what we did with the last time. And the zoo, we said, if you want the zoo and you want to pay for it, that's good, but you to have to tell us by your vote. And the people did. We took out a bond issue, I guess, for ten years. We were very fortunate; we paid it off in four years. And so you saw that released from your tax bills after four years. I hope everybody noticed it. Of course, it was so small, I don't think anybody noticed it in the first place. But anyway -- so I'm certainly willing to let the taxpayers decide for themselves if they would like to expand the zoo. This is prime property. It's the last of the piece of that land, and I would like to see it go to the zoo rather than go to development or -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are you making a motion? COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll make a motion. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, And I'll second it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala's right. We've brought this up a number of times before. We dealt with Conservation Collier; we dealt with the zoo before. There's an issue coming up on the ballot that has to do with the commercial center out in Golden Gate Estates. I mean, what better -- whenever there's a lot of controversy going on and you can't really get a grip on it, especially something like the zoo here, why not put it out there and see what can be done? I have no problems with it, and I can support Commissioner Fiala on this. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: May you make the decision and tell us what you want to do. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. I just personally think it's a terrible time to put another item on the agenda, but -- it's a big risk, but I think if you can get the facts out and make sure people understand Page 118 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 17 of 124 June 22, 2010 what's going on -- there are so many issues on the ballot right now that it's going to be so confusing. The tendency is going to be for people to just say, no, I'm not voting for any of these things without really taking a look at each of them individually. But in any event, we've got a motion on the floor. Motion by Commissioner Fiala, second by Commissioner Halas to approve placing it on the ballot and let the citizens decide. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 4 -1, with Commissioner Henning dissenting. Yes, County Attorney? MR. KLATZKOW: We need a resolution to send it out to the Supervisor of Elections. We've prepared one we can give you now to review, or we can bring it back at the next agenda, but it has to go to the Supervisor sometime in mid August in order to get there. It's whatever you want to do. We have a resolution ready to go if you'd like to take a quick look at it and approve it, or we can bring it back at the next meeting. CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're going to hand it out to us right now? MR. KLATZKOW: I could put it on the overhead. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think you ought to wait and Page 119 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 18 of 124 June 22, 2010 put it on an advertised public meeting, personally. MR. KLATZKOW: It's your prerogative. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do you see any problems? MR. KLATZKOW: No. We advertised -- this matter itself was advertised for approval or to be put onto the ballot. This is just the administrative paperwork to get it there. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's see it. MR. KLATZKOW: It's just two pages. CHAIRMAN COYLE: When are we going to get the appraisal done? MR. TETZLAFF: It's in progress, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do we have any idea when it will be available? MR. TETZLAFF: A week or two I'm told. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm reluctant to put $30 million in here. I know that's not an obligation, but we're saying to the people that we're willing to pay $30 million for this, and I think we need to have something substantive for the voters to actually vote on and to understand. MR. KLATZKOW: We can bring it back along with the appraisals. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. You could get it on our July 27th agenda, right? That would give us plenty of time. MR. OCHS: I believe August 24th is the deadline date for the Supervisor of Elections to have the final ballot language. MR. KLATZKOW: We just knew you had a really -- you've got a really big agenda next time out. We were -- this was intended so -- just to reduce it a little bit, but we can bring it back if that's what you'd like. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. But we've got a couple of days -- we can extend our agenda in July if we need to. It's a little more difficult to do it now. Page 120 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 19 of 124 June 22, 2010 Commissioner Fiala, I think you were first. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just wanted to say I agreed with you on that, and I didn't want the seller to think that we were -- we would want to pay $30 million, you know. I want the appraised value, and if it's 22 million and that's as high as we're going, then they know it's not going any higher than that, so I agree with you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would like it to be advertised on a future agenda. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then that's where we're going, it appears, and we'll have the appraisals available at that time so we can give the tax holders a more -- taxpayers a more accurate indication of what they're voting for. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Because it's not good to just throw out information that is not necessarily accurate and expect people to make an informed decision. Okay. All in favor, please signi- -- did we already vote on this? I thought we did, yes. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, we are not voting on this particular item, that is this language? MR. KLATZKOW: No. We're bringing that back to you, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So you bring it back to us next time, okay? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, very well. Where does that bring us? Item # 10B DIRECTION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER REGARDING A Page 121 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 20 of 124 URBAN REALTY SOLUTIONS V I- INWOOD GILIi[Rl. JR., M A I i;AI I CI RI I I IID GIN I RAI_41'M%III H R1e40 APPRAISAL REPORT OF 21.99 + /- Acres of Vacant Land Southeast Quadrant of Golden Gate Parkway At Goodlette -Frank Road North Naples, Collier County, Florida 34105 URS —10652 FOR Mr. Kevin Mooney Mr. John Garrison The Trust for Public Land 306 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 r I'�",'I!iI I[ I'll INUL AIMI.- IAA,Pk I Ci IDAJ 1-13!(, • 11111 "IC)AI li1.,81- oi • 11�Sin,i11 E S!-�8: TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal.... Certificate of Valuation Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 21 of 124 ExecutiveSummary ........................................................................................... ..............................1 Subject Maps and Photographs ........................................................................ ............................... 4 Purpose, Intended Use and Date of Appraisal ................................................. ............................... 7 Scopeof Appraisal ........................................................................................... ............................... 8 ValuationDefinitions ....................................................................................... ............................... 9 LegalDescription ........................................................................................... ............................... I 1 Five -Year History of Subject Property .......................................................... ............................... 13 Market Area: Location, Description and Trend ............................................. ............................... 14 Real Property Assessments and Taxes ........................................................... ............................... 22 Land Use and Zoning Classification .............................................................. ............................... 23 SiteDescription .............................................................................................. ............................... 26 Marketability and Estimated Marketing Period ............................................. ............................... 29 Highest and Best Use Anal ysis ...................................................................... ............................... 32 Introduction to the Appraisal Process ............................................................ ............................... 35 Sales Comparison Approach .......................................................................... ............................... 37 ComparableLand Sales ............................................................................. ............................... 38 Analysis of Comparable Land Sales .......................................................... ............................... 51 Reconciliation of Land Val ue .................................................................... ............................... 56 Reconciliation and Final Value Estimate ....................................................... ............................... 57 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions .......................................................... ............................... 58 AppraiserQualifications ..................................................................................... ............................... Addendum........................................................................................................... ............................... Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 22 of 124 URBAN REALTY SOLUTIONS 11 unwroou cu.htRT, JR- MAI >IA! F-C -FOCI If UD ctNI KAt. AITRAISLf. K/_114() July 10, 2010 Mr. John Garrison Mr. Kevin Mooney The Trust for Public Land 306 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL 32301 RE: The Bridges at Gordon River 21.99 + /- Acres Vacant Land Southeast Quadrant Golden Gate Parkway and Goodlette -Frank Road Naples, Florida 34105 Dear Mr. Mooney and Mr. Garrison: As requested, a detailed investigation, analysis and appraisal have been made of the market value of the fee simple estate of the referenced property, in as -is condition as of the appraisal date. The subject property was recently annexed into the City of Naples and proposed for development of a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC). Subsequent to annexation, and subject to a variety of conditions, the site was approved for development of 350 independent living units and a health care unit containing a maximum number of assisted or skilled care nursing beds equal to 25% of the number of independent living units, or 87 additional units. The site had recently been under contract for sale, subject to annexation and rezoning. However, likely due to deteriorating market conditions, the buyer elected not to continue the contract. Our market investigation revealed three similar facilities marketing new units, Moorings Park, the Arlington at Naples and the Terraces at Bonita Beach. Although sales are not as brisk as in years past, and achieving presale goals is taking longer than expected, these developments are achieving new contracts. However, with the uncertainty of the recession, the consensus appears to be that development of the subject would best be timed for some three to four years in the future. We also considered the suitability of the site for commercial purposes. Although commercial development may not be the preferred development of the site, the location is well suited for commercial development. While the market is slow for retail development, major companies, such as "big box" retailers remain active. Within the last few days we were advised of a pending contract on a site just southeast of downtown, underscoring market activity. Value for commercial purposes could be higher than for residential purposes, but would require a zoning change. We have not had an opportunity to explore the possibility of rezoning with city officials, but will gladly do so. SWSIR ;TN ATE I,LIKF; ;AA ACE. -11�; CA. i1�1 .P _;IoLi -I�Ib ♦ ihlif i�.!AI al, ° ?i, 1 ;<i4l • i u i ^.t!:.f .�I.�S'o-1s(h, Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 23 of 124 Mr. John Garrison Mr. Kevin Mooney July 10, 2010 Page two Returning to residential development, as the market does not support immediate development of a CCRC, the likely buyer in the near tern will be a land speculator, an investor, who would acquire and bold the property until such time as development is supported by the market. We provided a draft of an appraisal under these circumstances about two weeks ago, but have continued to analyze the market and appraisal methodology. In regard to the latter, as majority of our recent assignments have been of properties under distressed circumstances, we discussed methodology with review appraisers for the Department of the Interior and for major banks. We note that, for federal acquisitions, a specific marketing period is not required, yet adjustments for changing market conditions must be considered. We also spoke with a feasibility analyst for a national retirement and CCRC operator familiar with the Naples market. As a result of these conversations we believe our analysis, which deferred the retail purchase for three years, and discounting that amount to a present value, remains appropriate, although the three year term may be debatable. Of course, all projections are difficult and subject to unforeseen events. In this current analysis we added a direct comparison analysis, considered both, and rounded our estimate of value slightly upward. Based on the pricing of comparable sales and supported by the previous sales contract on the property, we estimated retail value, then deferred the purchase three years into the future, allowing for a new contract in approximately two years plus an additional year to obtain approvals and achieve presale commitments. During this time, the owner will incur annual costs of real estate taxes, plus payment of insurance and other carrying costs, which we have budgeted at $50,000 per year. The cash flows are discounted to a present value at the yield rate required by land investors in the market. The average Land Development yield rate as published by Korpacz /PriceWaterhouseCoopers in their Second Quarter 2010 market survey was 21.25 %, within a range of 15.0% to 30.0 %. We also know of Florida investment funds whose target rate is 20.0 %, which we will use in our analysis. We estimated land value at $85,000 per unit times 350 units, or $29,750,000. This amount is deferred three years, and deductions are made for holding costs, such as taxes and insurance. These calculations result in the following. Mr. John Garrison Mr. Kevin Mooney July 10, 2010 Page three Present Value Calculations Year Future Sale Taxes Holding Costs Net Cash Flow Yield Factor Present Value Rounded 1 2 3 $ 29,750,000 $ (155,737) $ (160,409) (165,222) $ (50,000) $ (51,500) $ (51045) S (205,737) S (211,909) S 29,968,267 20.00% $ 17,024,140 $ 17,000,000 Agenda Item No, 12A July 27. 2010 Page 24 of 124 Based on the above and other analyses, and as described in the accompanying appraisal report, we conclude that market value of the subject parcel, as of the appraisal date of July 9, 2010, is approximately $17,000,000. As to the holding period and timing of the deferral, please note that total discount in pricing is approximately 43 %. This is equivalent to approximately $360,000 per month, a significant amount. Included within the accompanying appraisal report are exhibits and documented data in support of the value conclusions. All material collected during our analysis has been retained in our files and is available for inspection upon request. As requested, we have prepared a complete appraisal and are submitting this appraisal in a summary narrative report. This appraisal has been prepared in compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, FIRREA and other governmental regulations, as well as the client's appraisal and reporting requirements. Please note that we provided appraisal services for this and adjacent property for the same clients in 2004 and 2005. The opportunity to have been of service is appreciated. If you have any questions or continents, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, Y f/ ✓lam ✓ r� ✓'i .�, f H. Linwood Gilbert, Jr., MAI State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ0940 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 25 of 124 URBAN REALTY SOLUTIONS I -1. LINtkOUD GILBLIki IR., MAI 51AI I CIKIitII D GLNI Ukl, APTIWSi:1, nle40 CERTIFICATE OF VALUATION This is to certify that, upon request for valuation by Mr. John Garrison and Mr. Kevin Mooney, The Trust for Public Land, we have personally inspected, collected and analyzed various data, and appraised the market value of the fee simple interest of the subject property, located southeast of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Goodlette -Frank Road, Naples, Collier County, Florida. We certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief. • The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are our personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. • We have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. • We have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. • Our engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. • Our compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the arnount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics & Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute, which include the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. This certificate is also a certification under Florida Real Estate License Law Chapter 475. • The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives F10 5 U UT H ST E R L I N G AV E N U E. TAM PA, F 10 RI DA 33 o09- -1511, • 11LE1111 NI �8G•E ?o -1808 • IALSIM!1F 813, ?3'o1 0ti Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 26 of 124 • We have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. Also, we made an inspection of the selected comparable properties. • No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person signing this certification. • As of the date of this report, H. Linwood Gilbert, Jr., MAI, has completed the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. • The undersigned appraiser, based on education, work experience and the previous appraisal of properties similar to the subject, is competent and qualified to appraise the property. • The undersigned appraiser has not performed any real estate service on this property in the preceding three years. This certificate is in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Standard Rule 2 -3 and with the Appraisal Institute's Supplemental Standards of Professional Practice. It is also a certification under Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board of the Division of Real Estate of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation. The reader should review the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, to which this analysis is subject, included at the end of the report. In our opinion, the fee simple estate of the subject property, known as The Bridges at Gordon River, located southeast of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Goodlette -Frank Road North, Naples, Collier County, Florida, had a market value, in as -is condition and as of the appraisal date of July 9, 2010, of approximately SEVENTEEN MILLION DOLLARS ($17,000,000). r. H. Linwood Gilbert, Jr., MAI State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ0900 "_URBAN REALTY SOLUTIONS Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 27 of 124 11. 1INWOOD GILBGRT, IR., MAI 51,Vf I - (-EILnfIrt) GIN I.AI APPRAISER 1ifi140 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Property Name: Site for Proposed CCRC to be named The Bridges at Gordon River Property Classification: Vacant Residential Land Address: Unplatted Location: Southeast quadrant of Golden Gate Parkway and Goodlette -Frank Road Municipal Jurisdiction: City of Naples — Recently annexed County: Collier Section, Township and Range: 27 / 49S / 25E Metropolitan Statistical Area: Naples, FL - MSA Property Ownership: Caribbean Venture of Naples, LLC Property Rights Appraised: Fee Simple Legal Description: Too lengthy for reproduction. Please see report. Purpose of Appraisal: Estimate market value as -is Appraisal /Inspection Dates: July 9, 2010 Date of Report: July 10, 2010 Report Type: Summary report Intended User of Appraisal: The Client and Collier County Government Intended Use of Appraisal: Assist in negotiating a purchase agreement 510 MIU] 11 STERLING AVENUE. TANIPA. FLORIDA 331,1)9 -•131(i • IELFPIiI) %I R;13� 8 h 1308 • IA(- SIMILE t313i 876 -1306 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 28 gf 124 County Identification Nos.: 13805000140; 13805000124; 13805000108; 13805000085; 13805000069; 13805000043; 13805000001; 13805000027 Property Assessment 2009: $13,546,224 Tax Millage Rate 2009: 10.8537 mils Ad Valorem Taxes 2009: $160,553.92 Non - Ad Valorem Taxes: $0.00 Total Property Taxes: $160,553.92 Gross $155,737.31 Net (less early payment discount) Neighborhood: The subject neighborhood surrounds the commercial corridors along Goodlette -Frank Road and Golden Gate Parkway between Tamiami Trail and Interstate 75. This neighborhood is approximately three square miles in size. The neighborhood is generally characterized by various retail uses and upscale residential neighborhoods. Many upscale residential communities have been developed over recent years, most featuring golf course amenities. Vacant land is offered for both commercial and residential development throughout the neighborhood. Land Use Plan: Senior Living Residential Zoning District: PD — Planned Development Resolution No. 09 -12527 Site Data: According to site plan submittal by CSD Architects to the City of Naples, the subject fronts approximately 1,741 feet along the southerly side of Golden Gate Parkway and has depth of approximately 874 feet along its easterly boundary. The site is irregular in shape, but generally rectangular and contains approximately 957,884 square feet or 21.99 acres. The site is level to slightly sloping and drainage appears typical. A natural lake of approximately 2.78 acres is located near the center of the property, and the easterly boundary fronts along the Gordon River. V•R•� Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 29 If 124 Soil is sandy, typical for the area, and it is assumed that no adverse subsoil conditions exist. Inspection reveals illegal dumping, but no obvious hazardous conditions were noted. There are no known impediments to development. Drainage and utility easements appear typical. Flood Zone Data: Zone AE, above the 100 -year flood plain, per FEMA Map Panel 12021C0391G, dated November 17, 2005. Improvement Data: Personal Property: Environmental Conditions: None Applicable None Applicable No unusual environmental conditions were noted, but this report is subject to receipt of a satisfactory Level 1 environmental audit. This appraisal does not address possible endangered or protected species, and is subject to revision if such are found to impede development. A bird nest was observed, believed to be an Osprey. Highest and Best Use: As vacant, development to residential retirement use, or, with a zoning change, to commercial use, with emphasis on retail use. Marketing /Exposure Periods: Value Indications Cost Approach Sales Comparison Approach Income Capitalization Approach Twelve months / Twenty four months N/A $17,000,000 N/A Final Estimate of Value $17,000,000 Agenda Item No, 12A July 27, 2010 Page 30 4f 124 SUBJECT MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Area Location Map mviv � � �L...rao• —', oel [o • E¢leru I ' car Neighborhood Map b c°;Ptr¢ ani J J_ S ` Xaples O U •gip. �1 Yom. } 4 B # 069 2.35 AC #708 2.4 AC #027 1.02 a #001 4.73 -A •R•S 140 s' i -1,24 08 h� •' 10 Y . ✓n Nom. s 0!01 4 4 k + Y J 4 a N `Y 4 Y #708 2.4 AC #027 1.02 a #001 4.73 -A •R•S 1 i.. 4.. r� 3 W s � h Y i if�i�p w H `y r � y�4 } 4YA 1 i.. 4.. r� 3 W •R45 s F r � � } 4YA 1 Y •R45 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 33 of 124 PURPOSE, INTENDED USE AND DATE OF APPRAISAL Purpose of this appraisal is to estimate, with the highest degree of accuracy possible, the market value, in as -is condition, of the fee simple interest of the subject property, located southeast of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Goodlette Frank Road, Naples, Collier County, Florida. Intended user of this appraisal report is the addressee of the report, the client, and Collier County. This appraisal report is prepared for the sole and exclusive use of the addressee and Collier County to assist with a possible voluntary acquisition of the site. It may not be relied upon by any third parties for any purpose whatsoever without the prior written consent of the appraiser. Property rights appraised are the fee simple interest of the subject property. This is a complete appraisal in a summary report format. Date of this appraisal is July 11, 2010, the last date of inspection. Date of report is July 9, 2010. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 34 6f 124 SCOPE OF APPRAISAL The scope of work for this appraisal assignment includes the identification of the appraisal problem, which is the valuation of the subject property in its as -is condition. The steps taken in the analysis include: Personal inspection of the property under appraisement In order to determine the competitive market of the subject, analysis was made of regional and neighborhood data and ascertainment of demographic and economic trends that effect the property and its intended use. In order to determine the competitive market position of the subject, analysis was made of economic trends affecting the property, including supply and demand analysis of properties considered directly competitive in the market, resulting in analysis of highest and best use of the property, both as if vacant and as improved. Description of the property site, including verification with applicable governmental authorities as to land use regulations, utilities, and property taxes, as well as complete description of the physical characteristics of the site. Estimation of highest and best use of the site. Estimation of value using the sales comparison approach. There is adequate market data to support this approach to market value. In order to apply the sales comparison approach, research was made of sales comparable properties through two real estate sales reporting services and the Property Appraiser's Office. Each sale was inspected, photographed and the transaction verified with a party considered knowledgeable as to the details of the transaction and motivation of the parties, principally with the buyer, seller, real estate broker or manager involved. Qualitative and quantitative adjustments are made to comparable sales in order to obtain an indication of value of the subject. Reconciliation of the value indications, with emphasis placed on the sales considered most reflective of current market activity for final value estimate. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 35 9f 124 VALUATION DEFINITIONS Estate is a right or interest in property. As related to property, the terms estate and interest are synonymous for the purpose of this appraisal. Unless otherwise distinguished, the term property indicates real property in this report. Fee simple interest or estate is the property interest represented by, "Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat. "t Leased fee estate or interest is, "An ownership interest held by a landlord with the rights of use and occupancy conveyed by lease to others. The rights of the lessor (the leased fee owner) and the lessee are specified by contract terms contained within the lease." Z Hypothetical condition is "That which is contrary to what exists but is supposed for the purpose of analysis. Hypothetical conditions assume conditions contrary to known facts about physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject property; or conditions external to the property, such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis. "3 Please refer to USPAP regulations. As an example, this condition is sometimes applied to an anticipated zoning change. Extraordinary assumption is, "An assumption, directly related to a specific assignment, which, if found to be false, could alter the appraiser's opinions and conclusions. Extraordinary assumptions presume as fact otherwise uncertain information about physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject property; or about conditions external to the property such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis. "4 Market value, for the purposes of this appraisal, is defined as: "The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: 1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated; 2. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what they consider their own best interest; 3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; Appraisal institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2002, p. 113. 2 NL p. 161. 3 IbN p. 141. 4 lbiL p. 106. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 3q Of 124 4. Payment is made in terms of cash in US dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and 5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.i5 Market value is defined in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice ( USPAP) as, "A type of value, stated as an opinion, that presumes the transfer of a property (i.e., a right of ownership or a bundle of such rights), as of a certain date, under specific conditions set forth in the definition of the term identified by the appraiser as applicable in an appraisal. ,6 In our opinion, the USPAP definition does not appear to conflict with the FIRREA definition. Prospective value opinion is, "A forecast of the value expected at a specified future date. A prospective value opinion is most frequently sought in connection with real estate projects that are proposed, under construction, or under construction to a new use, or those that have not achieved sellout or a stabilized level of long -term occupancy at the time the appraisal report is written." 7 Retrospective value opinion is defined as, "An opinion of value that is likely to have applied as of a specific historic date. A retrospective value opinion is most frequently sought in connection with appraisals for estate tax, condemnation, inheritance tax, and similar purposes. "8 Encumbrance is defined as, "An interest or right in real property that may decrease or increase the value of the fee estate but does not prevent its conveyance by the owner. An encumbrance effects a permanent reduction in an owner's property rights, while a lien represents a claim against the owner's property rights, which may or may not become permanent. Mortgages, taxes, and judgments are liens; restrictions, easements, and reservations are encumbrances. "9 Fixture is defined as, "An article that was once personal property but has since been installed or attached to the land or building in a rather permanent manner so that it is regarded in law as part of the real estate.i10 5 Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA) of 1989, by the Federal Reserve System (FRS), National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS), and the Office of Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). 6 Appraisal Institute, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and Advisory Opinions 2006 Edition The Appraisal Foundation, USA, 2006, p. 4. Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal Fourth Edition Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2002. p. 224. 9 Ibid. p.248. 9 IbjL p. 95. to Ibid., p. 116. Agenda Item No, 12A July 27, 2010 Page 371 If 124 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The legal description of the subject property was obtained from the warranty deeds of the most recently recorded transactions in Collier County Official Records. The legal descriptions read as follows; Parcel No. 13805000001 (O.R. Book 4032, Page 1878) A parcel of land lying in Lot 7 of Naples Improvement Company's Little Farms as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 2 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCE at the Southwest corner of Lot 7 of Naples Improvement Company's Little Farms as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 2 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence N890 17' 39 "E for 50.00 feet to the East right -of -way line of State Road No. S -851, (Goodlette -Frank Road); thence continue N89 017' WE for 908.34 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue N89° 1T 39" E for 895 feet more or less to the mean high water line of the Gordon River and a Point hereinafter referred to as Point "A "; thence return to the Point of Beginning and run NOW 39' 49" W for 330.03 feet; thence N89 017' 39" E for 60 feet; thence / for 165.02 feet; thence N890 17' 39" E for 935 feet more or less to the mean high water line or the Gordon River; thence meander Southwesterly along the mean high water line of the Gordon River for 200 feet more or less to Point "A" and the POINT OF ENDING; containing 3.81 acres more or less. Parcel No. 13805000027 (O.R. Book 4032, Page 1876) The East 270.00' of the West 1313.3V of the N 1/2 of Lot 7, as measured from the West line oft1he'SE•1 /4 of Section 27, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, NAPLES- 'nd]?RMEMENT` CO'S LITTLE FARMS, according to the map or plat thereois es recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 2, Public Records of Collier County;.Florida. Subject to easements, restrictions;,reservations common to the subdivision and taxes forlthe'current year and subsequent years. Subject property is vacant; unimproved property and has never assumed the character of homestead. The Grantor warrants that the above described property is not the homestead of Grantor or any member of his family nor is such property contiguous to any such homestead property.,,, The Grantor's permanent place of residence is 2140 COac1 House`: Lane, Naples, FL. Thelma T. Hodges joins in this conveyance to clear her interest in the subject property because the Corrective Deed recorded in O.R. Book 512, Page 900, incorrectly stated that legal description of the easement was measured from the West line of the SE 1/4 of Section 27, . Township 49 South, Range 25 East, and should have been measured from the West line of Lot 7. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 35,12f 124 Six Northern Parcels (O.R. Book 3951, Page 3725) Parcels 18A -3, 18C, 18D, 18E, 18F, 18G and 19H (as follows): 18A -3 (Identification No. 61940840505): All that part of Lot 9 of Naples Improvement Company's Little Farms Subdivision, lying south of Golden Gate Parkway, recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 2, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; and 18C (Identification No. 61940760009): The East 564 feet of the West 1,184 feet of Lot 8 of Naples Improvement Company's Little Farms Subdivision, less road right -of -way granted in Official Records Book 876, Page 1718, according to the map or plat thereof on file and recorded in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 2, in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida; and 18D (Identification No. 61940800008) The East 470 feet of the West 1,654 feet of Lot 8 of Naples Improvement Compary's Little Farms Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 2, in the Public Records of Collier County,_ Florida; and 18E (Identification No. 61940600004) Ail of Lot 8--of Naples, Improvement Company's Little Farms Subdivision, except the 'Nest 1,654 feet; according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 2, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; the East and West boundary lines of said Parcel being measured from the West line of said Lot 8 (said West line of Lot 8 lying, 25.00 feet East of the North` and South '/4 Section line of Section 27, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida); and 18F (Identification No. 61940520003) .The East 338.24 feet of the West 958.34 feet of Lot 7 of Naples Improvement Company's Little Farms Subdivision, per Plat Book 2, Page 2, Public Records of Collier County , Florida, less and except that portion deeded to the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida described as: Commence at the Northwest corner of said Lot 7, thence North 89° 17'39* East along the North line of said Lot 7 for a distance of 620.00 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence continue along the North line of said Lot 7 a distance of 41.60 feet to the point of intersection with the point of curve concave to the Northwest having a radius of 813.94 feet and a central angle of 26° 13' 03'; thence continue Southwesterly along said curve an arc distance of 51.30 feet to a point, thence North 000 39'49" West 30 feet to the Point of Beginning. 18G (Identification No. 61940480004): North'' /) of Lot 7, less the West 1,288.34 feet of Naples Improvement Company's Little Farms Subdivision, as per plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 2, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; and 19H (Identification No. 00268680000): In North '/2 of North '/ of Section 35, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, being at the Northwest comer of the Section and run East 1,398.25 feet; thence South 640 West 1,555.06 feet; thence North 664.01 feet to the place of beginning, Collier County, Florida. Together with that certain perpetual, non-exclusive access and egress easement over the North 60 feet of the West 950 feet of Lot 6 of Naples Improvement Company's Little Farms Subdivision, the plat of said subdivision on file and recorded in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, in Plat Book 2, Page 2, in the Public Records of Collier County . Florida; said Lot 6 now owned by Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, as such easement was reserved by Grantor in its Warranty Deed to Collier County of even date herewith. .. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 391 3f 124 FIVE -YEAR HISTORY OF SUBJECT PROPERTY A review of the public records of Collier County indicates that the subject property ownership is in the name of Caribbean Ventures/Naples, LLC, with a mailing address of 5801 Pelican Bay Boulevard, Ste. 300, Naples, FL 34108. The subject property consists of a total of eight separate parcels. The transaction history of each is listed below. According to Official Records Book 4032, Page 1876, the property identified by County Parcel No. 13805000027 was last transferred in May 2006 from Earl G. Hodges, individually and as a trustee, and Thelma T. Hodges (Grantors) to Caribbean Ventures, LLC (Grantee) for consideration of approximately $1,200,000. According to Official Records Book 4032, Page 1878, the property identified by County Parcel No. 13805000001 was last transferred in May 2006 from Darlene Stoneburner Lofgren and Kevin Stoneburner (Grantors) to Caribbean Ventures, LLC (Grantee) for consideration of approximately $4,000,000. The remaining six parcels were last transferred in December 2005 from The Trust for Public Land (Grantor) to Caribbean Ventures, LLC (Grantee) for consideration of $22,000,000. Previous to this transaction, the aforementioned six parcels were transferred as part of a larger transaction which included additional land not subject to this appraisal for consideration of approximately $67,500,000. The property was previously under contract for sale to Senior Care Development, LLC, which contract was assigned to Naples Life Care, LLC in a subsequent amendment. The original contract was dated August 13, 2007, and was amended on several occasions. The original contract price was $42,499,975 based on 525 potential independent living units, and required annexation. Amendment Five revised the minimum price to $33,285,634 based on 396 potential independent living units. The price was based on a sliding scale, dependent on the number of units that were approved. Although the site was successfully annexed, only 350 units were permitted, and we are advised that the contract was eventually terminated by the purchaser. No title search was conducted by the appraisers, and the above is provided for informational purposes only and is not warranted. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 4014f 124 MARKET AREA: LOCATION, DESCRIPTION AND TREND A market area is a geographic area wherein occupants usually have an observable commonality of interests. Market areas can be large areas, equating to an entire county or even a group of counties, depending on the purpose of analysis. Habitats, buildings and business enterprises may be relatively uniform, as in a district or neighborhood, all within a larger market area; that is, a smaller area exhibits a greater degree of commonality than the larger area. For example, there may be a retail district and /or industrial zone within a mixed use neighborhood which includes residences, and this neighborhood and other connecting neighborhoods and districts may form a larger market area. A market area is the area from which demand for a particular property or use is drawn, and will vary by use type. For example, the market area for a community shopping center is larger than the market area for a neighborhood or strip shopping center. There is no set life expectancy for a market area, neighborhood or district, and major changes can interrupt the order of the stages. In some instances, after a period of decline, a neighborhood may undergo a transition to other land uses, or its life cycle may begin again due to revitalization and redevelopment of land or buildings. While neighborhoods of Naples have individually undergone revitalization, and continue to do so, the general area is in a growth stage. Social considerations in a market area analysis involve a description of occupants and visitors revealing their reasons and motivations for living, working and visiting within the market area. These reasons may include the market areas reputation, environment and availability and convenience to employment, shopping /service centers and recreation centers. Demographic analysis is often related to driving times and linkages to commonly used supporting properties and facilities, rather than by specific census tracts. A retirement community often draws from nearby neighborhoods, but may draw from northern climes. A residential neighborhood is typically a group of complementary land uses, such as homes, schools and neighborhood commerce, whereas a district may be characterized by homogenous land uses, such as industrial districts or office districts or high -rise districts. Although a market area may be confined to a neighborhood, a market area is often larger and may include a broad array of land uses and several neighborhoods and census tracts. Some of the smallest areas of commonality may be referred to as traffic analysis zones or commercial nodes which are based on specific traffic routes and particular roadway intersections. Each neighborhood or district has a dynamic quality of its own, which is described as the life cycle of a neighborhood or district. The complementary land uses that comprise neighborhoods and the homogenous land uses that comprise districts typically evolve through four stages. 1. Growth - A period during which the neighborhood gains public favor and acceptance. 2. Stability - A period of equilibrium without marked gains or losses. 3. Decline - A period of diminishing demand. 4. Revitalization - A period of renewal, modernization and increasing demand. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 411 gf 124 The demographic analysis that follows was obtained using information from the Appraisal Institutes / Site To Do Business data service. The compiled information is based on forecast modifications to the 2000 census utilized for demographic projections. Market Area The subject market area is generally described using as a 10 -mile radius from the subject property, which best represents the potential market area in terms of the concentration of potential residents and employees. The Naples Municipal Airport is considered the center of the immediate neighborhood. Most development and communities are located in close proximity to the airport, including the subject property. For this reason, we chose the Naples Airport as the center of this demographical ring study. The main transportation route through the market area, Interstate 75, extends south then due east across the Everglades into Broward County and north into nearby Ft. Meyers and Lee County. Market Area Boundaries Sowee SMROnhnecom .w - STUB SNLINEvan- Social Influences Population Totals Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 421 of 124 In the identified market area, the 2009 population was 233,924 persons. In 2000, the census count in the market area was 182,908 persons. The five -year projection for the population in the year 2014 is 255,377, representing a change of 1.77 percent annually from 2009 to 2014. Currently, the population is 48.7 percent male and 51.3 percent female. The difference between change in population and change in households is a result of two factors; the presence of group quarters (non- household) population in the market area and the average number of persons per household. The group quarters population in the market area was 2,075 in 2000, or 1.I percent of the total population. Average household size was 2.30 in 2009, compared to 2.30 in the year 2000. Radius: 3 Miles Radius: 5 Miles Radius: 10 Miles 2000 Total Population 50,286 100,890 182,908 2009 Total Population 54,475 118,138 233,924 2014 Total Population 55,897 125,026 255,377 2009 - 2014 Annual Rate 0.52% ° 1.14 /0 1.77% Population Characteristics The median age for the United States was 35.3 in 2000 and 36.7 in 2009. In the market area, the median age of the population was 46.5, compared to 51.2 years in 2009. By age group, the changes in the percent distribution of the market area population show the following: Persons of Hispanic origin represent 22.1 percent of the population in the identified market area compared to 15.0 percent of the U.S. population. Persons of Hispanic Origin may be of any race. In sum, the Diversity Index, which measures the probability that two people from the same area will be from different race /ethnic groups, was 51.7 in the identified market area, compared to 59.3 in the U.S. population. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 43191' 124 Population by Education In 2009, the educational attainment of the population aged 25 years or older in the neighborhood area was distributed as follows: • 10.5 percent had not earned a high school diploma (16.4 percent in the U.S.) • 26.9 percent were high school graduates only (29.6 percent in the U.S.) • 7.0 percent had completed an Associate degree (7.2 percent in the U.S.) • 22.6 percent had a Bachelor's degree (17.0 percent in the U.S.) • 11.9 percent had earned a Master's /Professional /Doctorate Degree (9.7 percent in U.S.) 10 15 20 25 30 35 % High School Grad 269 .,4 - .5 ®Market Area ® U& % Bachelors Degree + 26 7 34.5 Households The household count in this market area has changed from 78,686 in 2000 to 100,751 in 2009. _. The five -year projection of households is 110,385, a change of 1.84 percent annually from 2009 through 2014. Average household size was 2.30 in 2009, compared to 2.30 in the year 2000. The number of families in 2009 was 66,751 in the market area. Radius: 3 Miles Radius: 5 Miles Radius: 10 Miles 2000 Households 23,131 45,499 78,686 2000 Average Household Size 2.13 2.18 2.30 2009 Households 24,903 53,081 100,751 2009 Average Household Size 115 2.20 2.30 2014 Households 25,507 - 56,243 110,385 2014 Average Household Size 2.15 2.20 2.29 2009 - 2014 Annual Rate 0.48% 1.16% 1.84% Housing In 2009, 48.9 percent of the 77,764 housing units in the market area were owner occupied; 19.4 percent, renter occupied; and 31.7 percent were vacant. In 2000, there were 61,480 housing units; 54.2 percent owner occupied, 19.7 percent renter occupied and 26.0 percent vacant. The annual rate of change in housing units since 2000 is 2.57 percent. Median home value in the market area is $175,811, compared to a median home value of $192,285 for the U.S. In 2014, median home value is projected to change by 1.01 percent annually to $184,909. From 2000 to 2009, median home value changed by 2.79 percent annually. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 4-1 Sf 124 Economic Influences Economic considerations involve the financial capacity of a neighborhood's occupants to rent or Radius: 3 Miles Radius: 5 Miles Radius: 10 Miles 2000 Housing Units 30,859 61,480 107,418 Owner Occupied Housing Units 54.2% 54.2% redevelopment of older properties to more intense uses. Renter Occupied Housing Units 208% 19,7% 55.6% Vacant Housing Units 25 0% 260% 17.7% 2009 Housing Units 36,423 77,764 267% 148,661 Owner Occupied Housing Units 48.7% 48.9% Professional 15.1 /° 15.7% Renter Occupied Housing Units 19.7% 19.4% 50.7% Vacant Housing Units 31.6% 31.7% 17.0% 2014 Housing Units 37,475 82,589 32,2% 163,221 Owner Occupied Housing Units 48.7% 48.9% 50.9% Renter Occupied Housing Units 19.4% 19.2% 167% Vacant Housing Units 31.9% 31.9% 32.4% Economic Influences Economic considerations involve the financial capacity of a neighborhood's occupants to rent or own property, to maintain it in an attractive and desirable condition, and to renovate or rehabilitate it when needed. Many of the subdivisions in the market area were originally developed in the distant past, but with current redevelopment of many residential and commercial properties. In general, residential property values have recently declined in response to an oversupply. The area is, however, experiencing continued population growth and the redevelopment of older properties to more intense uses. Business Climate and Economic Activity In the market area, there is an approximate ratio of 58.5% white - collar occupations, 22.2% services occupations and 19.4% blue-collar occupations. Radius: 3 Miles Radius: 5 Miles Radius: 10 Miles 2009 Employed Population 16+ by Occupation Total 21,432 White Collar 46,544 92,690 Management /Business/Financial 57.3% 15 9% 151% 15.7% 58.5% Professional 15.1 /° 15.7% 15.3% 15.9% Sales 14.7% 15.4% Administrative Support 11.8°/ 11.8% 15.9% Services 22.9% 22.5% 11.3% 22.2% Blue Collar 19.4% 18.7% Farming /Forestry/Fishing 0.5% 19.4% 0.6% Construction /Extraction 10.1% 9.3% 0.6% 9.9% Installation /Maintenance /Repair 3.5% 3.3% 31% Production 20% 21% Transportation /Material Moving 3.3% 2 2% 3.5% 3.6% The ten basic industries and the participation in the market are reflected in the chart below. The services industry makes up the largest employment pool, with 48.0% of the total work force. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 4019f 124 Radius: 3 Miles Radius: 5 Miles Radius: 10 Miles 2009 Employed Population 16+ by Industry Total 21,432 46,544 92,690 Agriculture /Mining 0.8% 0.9% 1.0% Construction 14.1% 13.5% 14.1% Manufacturing 2.8% 2.6% 2.5% Wholesale Trade 2.0% 2.1% 2.0% Retail Trade 14.9% 14.6% 14.2% Transportation /Utilities 2.6% 2.9% 2.9% Information 1A% 1.2% 1.2% Finance /Insurance /Real Estate 10.1% 10.5% 10.7% Services 48.1% 48.3% 48.0% Public Administration 3.6% 3.4% 3.4% Unemployment According to data released Friday from Florida's Agency for Workforce Innovation, Collier County's unemployment rate was 11.2 percent in May 2010, down from 11.5 percent in April 2010 and above 10.1 rate in May 2009. Neighboring Lee County's unemployment rate was 12.5 percent in May 2010, down from 12.7 percent in April 2010. Nearby Charlotte County's rate was 12 percent in May 2010, down from 12.6 percent in April 2010 and above the 11 percent rate a year ago. Even though the unemployment rate fell, it was in part due to the number of available workers shrinking instead of increased hiring. Collier's seasonal population commonly drops over the summer months. The county has lost 4,300 jobs since May 2009 and has lost 900 jobs since April, according to state data. The largest job losses in May came in the hospitality industry, which gave up 1,700 jobs as resorts trimmed their rosters for the summer. Statewide, unemployment fell to 11.7 percent in May 2010, down from 12 percent in April 2010, but up from the 10.2 percent rate in May 2009. The rate was highest in Flagler County, at 15.1 percent, and lowest in Liberty County at 6.4 percent. 1T f IS YY reran f,.m ,FL klmme 1 :i5 e.�� ne. Ewa ,�. irco ,ran :ap xo� m. ase v „ran Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 4E2,gf 124 Households by Income Median household income in the year 2009 income was $64,777 in the market area, compared to $53,154 for all U.S. households. Median household income is projected to be $69,086 in 2014. In 2000, median household income was $49,717. Average household income was $96,929 in this market area, compared to $73,126 for all U.S. households. Average household income is projected to be $105,538 in 2014. In 2000, average household income was $50,067, compared to $33,178 in 1990. Radius: 3 Miles Radius: 6 Miles Radius: 3 Miles Radius: 5 Miles Radius: 10 Miles Median Household Income 100,751 < $15,000 7,8% 7.0% 7.3% 6.% 2000 $45,003 $46,583 $49,717 2009 $57,473 $60,292 $64,777 2014 $58,868 $61,496 $69,086 Average household income was $96,929 in this market area, compared to $73,126 for all U.S. households. Average household income is projected to be $105,538 in 2014. In 2000, average household income was $50,067, compared to $33,178 in 1990. Radius: 3 Miles Radius: 6 Miles Radius: 10 Miles 2009 Households by Income Household Income Base 24,905 53,080 100,751 < $15,000 7,8% 7.0% 7.3% 6.% $15,000 - $24,999 0 8/ .0 7.3% 6.77% $25,000 - $34,999 11.4% 10.7% 9.3% $35,000 - $49,999 16.8% 16.5% 14.5% $50,000 - $74,999 21.6°/ 22.6% 222 - $99,999 11.0 12.1% 12.5% $100,000 - $149,999 12.1% 12.1% 1$150,000- $199,999 4.8% 48% . ./$75,000 5.5% $200,000+ 5.6% 6.9% 8.8% Average Household Income $80,978 $86,752 $96,929 Per capita income in the year 2009 was $41,889 in the market area. The per capita income is projected to be $45,765 in 2014. In 2000, the per capita income was $34,043. Radius: 3 Miles Radius: 5 Miles Radius: 10 Miles Per Capita Income 2000 $31,660 2009 $33,690 $34,043 2014 $37,274 $39,337 $41,889 $40,112 $42,379 $45,765 Disposable Income & Consumer Expenditures Current median household disposable income is $47,354 and the average disposable income is $60,999. In addition, the total household expenditures are $15,859,659,287 and the average amount spent per household is $68,121. According to a recent article in Forbes magazine, Collier County led the nation in inmigration of the wealthy. According to IRS data, in 2008, 15,150 people moved to Collier County with an average reported income of $76,161 per person, compared to average income of $26,128 per person moving out. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 4721f 124 Governmental Influences The subject market area is in the City of Naples and Collier County. The market area is governed by these jurisdictions for future land use plans and its various municipalities zoning codes. The purpose and primary effect of the Future Land Use Plan is to provide a general outline for growth for a given area in an attempt to support and provide for orderly growth within the state. The implementation of this land use plan has the effect of eventually requiring the zoning ordinances to be in compliance with the plan within a reasonable period of time. The designations, therefore, of the land use plan should be viewed as the long -term intentions with respect to a given land area and its boundaries. Most commercial land uses are designated along major traffic arteries and at commercial nodes within the market area, which are often surrounded by residential uses. The governmental tax burdens within the market area appear to be in proportion to the governmental services provided. Environmental Influences Property uses within the market area include residential uses, including single - family, condominiums, apartments, and supporting commercial uses that include general retail stores, restaurants, professional services, medical services and banking. Places of worship, schools and public libraries are also convenient. Fire and police protection appear to be adequate for the present population. The market area has good transportation routes via roadways connecting linkages. In addition to nearby recreational bay waters within the market area, there are several parks and golf courses nearby. Naples Municipal Airport and Southwest Florida International Airports are nearby, with a regional mall in close proximity. Conclusion Outlook for the subject neighborhood appears favorable. Although the market is slowing, nearby commercial and residential properties have relatively high occupancy rates. New and redeveloped commercial and residential properties are evident in and around this market. The substantial population base surrounding the market area provides a good employee pool and consumer base. Population change is expected to increase in the market area as more intense vertical development occurs on the remaining available land and underdeveloped sites. Property values are expected to continue to appreciate over the long term. These factors favorably influence the subject neighborhood and its market area, and no adverse factors were noted. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 4872f 124 REAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS AND TAXES The subject parcel identification and assessments are obtained from the Collier County Tax Collector as noted below. The current millage rate for the ad valorem taxes on the real property is 10.8537 mils in the subject district. Taxes are issued and may be paid in November of each year, when a 4% discount is allowed. The discount decreases by 1% per month until March, when there is no discount. Taxes become delinquent April 1, after which time a penalty is imposed. Certificates for delinquent taxes are auctioned approximately 60 days from delinquency, and holder of two consecutive tax certificates may foreclose to acquire title. Prudent property owners typically take advantage of the 4% discount and pay real estate taxes in November, rather than in March of the following year. 2009 Property Tax Summary Parcel Tax ID Assessment Ad Valorem Tax Non -Ad Tax Total Tax Net Tax 13805000140 61940840505 $ 2,058,000 $ 24,392.03 $ - $ 24,392.03 $ 23,66027 13805000124 61940800008 $ 1,400.668 $ 16,601.14 $ - $ 16,601.14 $ 16,103.11 13805000108 61940760009 $ 1,680,000 $ 19,911.86 $ - $ 19,911.86 $ 19,314.50 13805000085 61940600004 $ 1,120,556 $ 13,281.16 $ - $ 13.281.16 $ 13805000069 61940520003 $ 1,785,000 $ 21,15636 $ - $ 21,156.36 12,882.73 13805000043 61940480004 $ 1,897,000 $ 22.483.82 $ - $ 22,483.82 $ $ 20,521.67 21,809.31 13805000001 61940360001 $ 2,891,000 $ 34,265.01 $ - $ 34,265.01 $ 33,237.06 13805000027 61940440002 $ 714,000 $ 8.462.54 $ - $ 8,462.54 $ 8.208.66 TOTAL $ 13,546,224 $ 160,553.92 $ - $ 160,553.92 $ 155,737.31 Taxes are issued and may be paid in November of each year, when a 4% discount is allowed. The discount decreases by 1% per month until March, when there is no discount. Taxes become delinquent April 1, after which time a penalty is imposed. Certificates for delinquent taxes are auctioned approximately 60 days from delinquency, and holder of two consecutive tax certificates may foreclose to acquire title. Prudent property owners typically take advantage of the 4% discount and pay real estate taxes in November, rather than in March of the following year. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 4cPgf 124 LAND USE AND ZONING CLASSIFICATION The Land Use plan sets forth the physical plans for growth and development of a community. The primary thrust of the Plan is to determine the overall development of the county, where it was, where it is today and how the future land use patterns and policies will reflect and meet the needs of growth tomorrow, and zoning is a specifically delineated area or district within which regulations and requirements uniformly govern the use, placement, spacing and size of land and buildings. The Land Use Plan and Zoning work hand in hand and must be compatible in intent prior to development of any property. In the event of pre- existing conditions of lot or building non - conformities, a property may be considered legally conforming per a "grandfather" rule. Pre- existing conditions in compliance, which become non - conforming by virtue of right -of -way changes, typically will place the property in a special exception category as legally non - conforming. Future Land Use Plan According to the City of Naples Future Land Use Plan, the area of the subject site is located in a newly created Senior Living Residential District, which permits a variety of commercial and age restricted residential uses. The district was created during the subject property's rezoning and with respect to the surrounding, the subject property is presently compatible with the general Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Zoning PD — Planned Development, Resolution No. 09 -12527 The subject land is zoned as Planned Development, which provides specific development criteria in accordance with the proposed development plan. Ordinance No. 09 -12526 contains specific development criteria which is summarized below. Maximum Density Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width Minimum Yards Along Golden Gate Parkway Along Gordon River Along southern property line Along western property line 350 dwelling units 15,000 square feet 100 feet 50 feet 100 feet from current mean high water line 30 feet 30 feet Maximum Height 52 feet (residential); 42 feet (commercial) Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 5024f 124 Minimum Floor Area 1,000 square feet per principal building on ground floor and 750 square feet per dwelling unit. Maximum Lot /Impervious Coverage 40% Zoning and Land Use Conformity The above zoning and land use information represents a brief review of the zoning regulations. Although the jurisdiction has rather straightforward zoning regulations, the regulations can be rather complex and interrelated, and not all factors potentially affecting the subject property can be shown. The reader is advised to consult the zoning regulation and department personnel for an optimum understanding of these regulations. v p°9T"•� r' e w 3Yh „n �6 dr@ U•R•S x ,kpi x, i Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 5226f 124 SITE DESCRIPTION Data sources for this site description include information provided by the Collier County Property Appraiser's office, other public records, a personal inspection by the appraisers and review of a survey and proposed site plan for the subject. The subject land is presently vacant and proposed for development to residential use. The subject site lies in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway with Goodlette -Frank Road. Surrounding Properties North — Freedom Park East — Bear's Paw Country Club South — Naples Zoo West -- Coastland Center Mall Naples High School Property Characteristics Generally level, sloping southeasterly. Generally Land Area 21.99 acres Site Configuration Irregular but generally rectangular Frontage 1,741.48 feet along the southerly side of Golden Gate Parkway A 60 -foot easement for ingress and egress extends easterly fi-om Goodlette -Frank Road. Terrain/Vegetation Generally level, sloping southeasterly. Generally wooded with 2.38 -acre pond to east of center. Access Unimproved interior road extending south from Golden Gate Parkway near westerly subject boundary. 60 -foot easement extends east from Goodlette -Frank Road bisecting the site. Flood Zone "AE ", high flood risk FEMA Map Panel 12021 C0391 G, dated November 17, 2005 Drainage Unimproved. Natural drainage to southeast toward Gordon River. Potable water City of Naples Sewer City of Naples Reclaimed Water City of Naples Electricity Telecommunications Police protection Fire protection Public transportation Emergency medical service Florida Power and Light Various City of Naples City of Naples Fire Department Collier Area Transit (CAT) Collier County Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 5�ggf 124 Environmental No unusual environmental conditions were noted, other than illegally- dumped debris, but this report is subject to receipt of a satisfactory Level 1 environmental audit. This appraisal does not address possible endangered or protected species, and is subject to revision if such are found to impede development. A bird nest was observed, believed to be an Osprey. Encumbrances According to the county appraiser maps provided, there were no easements related to the subject site except for the access easement. However, typical utility easements may be present and should not negatively affect the property. The appraiser is not aware of any additional title encumbrances, easements, encroachments, deed restrictions, covenants, association rules, special assessments, special agreements, or other possible encumbrances which may affect title to the subject property. No title search information has been presented to the appraiser. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 5429f 124 Flood Map i' YP �uS tiiy� "� e l7 A, = x j ry� YFtN g 'u Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 5T9f 124 MARKETABILITY AND ESTIMATED MARKETING PERIOD Marketability looks at the market appeal of the subject property; more specifically, it analyzes and supports a reasonable marketing period to effect the sale of the subject property. Included in this analysis is a discussion of supply, competition, and demand of the subject property and competitive properties located within the market area. Marketability is defined as, "The relative desirability of a property (for sale or lease) in comparison with similar or competing properties in the area "' That is, a property with good marketability has superior features or condition in comparison with competing properties. A marketability study is "a microeconomie study that examines the marketability of a given property or class of properties, usually focusing on the market segment(s) in which the property is likely to generate demand. Marketability studies are useful in determining a specific highest and best use, testing a specific highest and best use, testing development proposals, and projecting an appropriate tenant mix." 12 While this type of study is typically quite detailed and specific, a brief version is part of the highest and best use analysis of every appraisal. Market value estimates imply that an adequate marketing effort and reasonable time for exposure occurred prior to the effective date of the appraisal. Exposure time is, "The estimated length of time the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consutnmation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal. Exposure time is always presumed to occur prior to the effective date of the appraisal." 13 "Exposure time is different for various types of property and under various market conditions. It is noted that the overall concept of reasonable exposure encompasses not only adequate, sufficient, and reasonable time but also adequate, sufficient, and reasonable effort. This statement focuses on the time component. The fact that exposure time is always presumed to occur prior to the effective date of the appraisal is substantiated by related facts in the appraisal process: supply /demand conditions as of the effective date of the appraisal; the use of current cost information; the analysis of historical sales information (sold after exposure and after completion of negotiations between the seller and buyer); and the analysis of future income expectancy projected from the effective date of the appraisal . ,,14 11 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2002, p. 174. 12 Ibid. p. 174. 13 &L p. 105. 14 Appraisal Institute, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and Advisory Opinions 2006 Edition The Appraisal Foundation, USA, 2006, p. 90. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27. 2010 Page 5(�®f 124 Marketing time is defined as, "Reasonable marketing time is an estimate of the amount of time it might take to sell an interest in real property at its estimated market value during the period immediately after the effective date of the appraisal. "15 Reasonable Exposure and Marketing Period for Subject The appraiser must analyze historic data and future projections in order to estimate historic market exposure time and the future marketing period. The subject is a 21.99 -acre tract of undeveloped land, located at the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Goodlette -Frank Road. It is located just north of Caribbean Gardens and east across Goodlette -Frank Road from Coastland Mall. With a mix of commercial and residential properties in the surrounding neighborhoods, the highest and best use of the subject would be for either retail or residential development. Under other circumstances, the property might be developed to retail uses. However, it is proposed as a site for a continuing care retirement community (CCRC). Under the CCRC concept, a resident purchases the right to use an apartment for independent living for as long as their health permits. When they are unable to independently pursue the typical activities of daily living they may transfer to an assisted living facility, and eventually to a skilled care unit, or nursing home. All or a portion of the initial purchase price may be refundable at time of death, or possibly sooner, and the resident pays monthly fees for meals and services. CCRC's have been around for forty years or more, and have proven to be successful around the state. The Naples area has several successful communities of this type, and others have been planned. The most recent significant projects are the Terraces at Bonita Bay, wherein the land sale occurred in 2008, and the Arlington at Lely, with the land transaction in 2009. Both are in early stages of pre -sale marketing. The Moorings, a well established community, is marketing a proposed 31 unit building, and more are planned. Other than the site at the Moorings, the subject is arguably the most attractive urban site for such a development. It was placed under contract in 2007, subject to annexation into the City of Naples and zoning approvals. Annexation was successful, but the number of units was limited to 350, below the original request. However, subsequent to the successful annexation, the purchaser withdrew from the pending contract, apparently due to the continuing national recession and turmoil in the capital markets. Given the current economic conditions, and notwithstanding the attractiveness of the site, we do not believe a continuing care retirement community of this scope will be commenced within the next two to three years, possibly longer, but sufficient demand will eventually return. In the interim, the site should be an attractive target for land investors, as it should be one of the more attractive sites available as the market recovers. Based on economic conditions of the mid 2000s, we believe a marketing exposure period for the comparable sales was approximately 12 months, but noting that most contracts require a lengthy 15 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal Fourth Edition Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2002, p. 175. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 5734f 124 period for approvals. Marketing time for the subject is estimated at approximately 12 months to a land investor. A typical contract includes a due diligence period, a period to achieve state approvals, and time for the pre -sale of units. This often totals 24 months or more. Indeed, the previous contract on the subject was executed in 2007. Selling commissions in order to effect the sale of a property similar to the subject are usually 7% and downward. For the subject property type and its value range, a commission level of 3% to 4% is applicable. Availability of Mortgage Financing At the present time, third -party financing is difficult to obtain for acquisition and development of properties similar to the subject use. Although interest rates are at near - record lows, loan underwriting has become increasing stringent. Presale requirements have increased while loan ratios have decreased. We are advised that at least one major bank has expressed an interest in financing development costs for the subject. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 5£$0f 124 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS The highest and best use concept is reflective of a basic assumption about real estate and market behavior; that the price a buyer will pay for a property is based on their conclusion about the most profitable use of the site or property. Therefore, sites and improved properties tend to be put to their highest and best uses and, in this manner, maximize the profit potential for the property owner. The determination of a property's highest and best use may or may not conform with the existing use of the site because the alternative uses of the site may be restricted by the presence of improvements or legal encumbrances. The highest and best use is determined separately for the land or site as though vacant and available to be put to its highest and best use than for the improvements. Highest and best use is defined as: "The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity. ,16 The first determination reveals the fact that land value is derived from potential land use. Land has limited value unless there is a present or anticipated use for it; the amount of value depends on the nature of the land's anticipated use. According to the concept of surplus productivity, the highest and best use of a site is that use among all reasonable alternative uses that yields the highest present land value after payments are made for labor, capital, and coordination. The highest and best use of a property as improved refers to the optimal use that could be made of the property, including all existing structures. The implication is that the existing improvement should be renovated or retained as long as it continues to contribute to the total market value of the site, or until the return from a new improvement would more than off -set the cost of demolishing the existing building and constructing a new one. To determine the highest and best use of the subject site, as if vacant, the use must meet four criteria. The highest and best use must be 1) legal permissibility, 2) physically possible, 3) financially feasible, and 4) maximally productive. These criteria should usually be considered sequentially; a use may be financially feasible, but this is irrelevant if it is physically impossible or legally prohibited. Legal Permissibility Restrictions, zoning codes, building codes, land use controls, and environmental regulations are considered because they may preclude many possible highest and best uses. • The subject site was recently annexed into the City of Naples and has a PD zoning designation which permits development of up to 350 independent living retirement units, plus supporting ALF and SNF units up to 25% of the 350 approved units. 16 /bid. p. 135. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 593gf 124 • The subject site is of sufficient size to meet minimum development criteria. Physically Possible The size, shape, area, and terrain of a site affect uses to which land may be developed. • The subject site is 21.99 acres, is generally level and readily developable. • The site has adequate frontage for exposure and visibility. Primary access will be along Goodlet Frank Road, with secondary access to Golden Gate Parkway. • No soil tests were available. However, improvements in the general area have typically been constructed without undue foundation expense. The site is fairly low but appears mostly dry and sandy, with an easterly boundary of marshy area along the Gordon River. • Municipal potable water, sewer, garbage collection and electricity are available. • Overall, the site size, topography, configuration, and orientation are sufficient for development. Financially Feasible All the potential uses of the subject site that are expected to produce a positive return are regarded as financially feasible and are examined here. • The market area population is served by good quality linkages providing good quality access throughout Collier County, the greater Naples area and statewide. The market area population, social characteristics, and income characteristics are above average. The outlook for the market area is positive, with growth expected for the economic base, population and income characteristics. • Residential retirement housing units are permitted for the site. While this should be a feasible use in this location, market conditions are relatively slow, and three competing projects are soliciting presales. It cannot be demonstrated that sufficient demand currently exists to support a new development, regardless of the attractiveness of the subject site. Highest and Best Use As If Vacant Physically, the subject property is suitable for residential retirement units, and legally the subject site can be developed with such uses. The subject site has good quality linkages, along with access and visibility from surrounding thoroughfares. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 6034f 124 Financial analysis of all physically possible and legally permissible uses indicates the property will be best utilized for the development of retirement housing, or perhaps a mixed use design. However, under current economic conditions, developers use caution and are carefully monitoring the market. Presently, economic conditions are not conducive to immediate development, so development of the subject will be deferred until such time as market demand is sufficient to support timely achievement of presales. Maximally Productive Physically, the subject can support combinations of building area scenarios in multiple story designs, limited by floor area ratio and parking requirements. Legally, however, the subject is limited to a maximum of 350 units, together with assisted living and skilled care units up to a maximum of 25% of the total independent living units. Based on site plans provided by the owner, 350 units plus support units appear developable. Although zoning appears to allow up to 396 units, the maximum number of units is established by the PD zoning. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 6135f 124 INTRODUCTION TO THE APPRAISAL PROCESS Traditionally, three approaches are used to arrive at an estimate of market value, the cost, sales comparison, and income capitalization approaches. Ideally, each approach, properly employed, provides an accurate indication of value, but, due to the unique characteristics of various types of properties, one or more of the approaches may be inappropriate or inapplicable in arriving at an estimate of value. The three approaches are: Cost Approach The cost approach is based on the principle of substitution, that no prudent person would pay more for a property than the cost to acquire a similar site and construct a building of equal desirability and utility, assuming no undue or costly delay. The procedure involves first estimating value of the site as if vacant. Anticipated direct and indirect costs necessary to reconstruct all improvements are then estimated, predicated upon labor and material prices prevailing on the appraisal date. From this construction cost estimate, deductions are made for accrued depreciation caused by physical deterioration and functional and economical obsolescence. This depreciated cost figure is then added to the estimated value of the site, resulting in the indication of value by the cost approach. The cost approach is most accurate when applied to a relatively new structure with no functional deficiencies, and which represents highest and best use of the site. The depreciation estimates are difficult to precisely measure from market data, so the indication of value may largely depend on the experience, judgment and ability of the appraiser, especially for older improvements. Sales Comparison Approach The sales comparison approach is also based on the principle of substitution; that a prudent person would pay no more for a property than the cost to acquire another property of similar desirability or utility. The process involves the collecting, analyzing, and comparing of sales, listings and offers for properties similar to the property under appraisement. After the most comparable property transactions are identified, adjustments are made for such variables as changes in market conditions since date of sale, location, size, physical characteristics and terms of sale. Advantages of the sales comparison approach are that it permits direct comparison of the property under appraisement to factual market transactions involving similar properties, and that it is probably the approach most easily understood. Limitations of the sales comparison approach are that no two properties are identical, and dissimilarities between the comparable properties and the subject may relate to intangible qualities that are difficult to measure. Application of this approach may be limited by the lack of data for specific types of properties. Income Capitalization Approach The income capitalization approach is based on the principle of anticipation; that value of a property may be measured by the present worth of anticipated future benefits accruing to the ownership and use of the property. The procedure involves estimating gross income the property Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 6:�6f 124 is capable of producing, then deducting vacancy /collection losses and expenses which might be incurred in the operation. Resultant net income, as estimated by the appraiser, is converted to an indication of value through various means of capitalization or discounting. The income capitalization approach is most accurate in valuation of income producing properties. If sufficient sales of tenant - occupied, investor -owned comparables may be located, the income capitalization approach can provide a highly accurate value indication. The approach, however, has limited application for non - income producing properties, such as vacant land. Reconciliation of Value Indications Final step in the valuation process is reconciliation of value estimates indicated by the approaches outlined above, weighting each according to their relative importance, based on market appropriateness and availability and reliability of data. Dependent on type of property and purpose of appraisal, one or all of the approaches may be considered reliable. Result of this final reconciliation of values is the estimate of value as defined in the report. Valuation Methodology The sales comparison approach to market value estimation was applied and has data of sufficient quantity and quality to derive a reasonably accurate indication of value. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 6�qf 124 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH The sales comparison approach, like the cost approach, is based on the principle of substitution; in other words, the value of a property should be no higher than the cost to acquire another property offering similar physical or locational attributes. This procedure involves market research to identify similar properties which have recently sold or are offered for sale, investigation of the sale transactions to insure their validity and to determine motivating forces, and comparison of the sold properties to the subject, adjusting prices paid for various dissimilarities having a discernible affect on value. Adjustments are made for such factors as changes in market conditions since time of sale, location, size, land area, income producing capabilities, and if available, terms of sale. This analysis is usually processed on a "unit of comparison" basis. The unit of comparison most commonly employed for improved properties such as the subject is price paid per square foot of building area including land, and may be analyzed separately from land value on a contributory value basis. The application of the market or sales comparison method requires the appraiser to follow the following steps: 1. Market research - to obtain infonmation about transactions, listings and other offerings similar to the subject. 2. Verification of the information to determine if it is factual, accurate, reflects arm's length market conditions, and whether or not any unusual terms or conditions were present. 3. Develop relevant units of comparison. 4. Compare the subject and comparable sales according to the elements of comparison and adjust the sales price of each comparable toward the subject. 5. Reconcile the multiple value indications that result from the comparable sales into a single value indication. Applying the sales comparison approach to value to the subject property, these five steps were employed. In our research of the public records, we searched for sales with a highest and best use the same as or similar to the highest and best use of the subject and with buildings of generally similar construction quality, size, age and condition. The comparable sales were verified with a principal of the transaction, or with persons with direct knowledge of the transaction. In the verification process, we have attempted to obtain additional data that is normally appropriate in the sales comparison approach. This data would include the intended use of the property, mortgage terms, extraordinary acquisition or development costs, and any other data deemed relevant. Salient data regarding the comparable sales considered most indicative of value of the subject follow. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 643gf 124 Comparable Land Sales Comparable Land Sale No. 1: Location County: Parcel No.: Sale Date: Recorded In: Grantor: Grantee: Indicated Consideration Gross Land Area: Price Per SF of Gross Land Area: Price Per Acre of Gross Land Area: Total Proposed Independent Units: Price Per Unit Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 6839f 124 Arlington at Naples SW quadrant of Collier Boulevard and Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida Collier 00432960802 July 18, 2008 OiR Book 4379, page 3995 Stock Development, LLC Luther Village of Naples $17,450,000 1,687,635 SF, or 38.743 Acres $10.34 $450,404 160 $109,063 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 664gf 124 Total Units (Incl. ALF & Skilled) 284 Price Per Overall Unit $61,444 Comments: The property is located in Lely Resort, an attractive, upscale development approximately 7 miles southeast of downtown Naples. This parcel is proposed for development as a CCRC, and the developer is presently in presales. Although no specifics were provided, sales are thought to be below original projections. The developer is CRSA, a national consulting and development firm, and the owner is Lutheran Life Communities. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 6411` 124 Comparable Land Sale No. 2: Name of Proposed Property: Address: County: Parcel No.: Sale Date: Recorded In: Grantor: Grantee: Gross Land Area: Indicated Consideration: Price Per SF of Gross Land Area: Price Per Acre of Gross Land Area: Total Proposed Independent Units: Price Per Unit The Terraces at Bonita Springs 26401 South Tamiami Trail Bonita Springs, Florida Lee 28- 47- 25 -132- 00001.2000 November 2009 2009000312221 J.B.and Geraldine Nicola Bonita Springs Retirement Village, Inc. 871,254 SF, or 20.0 Acres $7,000,000 $8.03 $350,000 150 $46,667 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 6E40f 124 Total Units (Incl. ALF & Skilled) 256 Price Per Overall Unit $27,344 Comments: This parcel is proposed for development as a CCRC by Santa Fe Health Care, and is now in pre - sales. The property was apparently rezoned by the City of Bonita Springs to allow up to 461 units. However, the property is proposed for only 256 units, including 150 independent living units and 106 ALF and skilled care units, according to the marketing director. The independent living units will sell for $400,000 to $1.2 million, plus monthly maintenance fees from about $3,000 to $5,000 per month. The buyer's purchase price funds are held in escrow and majority is refundable. The property is located along Tamiami Trail in Bonita Springs, in southern Lee County. This property was reportedly under contract in 2007 for $11.5 million and was reported at $8.1 million in 2009. No amounts were confirmed, other than the eventual sales price, but the decline from $11.5 million to $7.0 million is a 401io decline in three years. Changing market conditions apparently warranted renegotiation. Comparable Land Sale No. 3: Location County: Parcel Identification Number Sale Date Recorded In: Grantor Grantee Indicated Consideration Gross Land Area Price per SF of Gross land Area Price per Gross Acre Developable Units Price per Developable Unit Southeast Corner Collier Blvd. And Lely Cultural Parkway Naples, Florida Collier 00432960145 April 2007 OR Book 4210 page 1766 Stock Development, LLC Lely Apartments, LLC $8,635,500 18.33 Acres or 798,455 square feet. $10.82 $471,113 303 $28,500 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 6�43f 124 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 7044f 124 Comments This property is located in the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard and Lely Cultural Parkway, in the northern area of the Lely development and just west across Collier Boulevard from the Physicians Regional Medical Center. The property is approximately 18.388 acres and was approved for 303 apartment units. The project was delayed, but no details were provided. The mortgage was recently sold by Wachovia/Wells Fargo. Comparable Land Sale No. 4: Location County: Parcel Identification Number Sale Date Recorded In: Grantor Grantee Indicated Consideration Gross Land Area Price per SF of Gross land Area Price per Gross Acre Developable Units Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 745f 124 Canwick Cove Circle, Lely Resort Southwesterly Quadrant of Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road Naples, Florida Collier 438920309 December 29, 2009 OR Book 4526, Page 1828 Regions Bank KCS Plantation, LLC $3,000,000 14.33 Acres or 624,214 square feet. $4.81 $209,351 84 Dwelling Units - PUD, City of Naples Agenda Item No. 12A July 27. 2010 Page 73461' 124 Price per Developable Unit $35,714 Comments This property is located within the Lely Resort Golf and County Club. The country club is located along the westerly side of Collier Boulevard, south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The site plan below depicts the orientation of the planned buildings around Canwick Cove Circle. The property is approximately 14.33 acres and is approved for 84 developable units under the Planned Unit Development guidelines for the greater Lely Resort Development Order. There are two parcels. Not highlighted in the above picture is the small parcel adjacent to the highlighted area to the east. The property was originally sold in May of 2006 for $14,700,000 with the approved site plan in place but no infrastructure. Regions Bank foreclosed on the property in March 2009 after the infrastructure and first building of three units were in place. After six months of no activity, Regions Bank sold the property to KCS Plantation, LLC, which is apparently owned by KC Stock Development, the original seller and developer of Lely Resort. The property was purchased with 3 of the 84 units complete with CO's, and the paving and utility infrastructure is in place for the remaining 81 units. The below site plan shows 28 buildings of 3 units each with open parking between the buildings, a clubhouse /pool facility in the interior of the development and golf courses along the exterior of the development. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 74% 124 Comparable Land Sale No. 5: Location County: Parcel Identification Number Sale Date Recorded In: Grantor Grantee Indicated Consideration Gross Land Area Price per SF of Gross land Area Price per Gross Acre Developable Units North Side Vanderbilt Beach Road Just West of I -75 Naples, Florida Collier 00201000003 Pending N/A BRT Coastal Development, et al ME $7,100,000 (est.) 7.51 Acres or 327,136 square feet. $21.70 $945,406 165 Price per Developable Unit $43,030 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 741Sf 124 Comments This property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, just west of I -75 and east of Livingston Road. It has been proposed as a site for an assisted living facility. The property is approximately 7.51 acres and was apparently approved for up to 200 units, but the buyer plans only 165 ALF units, or about 22 units per acre. The parcel has been under contract since September 2007, as the buyer encountered declining economic conditions and lack of financing. HUD financing is apparently nearing approval and the sale may soon be closed. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 7E49f 124 O V ,O M wt r O z` — M O �O 69 Vi vi Hi q 69 V3 A L O T O D M V �D j V3 69 69 V3 fR J3 Vi Vi Vi Z9 h V1 N M h ¢ M N 00 00 a O O O W O O b U O CO? M O O Hi fA (.9 iff f/. Q z ^ V ✓' � F G' O O O O C ¢ G U 'J^ G n Q p Q y U � x - U ° U �y m m _ o Z x O z 1 a U p - e •- � a r= Comparable Improved Sales Map rata usB subject to lie ense. I Del-.,me DeLo,— SIrnI AtIa, USA 2010 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 7 ED�gf 124 ' !• — aral� a.:aAaM� u vaie oli gearn ✓ ' ' Naplee Falk Fellicen Bay I� I 1' F it Norte lYa I I $iYl fIfiN Nspe Mun Q �gaPlee�', .c.,a yanies `� Lana sale -e J :Lana sale a MV 0 I ] 3 a 5 fi m mta zoom s7 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 7 -54f 124 Analysis of Comparable Land Sales All comparable land sales are adjusted toward the subject site for either the comparable sites' superior or inferior characteristics in relation to the subject site. The size of the adjustments applied to the comparable land sales are in proportion to the magnitude of the difference perceived in the market between the comparable land sale and the subject site. Urban land is typically analyzed on a unit of comparison basis. The unit of comparison used in the appraisal is the unit of comparison that is customarily used by purchasers in the market in the subject property's locale. After discussions with site developers and investors and as evidenced by market activity, it is believed the overall sale price per development unit is most appropriate as the unit of comparison and will be utilized in the following analysis process. Conditions of Sale The first step in the analysis process is to adjust for favorable, non -third party financing or other concessions of the comparable land sales. The comparable land sales sold for cash or with a cash equivalent instrument and, therefore, no adjustment is required for favorable, non -third party financing. Both buyer and seller appeared typically motivated in each sale. No concessions were apparent in the sales, and no personal property was involved in the transactions. Market Conditions The comparable land sales must be adjusted for changes in market conditions which have occurred between the date of the comparable land sale and the date of the value estimate of the subject site. The degree of the adjustment is in proportion to the magnitude of change that has occurred in the market for land in the subject property's locale, between the date of the comparable land sale and the date of valuation of the subject site. The greater the magnitude of change that has occurred, the greater the upward or downward adjustment is to be applied to the comparable price. Typically, a matched pair analysis is performed, comparing the earlier sale and subsequent sale price of the same parcel, or by comparing two sales of relatively similar parcels which occurred over a period of time, the more recent sale occurring near the time of appraisal. This method worked well in previous years, when there were a number of transactions from which to select comparable properties. More recently, however, there have been few sales, and majority were under conditions of duress. For example, the recent sale for Canwick was for $3,000,000, compared with an original purchase price of $14,700,000 in 2006. However, as with many sales, the price was influenced by the urgency of the seller to liquidate the property and the lack of financing for others to buy. Still, Sale 5 is a pending sale at approximately $7.1 million, not far off the 2007 listing price of $8.0 million, indicating that value is dependent on highest and best use, that any buyer will require a due diligence period, and that the price paid by the buyer is largely influenced by the amount of time granted for due diligence by the seller. Due to the lengthy period for due diligence and presales, the contract time for properties proposed for development of large -scale retirement communities can be several years. The time Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 7E52f 124 of adjustment should be as of the date of the meeting of the minds, the date of contract, rather than the subsequent closing date. At time of closing, market conditions may have changed from the time of the original contract. In earlier years, prices had often escalated significantly from the time of the initial contract to the date of closing. In our market research we identified two sales of sites exhibiting characteristics relatively similar to the subject, namely the type product to be developed. These sales were in 2008 and 2009. We understand that Sale 2 had originally been under contract at $11.5 million, eventually closing at $7.0 million, but the earlier price could not be confirmed. We also identified two formerly pending contracts which were abandoned, and one ALF site which is under contract, albeit lower than the original asking price. We are advised that, technically, that contract is not in force, yet the developer continues to pursue financing and believes he is close to obtaining FHA financing, and the seller has allowed additional time. Generally, prices appear to have declined by about 40% over the past few years. While the lack of comparable sales makes it difficult to compare sale transactions and extract a market adjustment, we also survey developers active in the market and obtain opinions as to the length of time it would require for market conditions to stabilize sufficiently to support new development. Of course, all projections are based on the survey respondents' view of economic conditions and development horizons. Respondents offered opinions ranging from 2 years to as long as 4 to 5 years for the time before a new development should be commenced, with 3 years being the center of the range. Contributory Value In cases when a comparable sale has improvements which contributed to the purchase price, the estimated value of those improvements may be subtracted from the purchase price in order to estimate the portion of the price paid for the land. Also, any personal property which may have contributed to a transaction price is subtracted in order to determine the price paid for the real property. Conversely, when existing improvements or personal property are costly to remove in order to prepare the real property for highest and best use, the removal expenses may be added to the purchase price. Interim use of any improvements did not unduly affect the sales prices. Extraordinary Site Development Costs Extraordinary site development costs include any cost necessary to ready the comparable site for development in excess of what is typical in the market and applicable to the subject. The extraordinary costs may include excessive grading, fill dirt, legal expenses, off -site improvements, etc. Where applicable, cost of extraordinary site development is added to the nominal purchase price of the comparable sites to render the adjusted purchase price. Location The adjustment for location is made for market relevant factors such as proximity to complementary supporting uses, size of roadway and traffic volumes, transportation linkages, population and labor markets and comer influence. Negative adjustments are applied to those Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 7$gf 124 sales which have superior locational characteristics, and, conversely, a positive adjustment is given if a comparable has an inferior locational character. The subject is located in the southeast quadrant of intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Goodlette -Frank Road, just north of downtown Naples and adjacent to Caribbean Gardens. The location is among the better available for CCRC development. Sale 1, a site in Lely, an upscale development, is considered slightly inferior, while a site near Bonita Beach in Lee County, noted as Sale 2, is considered a more significantly inferior location. Other sales surveyed, mostly for more typical ALF or rental apartment sites, were typical suburban sites, well- suited for the purpose intended but lacking the characteristics of the subject specific to CCRC development. These were adjusted upward. Physical Characteristics Adjustments were made for terrain, soil characteristics, configuration and general utility or developability of the site, as well as utility availability. Configuration and utility of the comparable sales were generally similar to the shape and developability of the parcels to be developed on the subject. Size The adjustment for difference in size is based upon the economic principle of diminishing marginal returns, which states that the rate of return beyond a certain point fails to increase in proportion to additional investments of labor or capital. Capital in this sense refers to physical assets such as land or building, and not money. The above principle states that the greater the land area, or quantity of units purchased, a developer will typically pay less for each additional land unit, thus lowering the overall average unit sale price. Although assemblage or plottage may be necessary and result in the assembled site having greater value than the sum of the parts, this states that larger sites will typically sell for a lower price per square foot than a smaller site. All sales are analyzed based on the gross land area of the comparables. The comparable sales ranged from 7.51 to 38.74 acres, compared to the 21.99 acre area of the subject. Other characteristics being equal, sites of significantly greater size than the subject would require a positive adjustment, while sites of significantly smaller size than the subject would typically require a negative adjustment. However, the adjustments may be tempered by the inflexibility or limited utility of a comparable site. CCRC's may range in size from the lower end of approximately 150 units or 5 acres to as large as Moorings Park, which contains 84 acres. All sales appear be of sufficient size to achieve the critical mass necessary to have a similar highest and best use. However, larger sites tend to sell for a lower price per unit or per square foot than smaller sites. Comparable Sale Ranking Following analysis of each of the comparable sales, and without specific adjustments, each sale is ranked as inferior or superior for each of the various categories of comparison. Following the Agenda Item No, 12A July 27, 2010 Page 8 (54f 124 comparative analysis, sales are ranked from highest to lowest, and the price for each is compared to the subject. The sales are then ranked and the subject ranked among them in order of comparability, as noted below. 1 Arlington at Naples CCRC Aug-08 $ 109,063 Subject Retail $ 85,000 2 Terraces at Ronita Springs CCRC SeP-09 $ 46,667 5 Vanderbilt Beach Road ALF Pending $ 43,030 4 Canwick Cove Townhouses Dec-09 $ 35,714 3 Collicr Parkway & Lcly Cultural Apt -07 $ 28,500 Sale No. 1 is inferior but is smaller than the subject, somewhat offsetting adjustments. However, the previously pending contract on the subject indicates the subject should be ranked slightly below Comparable Sale No. 1. Comparable Sale No. 2 is overall inferior, even though it is much smaller, and remaining sales are each considered inferior. Based on the above, and as evidenced by the prior contract on the subject, it appears that the retail or prospective price for the subject is approximately $85,000 per unit. Based on the 350 units proposed for the site, and as pennitted by zoning, this equates to $29,750,000. As no adjustments have been made for changing market conditions, and as this price is a projection, it is referred to as a prospective value. Timing Discount The previous contract on the subject was apparently abandoned due to lack of financing. Although financing is becoming available, and interest rates remain low, the two new projects under development on Land Sales 1 and 2 are in process of marketing in order to meet presale thresholds, as is Moorings Park. While all are achieving sales, the sales pace is below what was originally projected, and the time required to meet presale thresholds in order to commence development, including the amenity package and initial buildings at Land Sales 1 and 2, cannot be foretold. Further, with some 150 units each to sell, both will be marketing remaining buildings for 2 to 3 years, perhaps much longer. We believe it unlikely that the subject would soon be acquired by a developer willing to expend the considerable sums necessary to seek approvals and to commence presales until these two projects are shown to be successful. Although this cannot be known with certainty, consensus appears to range around 2 years for the subject. At that time, the subject would be placed under contract, approvals and preleasing would begin, and a closing would occur within approximately 12 months. We, therefore, have deferred the previously estimated retail price of the subject for a three -year period. Certain holding costs, including taxes, insurance, security and maintenance, will be incurred by the owner of the subject property, and the cash flows must be discounted to a present value. In other words, for an investor to obtain a minimum threshold return on investment, the present market value should be sufficiently low to allow the investor to carry the property for three years, then receive sufficient cash at a closing to achieve the threshold rate of return. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 855f 124 Discount or Yield Rate The discount or yield rate is that rate required for an investor to acquire and hold an asset for a period of time. The analysis requires that the investor project a likely prospective future sales price, and makes valid assumptions about the time of the holding period. Often, investors will look at a property differently, with differing assumptions as to prospective value and marketing time, and with different yield rates, yet arrive at similar present values. Yield rates are fairly consistent in the market, as investors compete for properties, but vary based on the unique characteristics of the property which affect risk. According to the Korpacz /PriceWaterhouseCoopers Second Quarter 2010 Investor Survey, required yield rates ranged from 15% to 30 %, with a national average of 21.25%. Florida, and Naples in particular, is often perceived as a growing market which will return to growth mode within a short period of time, and required rates may be lower. An large Orlando investment firm reportedly uses a 20% yield in its analyses. Local investors often quote a range from about 20% to 25 %. Although no sales could be identified in which investment rates could be quantified, we have utilized a 20% rate as reflective of the Naples market. Present Value The previously estimated prospective value of $29,750,000 is deferred three years into the future, our estimate of when cash would be received by an investor, holding costs deducted, then the cash flows are discounted to a present value, as follows. 2 3 Future Sale $ 29.750,000 Taxes $ (155,737) $ (160,409) (165,222) Holding Costs $ (50,000) $ (51,500) $ (53,045) Net Cash Flow $ (205,737) $ (211,909) $ 29,968,267 Yield Factor 20.00% Present Value $ 17,024,140 Rounded $ 17,000,000 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 8 �)6f 124 Reconciliation of Land Value The sales comparison approach is one of the narrowing of a range in values. In other words, adjustments were applicable to the comparable sales for all factors which can be measured by market data, reducing the sales prices to a smaller range in values. Prior to adjustment, the comparable sales ranged from $4.81 to $21.70 per square foot of land area, and from $28,500 to $109,063 per unit. Following adjustments for the factors noted, and based on analysis of the likely subject development, prospective value was estimated at $29,750,000. This future amount is discounted to a present value of $17,000,000. Based on 350 units, this is equivalent to $48,571 per unit. Based on other analyses, present value of the subject was estimated to range around approximately $50,000 per CCRC unit, well supporting the above analysis. We also considered the possibility that the site may be used for all or part commercial purposes in a mixed use development. This type development may result in higher value if subdivided to smaller parcels. For a larger parcel such as the subject, based on sales of commercial sites in Collier County, value could range from $15.00 to $20.00 per square foot, or from about $14.4 million to $19.2 million. As this would require a zoning change and site planning for these purposes, and therefore hypothetical conditions, a final value was not sought, but the range is also supportive of the previous analysis. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 8$7f 124 _ RECONCILIATION AND FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE The value conclusions are as follows: Sales Comparison Approach $17,000,000 The cost approach is not appropriate when the property is vacant and unimproved, and is therefore not employed. The sales comparison approach employs the principal of substitution, meaning that a buyer would pay no more for the subject property than the price for which they could acquire a similar property offering similar utility and investor goal fulfillment. A variety of sales of properties quite similar to the subject were found throughout the market, and those considered most applicable to the subject were included within the report. Based on analysis of these sales, the indication of value of the subject by the sales comparison approach is considered quite reliable, and the indication of value is given considerable weight. As the market is slow and the property is not expected to sell at the prospective value for a period of time, the income capitalization approach was utilized to discount the future value to a current value. This is the value that would provide an acceptable market rate of return to an investor, based on the set of circumstances previously discussed. Therefore, with primary weight on the value estimate by the sales comparison approach for a prospective value, and with discounting based on elements of the income capitalization approach, it is our opinion that the market value of the fee simple estate of the subject property, in as -is condition and as of the appraisal date, July 9, 2010, is approximately $17,000,000. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 8z5gf 124 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. The conclusions as to market value contained herein represent the opinion of the undersigned and are not to be construed in any way as a guarantee or warranty, either expressed or implied, that the property described herein will actually sell for the market value contained in this opinion. 2. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for matters including legal or title considerations. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise stated. 3. No furniture, furnishings, or equipment, unless specifically indicated herein, has been included in our value conclusions. Only the real estate has been considered. 4. The property is appraised free and clear of all encumbrances, unless otherwise noted. 5. No survey of the property was made or caused to be made by the appraiser. It is assumed the legal description closely delineates the property. It was checked with public records for accuracy. Drawings in this report are to assist the reader in visualizing the property and are only an approximation of grounds or building plan. 6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property's subsoil or structure that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies that may be required to discover them. 7. Subsurface rights (minerals, oil, or water) were not considered in this report. 8. Description and condition of physical improvements, if any, described herein are based on visual observation. As no engineering tests were conducted, no liability can be assumed for soundness of structural members. 9. The appraiser has inspected any improvements. Unless otherwise noted, subject improvements are assumed to be free of tennites, dry rot, wet rot, or other infestation. Inspection by a reputable pest control company is recommended for any existing improvement. 10. All value estimates have been made contingent on zoning regulations and land use plans in effect as of the date of appraisal, and based on information provided by governmental authorities and employees. 11. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations, unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. 12. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and land use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless a nonconfonnity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 8559f 124 13. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is predicated. 14. No responsibility is assumed by the appraiser for applicability of "concuirency laws ", referring to the 1985 amendments to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. At this time it is unclear what effect, if any, these laws might have on any property in any given county. As various legislative and judicial action is pending, the reader is cautioned to fully investigate the likelihood of development moratorium or other governmental action with appropriate municipal, county, or state officials. 15. It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in the report. 16. Appraisal does not constitute an inspection for compliance with local building, fire, or zoning codes. Reader is advised to contact local government offices to ensure compliance with applicable ordinances. 17. This appraisal report covers only the premises herein; and no figures provided, analysis thereof, or any unit values derived therefrom are to be construed as applicable to any other property, however similar they may be. 18. Distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the existing program of utilization. Separate valuations of land and improvements must not be used in any other manner, nor in conjunction with any other appraisal, and are invalid if so used. 19. Certain data used in compiling this report was furnished by the client, his counsel, employees, and /or agent, or from other sources believed reliable. However, no liability or responsibility may be assumed for complete accuracy. 20. An effort was made to verify each comparable sale noted in the report. There are times when it is impossible to confirm a sale with the parties involved in the transaction; however, all sales are confirmed through public records. 21. Consideration for preparation of this appraisal report is payment in full by the client of all charges due the appraiser in connection therewith. Any responsibility by the appraiser for any part of this report is conditioned upon full and timely payment. 22. The appraiser, by reason of this report, is not required to give testimony in court with reference to the property herein, nor obligated to appear before any governmental body, board, or agent, unless arrangements have been previously made therefore. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 8($gt 124 23. Unless otherwise noted, this appraisal has been prepared solely for the private use of the client who is listed above as the addressee. No other party is entitled to rely on the information, conclusions, or opinions contained herein. 24. Neither all nor any portion of the contents of this appraisal shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media without the written consent and approval of the appraiser, particularly as to valuation conclusions, identity of the appraiser or firm with which he is connected, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute or to the MAI designation. Furthermore, neither all nor any portion of the contents of this appraisal shall be used in connection with any offer, sale, or purchase of a security (as that term is defined in Section 2(1) of the Securities Act of 1933) without the prior express written consent of the appraiser. 25. Possession of this report or copy thereof does not convey any right of reproduction or publication, nor may it be used by any but the client, the mortgagee, or its successors or assigns, mortgage insurers, or any state or federal department or agency without the prior written consent of both the client and the appraiser, and, in any event, only in its entirety. 26. Before any loans or commitments are made predicated on value conclusions reported in this appraisal, the mortgagee should verify facts and valuation conclusions contained in this report with the appraiser. 27. Cost estimates for construction or reproduction of improvements are based on information from Marshall Valuation Service and other sources referenced in the report and are assumed accurate. 28. Estimates of expenses, particularly as to assessment by the County Property Appraiser and subsequent taxes, are based on historical or typical data. Such estimates are based on assumptions and projections which, as with any prediction, are affected by external forces, many unforeseeable. While all estimates are based on our best knowledge and belief, no responsibility can be assumed that such projections will come true. 29. Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed. 30. Unless stated otherwise, the possibility of hazardous material, which may or may not be present on the property, was not observed by the appraiser during the course of the normal inspection and research conducted during the appraisal assignment. The appraiser, however, is not professionally qualified to detect such substances, and inspection by a professional in the field is recommended for any property. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea - formaldehyde foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous materials could affect the value of the property, if found. The value estimate is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. This appraisal report is subject to receipt of an environmental audit confinning that no hazardous or toxic material is located on the premises. Should such material be discovered, final value estimates herein would be reduced by the cost to remove such substances and to restore the Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 8"64f 124 premises to serviceable condition, and may further be reduced by indirect expenses and income losses incurred by the owner during abatement. Such adjustments to the value estimate contained herein may be made only by the appraiser and only upon receipt of the environmental audit, construction cost estimates and other data satisfactory to the appraiser at his sole discretion. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 88 of 124 URLiAN REALTY SOLUTIONS It IINh',h it) Gil Itl Kr R. MAI *A It { I R III I k D..I Kf t %I AI '.,AI i 1 Il .1140 QUALIFICATIONS OF H. LINWOOD GILBERT, JR., MAI December 1991 to Present LICENSESAND CERTIFICATIONS President, Urban Realty Solutions — Tampa, Florida Principal of real estate research and appraisal firm providing market studies, feasibility analyses, damage studies, valuation and litigation support on marina, commercial, industrial and residential developments. Services include consultation with municipalities and private investors regarding economic impact and multiplier effect of public construction and development incentives. URS can link demographic and positive or negative financial data to GIS mapping, so that factors such as the spread of contamination may easily be visualized. Property value trends and other factors may be overlaid to demonstrate correlations. Experience includes development, construction, brokerage and property management for a variety of office, industrial and marina developments. Appraisals have included all types and sizes of residential, commercial, industrial, retail and resort properties. The fine is incorporated as Gilbert Associates, Inc., DBA Urban Realty Solutions, and has been in operation since 1991. Florida State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser License Number RZ0940 Licensed Real Estate Broker Numbers BK272378 and BK3005632 Temporary Puerto Rico and US Virgin Islands Appraisal Licenses PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIO:NIS Appraisal Institute Real Estate Investment Council, Inc. Association of Eminent Domain Professionals The International Marina Institute Marine Industries Association of South Florida National Marine Manufacturer's Association Marina Operators Association of America Florida Association for the Restoration of Ethics, Inc. Superyaeht Society Urban Land Institute MAI Professional Designation Member, Admissions Committee Member, Regional Ethics Panel Member Member Member, Instructor Member Member Member Member Member Member Ebucw /ON University of Georgia, Bachelor of Business Administration, 1973 Major in General Business Minor in Finance, Management, Marketing and Real Estate CONTINUING EDUCATION Courses 101 and 201 Society of Real Estate Appraisers Course II, Urban Properties (Commercial/Income) Course VI, Investment Analysis Course VIII, Residential Appraisal Capitalization Theories and Techniques (IBB) Rate Extraction Seminar Course X, Market Analysis Standards of Professional Practice Applied Appraisal Techniques Valuation Litigation / Mock Trial Capital Market Influences on Real Estate Valuation Analyzing Operating Expenses USPAP "Core" Law Update for Appraisers Power Lines and Electro- Magnetic Fields Effect on Value and People Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation — ALI /ABA Litigation Skills for the Appraiser: An Overview Construction Contracts — Strategies for Project Completion and Litigation Avoidance CLE Eminent Domain Conference 2001 Appraisals & Federal Regulations The Valuation of Wetlands Appraising for Pension Fund Portfolios Development Analysis Valuation of Hotels and Motels Income Capitalization Workshop Advanced Capitalization Workshop Calculator and Computer Solutions to Contemporary Problems Hewlett Packard Financial Calculators — Advanced Course Impact of Environmental Considerations on Real Estate Appraisals Appraisal Regulations of the Federal Banking Agencies Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 89 of 124 Discount and Capitalization Rate Components The Appraiser as Expert Witness Understanding Limited Appraisals and Reporting Options Tax Credits for Low Income Housing Fair Lending and the Appraiser Appraisal of Nursing Facilities Economic Worth of On- Premise Signage Florida Ad Valorem Property Tax Update Regulatory Takings & Property Rights Transportation Issues & Eminent Domain Regression Analysis in Appraisals Analyzing Distressed Real Estate Marina Retrofit, Redesign & Construction FDEP Appraising Submerged Land Easements Developing Resort, 2 "d Home and Golf Course Communities, Urban Land Institute Valuing Enhancement Projects (LEED Green Buildings) & Financial Returns, BOMI Marina Dry Stack Conference, AMI Green Marina Design Marina Shoreline Development & Permitting, LSI Feasibility, Investment Timing & Options, Al Florida State Law Update for Real Estate Appraisers National USPAP Update Course Business Practices and Ethics Inverse Condemnation New Technology for the Real Estate Appraiser Instructor Leadership and Development Conference Separating Real and Personal Property from Intangible Business Assets Analyzing Commercial Lease Clauses Litigation Appraisal The Appraiser As An Expert Witness Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 90 of 124 Mr. Gilbert has also attended courses and seminars covering various aspects of real estate valuation, lending, leasing, marketing and management sponsored by The Urban Land Institute, The Ohio State University, The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Robert Morris Associates, The Northwest Center for Professional Education, New York University, St. Petersburg College, the University of Shopping Centers (sponsored by The International Council of Shopping Centers), CCIM Institute, Florida Power Corporation, the Environmental Assessment Association and others. He has been a guest lecturer at NAIOP Real Estate Development course, Instructor of a Real Estate Appraisal Course for the International Marina Institute and was a guest lecturer at the St. Petersburg BAR Association on ad valorem taxation. Also, Mr. Gilbert is qualified as an Expert Witness in real estate valuation matters in bankruptcy and civil courts. H. Linwood Gilbert, Jr., MAI, has completed the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE April 1993 to September 2004 Executive Vice President, Urban Economics, Inc — Tampa, Florida Principal of real estate research and appraisal fine providing services similar to now provided under Urban Realty Solutions. The firm also focused on support for litigation through valuation and damage studies. Broker of transactions totaling $100 million. February 1991 to May 1993 President, Gilbert Associates, Inc. — St. Petersburg, Florida Real estate consulting Finn providing market research, highest and best use analysis, and other financial planning and marketing services. During economic downturn, prepared guidelines for the marketing, construction and management of distressed developments, including determination of status of development approvals, such as Development of Regional Impact, cmironmental and local permitting; assistance in selection of consultants and contractors, and value engineering for proposed construction. Broker of record for St. Petersburg CBD Master Retail Development company, including oversight of the St Petersburg Pier Festive Market. 1983 to February 1991 Vice President, Development, Talyuin Development Company St. Petersburg, Florida Responsible for development of all projects in the Tampa Bay area for this Florida Progress Corporation subsidiary. Conducted research and feasibility analyses for most projects undertaken by Development Division. Managed Development Division and was project director from concept through completion of Bank of America Tower, a 330,000 - square Blot, $50 million mixed -use development, completed on time and on budget in December 1990, The Harborage at Bayboro, a 635 -slip marine complex, plus numerous office, retail and industrial projects. Negotiated partnership with The Wilson Company for co-devclopment of Carillon Corporate Center. Organized construction, marketing, and piopety management departments, as well as the marine division. Property development and management included approximately 750,000 square feet of commercial and industrial properties. Negotiated major leases for buildings, an rights and submerged lands, and design /build contracts, including conversion of historic school building to moderate income aparnnents. Provided private sector leadership in the planning and implementation of St. Petersburg's Intown Redevelopment program. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 91 of 124 1978 to 1983 Vice President, Warren Hunnicutt, Jr., Inc. — St. Petersburg, Florida Appraised and conducted feasibility analyses on virtually all types of commercial, industrial, hospitality and residential properties, and including islands and environmentally sensitive lands. Specialized in larger projects, including shopping centers, motels, golf course communities and industrial developments. Conducted and published first county-wide surveys of retail and industrial markets. Office was one of the first in the industry to use computerized discounted cash flow models. 1972 to 1978 Assistant Vice President, Construction Lending and Review Appraiser, Century First National Bank (now Wachovia/Wells Fargo) — St. Petersburg, Florida Responsibilities included construction and permanent loan underwriting and administration, as well as review appraiser for all loans originated in Commercial Lending areas. Three years as Special Assets officer, handling all legal proceedings, construction completion and marketing of foreclosed properties, which ranged from major hotels to high -rise condominiums. 1969 to 1972 Real Estate Loan Representative, The Citizens & Southern National Bank— Athens, Georgia Underwrote and administered construction and permanent single - family FHANA and conventional loans. Appraiser trainee. Also trained in credit card, sales finance, branch management, installment lending and other departments under commercial banking management training program. CivicACTirrT /Es Member, Board of Directors of Tampa Union Station Preservation and Restoration, Inc.; Member, Council of Elders of the Community Alliance of St. Petersburg, a biracial organization (former co- chairman); Former Board of Governors and Chairman, Transportation Committee, The St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce; Former Board Member and Treasurer, The National Association of Industrial and Office Parks; Former Board Member, The Science Center of Pinellas County (an educational institution); Former Board Member and Transportation Committee Chairman, The Committee of 100 of Pinellas County; Member, Gulfcoast Certified Development Corporation; Member, Leadership St. Pete and Leadership Tampa Bay, and a Member of the St. Petersburg Suncoasters, sponsors of the Festival of States. Mr. Gilbert is also active in other community organizations. nCd STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL ED SEQ# LOS 120202494 The CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISER Named below IS CERTIFIED Under the provisions of Chapter 475 FS. Expiration date: Nov 30, 2010 GILBERT, H LIWOOD JR 810 S STERLING AVE TAMPA FL 33609 CHARLIE RIST GOVERNOR CHARLES W. DRAGO DISPLAY AS REQUIRED BY LAW SECRETARY Agenda Item No, 12A July 27, 2010 Page 92 of 124 ADDENDUM Engagement Authorization Annexation Agreement Zoning Requirements Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 93 of 124 APPRAISAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (Caribbean Gardens/Naples Zoo phase 11 53409 -531) This Agreement is made this _ day Wane, 2010 between THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND, a nonprofit California corporation ( "Client'), having a place of business at 306 North Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32301, and URBAN REALTY SOLUTIONS, ( "Appraiser'), with a place of business at 810 South Sterling Avenue, Tampa, Florida 33609 -4516. For and in consideration of the fees, mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, Client and Appraiser agree as follows: 1. Real Property to be Appraised. The real property to be appraised is situated in Collier County, Florida as more particularly described in EXHIBIT "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Subject Property"). 2. Interest to he Appraised. The interest to be appraised is the fee simple. 3. Purpose of Appraisal and Use of Report. The purpose of the appraisal is to estimate the current fair market value of the Subject Property. For the purposes of this Agreement, the definition of "market value" shall be the definition used in Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 2002, as follows: __. A type of value, stated as an opinion, that presumes the transfer of a property (i.e., a right of ownership or a bundle or such rights), as of a certain date, under specific conditions set forth in the definition of the term identified by the appraiser as applicable in an appraisal. The results of the appraisal shall be in the form of full narrative written report (the "Appraisal Report"). prepared by Appraiser, which will be delivered to and used by Client to provide the basis for the determination of the purchase price for the Subject Property, 4, Special Conditions and Requirements. a. Jurisdictional Lands. The Appraisal Report shall reflect specific values of those parts of the Subject Property (if any) which me subject to regulation by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or other regulatory agency because of special circumstances, or which are subject to restrictions resulting from development covenants imposed by contract, law or other agreement. b. Government Aeencv Requirements. In addition to the Appraiser's responsibilities included in USPAP Standards of performance, and other appraisal requirements set forth herein, the Appraisal Report shall conform to the standards of Collier County, Florida. Appraiser hereby represents and warrants that [it] is approved/on the approved list of Collier County, Florida) at Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 94 of 124 the execution of this Agreement, and that Appraiser will be approved on the date the Appraisal Report is delivered to client. Appraiser and Client hereby agree that in the event Appraiser is not an approved appraiser by Collier County, Florida, according to that agency on the date the Appraisal Report is delivered to Client, Client shall be relieved of all responsibility for payment for services or expenses to Appraiser otherwise required under this Agreement. Appraiser acknowledges that [it] has been informed by Client that Client is relying on Appraiser's representation of its approved status, and that such status is a fact material to Client's willingness to enter into this Agreement" 5. Standards of Performance. Appraiser agrees to exercise independenijudgment and to complete the Preliminary Estimate of Value, and the Appraisal Report, as applicable, in accordance with sound appraisal practice, the Code of Professional Ethics of the Appraisal Institute, and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 2002. 6. Time for Performance. Appraiser shall deliver a draft of the completed Appraisal Report to Client no later than June 28, 2010. Appraiser shall deliver the completed Appraisal Report to client no later than two (2) days after Client provides comments on the Draft Appraisal Report. 7. Copies of Report. Appraiser agrees to provide Client with Three (3) copies of the Appraisal Report 8. Professional fee. Client agrees to pay Appraiser, upon completion of the Appraisal Report to the satisfaction of Client, as compensation for the professional appraisal services to be rendered hereunder, the amount of Six Thousand Dollars and NO /100 (S6,000.001. This amount includes all expenses to be incurred by the Appraiser in the course of completing this Appraisal Report. 9. Client's Responsibilities. To enable Appraiser to perform the appraisal services required hereunder, Client shall provide Appraiser or Appraiser's agents with access to the Subject Property, and a boundary map (the "Map "), which is attached hereto as EXHIBIT "B" and incorporated herein by this reference. Upon request, Client shall also provide Appraiser with such other materials, if any, in the possession of Client, such as studies or reports on conditions of the Subject Property, which, in Client's determination, may have an effect upon the fair market value of the Subject Property. It is agreed that Appraiser may, but need not, assume the accuracy of any and all information and materials submitted by Client. 10. Warranties and Representations by Appraiser. Appraiser warrants and represents to Client that Appraiser has no present or contemplated future interest in the Subject Property and that Appraiser has no personal interest or bias with respect to this Agreement or the parties involved. No one other than Appraiser (or the individual who signs the .Appraisal Report on behalf of Appraiser) shall form the analyses, conclusions, or opinions to be set forth in the Appraisal Report, unless the participation by such otherparp is indicated by the co- signing of the Appraisal Report by such other party or acknowledged in writing. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 95 of 124 11. Appraiser's Responsibilities. All statements of fact in the Appraisal Report which are used as the basis of Appraiser's analyses, opinions and conclusions shall be true and accurate to the best of Appraiser's knowledge and belief. Appraiser shall analyze and take into consideration all exceptions to title as shown on the Title Report [if provided], Appraiser may assume that there are no conditions that are not apparent relating to the Subject Property, sub -soil or structures located on the Subject Property (if any) which would affect Appraiser's analyses, opinions or conclusions with respect to the fair market value ofthe Subject Property, unless facts are provided to the Appraiser by Client or others which would affect Appraiser's analyses, opinions and conclusions. 12. Confidential Information and Ownership of Documents. The data gathered in the appraisal process and the Appraisal Report prepared pursuant to this Agreement shall be the property of Client. With respect to any information provided to Appraiser by Client, Appraiser shall not disclose any confidential information furnished to Appraiser except to Appraiser's officers or employees for the purpose of preparing the Appraisal Report. Appraiser shall not disclose all or any part of the Appraisal Report and the related appraisal data to any person without Client's prior written consent; provided, however, that Appraiser may disclose all or any part of the Appraisal Report and the related appraisal data to appropriate representatives of the Appraisal Institute, if such disclosure is required to enable Appraiser to comply with the Bylaws and Regulations of such Institute now or hereafter in effect, and for purposes of such compliance Appraiser may retain a copy of the Appraisal Report and related appraisal data- 13. Limitations Upon Use of Appraisal Report by Client. The parties hereto understand that Client is commissioning and paying for the preparation of the Appraisal Report to be used in the ordinary course of Client's business in negotiating and entering into transactions for the acquisition and disposition of the subject Property. Client agrees that it will not disseminate all or any portion of the Appraisal Report to the general public through the advertising media, public relations media, sales media orother public means of communications unrelated to Client's use of the Appraisal Report in negotiating and entering into transactions forthe acquisition and disposition of the Subject Property without the prior written consent and approval of Appraiser. The parties hereto agree that Appraiser has no obligation to update the Appraisal Report or revise it in any manner because of events or transactions occurring subsequent to the date of the Appraisal Report unless otherwise provided herein. 14. Default. In the event that Appraiser defaults in the performance of my ofAppraisees obligations under this Agreement, in addition to Client's right to recover damages for breach of contract or any other remedy provided by law or equity, Client shall be entitled to receive all information and materials obtained by Appraiser in the appraisal process up until the time of Appraiser's default, and Appraiser shall return to Client all documents and materials furnished to Appraiser by or on behalf of Client. 15. Extent of Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement between Client and Appraiser and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 96 of 124 16. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon the heirs, successors and assigns of Client and Appraiser. 17. Goveraine Law. This Agreement shall he governed by the laws of the State of Florida 18. Severability. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be determined to be void or unenforceable by any court of competentiurisdiction, then such determination shall not affect any other provision of this Agreement and all such other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. 19. Time is of the Essence. Appraiser understands that time is of the essence in this Agreement and that Client will be relying on the timeliness of the Appraisal Report in Client's negotiating and entering into agreement for the acquisition and disposition ofthe Subject Property. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties hereto has dated and executed this Agreement and caused it to be delivered to the other party hereto. CLIENT: THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND, a nonprofit California corporation i By �a2 Name: Kevin Mooney Title: Senior Project Manager Date: June 1, 2010 APPRAISER: URBAN REALTY SOLUTIONS By:v_ Name: H. Linwood Gilbert Title: _President 6/1/2010 Date: Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 97 of 124 Agenda Item 8 Meeting of 9/16/09 ORDINANCE 08 -12255 AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THE BRIDGES AT GORDON RIVER ANNEXATION; AMENDING SECTION 1.2 OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA, IN ORDER TO ANNEX 21.99+ ACRES, LOCATED EAST OF GOODLETTE -FRANK ROAD, WEST OF THE GORDON RIVER, SOUTH OF GOLDEN GATE PARKFAY AND NORTH OF THE NAPLES ZOO, MORE FOLLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF NAPLES TO INCLUDE SAID PROPERTY; DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO FORAARD A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO THE CIRCUIT COURT CLERK, THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER OF COLLIER COUNTY AND THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE OF THE ANNEXATION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Cl:accei _".941' of the Plorida Statates allc,+s :;:nie-s ,f xaal pic ,sz y .n en '.n i erfrorated xrea _� a cumty w}.ich is n'igur_s to a nu �c.ralll�, and :rascr ip con. -.;t w petition to nmieFI onto -he amity; and WHEREAS, d f °---AR laluure of '.VaP_es, LLIC, cwnet r.£ tr, catty, and S -Tic4 '.a _.:YV e1:.c.i�uCL, LLC, p, hav lecY Tuned to -n :' intc t_ in accor9ance •�+i .h .Y.apter 1� -.SA:3 of the WHEREAS, Sohn M. ? ;: ^so, Es7., of h -f ✓, - 'J,'mo, 4i7a. ^n 6 nrhnsbn P nue: _as ben a_i ctrc -i-d by th ct.ticner Lo £i3a '.tiffs ps'ic. i. ;r: acd D7!{EAEAS, 1 �leeii nq a� �idw__i -ed 6ubl'., heat _nd, Rie C1 r�::.p -„ _��ry :.oatd �, -.:� r�et ed the wblir input, ji _if iec_ a _iticus snd iIt. a i n the _o ie erd hn3 1e1c1131 e117ed Ly a a of 4 to 1, tin __-'p1 _ s?cc , ]:,d WHEREAS, f c ^nr i : -ng tl rna =i anon of C,ty 0, _ 71 �. -er *h- t- _:ri'_e ___o d puLli.: hea =inls a =rite -r.es end tFa rnh.Ii Ipci n�ty co -att, 9 -e _icy i• �� d zl,., le the I .'urns Llf �i:a cn y �i,net ,f 'l e F. r „o sed, and hat ghe [ icF ,r -ed .;icier. __ in 11 e I -et L �„ :. _.._ z 1 -t n tie �_- = Le iii -i and �iti_ nr-n- WHEREAS, I e a_e i r a_e'.e °d eleotot° in the ai.a Lo be i set; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA: Section 1. 71at _1 "'I i ci 'Re of She ` and Ordinance 08-12255 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 98 of 124 Page 2 Section 2. TMt r. '.? 1 ;f I, — '"I r y i--ldn I), -h-,t 1- F -Y f the -L'y open Section 3. -he k Is , =I -j'v I'll d a c 1--f f -d ccrr,, "I I I e lice. It —t tf!'-x If Co- to Lie Section 4. he , -IT-Y y 1. f J, ,c -w iIII -a Section 5- 'hi - d 1, 'na f -111!,'1, by APPROVED AT FIRST READING THIS 17TH DAY OF DEMMER, 2008. PASSED AND ADOPTED AT SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING IN OPEN AND REGULAR SESSION Or THE CITY COUNCIL Or THE ciT7 or NAFLEs, FLORIDA THIS 16TH DAY Or SEPTEMBER, 2009. A* ', : t ; J i L , - !. r L t , I lo I r 4 r I , - Il a, I , 1c -a: m1,,l - , I, -i -- -: ",I n�Y M:\REF',COUNCIL\ORD\200S\08-12255 DtiLe filed 1,1 -1, , i t%, -,1.: Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 99 of 124 Ordinance 08-12255 Page 3 A L? r _ .L lF:.ion of Ft ,olt y to E A r.._s d (A L;UF" _ -HE LE =I .GJFIFTTn1iS i'OI:TATI'.Er IN F i i.ICS A 111E C IIl idCD L HIBIT R, F1C. _° IL tE1dED '_k 1"F JI'F'II'E r h 7t•'E F" I ;5 rI�;aCF TFT1ET i:.'.11 i, :.. FT.,r.:EP. 1 FOFT!%IG ;U =. ='.F F - _.:? f.]cPSI THE BRIDGES AT GORDON RIVER ^tier. ;V S' r _4, 9 cf thpl =_e _mpYC '- '11i, I I, nq .I),'a ] i.Lr_e at'rrs as 1'd !. r. P-.-i- ;t (.;:7? of tl,e II l:c. Few 1: of C:1 I I S: r�uoe :mot pit—, jr. -, Lhe nm 10 -1 ii t four ,4, e,I --_�: 1) h nca tulg I. tL l 9.' {S" C for e ='3l,oe I 'E F ..._. r . �. F 'r, tar r, i ^nrc.� `17 - >zr; rsil F l.^ars 6c '}i 11 v _ �_. -4 C:e -t it >h I: 5 =ter a 'ca !!1- „ rrd Ir'ca c .Iii 7 -1 r, aainq l:.i.= qt E1 14 f,: 1 -.:aA u11 _1 -i; ,..• -� - ac c- :'n .1 Ir.: f 4 Lr I� it IL.t aye %L Lc L , .._ _ - ,- el . yirmi: l rf r, -e ) ,i ] ..: , d }'Lt =in .I'P:ert; '.] c_�:. 1: - n_:r 1 uo U.o o. li1.c f c, , -. -., f r .1151 7r..- ,f ?C. i.h 1 f � iic L_t ]) rl r. ..Y, ':e "1:'. !'• F.:rr, f -_eL cn 4 _ 1: "r 11 -� Fo::.• _., _. t::uc:, t _I I iz, nIt?trJ f -nY r'.? ):.. n- e:r& .. i::'.h an— in N:+.w�. -!:n e ,. +Id ul .1 _t _t. L ._.'_I .. _ .._ f _ -.J9 -. = _- { ;) Isc_ n -h "d I ._• F.'t, .ter �[:Fi - .ir�' >I -., f =r - ,_ �n '_I .au ro- ;t =r., rr hi lY r =e T.o 1p ely - Ordinance 08 -12255 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 100 of 124 Page 4 NOTES 9_a iu� ace c.,._a ino -.._:ai h_trni are k -_ea ,.0 V.c P1c.tida L-t,- pl:�ue Ea t -.- Idr_'h Am?r {c �u eii= nati. f, t_i2e aC to eae °r nCS, _esel%acions +cr re,t '..tiocs of Ordinance 08 -12255 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 101 of 124 Page 5 Erhikit B MAP SHOWING CURRENT BOUITDARIES OF CITY OF NAPLES (HEAVY BLACK LINE) WITH AREA TO BE ANNEXED (SHADED) tu -r 7 CFxF Annexation ) Usrx cues yt C Gulf of or Mexico �G(� )1 YZ V Iv A -r Annexation Area (i is i YZ V ii ma^ � T � hI t - ih. 2 Ordinance 09-12526 I. it hibit A E! 0 Ll E Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 102 of 124 Page 23 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 103 of 124 Agenda Item 9-b Meeting of 9/16/09 ORDINANCE 09-12526 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE BRIDGES AT GORDON RIVER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT; GRANTING REZONE PETITION 08-RI, REZONING A 21.99 + ACRE PARCEL or LAND LOCATED EAST Or GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD, REST or THE "50RDw RIVER, SOUTH or GOLDEN GATE PAR MW AND NORTH OF THE NAPLES Zoo, FROM COLLIER COUNTY ZONING DESIGNATIONS Or RMF-6, RMF-6(3) AND AGRICULTURAL, TO A CITY ZONING DESIGNATION OF PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT or A CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY; APPROVING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, zlri)�ILOn 11!S 1'-e f It 1, LL-, I:'ICIL If It - -- --1.19 -, 'c- 1— at.d we t S11c,;Ietve -Fl rtnk eP—t of the '--,i d>n OOUth -f ll1dttn irate FI-,17,.v and north of -1,s tja,,--s la eLl --ej LO _::jan,je 1,9 1 L11r, 9 170: :lcllinq RT IF- 6 d 14 7,i ... A-,d WHEREAS Jahn M. L6O - ttds 1-eCTI -,I'LhIzi=ed by Lhe -IIfer as WHEREAS, - f , 11 I;i na an ad,: t 4 --d r`te F I , I I n , fO, , i ry 'a-d a-- -it,:I 'If CC2Lil,-- 1.'j -he ar,d ha public ff'-, ti— _11r"1 111-1 1,1 and In -he :,nde , - HJ _d LY I nd WHEREAS, 1-1! -:.d C11,,ng a '-he jul-lic III, -r FCrnuity t-e - i and WHEREAS, in "'e I`it.' Of eS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED By THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA: Section 1. '.'Lat I.,- -f II--- -I I f tti� -1 , ;n,,-h s, t, - j, 11 ,It, I--,,,-,y nd -h -h- it I--lftV ,FE L--, J _ -1 1 1.1;1-1 112 fITT'— (-',) and cf PD, -lIt Section 2. hy 0 pall 1--i, If t,-,e -,I, Oi, 111 11 21 f If -h, d'I 1 I. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 104 of 124 Ordinance 09-12526 Page 2 -pr,'t D,cu, .f, 1 Section 3. lht 'h, 4 !.'l, of U41Y of Section 4. -hl- fe: -1A A p �n 'h, cff, e ij. C. f -,Inr C!, E-,e il". h,t APPROVED AT FIRST READING THE ISTH DAY OF MARCH, 2009. PASSED AND ADOPTED AT SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING IN OPEN AND REGULAR SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA THIS 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009. A-t-st: M:\REF\COVNCIL\ORD\2009\09-12526 's " form an'd ti:, -7,.ttv,n-1Y Ordinance 09 -12526 Exhibit "A" PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT FOR THE BRIDGES AT GORDON RIVER Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 105 of 124 Page 3 Date of Submittal: August 11, 2008 as revised on February 2, 2009 and March 18, 2009 Prepared by: Cheffy Passidomo Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 106 of 124 Ordinance 09 -12526 Page 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section I Legal Description of the "Property" 5 Section II Project Team 7 Section III Planned Development (PD) Criteria 8 Section IV Development Standards 12 Section V Dedication of Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement 16 Section VI Water and Sewer Adequacy and Availability 17 Section VII Basic Water Management Strategy 18 Section Vlll Time Limits 19 Section IX Regulations 20 Section X Land Owner Covenants 21 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 107 of 124 ordinance 04 -12526 page 5 SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION Q. GRADY MINOR B ASSOCIATES, P.A. Civil Engineers Ar Land Surveyors / Planners i Landscape Architects THE BRIDGES AT GORDON RIVER A portion of Lots 7 through 9 of Naples Improvement Company's Little Farms as recorded in Plat Book 2 at page 2 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Commence at the intersection of the East right -of -way of Goodlette -Frank Road (C.R. 851) and the South right -of -way of Golden Gate Parkway; thence run along said South right -of -way for the following four (4) courses: 1) thence run North 44 "4245" East, for a distance of 35.36 feet; 2) thence run North 89 °42'45 " East, for a distance of 122.57 feet, 3) thence run North 80 "12'12 "East, for a distance of 159.63 feet, 4) to a point on a circular curve concave northwest, whose radius point bears North 11'2626" West, a distance of 813.94 feet therefrom; thence run Northeasterly along the arc of said curve to the left, having a radius of 813.94 feet, through a central angle of 22 "3633 ", subtended by a chord of 319.10 feet at a bearing of North 67" 15'18" East, for an arc length of 321. 18 feet to the intersection of the South right -of -way of said Golden Gate Parkway and the West line of the East 338.24 feet of the West 958.34 feet of Lot 7 of Naples Improvements Company's Little Farms Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 2 at page 2 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, also being the point of beginning of the parcel of land herein described: thence run South 00" 16'32" East, along the West line of the East 338.24 feet of the West 958.34 feet of said Lot 7, for a distance of 302.90 feet to a point on the South line of said Lot 7, thence run along said South fine for the following two (2) courses: 1) thence run North 89 °41'51 "East, for a distance of 338.41 feet, 2) thence run North 89'50'24" East, for approximately 850 feet to a point on the mean high water line of the west bank of Gordon River, said point herein called Point A ". thence return to the aforementioned point of beginning. thence run along the south right -of -way of said Golden Gate Parkway for the following four (4) courses: 1) beginning at a point on a circular curve concave northwest, whose radius point bears North 34 °02'58" West a distance of 813.94 feet therefrom; thence run Northeasterly along the arc of said curve to the left, having a radius of 813.94 feet, through a central angle of 05 °09'09 ", subtended by a chord of 73.17 feet at a bearing of North 53 °2227" East, for an arc length of 73.20 feet to the end of said curve; 2) thence run North 50 °4753" East, for a distance of 459.55 feet 3) to the beginning of a tangential circular curve concave south; thence run Easterly along the arc of said curve to the right, having a radius of 713.94 feet, through a central angle of Ordinance 09 -12526 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 108 of 124 Page 6 38 °52'20 "; subtended by a chord of 475.13 feet at a beating of North 70'14'03" East, for an arc length of 484.37 feet to the end of said curve,; 4) thence run North 89 °40'13" East, for approximately 724 feet to a point on the mean high water line of the west bank of Gordon River, thence meander Southwesterly along the mean high water tine for approximately 900 feet to the aforementioned Point "A" and the point of ending, containing 21.99 acres, more or less. NOTES Bearings and coordinates shown hereon are based on the Florida state plane coordinate system, East zone, North American datum of 1983, national geodetic survey adjustment of 1999 and are referenced to the south right -of -way of Golden Gate Parkway, being N 89 °40'13" E. This property is subject to easements, reservations andror restrictions of record. Ordinance 09 -12526 SECTION II PROJECT TEAM PETITIONER Senior Care Development, LLC, d /b /a Naples Life Care, LLC Jay Addison, Vice - president — Acquisition and Development 500 Mamaroneck Ave. Harrison, NY 10528 Ph: (203) 222 -6262 OWNER OF PROPERTY Caribbean Venture of Naples, LLC Thomas Ouverson, Authorized Agent 3411 Tamiami Trail North — Suite 200 Naples, Florida 34103 Ph: 659 -6080 ARCHITECT David Dillard, AIA CSD Architects 2001 North Lamar Street— Suite 450 Dallas, TX 75202 Ph: (214) 220 -1800 ARCHITECTIURBAN PLANNER Matthew Kragh, AIA pkSTUDIOS 2550 Goodlette -Frank Road North Naples, Florida 34102 Ph: 434 -5800 CIVIL ENGINEER Joshua R. Evans, P.E. Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Ph: 947 -1144 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT Jeffrey S. Cud, ASLA pkSTUDIOS 2550 Goodlette -Frank Road North Naples, Florida 34102 Ph: 434 -5800 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 109 of 124 Page 7 LAND USE ATTORNEY John M. Passidomo Cheff Passidomo 821 5 Avenue South Naples, Florida 34102 Ph: 436 -1529 SURVEYOR Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Ph: 947 -1144 Ordinance 09 -12526 SECTION III PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) CRITERIA Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 110 of 124 Page 8 1. Land uses within the development shall be appropriate in their proposed location, in their relationships to each other, and in their relationships with uses and activities on adjacent and nearby properties. The proposed land use is a high -end, state of the art, fully amenitized continuing care retirement community ( 'CCRC' which accommodates a continuum of care for senior citizens featuring residential housing, related amenities, and medical and personal care facilities and services in a campus -style environment which contains independent living units, accessory assisted living facilities, accessory skilled nursing facilities, and other accessory uses, structures and amenities which provide living arrangements for the elderly that allow them to "age in place" as their health and personal care needs change over time. CCRCs may be operated for profit or not- for - profit, and developed through their own ownership andlor management. The proposed land use will function as part of an integrated plan for a CCRC in an urban setting, which promotes internal pedestrian connectivity for its residents. Traffic and other impacts will be minimal, especially compared to uses permitted in what otherwise is a mixed use activity center under the existing regulatory scheme in Collier County. The master plan for the Property promotes pedestrian and vehicular connectivity to adjacent lands at the Naples Zoo, the Conservancy, the proposed Greenway boardwalk and park, and Freedom Park. In its completed form, The Bridges at Gordon River will house approximately 578 residents ranging in age from 70 to 100 years of age in 350 independent living units. The community will also include a 88 -bed health center with 3 levels of care' assisted living, skilled care and memory support. The project will consist of (4) four independent living residential buildings, a health center building adjacent to Golden Gate Parkway and the development's main entry a centralized clubhouse or commons building, and a spa. While the majority of the CCRC uses will be privatized, the health center will remain open to the public for a period of (5) five years from the date the facility becomes licensed by the State of Florida, as provided under Section 651.118(7)(wh1ch states that "sheltered nursing home beds may be used for persons who are not residents of the continuing care facility and who are not parties to a continuing care contract for a period of up to 5 years after the date of the issuance of the initial nursing home license "). The unique design of the project will be a retirement village with all of the best features of a small town centered within its most attractive natural and manmade amenities. The uses will be compatible with and buffered from adjacent land uses. Buildings that house commercial uses such as the assisted living and skilled nursing units in the health center will be limited to 42 feet in height from FEMA. The independent living buildings that are strictly residential uses will be limited to 52 feet in height from FEMA, plus architectural embellishments as and to the extent commonly permitted under the Naples Comprehensive Development Code. All uses will be limited to 42 feet in height as measured from FEP41A along a 200 foot buffer from Golden Gate Parkway. ordinance 09 -12526 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 111 of 124 Page 9 The Bridges at Gordon River has been designed (1) to minimize impacts on the Gordon River; (2) to maximize compatibility with its neighboring uses; and (3) to provide the important public benefits specified below. Minimizing Impacts to the Gordon River: The design of The Bridges at Gordon River also promotes good environmental stewardship. The development has established a 100'setback from all buildings to the Gordon River. The water collection and distribution system has been designed to improve the water quality currently discharged into the river by incorporating a natural pre- treatment filtration system. Maximizing Compatibility with Neighboring Uses: The Bridges at Gordon River will house approximately 578 full time active, aging -in -place residents in 350 independent living units. The residents of this community will take full advantage of the neighboring Coastland Center Mall, Caribbean Gardens Zoo and the Collier County Greenway. The project will include a public waterfront access easement and a public boardwalk containing public displays of art along the Gordon River and Golden Gate Parkway to encourage the public's access to and enjoyment of the Gordon River. The boardwalk and the dedicated public access will create a looped system to the Collier County Greenway project adjacently east and south of the Bridges at Gordon River, which will make stops at a county kayak facility, the Caribbean Gardens Zoo, and the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. The boardwalk and dedicated public access along Golden Gate Parkway will provide for a future connection to the County's Freedom Park to the North. 2. The development shall comply with applicable city plans and planning policies, and shall have a beneficial effect both upon the area of the city in which it is proposed to be established and upon the city as a whole. The development complies with applicable city plans and planning policies and its annexation into the city achieves state planning policies and objectives of eliminating enclaves and promoting efficient planning, growth management and service delivery. The Property is already located within the city's water and sewer district and its annexation gives the city control over land use on the city's border for land that is currently in a mixed use activity center in the County regulatory scheme. To the surrounding area, the proposed CCRC brings something more development that is compatible with local agendas for growth and an influx of vital new citizens anxious to volunteer their time, skills and services in neighboring libraries, schools, environmental initiatives, community and cultural organizations, theatre groups, museums, and the like. Here, the proposed CCRC provides another option to city residents who want to live in a premier continuing care retirement community without having to leave the city and forfeit the privileges of city residency. The Property's proximity to the Naples Zoo, the Conservancy and adjacent public lands provides special opportunities to create connectivity between and among important public and quasi - public institutions along the headwaters of the Gordon River. 3. The total land area within the development and the area devoted to each functional portion of the development shall be adequate to serve its intended purpose. ordinance 09 -12526 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 112 of 124 Page 10 The proposed land uses are compatible to each other and adequately served by the land area on which they will exist to achieve their intended purpose. The project is relatively compact and structured as a campus setting by design to accommodate the particular spatial needs of its residents. 4. Streets; utilities; drainage facilities; recreation areas; building heights, sizes and yards; and vehicular parking and loading facilities shall be appropriate for the particular use or uses involved, and shall equal or exceed the level of design and construction quality required of similar land development elsewhere in the city. The Property has direct access to two arterial collector roads — Goodlette -Frank Road and Golden Gate Parkway — and all internal streets and parking facilities are able to accommodate the modest level of traffic to be generated by the uses. Commercial building heights shall be limited to 42 feet in accordance with the city charter, and residential building heights shall be limited to 52 feet, plus 7 feet for architectural embellishments as and to the extent elsewhere generally permitted throughout the City of Naples, bath of which are appropriate for the uses and in the context of the surrounding mixed -use activity center. All structures, no matter what the use, are limited to 42 feet in height at a boundary of 200 feet from Golden Gate Parkway. Site improvements shall be constructed according to the requirements of the City of Naples Comprehensive Development Code where applicable. The proposed development standards contained herein are appropriate for the intended use of the Property. 5. Visual character and community amenities shall be equal or better in quality than that required by standard zoning districts for similar development. The project will include heavy landscaping, expansive water features, and extensive outdoor ornamental and decorative features. Included in the outdoor design elements is an elevated walkway along the Gordon River with public art consisting of interpretive wildlife sculptures placed in a natural setting. All structures within the project will be well- articulated and include sophisticated architectural design elements as well as high - grade materials and finishes intended to evoke a classical Venetian setting. The level of amenities is unmatched in Naples -area continuing care retirement communities, including the unique connection to the Gordon River Greenway. The onsite publicly dedicated amenities include a waterfront public access boardwalk connection along the Gordon River. The character of this boardwalk will meet and exceed the quality of similar Naples boardwalks, and will include public art, scenic overlooks, benches, gazebos and decks. 6. Open space shall be adequate for the type of development and the population densities proposed. Open space will exceed 50% of the total Property area, and functional characteristics of the open space are maximized by the water -side walkways, water features that also function as water quality elements, and the public and resident access to the onsite Gordon River Greenway segment. Ordinance 09 -12526 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 113 of 124 Page 11 7. Areas proposed for common ownership shall be subject to a reliable and continuing maintenance guarantee. There are no areas proposed for common ownership. 8. In the case of developments which are to be constructed in several units, the proposed units shall be shown on the overall development plan. The proposed construction units shall individually comply with the standard set forth in this section in order that, if for any reason construction ceases prior to completion of the entire planned development, the resulting partially complete project will adequately serve its purchasers and occupants and will not cause a general public problem. It is anticipated that the Bridges at Gordon River will be constructed in two residential phases as is generally and conceptually depicted on the attachments to this Planned Development Document. It is anticipated that phase one will include independent living units, the clubhouse amenity facility, the spa facility, and the health center. Phase two will add the remaining independent living units and amenities that were not constructed with phase one. The accessory and supporting components of the project that will be constructed with each phase will be adequate to serve the then - existing independent living units. ordinance 09 -12526 SECTION IV DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Definitions. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 114 of 124 Page 12 Independent Living Unit means an assemblage of rooms or spaces comprising a dwelling unit and intended to provide living accommodations for a single family, whether in a single - family residence or a multifamily residential building, and which contains sleeping, bathroom, and food preparation, cooking, and kitchen facilities. Assisted Living Facility means a facility, whether operated for profit or not, which undertakes through its ownership or management to provide the residents of a CCRC, for a period exceeding 24 hours, with limited nursing services and with regular assistance with routine daily activities, including the following. bathing, dressing, eating, grooming, walking, and moving from a prone to upright position. Each unit within the assisted living facility may contain sleeping facilities, a restroom, a compact refrigerator, a microwave oven, and a sink, but may not otherwise contain any facilities or appliances for food preparation, cooking and consuming meals. Assisted living facilities shall be considered commercial uses accessory to the independent living units even though units in the assisted living facility may: 1. Be occupied by individuals who do not otherwise reside in an independent living unit for the 5 -year statutory period set forth in Section 651.118(7), Florida Statutes; and /or 2. contain a microwave oven and "or sink, and /or compact refrigerator. Skilled Nursing Facility means a facility, whether operated for profit or not, which undertakes to provide its occupants, for a period exceeding 24 hours, with a high level of around - the -clock specialized care for infirm persons suffering from acute illnesses and who require medical, skilled nursing or rehabilitative services, including without limitation intravenous injections and physical therapy. This is a level of care that requires the daily involvement of skilled nursing or rehabilitation staff and that, as a practical matter, cannot be provided on an outpatient basis. The occupants of a skilled nursing facility typically are unable to independently perform routine activities of daily life and are not ambulatory. Skilled nursing facilities shall be considered commercial uses accessory to the independent living units even though units in the skilled nursing facility may: 1. Be occupied by individuals who do not otherwise reside in an independent living unit for the 5 -year statutory period set forth in Section 651.118(7), Florida Statutes; and /or 2. contain a microwave oven and/or sink, and/or compact refrigerator. Overall Project Purpose, The Property is intended to accommodate — in one campus -style environment — multi- family independent living units, accessory assisted living and skilled nursing facilities, and accessory uses and amenities. These facilities are intended to provide living arrangements for the elderly that will allow them to "age in place' as their health and personal care needs change over time, and include a related continuum of medical and personal care facilities and services. ordinance 09 -12526 Permitted Uses. The following are permitted uses: (1) Multifamily residential independent living units. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 115 of 124 Page 13 (2) Assisted living facilities and accessory uses and structures which are incidental thereto and customarily associated therewith. (3) Skilled nursing facilities and accessory uses and structures which are incidental thereto and customarily associated therewith. (4) Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement. (5) Any use which does not unreasonably interfere with the intended purpose of the planned development, including, without limitation, public pedestrian access over and across the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement, signage, sculpture, art, water facilities, boardwalks, pavilions, benches, gazebos, water management, and landscaping for the benefit the Property and any other use of the Property permitted under the Naples Comprehensive Development Code. Accessory Uses. The following are accessory uses: Private and resort recreational amenity elements for residents, tenants, guests and invitees, including without limitation the following: Clubs, private and resort Indoor and outdoor live and staged entertainment, amplified and non - amplified sound Pool and pool deck Personal service establishments such as spas, barbershops, and beauty shops Gazebos, arbors, decks, and seating areas Libraries Tennis, racquetball, shuffleboard, and similar courts Activities rooms Massage rooms Food and beverage service; indoor and outdoor Bar /lounge Indoor dining Outdoor dining Parking lots (noncommercial; no meters or on -site parking fee collection) Additional activities and uses normally associated with private and resort recreation Conditional Uses. The Planning Advisory Board may, through the review and approval of a conditional use petition and with the approval of City Council, permit other uses which are similar to and no more intense than the permitted or accessory uses. Dimensional and Performance Standards. Maximum Permitted Density. Maximum permitted density on the Property is 350 independent living units, The skilled nursing facilities and assisted living facilities are Ordinance 09 -12526 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 116 of 124 Page 14 commercial uses accessory to the independent living units, and the aggregate number of beds contained in the assisted living facilities and skilled nursing facilities shall be limited to no more than 25% of the total number of independent living units authorized in this Planned Development Document. Minimum lot area. Minimum lot area is 15,000 square feet. Minimum lot width. Minimum lot width is 100 feet. Minimum yards. Minimum yards are as follows (the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement is not a property line): L Along Golden Gate Parkway: 50 feet. 2. Along the Gordon River: 100 feet from the current mean - high -water line. 3. Along the Southern property line: 30 feet. 4. Along the West property line. 30 feet. 5. The following shall be permitted within the minimum yard areas at heights exceeding 30 inches: Entry signage and related decorative features and embellishments; walls and/or fences up to 8 feet, a gate /guard house with floor area up to 250 square feet; the grand public gateway pavilion; cornices, overhangs, awnings, balconies, and other architectural features with no ground support; mechanical equipment, including generators, and related buffering elements; elevated walkways, boardwalks, kiosks, gazebos, scenic overlooks, and public art. 6. There is no minimum yard for separation between principal structures, and the length and width of structures permitted on the Property may extend to the setback lines. Minimum floor area. Minimum floor area is as follows: 1,000 square feet per principal building on the ground floor, and 750 square feet per independent living unit. Maximum height. Maximum height for buildings containing only independent living units and related amenities, and for other non - commercial structures, shall be limited to 52 feet, measured from the 1st -floor FEMA elevation to the peak of the roof. Chimneys, elevator shafts, stair towers, rooftop heating, ventilating and air conditioning equipment, ornamental screening for such equipment, and architectural embellishments not for habitation may extend 7 feet above the peak of the building roof over an area which does not exceed 10% of the building's roof area. The maximum height of all commercial structures shall be limited to 42 feet measured from the 1st -floor FEMA elevation to the peak of the roof or the highest point of any appurtenance attached to the roof. Minimum Off - street Parking. Minimum off - street parking on the Property (including both structured and open -air parking) is as follows: Ordinance 09 -12526 Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 117 of 124 Page 15 (1) For the independent living units and accessory structures /uses (other than assisted living and skilled nursing facilities): one and one - quarter (1 %) spaces per independent living unit. (2) For the assisted living and skilled nursing facilities (including all uses contained in the Health Center): one space per 2 beds. Maximum lot coverage by all buildings. Maximum lot coverage by all buildings is 40 percent. General Development Site Plan. The General Development and Site Plan (GDSP) prepared by pkSTUDIOS and CSD Architects, dated February 2, 2009, for Senior Care Development LLC, a copy of which is attached hereto as Attachment 1 (the "Site Plan'), is approved as the conceptual plan for this development. [Landowner acknowledges that a final site plan must be approved in accordance with Section 46 -33, Naples Land Development Code, to reflect the 350 independent living units approved by City Council at second reading of Ordinance 09 -12526 approving this Planned Development Document.] Sizes of buildings shall not be exceeded by more than 10 percent, and other standards contained in this Section shall not deviate more than 10 percent, without Council GDSP approval. Allocations of units between assisted living and skilled nursing may occur without further approval. Reallocation of units between skilled nursing- assisted living and independent living shall not exceed 10 percent without Council approval. Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 118 of 124 ordinance 09 -12526 Page 16 SECTION V DEDICATION OF PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN WATERFRONT ACCESS EASEMENT Within ten (10) days following the date that the ordinance approving the Planned Development Rezone requested with this Planned Development becomes final and non - appealable, the Land Owner, its successors or assigns shall execute, deliver and record an 8 foot wide non - exclusive public pedestrian waterfront access easement (the "Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement ") to the City of Naples for use by the public during daylight hours for ingress and egress to, from and generally along the area illustrated as 'Boardwalk" at a location determined by the Land Owner, its successors or assigns within the area designated as "Preserve Area" on the Public Access Easement Plan (referenced by Sheet A -5 dated February 2, 2009) attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The Land Owner, its successors or assigns shall retain the right to (i) use the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement Area for any purpose which does not unreasonably interfere with the intended purpose of the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement, including, without limitation, pedestrian access to and from the Property, pathways, signage, utilities, lighting, sculpture, art, water features, benches, drainage, water management, lot coverage calculations, setback areas, intensity calculations, open space, and landscaping for the benefit the Property; (ii) suspend the right to use the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement during any period of construction or maintenance in, or in reasonable proximity to, the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement Area; (iii) limit access to and from the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement during non - daylight hours; and (iv) grant a conservation easement over portions of the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement to the South Florida Water Management District. The Land Owner, its successors or assigns shall design, permit, construct and maintain the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement Area, and pay for same. The city shall cooperate with the Land Owner, its successors or assigns in the foregoing undertaking. The Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement shall provide that the Land Owner, its successors or assigns shall construct a boardwalk in the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement Area after delivery of the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement to the City of Naples. The Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement Area shall thereafter be maintained by the Land Owner, its successor or assigns at its sole cost and expense to a standard which equals or exceeds the prevailing level of maintenance of city parks and parkways. In the event Land Owner or its successors or assigns submits a petition to rezone the Property or amend the Planned Development Rezone Ordinance which approves this Planned Development Document prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for the buildings located or to be located within the Property, as shown on the General Site Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, then the Public Pedestrian Waterfront Access Easement shall automatically terminate and become null and void. ordinance 08 -12526 SECTION VI WATER AND SEWER ADEQUACY AND AVAILABILITY Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 119 of 124 Page 17 Water and sewer service for the project is available and will be provided in accordance with adequate public facilities criteria. The Petitioner shall be responsible for the construction and cost of the water and sewer facilities within the project, and for the relocation of any existing water and sewer facilities. ordinance 09 -12526 SECTION VII BASIC WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 120 of 124 Page 19 Storm runoff will be attenuated on site by means of above ground detention /retention areas, swales, holding/settling ponds, and water quality wetlands and littoral areas, all in accordance with South Florida Water Management District criteria. Storm water quality pretreatment will be provided on site via best management practices in accordance with South Florida Water Management District criteria. 0=diaaA00 09 -12526 SECTION VIII TIME LIMITS Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 121 of 124 Page 19 The period for which construction of improvements is required to commence under Sec. 58-810 of the Naples Code is sixty (60) months. ordinance 09 -12526 SECTION IX REGULATIONS Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 122 of 124 Page 20 The regulations contained herein take priority over any setback, maximum height, parking, lot coverage, or other regulation contained in the Code of Ordinances. To the extent that this document does not provide a regulation, the regulations of the Code of Ordinances shall apply. Ordinance 09 -12526 SECTION X LAND OWNER COVENANTS Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 123 of 124 Page 21 The Land Owner covenants that the Land Owner, its successors or assigns shall: 1. Install the landscaping along Golden Gate Parkway shown on the Site Plan prior to the earlier to occur of (i) the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for improvements contemplated in phase one of the project or (ii) the issuance of a building permit for improvements contemplated in phase two of the project; 2. Contribute the fixed sum of $10,716 to the City of Naples prior to the earlier to occur of (i) the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for improvements contemplated in phase one of the project or (ii) the issuance of a building permit for improvements contemplated in phase two of the project to help defray the first two fiscal year's estimated net fiscal operating deficit resulting from annexation of the property into the City of Naples as projected by the city's consultant Fishkind & Associates' Urban Services Report for the Voluntary Annexation of the Bridges at Gordon River as updated December 5, 2008; 3. Donate excess water quality storage to the City of Naples for use as credits in the city program; and 4. Tie into the City of Naples reclaimed water line by connecting to the existing reclaimed water line along Goodlette Road at a point South of Golden Gate Parkway. 5. Pay a pro -rata share of the expense of designing, permitting, and constructing a public access road between the Southwest corner of the subject property and the Goodlette Road /Fleischmann Boulevard intersection (as indicated by shading on the Q. Grady Minor Site Plan dated June 2008, updated September 3, 2008, and attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "A ") — including (2) actuated and signalized pedestrian crossings at the public access road intersection with Goodlette Road, traffic control signage, curbing, a multi -use pathway, and a single -pitch open drainage swale system — based on the relative vehicular traffic anticipated to be generated at build -out over the public access road by the Bridges at Gordon River, the proposed Collier County kayak park on the Gordon River, and the Naples Zoo, Land Owner covenants to pay not less than forty -five percent (45 %) of such expense. 671613770 #172 - Punned De Dot 41409 Ordinance 09 -12526 c �I{ II, Oi'�f s o Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 124 of 124 Page 22 D {; {�b ^COnlinwnP Cem RemBrtrenl COmmvniry lo'Senlw Lase LLL N 0 �2 LfMrBlepme U Ei4e Naryec yle Cea. LLC FF � Gvltlen Gelx PoM1wOY Nepec, Flantle � II, Oi'�f s o Agenda Item No. 12A July 27, 2010 Page 124 of 124 Page 22