Loading...
Agenda 10/13/2009 Item # 8A Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 1 of 157 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PUDZ-2008-AR-12773, Collier Rattlesnake Inc., represented by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor Inc. and Rich Yovanovich, of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is requesting a Planned Unit Development (pun) rezone from Rural Agricultural (A) to Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) to be known as the Good Turn Center MPUD. The MPUD proposes a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and/or a variety of skilled nursing care facilities uses with a maximum of 200 units on 9.5::1: acres. The subject property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard, approximately 660 feet north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road Section 14, Township 50 South and Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) consider an application for a PUD rezone to a Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development to permjt 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and/or a variety of skilled nursing care facilities uses with a maximum of 200 units and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the commumty's interests are maintained. - CONSIDERA TIONS: The petitioner is proposing to rezone the subject site from the Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district to the Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for the Good Turn Center MPUD. The subject property is approximately 9.5::1: acres and is in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. The proposed rezone from the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a MPUD zoning district is to allow development of commercial, general and medical office, group housing, and light retail land uses with a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and institutional housing units such as assisted living or continuing care centers for persons over the age of 55 and with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of O.pO, and not to exceed 200 umts. FISCAL IMPACT: The rezone to MPUD by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There is no guarantee that the project, at build out, will maximize its authorized level of development, however, if the Good Turn Center MPUD is approved, a portion of the land could be developed and the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as needed to - maintain adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in order to meet the requirements of concurrency management, the developer of every local development order that is Page 1 of5 PUDZ-07-AR-12773 10-5-09 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 2 of 157 approved by Collier County is required to pay a portion of the estimated Transportation Impact Fees associated with the project in accordance with Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Finally, additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates, and that revenue is directly related to the value of the improvements. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Mixed Use Activity Center (MUAC) Subdistrict (Activity Center No.7) of the Urban Commercial District, Urban Designation, as identified on Future Land Use Map and Map Series. Relevant to this petition, Mixed Use Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character; developed at a human scale; pedestrian oriented; interconnected with abutting projects; and, permit a full array of commercial uses, residential uses, institutional uses, hotel/motel uses, community facilities, and other urban land uses subject to numerous criteria in the Future Land Use Element. The mixture of land uses proposed for the Good Turn Center include commercial development and group housing uses such as assisted living facilities, independent senior housing for persons over age 55, continuing care retirement community, and nursing home uses. Based upon the detailed GMP analysis found in the staff report, staff concludes that the proposed MPUD rezone may be found consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). Transportation Element: The Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that this project can be found consistent with policies 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Furthermore, The Transportation Department staff has indicated that the impacts associated with commercial, medical office, group housing, and retail land uses with a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and 200 institutional housing units at the proposed intensity are acceptable. The first concurrency link on Collier Boulevard that is impacted by this project is Link 34, Collier Boulevard (CR-951) between Davis Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864). The project generates 161 PM peak hour, peak direction trip on this link, which represents a 4.9 percent impact on Collier Boulevard (CR-951) upon reaching build-out condition. The second concurrency link on Collier Boulevard (CR-951) that is significantly impacted by this project is Link 35, Collier Boulevard (CR-951) from Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) to Tanliami Trail (US-41). The project generates 74 PM peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 2.2 percent impact on Collier Boulevard (CR-95I ) upon reaching build-out condition. - The first concurrency link on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) that is impacted by this project is Link 75, Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) between Collier Boulevard (CR-951) and Santa Barbara Boulevard (Polly Ave). The project generates 87 PM peak hour, peak direction PUDZ-07-AR-12773 10-5-09 Page 2 of5 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 3 of 157 trips on this link, which represents a 2.7 percent impact on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) upon reaching build-out condition. The second concurrency link on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) that is significantly impacted by this project is Link 74, Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) from Santa Barbara Boulevard (Polly Ave) to County Barn Road. The project generates 74 PM peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 3.2 percent impact on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) upon reaching build-out condition. AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT: The petitioner has not volunteered to contribute to the County's Affordable Housing Trust fund. ENVIRONMENT AL ISSUES: Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the application and the MPUD document to address any environmental concerns and has deemed that all environmental issues have been addressed. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The applicant was not required to submit an Environment Impact Statement (EIS) for this project, nor was a hearing before the Environmental Advisory Council required, because the site is below the 10-acre size threshold requirement for tracts located landward of the coastal management boundary. Furthermore the site is not located within a Special Treatment (ST) overlay area, and for this reason the rezone is consistent with the LDC and GMP. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard petition PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 on August 6, 2009, and by a vote of 6 to 1 recommended to forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval subject to conditions of approval that have been incorporated into Exhibit E, List of Developer Commitments of the MPUD Ordinance. During the initial CCPC hearing, Commissioner Caron voted against the petition, stating that the needs analysis in the application didn't discuss available built and unbuilt parcels within two miles of the project. She also felt that the petition appeared to be a speculative rezone. However, subsequently, during approval of the August 20, 2009 CCPC consent agenda, she expressed that she still had misgivings but they were not serious enough to prevent her from voting with the majority in favor of the petition. Although she now supports the proposed rezone, her original dissenting vote is a matter of public record and makes this petition ineligible for inclusion on the summary agenda. PUDZ-07-AR-12773 10-5-09 Page 3 of5 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 4 of 157 LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: Petitioner is requesting a rezone from the Agricultural (A) zoning district to the Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district. The attached staff report and recommendations of the Planning Commission required are advisory only and are not binding on you. This item requires all testimony given must be under oath. The Petitioner has the burden to prove that the proposed rezone is consistent with all the criteria set forth below, and you may question the Petitioner, or staff, to satisfy yourself that the necessary criteria have been satisfied. Should you consider denying the rezone, to assure that your decision is not later found to be arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable, the denial must be based upon competent, substantial evidence that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below. Criteria for Strahzht Rezones 1. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan? 2. Will the proposed rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern? 3. Would the proposed rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts? 4. Are the existing district boundaries illogically drawn III relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change? 5. Do changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary? 6. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions III the neighborhood? 7. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety? 8. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem? 9. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas? 10. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area? ...- PUDZ-07-AR-12773 10-5-09 Page 4 of5 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 5 of 157 11. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations? 12. Will the proposed change constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare? 13. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning? 14. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county? 15. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. 16. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. 17. What is the impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, art.II], as amended? ,.--- 18. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to this rezone request that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare? The proposed Ordinance was prepared by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. -HAC & STW RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request for PUDZ-2008- AR-12773, Good Turn Center MPUD subject to staff's and the CCPC conditions of approval which are found in Exhibit E, Developer Commitments of the MPUD Ordinance. PREPARED BY: Melissa Zone, Principal Planner Department of Zoning & Land Development Review PUDZ-07-AR-12773 10-5-09 Page 5 of5 Item Number: Item Summary: Meeting Date: Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 6 of 157 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 8A This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition: PUDZ-2008-AR-12773, Collier Rattlesnake Inc., represented by D, Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor Inc, and Rich Yovanovich, of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is requesting a PUD Rezone from Rural Agricultural (A) to Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) to be known as the Good Turn Center MPUD. The MPUD proposes a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and/or a variety of skilled nursing care facilities uses with a maximum of 200 units on 9.5 acres. The subject property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard, approximately 660 feet north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road Section 14, Township 50 South and Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (CTS) 10/13/2009 9:00:00 AM Prepared By Melissa Zone Community Development & Environmental Services Principal Planner Date Zoning & Land Development Review 9f23/2009 1 :59:00 PM Approved By Norm E. Feder, AICP Transportation Services Transportation Division Administrator Date Transportation Services Admin. 9/29f2009 11: 13 AM Approved By Judy Puig Community Development & Environmental Services Operations Analyst Date Community Development & Environmental Services Admin. 9/29/2009 3:07 PM Approved By Nick Casalanguida Transportation Services MPO Director Date Transportation Planning 9f30/2009 8:12 AM Approved By Steven Williams Attorney's Office Assistant County Attorney Date Attorney's Office 10/112009 10: 55 AM Approved By Susan Istenes, AICP Community Development & Environmental Services Zoning & Land Development Director Date Zoning & Land Development Review 10/1/20091:05 PM Approved By Joseph K. Schmitt Community Development & Environmental Services Adminstrator Date Community Development & Community Development & Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 7 of 157 Environmental Services Environmental Services Admin. 10/1/20094:39 PM Approved By Heidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney Date County Attorney County Attorney Office 1015120095:03 PM Approved By OMB Coordinator OMB Coordinator Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 101612009 9:00 AM Approved By Jeff Klatzkow County Attorney Date County Attorney County Attorney Office 101612009 2:27 PM Approved By Mark Isackson Budget Analyst Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 1016120092:33 PM A.~r~.o~~ Page 8 of 157 Co~r County - ~ -~ .- STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: AUGUST 6, 2009 SUBJECT: PUDZ-2008-AR-12773; GOOD TURN CENTER MPUD PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Collier Rattlesnake, LLC 3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Agent(s): D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor, Inc. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Richard D. Y ovanovich Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezone of the subject site from the Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district to the Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for the Good Turn Center MPUD. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject MPUD is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (CR-951), approximately 660 feet north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864), located in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on following page) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property is approximately 9.5:1: acres and is in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. The proposed rezone from the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a MPUD zoning district is to allow development of commercial, general and medical office, group housing, Page 1 of 15 PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20/09 z o w- !::!< wO 3 <C <? o iN3N3SY3 , lp'd". ,O1,4 <C ! ~ ~ " il g ~ e c i ;:) il ll. v o ~ .. g ~ l:i ;! I enda I Octob Pa Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 10 of 157 and light retail land uses with a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and 200 institutional housing units such as assisted living or continuing care centers. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: East: South: West: Vacant, with a zoning designation of Heavy Commercial District (C-5) Florida Power & Light easement and power lines, with a zoning designation of Rural Agriculture (A) Vacant, with a zoning designation of Hammock Park Commerce Centre (CPUD) Mixed-Use development with residential, golf course and commercial/office development and Collier Boulevard (CR-951) Right-of-Way, with a zoning designation of Naples Lakes Country Club PUD Aerial Photo with subiect property Highlighted GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Mixed Use Activity Center (MUAC) Subdistrict (Activity Center No.7) of the Urban Commercial District, Urban Designation, as identified on Future Land Use Map and Map Series. Outside the MUAC, to the PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7120/09 Page 2 of 15 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 11 of 157 west of Collier Boulevard (CR-951), lies the Urban Residential Subdistrict, and; to the east of Collier Boulevard (CR-951), lies the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. Relevant to this petition, Mixed Use Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character; developed at a human scale; pedestrian oriented; interconnected with abutting projects; and, permit a full array of commercial uses, residential uses, institutional uses, hotel/motel uses, community facilities, and other urban land uses subject to numerous criteria in the Future Land Use Element. The mixture of land uses proposed for the Good Turn Center does not include a residential component. This MPUD also proposes to include group housing uses such as assisted living facilities, independent senior housing for persons over age 55, continuing care retirement community, and nursing home uses. The Mixed Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the community. Factors to consider during the review of a MUAC rezone petition are as follows: · The amount, type and location of existing zoned commercial land, and developed commercial uses, within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two road miles of Mixed Use Activity Center. (The proposed development is located within Activity Center No.7. Less than 60,000 square feet is presently developed of the 530,000 square feet approved for commercial development on zoned commercial land within the Activity Center - only 11 percent of development potential is realized. Within a two mile radius, just 244,356 square feet is presently developed of the 1,616,500 square feet approved for commercial development on zoned commercial land - only 15 percent of potential is realized. More specific commercial analysis was submitted with the MPUD rezone petition, and is covered below.) · Market demand and service area for the proposed commercial land uses to be used as a guide to explore the feasibility of the requested land uses. (A market study was submitted with this application. The site is presently zoned Rural Agricultural (A). Further, the MPUD document proposes commercial, general and medical office, group housing, nursing home, and light retail land uses that appear to be compatible to the existing commercial zoning in Activity Center No.7 and a two road mile area. More specific commercial analysis was submitted with the MPUD rezone petition, and is covered below.) The petitioner's consultant, Fishkind & Associates, Inc., prepared and submitted a Retail Demand Analysis for the subject parcel, utilizing 2005 Commercial Inventory data. As defined in the petitioner's analysis, the subject's primary market area was determined to be within a two mile radius from its location and the study focused on the projected future supply and demand of the trade area. PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20/09 Page 3 of 15 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 12 of 157 The petitioner surveyed the existing supply and demand of retail space in the primary trade area. Their inventory included general merchandising, traditional retail uses, eating and drinking establishments, personal services, etc. The market conditions study utilizes a drive-time analysis to select and evaluate demographics used in their commercial demand model. The population and market area studied extends to approximately a 20-minute drive time - the general area for a community retail center. · Growth is projected to increase to approximately one and one-quarter (1.25) times the population of the community retail center market area during the period 2007 to 2015. This area is projected to grow from 48,904 households in 2007 to 61,421 households in 2015 - an increase of 12,517 households, according to the consultant's proprietary model. The projected household income for these 48,904 households in 2007 is $61,516, and then increases to $62,775 for the 61,421 households in 2015. These figures are calculated out to provide a demand figure given in square feet of commercial space and in acres. The consultant concludes that this market has demand for an additional 108,751 square feet of community retail center market commercial space. Fishkind summarizes, 'the results of this analysis demonstrate that there is current need for additional community serving retail space in this market. The timing of the project would immediately satisfY a portion of that net demand". FLUE Objective 7 and its applicable policies (Smart Growth - Community Character Plan) require that new development be pedestrian oriented, show traditional neighborhood design, provide interconnections (vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle) to nearby residential areas, and to nearby commercial areas (pedestrian, bicycle). The petitioner generally agrees with these requirements through statements provided in the application materials, providing a design proposal sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood, according to Policies 7.1 through 7.5, included below for reference: Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. (The Conceptual Master Plan indicates access to Collier Boulevard (CR-951), an arterial road, at the project's southern boundary.) Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. (A loop road is not depicted on the Conceptual Master Plan and might not be expected given the conceptual master plan layout and relatively small size of the property combined with its rectangular configuration. Only a single access point is proposed onto Collier Boulevard (CR-951); all other proposed access points will be from the proposed local road from interconnection with adjacent commercial developments.) Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7120/09 Page 4 of 15 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 13 of 157 of land use ope. (The Conceptual Master Plan allows for two (2) "potential" vehicular and pedestrian interconnects between the proposed Good Turn Center MPUD and the Hammock Park Commerce Center CPUD to the south, and the commercially-zoned land to the north of the project; but the interconnections themselves should be absolute and expected to be part of the SDPs/PPLs. ) Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. (Being a proposed Mixed-Use PUD, there are no residential densities, however, the development standards and conditions for the institutional housing are expected to be consistent with other similar types of developments. Details of designing Good Turn Center MPUD as a walkable development are expected to be part of the SDPs/PPLs; sidewalks will be required as no deviation from sidewalk requirements is requested.) Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's original Traffic Impact Statement (nS) and, pending review of the revised TIS to be delivered July 23, 2009, has determined that this project can be found consistent with policies 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. GMP Conclusion: Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes that the proposed MPUD rezone may be found consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). ANAL YSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on which a determination must be based. These criteria are specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC) Sections 10.02.13 and 10.02. 13.B.5. The staff evaluation establishes a factual basis to support the recommendations of staff. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) uses these same criteria as the basis for the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. These evaluations are provided on page 7 of this staff report. Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the MPUD documents to address any enviromnental concerns. All environmental issues have been addressed. The applicant was not required to submit an Environment Impact Statement (ElS) for this project, nor was a hearing before the Environmental Advisory Council required, because the site is below the 10-acre size threshold requirement for tracts located landward of the coastal management boundary. Furthermore the site is not located within a Special Treatment (ST) overlay area, and for this reason the rezone is consistent with the LDC and GMP. TranslJortation Review: Transportation Department Staff has reviewed the petition and notes the following: Collier Boulevard (CR-951) Impacts: The first concurrency link on Collier Boulevard that is impacted by this project is Link 34, Collier Boulevard (CR-951) between Davis Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864). The project generates 161 PM peak hour, peak direction PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20/09 Page 5 of 15 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 14 of 157 trip on this link, which represents a 4.9 percent impact on Collier Boulevard (CR-951) upon reaching build-out condition. This concurrency link reflects a remaining capacity of 1042 trips in the adopted 2008 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) (adopted late 2008) and is at Level of Service "B". In the fifth year this concurrency link will reflect a remaining capacity of 419 trips. The second concurrency link on Collier Boulevard (CR-951) that is significantly impacted by this project is Link 35, Collier Boulevard (CR-951) from Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) to Tamiami Trail (US-41). The project generates 74 PM peak hour, peak direction trip on this link, which represents a 2.2 percent impact on Collier Boulevard (CR-951) upon reaching build- out condition. This concurrency link reflects a remaining capacity of 1,161 trips in the adopted 2008 AUIR and is at Level of Service "B". In the fifth year this concurrency link will reflect a remaining capacity of 858 trips. Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) Impacts: The first concurrency link on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) that is impacted by this project is Link 75, Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) between Collier Boulevard (CR-951) and Santa Barbara Boulevard (Polly Ave). The project generates 87 PM peak hour, peak direction trip on this link, which represents a 2.7 percent impact on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) upon reaching build-out condition: This concurrency link reflects a remaining capacity of 2,550 trips in the adopted 2008 AUIR and is at Level of Service "B". In the fifth year this concurrency link will reflect a remaining capacity of 2,254 trips. The second concurrency link on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR -864) that is significantly impacted by this project is Link 74, Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) from Santa Barbara Boulevard (Polly Ave) to County Barn Road. The project generates 74 PM peak hour, peak direction trip on this link, which represents a 3.2 percent impact on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864) upon reaching build-out condition. This concurrency link reflects a remaining capacity of 1,578 trips in the adopted 2008 AUIR and is at Level of Service "B". In the fifth year this concurrency link will reflect a remaining capacity of 1 ,345 trips. Utility Review: The Utilities Department Staff has reviewed the petition and notes the following: The MPUD is located within the Collier County Water-Sewer District boundary, and is subject to the conditions associated with a Water and Sewer Availability Letter from the Collier County Utilities Division. All portions of the project to be developed will be required to comply with Ordinance No. 2004-31, as amended. According to the County's Geographical Information System (GIS), there are existing 36-inch and 20-inch water main pipes on Collier Boulevard (CR-951), and an existing 12-inch force main pipe on Collier Boulevard (CR-951), and a 20-inch force main pipe on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864). PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20/09 Page 6 of 15 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 15 of 157 Emergencv Manazement Review: The Good Turn Center MPUD is located in a Category 3 hurricane surge zone, which requires evacuation during some hurricane events. While there is currently no impact mitigation required for this, it should be noted that approval of this MPUD increases the evacuation and sheltering requirements for the county. Zoning Review: This request is consistent with adopted land use plans for Collier County, which recommend a mixture of uses to include residential land uses as well as community facility and retail land uses. The proposal includes mixed-use development that consists of non-residential use and assisted living facility or continuing care center in the same structure or in separate structures, on the same lot three stories over parking. The project as proposed meets the standards specified in Exhibit B of the MPUD Ordinance. The site plan accompanying this petition (Exhibit C of MPUD Ordinance) shows a general layout for approximately 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and independent senior housing units for persons over age 55 at a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.6 not to exceed 200 units. Improvements proposed for the site include: · Thirty (30) percent of the site will be set aside for open space. · There will be a 20-foot wide Type D Buffer along the existing canal which abuts Collier Boulevard (CR-951) to the western boundary line. · There will be a 10-foot wide Type A Buffer along the northern, southern and eastern boundary line. · There will be a 0.42::1: acre preserve that is 15 percent of the existing native vegetation on- site and will be adjacent to the southern property's preserve. · Access will be a shared access point on the southwest corner to Collier Boulevard (CR- 951) with the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD. · The petitioner has potential road interconnects along the northern and southern boundary of the property. The proposed rezone to MPUD is consistent with the GMP and LDC and because the surrounding property is zoned for a mix of residential and commercial land uses the Good Turn Center MPUD is in harmony with the land uses recommended for Mixed Use Activity Centers (Activity Center No.7). Based on staff's review of the adjacent existing and anticipated land uses, the proposed MPUD is compatible with the surrounding zoning and land uses. Compliance with Sub-section W.02.B.B.5. of the LDC: Planning commission recommendation. The planning commission shall make written findings as required in section 10.02.08 of the LDC, and shall recommend to the Board of County Commissioners (BCe) either approval of the PUD rezoning as proposed; approval with conditions or modifications; or denial. In support of its recommendation, the planning commission shall make findings as to the PUD master plan's compliance with the following criteria in addition to the findings in section 10.02.08. a) The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20/09 Page 7 of 15 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 16 of 157 The subject property is located in the Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Activity Center No. 7 which is intended to be mixed-use in character; developed at a human scale; pedestrian oriented; interconnected with abutting projects; and~ permit a full array of commercial uses, residential uses, and institutional uses. The applicant provided a Retail Demand Analysis as part of the application to demonstrate the demand for additional commercial development within the Activity Center No.7. In addition, the ingress/egress access and traffic analysis in the TIS was utilized for the trip generation of commercial uses that could be developed on the subject site as well as for the continuing care retirement community that could be developed on the subject site. The surface water management system will utilize on-site water quality treatment and attenuation, and the outfall of the system will be to the CR-951 canal. All utilities, potable water and sewer are available. For these reasons the proposed rezone will be compliance with all the Level of Service (LOS) as recommend by the GMP. The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate -- staffs that are responsible for oversight of the LOS spelled out in the GMP. b) Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control. c) Conformity of the proposed MPUD with the goals, objectives, policies and the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. On page two (2) of this staff report~ the Comprehensive Planning Department provided a detailed analysis of how this project meets the goals, objectives, policies and FLUE ofthe GMP. d) The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The Good Turn Center MPUD has been designed to optimize internal and external land use because of the development standards contained in the MPUD Ordinance, and the requirements for buffering and screening in Section 4.06.02. What is shown in Table 2.4, Table of Buffer Requirements of the LDC, shall be required for all new development. e) The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of usable open space for the Good Turn Center MPUD is at least thirty (30) percent of the gross area and this project will meet the minimum requirement of the LDC. PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20/09 Page 8 of 15 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 17 of 157 j) The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements andfacilities, both public and private. Any future development will have to adhere to the transportation commitments contained in the MPUD Ordinance as well as be in compliance with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when the development approvals are sought to assure the adequacy of available improvements and facilities. g) The ability of the subject property and o.fsurrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The development of the subject site is timely because supporting infrastructure such as capacity of roads, wastewater, and utilities are currently available. When the developer comes in to expand the project, it will be reviewed again for supporting infrastructure, and must be in compliance with all LOS standards to accommodate the expansion. h) Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public pwposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The Good Turn Center MPUD development standards are contained in Exhibit B of the MPUD documents and a portion is provided in the comparative chart below. Given that assisted living facilities or continuing care centers are permitted in the C-3 zoning district, the C-3 zoning district was used as a point of reference for the evaluation of the proposed development standards. An analysis of the chart below indicates that the height and minimum yard setbacks for the proposed MPUD project are similar to the development standards within the standard C-3 zoning district that permit the proposed uses. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed development standards for principal and accessory structures would meet or exceed the standards of the C-3 zoning district. These development standards are also typically used in a Mixed-Use Activity Center. Comparative chart of Good Turn Center MPUD and Commercial Intermediate (C-3) Zoning District Minimum Lot Area 10,000 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 75 feet 100 feet 75 feet Minimum Setbacks 50% of the Front 25 feet 25 feet building height, Side 25 feet 25 feet but not less than Rear 40 feet 40 feet 15 feet Min. Distance between 20 feet or ~ sum of 20 feet or ~ sum of Structures buildina hei ht buildin hei ht none Setbacks from Preserve 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Page 9 of 15 PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7f20/09 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 P e 18 of 157 Maximum Zoned Building Height 3 stories over parking, not to exceed 45 feet 3 stories over parking, not to exceed 45 feet 50 feet Maximum Actual Building Height 3 stories over parking, not to exceed 55 feet 3 stories over parking, not to exceed 55 feet Minimum Setbacks Front Side Rear 25 feet 15 feet I 0 feet I 0 feet 20 feet or Yz sum of build in hei ht 25 feet 25 feet 15 feet 15 feet 1 0 feet 20 feet or Y:z sum of buiJdin hei ht 25 feet 50% of the building height, but not less than 15 feet I 0 feet Setbacks from Preserve Min. Distance between Structures Maximum Building Height * Assisted Living Facility *'" Continuing Care Centers Compliance with Sub-section 10.03.05.1 of the LDC: Nature of requirements of planning commission report. When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations of the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners required in 10.02.12 D. shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following, when applicable: 1) Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies andfuture land use map and the elements of the growth management plan. The Comprehensive Planning Department has provided a detailed analysis on page two (2) of this report, on how this petition is consistent with all applicable elements of the GMP. The property is located within the Mixed Use Activity Center (MUAC) Subdistrict (Activity Center No.7) of the Urban Commercial District, Urban Designation, as identified on Future Land Use Map. This district is intended to accommodate a variety of land uses including commercial uses and community facilities. 2) The existing land use pattern. The subject property abuts a vacant parcel with a zoning designation of Heavy Commercial District (C-5) along the north. Adjacent to eastern property line is a Florida Power & Light easement, with a zoning designation of Rural Agriculture (A). The southern property abuts the Hammock Park Commerce Centre (CPUD) which is undeveloped. Alongside the western boundary is an existing canal and ROWand Naples Lakes Country Club PUD that is an approved mixed-use development. PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20109 Page 10 of 15 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 19of157 3) The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The subject property is a rectangular shaped lot of sufficient size (9.5::1: acres) and does not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts because the rezone request conforms to the requirements of the Mixed Use Activity Center (MUAC) Subdistrict (Activity Center No.7) and therefore the project is consistent with the FLUE. 4) Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The boundaries of the Activity Center No.7 have been delineated on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the subject parcel was deemed to be logically drawn during the GMP adoption of the Mixed use Activity Centers Subdistrict. 5) Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed MPUD is not required at this time however, the request is reasonable because the property owners are unable to develop their property in accordance to the Mixed use Activity Centers Subdistrict without a rezone of the subject property. 6) Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The current development standards and landscape buffering requirements contained the MPUD Ordinance are designed to ensure the least amount of adverse impact on the adjacent developments. 7) Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The Transportation Department staff has reviewed the petitioner's request and indicated that the impacts associated with commercial, medical office, group housing, and retail land uses with a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and 200 institutional housing units at the proposed intensity are acceptable. 8) U11ether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The developer has to adhere to all County Ordinances related to paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans for this project in addition to being subjected to the Concurrency Management System of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. The developer is also required to provide a copy of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) permits prior to any construction drawing approvals. PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20/09 Page 11 of 15 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 20 of 157 9) Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The development standards for Good Turn Center MPUD are similar to the development standards for the C-3 zoning district, as depicted in the comparison chart on page 9 of this staff report. During the site development process (SDP) the developer will have to provide detailed plans for the exterior and interior lighting. The project will be designed in accordance to LDC standards to enhance compatibility of the commercial and residential uses through such measures as, but not limited to, minimizing noise associated with commercial uses; directing commercial lighting away from residential units; and separating pedestrian and vehicular access ways and parking areas from residential units, to the greatest extent possible. Street materials, signage, and lighting will be complementary and the same throughout the project's access ways. 10) Whether the proposed change will adversely afftct property values in the adjacent area. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results which may be internal or external to the subject property. Since property valuation is affected by several factors including zoning, zoning by itself may or may not affect the values of the adjacent area. 11) rVhether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The proposed MPUD will not result in deterrence to the adjacent properties. The master plan indicates an access to the arterial road fronting the project, and potential interconnections with adjacent properties along the northern and southern boundary line, which could redirect traffic internally to reduce congestion on Collier Boulevard (CR-951). Furthermore, the buffer requirements in conjunction with the preserve area and setbacks, and the proposed development standards combined with the site development plan (SDP) approval process, provides assurance the project will be built in accordance with existing County regulations. 12) Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The proposed MPUD is consistent with the FLUE and the goals and objectives of the GMP as well as adhering to the development regulations set forth in the LDC. Since the applicant has not requested deviations from the LDC, no special privileges are being sought. 13) Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property has a zoning designation of Rural Agriculture (A), and this zoning district does not meet the intent of Activity Center No. 7 of the FLUE. Therefore, any use permitted by right in that zoning classification would continue to be permitted on the subject property with no further legislative action, and subject only to the site plan requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 14) Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20/09 Page 12 of 15 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 21 of 157 During the review of the first development order, staff will evaluate the appropriateness of the requested commercial uses and senior housing on the subject site. The review will include a review of both the subject proposal and surrounding or nearby properties as to allow the appropriate development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, water management), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, and type of open space and .location and traffic generation. Furthermore, the applicant has not requested deviations from Section 5.05.08, Architectural and Site Design Standards of the LDC. For this reason the structures will be of a similar architectural scale to existing neighborhood development and will not be out of scale with the surrounding area. 15) Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There are many sites that are already zoned to accommodate the proposed development; however this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The proposed MPUD was reviewed and deemed compliant with the GMP and the LDC. 16) The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. The extent of the site alteration will be determined through extensive evaluation by federal, state, and local development regulations during any site development plan approval process. 17) The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County growth management plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended The project will have to meet all applicable criteria describe in the PUD Ordinance, as well as all the regulations set forth in the LDC and the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. 18) Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. This will be determined by the BCC during the advertised public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The EAC did not have to hear this petition. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on March 4th at 5 :30 p.m. at the Comfort Inn. Seven property owners from Naples Lake Country Club attended, as well as the applicant's team Wayne Arnold and Sharon Umpenhour ofQ. Grady Minor, Rich Yovanovich of Coleman, Y ovanovich & Koester, P.A., and county staff. Of those who spoke, the majority of PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20/09 Page 13 of 15 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 22 of 157 comments and concerns related to the new development's potential uses. Mr. Arnold explained that medical professionals have expressed interest due to the proximity to the new hospital and that there is potential for an assisted living facility and senior housing as well as retail. Mr. Arnold doesn't feel the uses will be offensive and stated that there will be no outdoor activities. Naples Lake resident, Dick Spangler, said that he is worried about an assisted living facility like Manor Care on Rattlesnake-Hammock Road being built on this property and wants to see a quality type institution instead. Mr. Y ovanovich stated that Manor Care pre-dated architectural standards and those architectural standards will apply to this project. Mr. Spangler also wanted to know if there were specific items that the applicant envisioned not having, such as billiards and motorcycle rentals. Mr. Arnold stated that because of the proximity to Rookery Bay, it is possible that there will be moped and bicycle rentals. Naples Lake resident, Barb Anderson, expressed concern over institutional uses. She doesn't want to see institutional care for the homeless, a detox facility, or low-income housing. Mr. Arnold suggested that the property owners email him a list of the types of uses they are against and he will bring these concerns to the owner. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 revised on July 23,2009. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition PUDZ- 2008-AR-12773 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval subject to the conditions of approval that have been incorporated into Exhibit E, List of Developer Commitments. Attachments: A. Retail Demand Analysis B. Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) C. Protected Species Survey PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Revised: 7/20109 Page 14 of 15 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 23 of 157 PREPARED BY: 7 - q - c96CJ7 MELISSA ZONE, P IP AL PLANNER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: ~ V.~ 7-~-OI RAY ND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW _.~~ YrJ.~ 7/ZI/O? SUS1\N M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE DEP ARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: 7ft.3jtJ ? K. SCHMITT ADMINISTRATOR DAtE . ITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Tentatively scheduled for the October 13,2009 Board of County Commissioners Meeting COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: ~~l P1i=G MARK I STRAIN, CHAIRMAN ~-r;--ol' DATE PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 Rev: 7/9/09 Page 15 of 15 ~Q)I'- coOL() 0..- "';N_ .- _0 :o::t N ..... ":::Q)Q) -.00> CtlOCtl -0-0... c:U cuO OJ ~ Z o w- I-~ aio o .... <It <( lN3lo'GSYJ ., Jf'd'~ ,Oll a.. <( ~ C? <.> It! It! () () ~ ~ g C ~ ::) ~ a. ~ (.) ~ ~ u o ~ (!) Z Z o N '" ~ z i:j . u 6 C: > ::) i5 .. Q.S '" '" w g 1'\IN"'~ '''NY;) C? (lG:6 -'~'O) Ob'\f^31noS ~nmoo ... ... ~ N .IE ~ :1:1> ~ I 0 '" a:: :;].. ~ " o ~:;J u~ is <( Ii: a.. ~ ~ "'b'~31S co 0. Z ~ g 0 0 N I N 31'W::lS OJ. lON / ~ c - ::J Q. 'Il: Z 0 l- i I- ~ W Q. ~ :1 ~ " , !~ a.. ~~ i g ~ <( ~.. ~ ~g: D e~ ~ ~ ~~ I-Z :e. m ~ .~ ~ I a- ~ 00 N g ill g w- e> -,~ ~ 00 lI:o Z D..... 0 ~ - i ~ lE: ~~i " ~ ~ 0 ;: ~ ~ ~i i ~~- <( () a 0 ~i ~ ~ .....J ~ ~~o ~ ~ ~ N i ~r ~ ~ ~ ~ 3[ . ~ '" N " N ~ ~ r = COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVElOPMENT REVIEW WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 25 of 157 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 341 04 (239) 403-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968 PETITION NO (AR) PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER DATE PROCESSED ASSIGNED PLANNER PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 REV: 2 .GOODTURNCENTERCPUD : Project: 2004060021 I Date: 6/3/08 DUE: 7/1/08 NAME OF APPLlCANT(S) COLLIER RATTLESNAKE. llC ADDRESS 3838 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH. SUITE 300 CITY NAPLES STATE FL liP 34103 TELEPHONE # 239- CELL # __________________ FAX # 239- E-MAIL ADDRESS: - ----- NAME OF AGENT D. WAYNE ARNOLD. AICP ADDRESS 3800 VIA DEL REY CITY BONITA SPRINGS STATE FL liP 34134 TELEPHONE # 239-947-1144 CELL # __________________ FAX # 239-947-0375 E-MAIL ADDRESS:WARNOLD@GRADYMINOR.COM \.l NAME OF AGENT RICHARD D. YOVANOVICH ADDRESS 4001 TAMIAMI TR. N., SUITE 300 CITY NAPLES STATE ~ ZIP 34103 TELEPHONE # 239-435-3535 CELL # ____________________ FAX # 239-435-1218 E-MAIL ADDRESS:RYOVANOVICH@GCILAW.COM BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. PUDZ Application -Rev 1 Page I of 14 GTCPUD Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 26 of 157 1~~~~l!i:~~~~2.:IS~:11;:~~};~~':lr~:T2~1:I~:~fitI~,~~I~l~~"'~~,~~~::;r~~;1J~~~i1~~~~~11I~1!1I. Complete the following for all Assoclation(s) affiliated with this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: NAPLES LAKES COUNTRY CLUB HOA. INC. MAILING ADDRESS 4784 INVERNESS CLUB DRIVE CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34112 NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: .. MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF MASTER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP PUDZ Application -Rev 1 Page 2 of 14 GTCPUD Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 27 of 157 a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an owners~ip interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership N/A b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Collier Rattlesnake. LLC Kenneth I. O'Leary, Manaqer 27499 Riverview Center Blvd Suite 101 Bonita Springs. FL 34134 100% c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership N/A d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership N/A PUDZ Application -Rev I Page 3 of 14 GTCPUD Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an indivic!fai12~flf 157 individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership N/A Date of Contract: ________________ ---f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- g. Date subject property acquired rgj September 2007 leased g Term of lease _ ____ yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: N/A Date of option: __________________________ Date option terminates: __________________..:..., or Anticipated closing date __________________ h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. PUDZ Application -Rev 1 Page 4 of 14 GTCPUD Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 29 of 157 Detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN NORTH 00032'56" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 14 FOR A DISTANCE OF 669.64 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 87"18'49" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.16 FEET TO THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD 951, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN NORTH 00032'56" EAST ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 334.85 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 87017'55" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,237.58 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 00031'41" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 335.16 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 87"18'49" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,237.68 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 9.503 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Section/Township/Range S14/T50S/R26E Lot: ________ Block: ______ Subdivision: ________________________________________ Plat Book ________ Page #: _________ Property I.D. #: 0041 7400002 Metes & Bounds Description: Size of property: ___________ft. X _______ft. = Total Sq. Ft. ________ Acres 9.5:!:: Address/general location of subject property: No address assigned. Property is located on the east side of Collier boulevard (CR. 951). approXimately 660 feet north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road. PUD District (LDC 2.03.06): 0 Residential D Community Facilities ~ Commercial 0 Industrial D Mixed Use Zoning Land use N C-5 S CPUD EA Undeveloped Hammock Park Commerce Center CPUD, undeveloped Undeveloped W ROW, PUD Collier Boulevard (CR. 951), Naples Lakes CC (Commercial. retail center) Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page). No Section/Township/Range __/__/ __ Lot: __ Block: __ Subdivision: _______ Plat Book _____ Page #: ______ Property 1.0. #: _________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: PUDZ Application -Rev I Page 5 of 14 OTCPUD Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 30 of 157 This application is requesting a rezone from the A. Agriculture zoning district(s) to the Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district(s). Present Use of the Property: Undeveloped Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Commercial. general and medical office. light retail. qroup housing and nursing home uses. Original PUD Name: Ordinance No.: ~J}5~~~~\t~7;"~f~ ~;~"":'F: "":.7;:;-=r~7' !):\:" ':'~""J'( ~~I~:::'~~~~~~f}~~2J\~tif5i~4t..~,f;:~;~~::wr~'1~i~~1Tf~'?'~;r?:~~r:-~~~~~~~n~~:;TI:~:f::;~~f%:[;'~:,:,'~~f~ ~.K:~.:~:\,~~:~:'::l~r,:.: is" "''':', -~ 1; :.." :;.-," '< :.,','1' ~ I, ;.. j',> ,e Ji:J ~1i;\~'ft'~,~ Hi~,~$~a fi:i ~~~ ~~~ ~~l@~ ~,~ ~ ~in~~ ~ 1;<;) .f,'-~1: ~,^)&1~::~:,f{.; '~',!~~;[~~~;#i'I;1_~:. :f~:;i.:;:i~:{-f.,\f/.;;t,/~~c~~~~~%~ ~~.!.~......c~;.,..~..;..::IZ."'L:~_\"-"",_-Je~~J._",,'::::' ~.-.J;~:-,- .;ri~,=>,;,-"""",..;;:'r...~t.;;;;i",:~~~~~:r{;;;.,..~~~~m-;hw;""^,;,':',',,,,,,,,~~,,Cl~':......I:.(..,~~~~~..tC_'lJ,~'A""~;^:.~'~ Pursuant to Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staffs analysis and recommendation to. the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. PUO Rezone Considerations (LOC Section 10.02.13.B) The Good Turn Center Commercial Planned Unit Development proposes a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on 9.5:t acres. A variety of office, retail and professional business service land uses are proposed to be developed within the CPUD. Provisions for development of a variety of group housing uses have also been included in this CPUD. The property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard, and access to the project is from Collier Boulevard. A potential interconnection with properties located immediately adjacent to the north and south of the Good Turn Center CPUD is shown on the conceptual master plan. The project is located within Mixed Use Activity Center #7, and the proposed commercial land uses is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Mixed Use Activity Center concept. The conceptual master plan prepared for the property identifies the proposed building enveloped in support of the commercial land uses. The conceptual master plan also identifies proposed points of ingress/egress to the site, native vegetation preserve areas, landscape buffers and areas proposed for storm water retention. The proposed development is compatible with surrounding commercial development which also lies within Activity Center #7. 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. ~ The SUbject 9.5:f: acre parcel is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard, approximately 660 feet north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The current PUDZ Application -Rev I Page 6 of 14 GTCPUD Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Future Land Use Element (FLUE) designation is Urban Commercial FDigtRdtpf 157 Mixed Use Activity Center #7 subdistrict. This activity center quadrant encompasses approximately 59 acres. The properties to the north and south are vacant but zoned for commercial development. To the west lies Collier Boulevard then a commercial shopping center at the intersection with Rattlesnake Hammock Road and residential development to the north of the commercial. In order to demonstrate that there is demand for additional commercial development, the applicant has prepared commercial needs analysis, which has been submitted with the CPUD application. The 9.5::t acre parcel consists of pine fJatwoods, hydric pine f1atwoods, hydric melaleuca and other surface waters. The proposed master plan depicts those areas that would be viable for development due to exotic dominance or upland habitat. A native vegetation preservation area has been identified on the conceptual master plan which meets the requirements of the Growth Management Plan and LDC. Traffic and access have been addressed in the T.I.S. The access will be coordinated with joint easements to permit ingress/egress at the designated Collier Boulevard location pursuant to the access management plan. Analysis of trip generation has been provided in the T.I.S. which is consistent with vehicular movements anticipated in an activity center. The surface water management system will utilize on-site water quality treatment and attenuation. Outfall of the system will be to the CR951 canal. All utilities, including potable water and sewer are available to the site. The site location and characteristics are suitable for commercial development of the type and intensity proposed within the Good Turn Center CPUD. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. The project is under unified control and evidence of this has been submitted in the application materials. Joint easements for cross access or shared access will be maintained by the owner or successors. Maintenance of the area within the boundary of the development will be the responsibility of the owner or property owner association. The wetland preserve will be maintained by the property owner association or similar entity as identified in the easement document. 3. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. PUDZ Application -Rev 1 Page 7 of 14 GTCPUD Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 32 of 157 The Good Turn Center CPUD is located in Mixed Use Activity Center #7 subdistrict of the Urban Commercial District (Policy 1.1) and it is identified on the Future Land Use Map Series of the Growth Management Plan. The master plan and PUD document exhibit those characteristics consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. The project proposes uses compatible with those permitted within the Activity Center subdistrict description of the Future Land Use Element. The preserve area complies with the minimum requirement of Policy 6.1.1 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, which requires preservation of a minimum of 15% of the existing native vegetation on-site. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The project proposes retail, business services, general office and medical office uses with related ancillary uses. These uses are compatible surrounding existing and proposed uses, and development will occur consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. A minimum of 30% of the project will be open space in accordance with Section 4.07.02 of the LDC. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The project timing is consistent with the availability and adequacy of facilities and adjacent commercial development at the corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The subject property and abutting properties are vacant; however, the subject property is the only property under ownership and control of the applicant. There is no intent to expand the boundaries of the proposed CPUD. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The proposed CPUD has been evaluated relative to environmental conditions, access management plan, compatibility and need for services. It is the intent of the CPUD to remain within the parameters of the land development code without unnecessary deviation from the regulations and meet the criteria found within the growth management plan. PUDZ Application -Rev I Page 8 of 14 GTCPUD Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 33 of 157 Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions, however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. Previous land use petitions on the subiect property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? 0 Yes [gI No If so, what was the nature of that hearing? ______________________________________ NOTICE: This application will be considered "open" when the determination of "sufficiency" has been made and the application is assigned a petition processing number. The application will be considered "closed" when the petitioner withdraws the application through written notice or ceases to supply necessary information to continue processinq or otherwise actively pursue the rezoning for a period of six (6) months. An application deemed "closed" will not receive further processing and an application "c1osed" through inactivity shall be deemed withdrawn. An application deemed "closed" may be re-openeg by submitting a new application, repayment of all application fees and granting of a determination of "sufficiency". Further review of the project will be subject to the then current code. (LDC Section 10.03.05.Q.) PUDZ Application -Rev I Page 9 of 14 OTCPUD THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW W/COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION. NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUBMllTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. #OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRE 1 Additional set if located in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelo ment Area) Co ies of detailed descri tion of wh amendment is necessar Completed Application with list of Permitted Uses; Development Standards Table; List of proposed deviations from the LDC (if any); List of Developer Commitments (download application from webslte for current form) Pre-a Ilcat/on meetin notes PUD Conce tual Master Plan 24" x 36" and One 8 Yz" x 11" co Proposed PUD Conceptual Master Plan 24" x 36"and One 8 Yz" x 11" co Original PUD document/ordinance and Master Plan 24" x 36" - ONLY IF AMENDING THE PUD Revised PUD a lication with chan. es crossed thru & underlined Revised PUD application wjamended Title page w/ord #'s, LDC 10.02.13.A.2 x 24 24 x x 24 24 24 x X X 24 X 24 24 X X ~~g{t~~rul~i&t~I~~~r~[~']I~;~~!!i~r~~~:~~ ~~~~ :'.~~~':~~(:~~~~~~,~~=~~~~ ?:II~Dt:~ ;~~~~t~~~ J~;~~~~~]Z~~!~~~~;~~ Deeds/Legal's & Survey (if boundary of original PUD is amended) List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation Owner/Affidavit signed & notarized Covenant of Unified Control Completed Addressing checklist 2 2 2 2 2 X X X X X w.W"'-'J1 '.''7'~~'''-I'.-.;... -:~-18~( .t/!"..:;;'12"'~ ;'>:~J:Nn,I>-""";:;r:--"'''''' r-l"'''''''-TO -""'" ,,--~ -'<"1""-""""- 77; ....... o-n"<"'~~IF.:'">:""'''''''''-''''''lT:",},'O''''''''''''''rSf.P.i-''''''J''''''''. !;\f'lIiC""';~."'"',,'7e,,~'''''''J''"'t!li'{f~Ii''''rl' ."",., "."ce. "'" " , , . ",' ':"f"'"""','." fB';""-'"." '.,."1 ~I~ ~~', OJ' '@2Ji~~~~~~~~kE}E~~.::~.:k~:!:~13t~l~:~~j~~A l~ : ~l:' :;_~ ~_ ..Ju~ ~ ~_,~...~. ~J :., I, ~~I ~j"~,:,' L:~. Jt:~W~:~~{~ ~"I~~ll'h i~~;G ~ lk1 ] Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and digital/electronic copy of EIS X or exem tion .ustification 4 Historical Surveyor waiver request 4 X Utility Provisions Statement w/sketches 4 X Architectural rendering of proposed structures 4 X Survey, signed & sealed 4 X Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) or waiver 7 X Recent Aerial Photograph (with habitat areas defined) min scaled X 1 "=400' 5 Electronic copy of all documents in Word format and plans (CDRom or X Diskette) If located in RFMU (Rural Frinqe Mixed Use) Receivinq Land Areas Applicant must contact Mr. Gerry J. acavera State of Florida Division of Forestry @ 239-690-3500 for ~:~::?~~d~:~; :e ~;t; _ _ ~ Pr _ve~: Plan",_;);;n ~pA.2.a.Co)I.c pp I anti gent Signature oat.::::... T~ PUDZ Application -Rev 1 Page 14 of 14 GTCPUD COVENANT OF UNIFIED CONTROL Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 35 of 157 The undersigned do hereby swear or affirm that we are the fee simple titleholders and owners of record of property commonly known as Folio Number 00417400002. No Site Address (Street address and City, State and Zip Code) and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. The property described herein is the subject of an application for commercial planned unit development (CPUD) zoning. We hereby designate Q. Grady M"mor and Associates, P. A. and Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, P.A.1 legal representatives thereo~ as the legal representatives of the property and as such, these individuals are authorized to legally bind all owners of the property in the course of seeking the necessary approvals to develop. This authority includes, but is not limited to, the hiring and authorization of agents to assist in the preparation of applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain zoning approval on the site. These representatives will remain the only entity to authorize development activity on the property until such time as a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to Collier County. The undersigned recognjze the following and will be guided accordingly in the pursuit of development of the project: I. The property will be developed and used in conformity with the approved master plan including all conditions placed on the development and all commitments agreed to by the applicant in connection with the planned unit development rezoning. 2. The legal representative identified herein is responsible for compliance with all terms, conditions, safeguards, and stipulations made at the time of approval of the master plan, even if the property is subsequently sold in whole or in part, unless and until a new or amended covenant of tmified control is delivered to and recorded by Collier County . 3. A departure from the provisions of the approved plans or a firilure to comply with any requirements, conditions, or safeguards provided for in the planned tmit development process will constitute a violation of the Land Development Code. 4. All ter'Jm and conditions of the planned unit development approval will be incorporated into covenants and restrictions which run with the land so as to provide notice to subsequent owners that all development activity within the planned unit development must be consistent with those terms and conditions. 5. So long as this covenant is in furce, ColJier County can, upon the discovery of noncompliance with the terms, safeguards, and conditions of the planned unit development, seek equitable relief as necessary to compel compliance. The Comty will not issue permits, certificates, or licenses to occupy or use any part of the planned unit development and the County may stop ongoing construction activity until the project is brought into compliance with all terms, conditions and safeguards of the planned unit development. COllie J^ J(a. /t!::J1Q.t; J...t.. C ~/~ IJJalfatel" ,I(;", J1 e f4 <T. cY J.eCd' f , Printed Name / Owner Printed Name STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNlY OF COLLIER) Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this 13- day of blove vn beY .2007 by ~n~ -YOf0cu~ as identification. { y.e{/trle ame typed, printed or stamped) 'DDr e/5~ l~ (Serial Number, ifany) ~;OTARY PUBUC. STATE OF FLORID"- \t.,ttt,,, . ~ I iW\ Arcelia G. Trevino ~.~}Col~ssion #DD652156 -'1'...".' ExpIres: MAR. 18, 2011 BONDED nnl.U ATLANnc BONDING co., INC. Application For Public: Hearing For PUD Rezone 1f1.2107 VfPA7 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 36 of 157 Exhibit A Legal Description Folio Number 00417400002 COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN NORTH 00032'56" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 14 FOR A DISTANCE OF 669.64 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 87018'49" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.16 FEET TO THE EAST RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD 951, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN NORTH 00032'56" EAsT ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 334.85 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 87"17'55" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,237.58 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 00031'41" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 335.16 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 87"18'49" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,237.68 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 9.503 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 REV: 1 GOOD TURN CENTER CPUD Project: 2004060021 Date: 1/24/08 DUE: 2/22/08 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 37 of 157 ORDINANCE NO. 09- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULA nONS FOR THE UNIN CO RP ORA TED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICUL ruRAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE GOOD TURN CENTER MPUD, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL LAND USES AND/OR A VARIETY OF SKILLED NURSING CARE FACILITY USES WITH A MAXIMUM OF 200 UNITS, IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9.5+/- ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Wayne Arnold, AICP of Q. Grady Minor, Inc. and Richard Yovanovich of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., representing Collier Rattlesnake LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Zoning District for the 9.5+/- acre project to be known as the Good Turn Center MPUD, to allow construction of a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and/or a variety of skilled nursing care facility uses with a maximum of 200 units in accordance with the MPUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibits "A" through "E" and incorporated by reference herein. 1 of2 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 38 of 157 The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of ,2009. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: By: DONN A FIALA, Chairman , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: 0. (f>.C ~ /' - ,..{) \ 0'- ':7 Heidi Ashton-Cicko Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A: Permitted Uses Exhibit B: Development Standards Exhibit C: Master Plan Exhibit D: Legal Description Exhibit E: List of Developer Commitments CP\09-CPS-00970\S 20f2 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 39 of 157 EXHIBIT A FOR GOOD TURN CENTER MPUD PERMITTED USES: A maximum of 100,000 sq. ft. of commercial land uses and up to 200 group housing units shall be permitted. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: Commercial Tract - C A. Principal Uses: 1. Administration of economic programs Groups 9611 - Administration of general economic programs 9621 - Regulation and administration of transportation programs 9631 - Regulation and administration of communications, electric, gas, and other utilities 9641 - Regulation of agricultural marketing and commodities 9651 - Regulation, licensing, and inspection of miscellaneous commercial sectors 2. Administration of environmental quality and housing programs Groups 9511 - Air and water resource and solid waste management 9512 - Land, mineral, wildlife, and forest conservation 9531 - Administration of housing programs 9532 - Administration of urban planning and community and rural development 3. Administration of human resource programs Groups 9411 - Administration of educational programs 9431 - Administration of public health programs 9451 - Administration of veterans' affairs, except health and insurance 4. Agricultural services Groups 0781 -landscape counseling and planning 5. Amusement and recreation services Groups 7911 - Dance studios, schools, and halls 7991 - Physical fitness facilities, including tanning salons 7999 - Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classified, including only golf driving range, jUdo/karate instruction, moped/motorcycle rental, bicycle rental, and yoga instruction 6. Apparel and accessory stores Groups 5611 - Men's and boys' clothing and accessory stores 5621 - Women's clothing stores 5632 - Women's accessory and specialty stores, except adult oriented stores shall be prohibited 5641 - Children's and infants' wear stores 5651 - Family clothing stores 5661 - Shoe stores 5699 - Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores 7. Automotive dealers and gasoline service stations Groups 5531 - Auto and home supply stores Exhibits A-E (Rev 8) doc Page 1 AR-12773/GTMPUD Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 40 of 157 5541 - Gasoline service stations 8. Automotive repair, services and parking Groups 7514 - Passenger car rental 7515 - Passenger car leasing 7532 - Top, body, and upholstery repair shops and paint shops 7533 - Automotive exhaust system repair shops 7534 - Tire retreading and repair shops 7536 - Automotive glass replacement shops 7537 - Automotive transmission repair shops 7538 - General automotive repair shops 7539 - Automotive repair shops, not elsewhere classified 7542 - Carwashes 7549 - Automotive services, except repair and carwashes 9. Building materials, hardware, garden supply, and mobile home dealers Groups 5211 - Lumber and other building materials dealer 5231 - Paint, glass, and wallpaper stores 5251 - Hardware stores 5261 - Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores 10. Business services Groups 7311 - Advertising agencies 7313 - Radio, television, and publishers' advertising representatives 7319 - Advertising, not elsewhere classified 7322 - Adjustment and collection services 7323 - Credit reporting services 7331 - Direct mail advertising services 7334 - Photocopying and duplicating services 7335 - Commercial photography 7336 - Commercial art and graphic design 7338 - Secretarial and court reporting services 7352 - Medical equipment rental and leasing 7371 - Computer programming services 7372 - Prepackaged software 7373 - Computer integrated systems design 7374 - Computer processing and data preparation and processing services 7375 -Information retrieval services 7376 - Computer facilitIes management services 7377 - Computer rental and leasing 7378 - Computer maintenance and repair 7379 - Computer related services, not elsewhere classified 7383 - News syndicates 11. Membership organizations Group 8661 - Religious organizations 12. Depository institutions Groups 6011 - Federal reserve banks 6019 - Central reserve depository institutions, not elsewhere classified 6021 - National commercial banks 6022 - State commercial banks 6029 - Commercial banks, not elsewhere classified 6035 - Savings institutions, federally chartered 6036 - Savings institutions, not federally chartered 6061 - Credit unions, federally chartered Page 2 Exhibits A-E (Rev 8).doc AR-12773/GTMPUD ...,.--....-.-...,.. ., Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page41of157 6062 - Credit unions, not federally chartered 6081 - Branches and agencies of foreign banks 6082 - Foreign trade and international banking institutions 6091 - Non-deposit trust facilities 13. Eating and drinking places Groups 5812 - Eating places, including indoor and outdoor entertainment, subject to the Collier County Noise Ordinance 14. Educational services Groups 8243 - Data processing schools 8244 - Business and secretarial schools 8249 - Vocational schools, not elsewhere classified 8299 - Schools and educational services, not elsewhere classified 15. Engineering, accounting. research, management, and related services Groups 8711 - Engineering services 8712 - Architectural services 8713 - Surveying services 8721 - Accounting, auditing, and bookkeeping services 8731 - Commercial physical and biological research 8732 - Commercial economic, sociological, and educational research 8733 - Noncommercial research organizations 8734 - Testing laboratories 8741 - Management services 8742 - Management consulting services 8743 - Public relations services 8748 - Business consulting services, not elsewhere classified 16. Essential services (Section 2.01.03 of the LDC) 17. Executive, legislative, and general government, except finance Groups 9111 - Executive offices 9121 - Legislative bodies 9131 - Executive and legislative offices combined 9199 - General government, not elsewhere classified 18. Food Stores Groups 5411 - Grocery stores 5421 - Meat and fish (seafood) markets, including freezer provisioners 5431 - Fruit and vegetable markets 5441 - Candy, nut, and confectionery stores 5451 - Dairy products stores 5461 - Retail bakeries 5499 - Miscellaneous food stores 19. General merchandise stores Groups 5311 - Department stores 5399 - Miscellaneous general merchandise stores 20. Health services Groups 8011 - Offices and clinics of doctors of medicine 8021 - Offices and clinics of dentists 8031 - Offices and clinics of doctors of osteopathy 8041 - Offices and clinics of chiropractors 8042 - Offices and clinics of optometrists 8043 - Offices and clinics of podiatrists Page 3 ExhIbits A-E (Rev 8) doc AR-12773I GlMPUD Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 42 of 157 8049 - Offices and clinicS of health practitioners, not elsewhere classified 8071 - Medical laboratories 8072 - Dental laboratories 8082 - Home health care services 8092 - Kid ney dialysIs centers 21. Holding and other Investment offices Groups 6712 - Offices of bank holding companies 6719 - Offices of holding companies, not elsewhere classified 6722 - Management investment offices, open-end 6726 - Unit investment trusts, face-amount certificate offices, and closed-end management investment offices 6732 - Educational, religious, and charitable trusts 6733 - Trusts, except educational, religious, and charitable 6792 - Oil royalty traders 6794 - Patent owners and lessors _ 679B - Real estate investment trusts 6799 - Investors. not elsewhere classified 22. Home furniture, furnishings and equipment stores Groups 5712 - Furniture stores 5713 - Floor covering stores 5714 - Drapery, curtain, and upholstery stores 5722 - Household appliance stores 5731 - Radio. television, and consumer electronics stores 5734 - Computer and computer software stores 5735 - Record and prerecorded tape stares 5736 - Musical instrument stores 23. Insurance agents, brokers and service Group 6411 - Insurance agents, brokers, and service 24. Insurance carriers Groups 6311 - Life insurance 6321 - Accident and health insurance 6324 - Hospital and medical service plans 6331 - Fire, marine, and casualty insurance 6351 - Surety insurance 6361 - Title insurance 25. Justice, public order, and safety Groups 9211 - Courts 9221 - Police protection 9222 - Legal counsel and prosecution 9224 - Fire protection 9229 - Public order and safety, not elsewhere classified 26. Legal services - Group 8111 27. Membership organizations Groups 8611 - Business associations 8621 - Professional membership organizations 8631 - Labor unions and sImilar labor organizations 8641 - Civic, social, and fraternal associations 8651 - Political Organizations Exhibits A.E (Rev 8).doc Page 4 AR-J2773 f G1MPUD Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 43 of 157 28. Miscellaneous retail Groups 5912 - Drug stores and proprietary stores 5921 - Liquor stores 5932 - Used merchandise stores, including only antique stores 5941 - Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops 5942 - Book Stores, excluding adult oriented stores 5943 - Stationery Stores 5944 - Jewelry Stores 5945 - Hobby, toy, and game shops 5946 - Camera and photographic supply stores 5947 - Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops 5948 - Luggage and leather goods stores 5949 - Sewing, needlework, and piece goods stores 5961 - Catalog and mail-order houses 5962 - Automatic merchandising machine operators 5963 - Direct selling establishments 5983 - Fuel oil dealers 5984 - Liquefied petroleum gas (bottled gas) dealers 5989 - Fuel dealers, not elsewhere classified 5992 - Florists 5993 - Tobacco stores and stands 5994 - News dealers and newsstands 5995 - Optical goods stores 5999 - Miscellaneous retail stores, not elsewhere classified 29. Miscellaneous services Group 8999 - services, not elsewhere classified 30. Non-depository credit institutions Groups 6162 - Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents 6163 - Loan brokers 31. Personal services Groups 7212 - Garment pressing, and agents for laundries and drycleaners 7221 - Photographic studios, portrait 7231 - Beauty shops 7241 - Barber shops 7291 - Tax return preparation services 32. Public finance, taxation, and monetary policy - Group 9311 33. Real estate Groups 6531 - Real estate agents and managers 6541 - Title abstract offices 6552 - Land subdividers and developers, except cemeteries 34. Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges, and services Groups 6211 - Security brokers, dealers, and flotation companies 6221 - Commodity contracts brokers and dealers 6231 - Security and commodity exchanges 6282 -Investment advice 6289 - Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities, not elsewhere classified 35. Social services Groups 8331 - Job training and vocational rehabilitation services 8351 - Child day care services Exhibits A-E (Rev 8). doc PageS AR-12773/ GTMPUD Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 44 of 157 8399 - Social services, not elsewhere classified 36. Veterinarian service - Group 0742 37. Video tape rental- Group 7841, excluding adult oriented sales 8. Accessory Uses/Structures: 1. Signs, water management, essential services, covered parking, nature trails, indoor and outdoor recreational facilities. Signage shall be permitted in accordance with the standards of the Land Development Code (LDC). 2_ Other accessory uses and structures customarily permitted for a principal use. Community Facility Tract - CF A. Principal Uses: 1. Health services Groups 8051 - Skilled nursing care facilities (Assisted living facilities, independent living facilities for persons over age 55, continuing care retirement communities, and nursing homes (maximum FAR of 0.6, not to exceed 200 units)) B. Accessory Uses/Structures: 1. Signs, water management, essential services, covered parking, nature trails, indoor and outdoor recreational facilities. Signage shall be permitted in accordance with the standards of the Land Development Code (LDC). 2. Other accessory uses and structures customarily permitted for a principal use. 3. Beauty and barber shops, resident dining (including serving of alcohol), and other personal services related to assisted living facilities, independent living facilities for persons over age 55, continuing care retirement communitIes, and nursing homes. The uses are limited to use by residents and their guests. Preserve Tract A. Principal Uses; 1. Passive recreation and walking trails. Exhibits A-E (Rev 8).doc Page 6 AR-12773/ GTMPUD Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 45 of 157 EXHIBIT B FOR GOOD TURN CENTER MPUD DEVELOPMENT 5T ANOARDS: Table I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the MPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shari be those specified in applicable sections of the Land Development Code in effect as of the date of approval of the Site Development Plan (SOP) or Subdivision plat. TABLE I DEVELOPMENT $T ANOARDS FOR MIXED USE DISTRICT C TRACT CFTRACT PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MINIMUM LOT AREA 5,000 square feet 10,000 square feet MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 75 Ft. 100 Ft. MINIMUM SETBACKS (External) Front 25 Ft. 25 Ft. Side 25 Ft. 25 Ft. Rear 40 Ft. 40 Ft. MINIMUM SETBACKS (Internal) Internal Drives/Right-of- 10Ft. 10 Ft. wav/Propertv Lines Preserve 25 Ft. 25 Ft. MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN 20 Ft. or Y:t sum of Building heights. 20 Ft. or Y2 sum of Building STRUCTURES heiahts. MAXIMUM HEIGHT Zoned Height - 3 stories over parking, Zoned Height - 3 stories over not to exceed 45 Ft. parking, not to exceed 45 Ft. Actual Height - 3 stories over parking Actual Height - 3 stories over not to exceed 55 ft. parkin!:! not to exceed 55 ft. MAX. GROSS LEASABLE AREA.. 100.000 Sq. Ft. FAR 0.6 ACCESSORY USES MINIMUM SETBACKS (External) Front 25 Ft. 25 Ft. Side 15 Ft. 15Ft. Rear 15 Ft. 15 Ft. MINIMUM SETBACKS (Internal) Internal Drives/Right-at- eFt. OFt. wav/Prooertv Lines Preserve 10Ft. 10Ft. MIN. DISTANCE BETVVEEN S.P.S S.P.S STRUCTURES MAXIMUM HEIGHT 25 Ft. 25 Ft. .whichever is greater ..Applies to commercial Olnd office uses. Any use subject to an FAR will be subject to the square feet permitted under that FAR S.P.S.: Same as Principal Structures. Exhibits A-E (Rev B). doc Page 7 AR-12773/ GTMPUD Agenda Item No. 8A Pag h !~ d z!ll falil .9L.SEI: 3 .L~,ll:.oo N I I I ~ I' I I W ill Ii -l-. _ _ ~~ i \ I ~.----- -11.---1-\ ~. .1 ~I \ I ~ ~ iw ~I \ ~. ~ :I~ d \ - i .Ii U \ \ ! i~ ~ \ I ~. I ! ~~ .1 \ I !i \ I It: \ II "'51~ ~u I \ ;U ~ ~ II II li~ "' II \ ti ~~~ ~ lL ~ I .0;1' M \ I Ii !!~il ;11 I I \ W iofN~ In I I \ - -,.~- - - - -.--J r I I i \ ~ ~' \ I @i~ \ i i \ . II~ I \ II ~ \ I ~I g >- E! 8 ~I ~~~~ ~ ~1 '- ~ ~-Il!~ 1 \ i :h~ ~; ~ I I I _..J ~ ~ ~ it ~ m ~ ~ \..i ~ ~ ~ ::; l- E-. iD f5 ~ <:> .... ~ u. U - U ~u. II ' - un III niB) ~ J . t Ilh J I ... . I o a 6 tll,. t.:!. IIlr ~; I i I 'il! ..: '" ..... i ~ ~ tl w . on on "t: fo z ,;; ;r; ~~ i 1 , , ,I !rl :1 I~ I ~ ~i ~ .t 11. o - o nil 0 adA.L 301M ,ol .S8.ttt '7\'M':) fJNIlSIX] ,Z8't,1: :3 .9',01:.00 N ---r~I>'M .JO-.J.H!)/~ ,r;~~) GH'fIATInng ~mo~ _ .....--.J.YM-i!2::i!fJ!J ~~I $~if ~88 UJ 19 I i Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 47 of 157 EXHIBIT D FOR GOOD TURN CENTER MPUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN NORTH 00032'56" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 14 FOR A DISTANCE OF 669.64 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 87018'49" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.16 FEET TO THE EAST RIGHT-OF.WAY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD 951, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN NORTH 00032'56" EAST ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 334.85 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 87017'55" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,237.58 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 00031'41" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 335.16 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 87018'49" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,237.68 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 9.503 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. E><hibits A.E (Rev 8).doc Page 9 AR-12773 I GTMPUD Agenda Item No. SA October 13. 2009 Page 48 of 157 EXHIBIT E FOR GOOD TURN CENTER MPUD LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Regulations for development of the Good Turn Center MPUO shall be in accordance with the contents of this MPUD Document and applicable sections of the LOC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate. Where this MPUO Ordinance does not provide development standards. then the provisions of the specific sections of the LOC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. 1. TRANSPORTATION A. The owner agrees to contribute its fair share toward the following intersections with planned improvements that are within the developments significant impacts: a} Rattlesnake Hammock at Collier Boulevard; b) Collier Boulevard at Davis Blvd; c) Rattlesnake Hammock at Grand Lely Drive; d) Rattlesnake Hammock at Polly Avenue. All fair share payments shall be completed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy. B. The Good Turn Center MPUD shall share access to CR-951 with the Hammock Park Commerce Centre PUO. 2. PLANNING A. The Good Turn Center MPUO will have an integrated and common building architectural style. Where multiple buildings are constructed within the MPUD. all buildings shall be constructed using like exterior building materials and color palate. Exhibits A-R (Rev 8).doc Page 10 AR-12773 I GTMPUD Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 49 of 157 GOOD TURN CENTER CPUD Protected Species Survey PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 REV: 2 GOOD TURN CENTER CPUD Project: 2004060021 Date: 6/3/08 DUE: 7/1/08 Boylan Environmenta ' Consultants, Inc. Wctland & Wildlife Surveys, Enviro 'nts cnnilling, & Impsct Assessment 11000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4 Fort Myers, Florida, 33966 Phone :( 239) 418-0671 Fax:( 239) 418-0672 April 14,2008 Agenda Item No. 8A Good Turn Cent2f_d~~~ INTRODUCTION Two environmental scientists from Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc conducted a field investigation on the 9.50 acre property on November 6, 2007. The purpose of the field investigation was to identify the potential of listed (endangered, threatened, etc.) species inhabiting the site that are regulated by the US Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission. The site is located in portions of Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. Specifically, the property is located on the southeast comer of Rattlesnake Hammock and County Road 951. The property is bordered on the west by County Road 951; the south is bordered by Florida Sports Park Road. The north side is bordered by undeveloped forestland, and a power line easement borders the property on the east. METHODOLOGY The property was surveyed for the presence of listed species via overlapping belt transects. This method is comprised of a several step process. First, vegetation communities or land-uses on the property or study area are delineated on an aerial photograph based on nomenclature of the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS). Next, the FLUCFCS codes or land-use types found on the property are cross-referenced with State and Federally listed species that can be found in Collier County. The list of protected species was derived from several sources, the Official List of Endangered and Potentially Endangered Fauna and Flora in Florida (Florida Natural Areas Inventory FNAI; 1995), Florida's Endangered, Threatened and Species of Special Concern (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (2004) and the Endangered and Threatened Species of the Southeastern United States (US Fish and Wildlife Service). Then, each community is searched in the field for the species which have the potential to occur in that particular FLUCCS type. An intensive pedestrian survey is conducted using belt transects as a means of searching for plants and animals. In addition, periodic "stop-look-listen" and quiet stalking methods are conducted for aninlals. Signs or sightings of these species are then recorded. The table at end of this report lists the FLUCFCS communities found on the property and the corresponding species that have a probability of occurring in them. Transects were walked approximately as shown on the attached aerial photograph. SITE CONDITIONS The temperature was in the lower 70's with clear skies during the field investigation. The site was undeveloped, but there was some disturbance on the east portion of the property that consisted of recent disturbance for utilities. Older disturbance was in the form of an access road Page 2 of5 Agenda Item No. SA Good Turn Cent2E~TN, 2009 P1r~e'-!N" of 157 for the power line easement. The majority of the property had considerable coverage of melaleuca, much off which was considered as melaleuca invaded wetlands. Vegetation communities were mapped in the field according to the system in use by the agencies, the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS). Listed below are the vegetation communities or land-uses identified on the site. We identified approximately 5.74 acres of potential jurisdictional wetland communities on the site. The following descriptions correspond to the mappings on the attached FLUCFCS map. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation 1999) for definitions. 411El Pine Flatwoods (0-25% exotic coverage; approximately 1.38 acres) This upland community was dominated by an open canopy of slash pine with scattered cabbage palm. The shrub layer was consisted of scattered dahoon holly, wax myrtle, and rusty lyonia. The understory was dominated by saw palmetto with lesser amounts of wire grass and penny royal. Very few exotics were found in this community. 411E2 Pine Flatwoods (25-50% exotic coverage; approximately 1.41 acres) This upland community was dominated by co-dominated by slash pine, melaleuca and ear-leaf acacia. The understory was composed of ear-leaf acacia saplings and scattered Brazilian pepper with a herbaceous layer sparsely vegetated with wire grass. 619 Hydric Melaleuca (>75% melaleuca; approximately 3.42 acres) This wetland community was overwhelmingly dominated by melaleuca. Very little other vegetation grew in the dense shade of this exotic tree. Slash pine was widely scattered in this community. 625E4 Melaleuca invaded Pine Flatwoods (>75% melaleuca; approximately 2.13 acres) This wetland community was dominated melaleuca with lesser amounts of slash pine in the canopy. Cypress trees were widely scattered. The understory was composed of scattered ear- leaf acacia saplings with minor amounts of blue maidencane, wire grass, saw grass and swamp fern in the herbaceous layer. 740 Disturbed Land (approximately 0.58 acres) This land-use designation describes previously cleared and disturbed land where public utility work was conducted. 740H Hydric Disturbed Land (approximately 0.19 acres) This land-use designation describes a previously cleared area for the powerIine right of way, now used by off-road vehicles. 743 Road Fill (approximately 0.39 acres) This land-use designation describes the fill area for the dirt road that runs down the middle of the power line easement. Page 3 of 5 Agenda Item No. 8A G O<;:~ih3, 2009 ood Turn CenterPa'~e'-5"l of 157 SPECIES PRESENCE The various listed species that may occur in the FLUCFCS communities have been tabulated on the attached table. During our field survey for protected species on the property, we did not observe any listed animal species or signs thereof. No nest-like structures or tree cavities were noted. No tortoise burrows were identified. We observed burrows belongjng to armadillos, which were not marked in the field. There was no evidence that these burrows were being used by gopher tortoises. The lack of tortoise burrows is likely due to the relatively high water tables in the area. The listed air plants were identified on the property. Page 4 of 5 Agenda Item No. SA ()C;:~TN, 2009 Good Turn Cente-rf'\a'~e~ of 157 Table. Collier County Protected Species Survey Summary Protected species having the potential to occur in the corresponding FLUCFCS community or land-types with corresponding field survey results. 411 Beautiful Pawpaw 90 X 20 Big Cypress Fox Squirrel 90 X 20 Eastern Indigo Snake 90 X 20 Pakahatchee Burmannia 90 X 20 Florida Black Bear 90 X 20 Florida Coontie 90 X 20 Florida Panther 90 X 20 Gopher Frog 90 X 20 Gopher Tortoise 90 X 20 Red-Cockaded Woodpecker 90 X 20 Satinleaf 90 X 20 Southeastern American Kestrel 90 X 20 Twisted Air Plant 90 X 20 619 NONE -- -- - 625 American Alligator 90 X 20 Everglades Mink 90 X 20 Plorida Black Bear 90 X 20 Florida Panther 90 X 20 Gopher Frog 90 X 20 Little Blue Heron 90 X 20 Snowy Egret 90 X 20 Tricolored Heron 90 X 20 Wood Stork 90 X 20 740 Burrowing Owl 90 X 20 Gopher Tortoise 90 X 20 743 Gopher Tortoise 90 X 20 Page 5 of5 "'-,'"" Ih I I U~i J ~~~I I i;1; I II: Q :::> 0 a.. z U fa a: ..J W en I- w Z (3 W w U 55 Z 0 0: w :::> t5 I- w o 6 o 0: o 0.. (!) ~ ~ d Iii d . -... i. S . >I! c:: lIf .t is ~ l~ -= - "! = 0 ::Sf f III ... III ...>c: ~ ~ c::. ~.. ~ t:r;JU I :l! lJJ ~ Iii ::: ih I I h~B j l28~ 1<1 Q I~i~ ~:rU ~~i~ ~.t~ I o ::J a. o a: w 0. t- ctJ Z ~ W en o 0 z ~ a: ::> ::J it t- O o o C) lcation Number Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Wet1andRapidAssessrnentProcedure Page 56 of 157 ~ ExI,noll Conditio.. 0 Propo,ed Condition. WRAP Proied Name EvakJalor V\t!lUardType Good Turn Center CPUD KoS. IHerbaceous Wetlands Disturbed Wetlands WelIandkrea;Je I 3.42 Land Use R..1JC(:S Code I 740H I Description: I Habital Support I Suffer Suffer type (Soore) X (% of area)=Sub To1als Wetland CanDPi (015( , 0.00 Field Hydrology (HYD) ~ 1.50 ~ We1land Ground Cover (GC) ~ 0.00 I V\.Q Input & Treatment ~)* 2.S8 . The value ofV\.Q is obtained Pi adding the TOTALscores ofland use Category and Prelreatment c:alegory then dillk:ling by 2 Wldlife Utlllzalion fWU) ~ 1.50 ~ 30-300 ft 2.00 0.25 0.50 30.300 ftw(...okl 1.00 0.75 0.75 -rurAL 1.25 I Pretreatment C \VRAPScore t 0.47 Field Nates: (lU) TOTAl 2.7S Pretrea1mentCaterlon (Score\X ("A. of area) =Sub Totals Natural areas 3.00 1.00 3.00 (PT) TOTAL 3.00 Wildlife Utilization (WU ) - No listed species Observed. High coverage of exotics. WeUand Canoov 015 \ I NA W;!tland Ground Cover (GC ) I None, due to ORV traffic. Habitat SuPPOrt/ Buffer I Surrounding uplands are dominated by exotics. Major road adjacent to site. Some off site buffering to the south. Field Hvdroloov I HYD } I Disturbed hydrology from the drainage of the power line easement. V\Q InpUt & Treatment MQ ) I Open space to the east and west. ~ j~~ 8. j ~ <~~ ~~<( ;; J8~" ~ a:g~ C!l3 ri ~oo~ ~~~~ Q.,c:JU)u.. ~5lo a:a: W ~i=~~ ..0 >::> WQ. D::O (")0::: .....W~W .....I-N::J NZOC "';"WO D::08 ~Z~co co 0:::0 0 0_0- O_N~ N I- .. N '0....- N (,)~ C 0 .~ as ::J021; Q.e>Q.Q co o - N N - N o ::::::> a.. o a: w I- Z W () z a: :::::> l- e o o CJ g. :a: en o LL U ::> ....J u. ~1. g. II (5 ;.. 0 h lli ~~ ~ ~<If ~ o;t ~ ~.~ ii). i ~.~r. i o Ii :3 oS J. ~ 1i ~I ~ ~ Bhi l:I 0 '3 ~t ~ ~.~ a! i ~k~c.3" ~ o:l- J ~ . ~ Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 58 of 157 Good Turn Center Retail Demand Analysis January 21, 2008 PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 REV: 1 GOOD TURN CENTER CPUD Project: 2004060021 Date: 1/24/08 DUE: 2/22/08 Prepared for Collier Rattlesnake LLC Prepared by Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 1415 Panther Lane, Suite 346/347 Naples, Florida 34109 239-254-8585 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 59 of 157 Good Turn Center Retail Demand Analysis (January 17, 2008) 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Backqround This report details a retail demand analysis for the proposed rezone of 9.5 acres located on the east side of County Road 951 immediately north of the Rattlesnake Hammock Road intersection in Collier County, Florida ("County"). Collier Rattlesnake, LLC ("Client") is planning a 9.5-acre commercial development ("Project") in the northeast quadrant of Activity Center #7 at this intersection. All 9.5 acres of the Project are located within the County's FLUE Activity Center #7 ("Activity Center"). The Project is planned for an estimated 100,000 square feet of commercial retail space. In support of the Project, the Client is interested in demonstrating that the Project is needed in terms of meeting the demand for commercial retail space in this market. Fishkind & Associates, Inc. ("Consultant") has been engaged to prepare this report on the commercial retail portion of the Project. The focus of this report centers on the 100,000 square feet of commercial retail development proposed for the site. Potential employees created by the Project will generate demand for a portion of the commercial retail component. In addition, current and future households and employees in the defined market area will also support the commercial retail development of the proposed Project. 1.2 Overview of Demand Analysis According to Policy 1.1, Section B.1 (XII), of the Collier County Growth Management Plan ("GMP"), there are 13 factors to be considered during the review of a rezone petition within a Mixed Use Activity Center. Two of those factors relate to this report. o The amount, type and location of existing zoned commercial land, and developed commercial uses, within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two road miles of the Mixed Use Activity Center. o Market demand and service area for the proposed commercial land uses to be used as a guide to explore the feasibility of the requested land uses. The Consultant has addressed the first factor by taking inventory of existing zoned and developed commercial uses within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two road miles of the Mixed Use Activity Center (found in Appendix 1). The remainder of this report addresses the secof)d factor: market demand and service area for the proposed commercial land uses to be used as a guide to explore the feasibility of the requested land uses. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 60 of 157 Historically, comparisons of market demand and service areas have focused their studies City or County-wide. This analysis studies the market for commercial retail demand around the project and portions of the community within certain drive time distances. There are two related reasons for this type of analysis. First, consumers are assumed to maximize benefit over all goods and services consumed subject to their income. This type of analysis requires that travel costs are either explicitly or implicitly accounted for during the consideration of the consumers' income constraint. This analysis requires the Consultant to narrow the scope of the analysis from the County level down to a local market level. The Consultant further reduces the analysis based on calibrated propensity to travel estimates. Second, the Consultant considers whether the choice of location is a Pareto improvement for consumers. (Pareto improvement means that no consumers are made worse off, and at least one is made better off.) That is, the Consultant asks the question whether additional retail space makes at least one local market better off, without reducing the welfare of all others. An analysis of commercial retail space over the whole of a County may lead to the wrong conclusion of where to develop new space. That is, the County as a whole may appear to need more retail space to support the aggregate level of demand generated by its residents. With many County-wide choices of commercially-zoned lands available, the development of one site over another may lead to an over supply in one location and an under supply in another. This is precisely the outcome ,the County wants to avoid. Therefore: o By narrowing the focus of this study to the local market, the Consultant determines if this market has a need for additional retail space. o The Consultant can replicate a competitive outcome, and ensure that the welfare of all other local markets is unchanged or improved. (Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank) Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 61 of 157 1.3 Overview of Market Trade Area Based on the character of the proposed development and surrounding uses, the market trade area utilized in this analysis is community serving in nature. According to the Urban Land Institute, "A neighborhood center's typical size is about 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from 30,000 to 100,000 or more square feet." Neighborhood centers sell convenience goods, groceries and personal services to the immediate neighborhood community. The typical market area for a neighborhood center is a 10- minute drive time. "A community center's typical size is about 150,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from 100,000 to 500,000 or more square feet. Centers that fit the general profile of a community center but contain more than 250,000 square feet are classified as super community centers." Community centers sell a wider range of products that includes apparel, hardware and appliances. The typical market area for a community retail center is a 20-minute drive time. r'A regional center's typical size is about 500,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from 250,000 to over 1,000,000 or more square feet. " Regional centers sell general merchandise, apparel, home furnishings, and a variety of other goods and services to a larger regional market. The typical market area for a regional retail center is a 3D-minute drive time. The typical market area for a community retail center is a 2D-minute drive time. The need for additional community retail development is based on an analysis of the 20- minute drive time market surrounding the site. A map of the market is provided in Appendix 3. 1.4 Analysis Process In satisfying the second factor that pertains to this report set forth by Policy 1.1, Section B.1 (XII), of the Collier County Growth Management Plan ("GMP"), this analysis uses a two-step process in exploring the market demand and service area for the proposed commercial land uses. o Determine the amount of effectively competing, existing commercial retail square footage within the described drive-time market area. o Determine current households, future households, household equivalents and incomes within the described market area to estimate future retail spending potential and associated square footage demand. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 62 of 157 In addition, employees in the surrounding area and employees generated by the Project will also support the commercial retail development. As described further in the Retail Demand Methodology found in Appendix 4, the Consultant estimates a distributive function that reduces retail spending as households are farther away from the site based on calibrated propensity to travel estimates. Accordingly, the supply of competing retail space is also reduced by distance away from the site. 2.0 The Supply and Demand for Commercial Retail Space 2.1 Proiect's Primary Market - ExistinQ and Under Construction Retail Supolv The analysis begins with the supply of existing and under construction community serving retail space 100,000 to 300,000 square feet in size as per the ULI community definition and within a 20-minute drive time around the Project site. Just as demand is reduced by distance of travel, so is competition. This means that the supported supply of competing square feet of retail space can also be reduced by the distance away from the site. The portion of supported supply which falls under the influence of the site in question is determined to be the effective competition. Appendix 2 provides the supply of existing community serving retail space utilizing CoStar Commercial Real Estate Information Services Data. The Consultant has further refined the supply of retail space by utilizing a three-step filter process. This process seeks to ensure that only community serving retail space within the described market area that is of similar size and character to the proposed Project is included. The steps are outlined below. o The retail center is within the described 20-minute drive time market area; o The retail center has between 100,000 and 300,000 square feet of gross leasable area; o The retail center is either existing or under construction; This analysis indicates that there is 2,452,404 square feet of aggregate community retail space within the described market area. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 63 of 157 2.2 Community Servino Retail Demand Results Fishkind and Associates, Inc. calculated that the community retail demand created by the 2015 average household income of $62,7751 and 61,4212 total households within the 20-minute market of the Project will support nearly 2,000,000 square feet of retail space. Given this figure, there will be sufficient net demand (541,779 sq. ft.) in 2015 in the market to support the Project's 100,000 square feet of proposed commercial retail square footage. Table 3 below shows the annual net demand for community serving retail space based on the household forecast for the market. Table 3. The Project Retail Demand Summary 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 20 - MINUTE HOUSEHOLDS 48,904 51,771 54,806 58,019 61,421 AVERAGE INCOME $61,516 $61.828 $62,142 $62,458 $62,775 COMMUNITY SQUARE FOOT DEMAND GENERAL MERCHANDISE 110,118 117,166 124,664 132,643 141,132 FOOD 138,992 147,887 157,352 167,423 178,138 FOOD SERVICE 142,138 151,687 161,366 171,664 182,622 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 39,311 41,827 44,504 47,352 50,383 SHOES 3,055 3,251 3,459 3,680 3,916 HOME FURNISHINGS 144,296 153,531 163,357 173,812 184,936 HOME APPLlANCES/MUSIC 37,148 39,525 42,055 44,746 47,610 BUILDING MATERIALS/HARDWARE 199,387 212,148 225,726 240,172 255,543 AUTOMOTIVE 558,173 593,896 631,906 672,347 715,.378 GIFT/SPECIAL TV 33,583 35,732 38,019 40,452 43,041 JEWLERY 955 1,016 1,081 1,150 1,224 DRUGS 8,328 8,861 9,428 10,031 10,673 OTHER RETAIL 21,948 23,352 24,847 26,437 28,129 PERSONAL SERVICERS 13,718 14,596 15,530 16,524 17,582 ENTERTAINMENT 84,760 90,185 95,956 102,098 108,632 TOTAL DEMAND (SQ. FT.) 1,535,910 1,634,660 1,739,249 1,850,532 1,968,938 COMPETING SUPPLY (SQ. FT.) (1,427,159) (1,427,159) (1,427,159) (1,427,159) (1,427,159) NET NEED (SQ. FT.) 108,751 207,501 312,090 423,373 541,779 Source: I-Site Census-Based Demographics Package & Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Today, there is a net deficit of just over 100,000 square feet of community retail square feet in the marketplace. That deficit increases by approximately 50,000 square feet annually to a net need for over 540,000 square feet of community serving retail space by the year 2015. 1 I-Site. Census-Based Demographics Package 2 I-Site, Census-Based Demographics Package - Adjusted for Seasonality Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 64 of 157 As previously mentioned, demand for retail space is generated from current and future households and employees within the market area. Additionally, employees created by the proposed Project will also generate a demand for retail space. The analysis utilizes the market's 'average' household income as a measure of retail spending potential. While a handful of households with extremely high incomes may be responsible for the high average in this market, retail spending potential should be accurately reflected as such. In summary, the results of this analysis demonstrate that there is a current need for additional community serving retail space in this market. The timing of the Project would immediately satisfy a portion of that net demand. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 65 of 157 Appendix 1 Retail Supply Within Mixed Use Activity Center a.nd Within Two Road Miles of Mixed Use Activity Center "0 Q) a. I- OLl. GiG ~e.? c ..J <{ <3 ffi li: :a: g :a: 0-, U<c be.? I-~ U < ~ 0. 0. ::s CI) j! .- :! I N "t:I C cu ~ C. Q. ::s rJ) ...... s- O) ...... c 0) o ~ .S; :.i:i (.) <( ..J e.? ~~~ o-u 1-(1)< z Qa; ~t: U(I) o -' w :a: < z o o L!l m L{) 000 000 qqq 000 (0 ..- co ..- ..- N L() 0 0 q 0 N m t.O 0 ..- ..- ("') ("') N 0 "'! 0 ro o t.O 0 N co m ~ (0 co (0 ~ '1 ~ 000 L() L() I.() j: ~ ~ 0:: W I- Z W III o ::> W ....J o U 0:: >- W c:r: ~I-X ~ Z W 0::>- ~ 8 ~ 0:: (j) 0 -< W 0 6 ~ ~ o ~ ~ :2 ....J c:r: ~ ~ W I Z (j) 'l:t:U Z..... 0.- j:: ~ fill 1.0 <0 - r.JON ..- I:ii<::>d> .-!. a. co. q> 0) :c 0 0 ~ ::>:::::l _~ 0... 0... ..... ..... ""'''<1" -io> ..... .... ""'''<1" -io> co <0 ~~ L() L() ~~ ..- ..- 00 ...J ...J ...J ...J (() (() ..... ..... .ii.i .ii.i Oi:: 0;:: (() (() E E ~<( LO .-U ..- J - ..- '7001:; "<1"-000 O)COoo I I:: 0 0 o 0 eX) 0.1(0 :::::IN<D 0.. ~~ /I) ..! :e("') .~ Nm cm :E' _0 ~1r ..... "<t ..- ..... "<t N o o o o ("') 000 0 o 0 0 0 000 0 oo..fo ~ ~ 1.0 ..- o o u;i ..... L() """ N ri 000 000 o L() 0 ON 0 Ii)..... 0 .......... ..... gg~g~~g~ "'0..00 cO"": 00) ("')CO .................... ..... o o cO N 0). ..... g8~~~gg~ NOr-..: cO cON t.O 0> m<o CO.....(O("') ~ ..... N co N o <0"( N'd" 1M .....f'i It? '"'"l ~ LOOO, ("') N...... " l-- V'l CON' N . M rit{~ . - \0 NNN --- ..- I 0) m I 0:: o - en en W 0::: 0.. >- U C> z o z 5: (0 <0 ~ N 00 Ii) 1.0 M N N N 0:: W I- Z W o ....J <( u Go ("') UJ ~ :2 If...... 0:: -< B5 I- - c:r: C> OW (j)0:: W 0:: c:r: W >- :J ....J ...... UJ 0 ...J U (j) - W 0 C> 0 ::s 0 ::::l 5: > S Z 0 o 0 ~ <( o :r: W (j) <0 N <0 (0 o '1 ~ 1.0 0 0 cb LO 1.0 ..... ~ ~ <( c:r: <( III c:r: <( III ~ Z <(en (j)w ~~ U)::J Ww 0..> 0........ OW IS (/)1- --- ..- ...-... .......... J U') ~~ ~8'7 "t'; 000 0) CO '1 N 0 '7 CO ex) V I I N I I coOOCX)OO I ::>::> I ::>::> 0::: 0.. 0... 0:: a.. a.. CO <0 '1 '1 o 0 Ii) 10 I I N 0) .i::' I:: :J en 0 WO ...... .... ~ .!!2 Zo u...() 00 z-g mo ....J CI) <9;:: 1-0 C/)~ ill c:r: CI) o 1)- u...co ,.... o o NO _"<t <0 N I ,.... ex) 0 co "<t I o ::> a.. <0 Ii) to ri o ("') o o lO <6 "<t ..... N .... (() If) .~ N "'<l: ..... 1.0 ("') 1.0 tq ..... m lO <6 c: :J o o s ~ ..... ~ (5 o ro 2 en co c (1).- :J 5 O)N ~~ oC!) 0)...... -01:: :J :J - 0 go .- ..... >..!!2 <0= E8 0). 0"'" <00 0..0 (1)0.1 ...... .g! ~ o .... :J O)<{ E_ E 0 o (I) o tU -o]! co- >0 0:::> Cio.. a. <0:- _:J o 0 ......0 c ..... :J Q) 0= E 0 -<0 .. Qj 0) u - ..... o :J zo .. (f) Appendix 2 Retail Supply 20-Minute Drive Time Market Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 67 of 157 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 68 of 157 APPENDIX TABLE 2 - 20-Minute Retail Supply Address 9885 Collier Blvd 12703-12713 Tamiami Trl E 14960 Tamiami Trl 6650 Collier Blvd 7055-7301 Radio Rd 6050-6060 Collier Blvd 3701-3775 Tamiami Trl E 345jTamiami Trl E 3300-3420 Tamiami Trl E 4849-4895 Golden Gate Pky 1651 Airport Rd S 2560-2896 Tamiami Trl E 4953-4995 Golden Gate Pky 4095 Pine Ridge Rd 300 Goodlette Rd S 5939-6029 Pine Ridge Road Ex 691 5th Ave S Total GLA 199,909 127,362 165,000 203,797 106,354 145.962 134.707 125,022 134,867 107.115 129,844 204.551 144,240 101,000 185,914 125,000 111,760 Drive Time 5.37 8.25 8.70 9.20 10.45 10.63 11.20 11.85 12.47 13.65 13.87 13.97 14.10 14.15 17.45 17.58 17.83 Net Competing Supply 161,406 90,075 114,163 137,558 67,348 91.563 81,986 73,458 76,566 56,840 68,017 106,521 74,537 52,038 77,735 51,809 45,541 % Competing Distance 80.74% 70.72% 69.19% 67.50% 63.32% 62.73% 60.86% 58.76% 56.77% 53.06% 52.38% 52.08% 51.68% 51.52% 41.81% 41.45% 40.75% Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 69 of 157 Appendix 3 20-Minute Drive Time Trade Area Map Activity Center #7 Map Activity Center #7 Aerial j \ \, III III GI C u ~~ii: Q) U", >.aI:;, ca ~ III III "'C -.... C Gl III 0.0: Ql:t:: f=..... nso:::uU>o :i5 ic o M -'I .--... "' ~ "" 0 0 jl~ :;r ~6 i 0 14ft e N 09 " ~ !1', " ~i 6 >- II e; 'It' -... ~ I "' " ~:! a: I oc'" '----' " wi " '" l~~ .i5~ C iJ ~ " W ~ I w"" 13 oj, :::;0 Z .. ~ ~ wO W ~ co " '" h~ 1-'" l!l ~ 5 9 lP i 0.. is ill ~r~ W 0 W ~ >- i 1 tnz oJ <.> ~~11 I:: <> <> 1"'2 '" " '" ro !: ~ ! ~ = ~ = ~< ~ V> "' ~f 00 5 ... :I > w " ;~i B~ 0 i5 I ~ I~ o/:, 1.,/.. "" ~re& ::l! ::; 1~1 ~I~ < ~ <( '~H" . ~ [ '" " 01( ~ i ~ i Q I e ;.~. >J( </ '" 1 v c. ~ t .;. ""'"'-:l ,DOl " ! ''r~~,Q.I:1 ~ " Q ~ .:w WroYO .. 00taljI IIUI? JO 7W >- . c, 1 ~ I ~:a(l,l.tO "I C;' ~ '. i ~ ! ~ C1i :.'11l! .,. g ;! :, l Print Map Agenda Item No. 8A http;llmaps.collierappraiser.comlwebmap/mapJilmO.'atiJ~ier%... Page 72 of 157 MAFtuMi!ND: , ~'ti~K, '8'; PAroole, . '. s"blllvl81Dns A.il.,. mt'J;ll~~d>l,l~j,lI1'~ .b~j,.1.lllNi7(.2i.llEq l!l~ll~lnll"d.;~~i'lii" Co!lliH' C""~. 1--.----------------1 Farro Number: 00417400002 I I Name: COLLIER I RATrLESNAKE LLC !I I Street# & Name: NO SITE j' ADDRESS I I Legal Description: 145026 I ,S1/2 OF N1/2 OF SW1/4 OF i I SW1/4, LESS W 100FT 9.24 AC! I<?R1768 PG!~~ _ _ .. ..... ! _..~'"..~.-......~._._.."..-.-_....,........._.__._-,-,.."~...._----,- Q 2004. Collier County Property Appraiser. While lhe Collier County Property Appraiser is committed to providing the most accurate and up-Io-date Information, no warranties expressed or implied are provided for the data herein, ils use. or its interpretation. 1 of 1 12/7/2007 11:09 AM Appendix 4 Retail Demand Methodology Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 73 of 157 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 74 of 157 Retail Demand Methodology The methodology employed in the analysis of the demand for retail space at this site is based on a proprietary consumer expenditures model developed by the Consultant. This 'model can estimate the aggregate market demand for retail space, the demand for retail space at a specific location, and the effective supply of competing retailers in the area. The net demand for retail space at the location being studied is determined as the difference between the site demand and the effective supply of competition. The proprietary consumer expenditures model estimates retail demand by square footage. shopping center type and store type. The model incorporates multiple data sources. These sources are census based ("I-Site") local area households and household income data, consumer expenditure profiles from Jhe U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Expenditure Survey, Department of Revenue Gross Sales data, and Urban Land Institute shopping center tenant profiles, square footage requirements and average sales per square foot by store type from the publication Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers. The model operates by first determining retail household expenditures for market area households. Expenditures are determined through application of the results of the 2000 Consumer Expenditure Survey, conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor. This survey of over 30,000 households nationwide provides detailed information on average dollar expenditure amounts and the expenditure percent of household income, for all household expenditures. The income expenditure percentages are applied to the average local area household income and multiplied by the number of households to determine market area spending potential for retail store goods. Next, the historic Department of Revenue (DOR) Sales data (for the county in question) is indexed by tenant classification3, from the Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers. The expected expenditures on retail goods are then applied to this county specific (DOR) index to determine an estimate of spending by major store type (tenant classification). The determination of sales by retail center (neighborhood, community, regional, super-regional) is determined through the construction of an index of surveyed sales by center type (also located in the Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers). Supportable square feet of a retail center is determined by applying the average sales per square foot of GLA, found in Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, to the expected sales by store type (tenant classification). In addition to determining the supportable square feet of retail space, Fishkind & Associates has determined the expected sales by DOR retail classification, which is a subset of the individual store types (tenant classifications). 3 Tenant Classification are: general merchandise, food, food service, clothing and accessories, shoes, home furnishings, hOm9 appliances/music, building materials and hardware, automotive, hobby/special interest, gifts/specialty, jewelry, liquor, drugs, other retail, personal services, entertainment/community. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 75 of 157 Demand for retail space at a specific location is determined in approximately the same way as the aggregate market demand for retail space. The difference in the methodologies is that the amount of household income spent at the location in question is reduced as the household is farther away. Fishkind & Associates estimates a distributive function based upon data regarding spending patterns in the local community. Supply of retail space that will be competing with the site in question is examined in a multi part process. First, the retail centers in the county or relevant region are separated according to size of center. This has the effect of determining which centers are neighborhood serving, community serving, or regional serving. Second, just as demand is reduced by distance of travel, so is competition. This means that the supported_ supply of competing square feet of retail space can also be reduced by the distance away from the site. Finally, the portion of supported supply which falls under the influence of the site in question is determined to be the effective competition. The determination of sales is a multi part process. Sales to be made at the location of a proposed retail project are based on the constant sales per square foot measure used in the determination of the demand for retail space, and an estimate of excess spending at the existing and proposed retailers. Potential location specific expenditures are determined using data from the US Department of Labor. From the potential expenditures and demanded space, a determination of "base-line" spending per square foot can be made for each store type. Spending per square feet of store space is then applied to the estimate of existing store space to determine a total "base-line" sales estimate. This "base-line" estimate will be Jess than the total potential expenditures. Therefore, an estimate of excess spending can be made from the difference between the estimated total expenditures and the "base-line" estimate. After the determination of "base-line" sales per square foot and excess sales per square foot, the proposed project needs to be added to the supply of retail space. At this point adjusted total sales can be determined from the "base-line" sales per square foot and the adjusted supply of retail space (existing plus proposed). The adjusted excess spending, as a result of the proposed retail project, is determined by the difference between the (adjusted) "base-line" expected spending and the estimate of total expenditures. An estimation of the expected sales for the proposed project is determined by the size of the project and the total estimated spending per square foot, which is the "base-line" sales per square foot plus the adjusted excess spending per square foot as a result of the project. The final impact to sales per square foot of competing retailers in the market surrounding the proposed project is calculated as the difference between the excess sales per square foot, with and without the proposed project. !_ 1:. TRANSPORTATION K (ONSULTANTS,INC. PUDZ-200B-AR-12773 REV: 2 GOOD TURN CENTER CPUD Project: 2004060021 Date: 6/3/08 DUE: 7/1/0B Agenda Item No, 8A October 13, 2009 13881 PLA1'tfrY,IQtIIM~ ~~fE 11 FORT IVl~S.l:L 3391~-4339 OFFICE 239.278.3090 FAX 239.278,1906 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION PlANNING SIGNAL SYSTEMSIDESIGN ! .1 '.1 I j I I May 20, 2008 Mr. Wayne Arnold Q. Grady Minor & Associates 3 SOO Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 RE: Goodturn Center CPUD PUDZ-AR-12773 Dear Mr. Arnold: TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. has reviewed the comments issued by Collier County Transportation Staff for the proposed Goodturn Center CPUD. The comments and TR Transportation's response to those comments are listed below for reference. 1-- Transportation - TIS Requirements 1) TIS must follow the 2%-2%-3% impacts to their respective end. Table lA should match the distribution map numbers. Please see the revised TIS attached to the end of this document. The distTibution utilized within Table lA matches the distribution illustrated on Figures 3A and 3B. 2) The report must analyze the intersections within the radius of significantly impacted links. I . I Please see the revised TIS attached, which provides an analysis of the Collier Boulevard/ Davis Boulevard, Collier Boulevard/Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Rattlesnake Hammock Road/Grand Lely Drive, and Rattlesnake Hammock Road/PoIly Avenue intersections. From th,e analysis, all movements to each intersection were shown to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in 2013 both with and without the proposed development. 3) Using the analysis of the intersections within the radius of significantly impacted links, the applicant must determine his proportionate share of the intersection improvements that are currently under way. These intersections shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a) Rattlesnake Hammock at Collier Boulevard; b) Collier Boulevard at Davis Boulevard; c) Rattlesnake Hammock at Grand Lely Drive; d) Rattlesnake Hammock at Polly Avenue; and shall include any other intersection within the significantly impacted radius that is programmed for improvements within the 5-year planning window. I '. 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Mr. Wayne AR~77 of 157 Goodtum Center CPUD PUDZ-AR-12773 May 20, 2008 Page 2 The applicants proportionate share payment for intersection improvements will be determined at the Site Development Plan (SDP) stage, when there will be a better understanding of the type/intensity of uses that will be developed on the subject site. Transportation - Additional Comments 2) The applicant must provide supporting documentation showing the interconnected access to adjacent parcels is effective before it can be utilized in the TIS distribution maps. As there is currently no supporting documentation for the cross-access to the property to the north, this access was removed from the analysis in the revised TIS, attached. , I , , \ i If you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ed B. Treesh President (\ . ~ (\/\ 11 Dt:Jt\ ~ David L. Wheeler TranspOliation Consultant Attachments . Ll: TRANSPORTATION K (ONSULTANTS,INC. ! I '\ TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT . I ! I I , I I 1.-,. I ~ FOR GOODTURN CENTER PROJECT NO. F0710.18 PREPARED BY: TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. 13881 Plantation Road, Suite 11 Fort Myers, Florida 33912-4339 (239) 278-3090 REVISED: May 21, 2008 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 78 of 157 "l: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. CONTENTS , 1 f I 1. INTRODUCTION II. EXISTING CONDITIONS III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT I IV. TRIP GENERATION I I V. TRIP DISTRIBUTION 1 VI. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS VII. PROJECTED CONCURRENCY AND IMPROVEMENTS VIII. CONCLUSION Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 79 of 157 1 1: TRANSPORTATION ,.i-. K CONSULTANTS, INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 80 of 157 I. INTRODUCTION TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. has conducted a traffic impact analysis for the Goodturn Center located along the east side of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) north of its intersection with Rattlesnake Hammock Road in Collier County, Florida. This repo11 has been completed in compliance with the guidelines established by the Collier County Transportation Planning Division for developments seeking Zoning approval. The approximate location of the subject site is illustrated on Figure 1. L_ The subject site is cUlTently zoned for Agricultural uses. Upon approval of this re-zoning request, the subject site would be zoned for the development of up to approximately 100,000 square feet of commercial uses. Direct access to the subject site will be provided to Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) via a right-in/right-out site access drive located along the southem boundary of the project. Cross access will also be provided to the existing full median opening on Collier Boulevard at Rattlesnake Hammock Road via an existing cross access easement with the adjacent property to the south. A methodology meeting was held with Collier County Staff on Tuesday November 13th, 2007 in order to discuss the parameters of this project and the study that was required. This report examines the impact of the development on the surrounding roadways. Trip generation and assignments to the site access driveways will be completed and analysis conducted to detennine the impacts of the development on the surrounding intersections. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject site is cun'entIy vacant. Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) borders the subject site to the west. Surrounding the subject site to the north, south, and east is vacant land. '. Page 1 '! '\ ) 19 ~, H1G;~~~NaT.S. tC S:T~....... ~ I _,' ---: ~...Jlro.'"I---1 i~ ~\ CEO:~ ,::MOCK --- -r'\='~"~'Yl~-~1'" ""'- ,:r: ,--'h' ._~~.. -.!!!.lJ{l'd 1/ ILt a" ,.// ---""- i~J>.f! ........ 4tJ-----. ---.- - - -~~~~.- )--------- '1t~ / +. Ii." ~~. .l.c:~.~~.~ J .'In.. -ll~ ~d!/~ ~~~;~7?/ Club I [J;) .-_.._....._._~_.w_ -', L.~ l,~g~ i ~ -.-....--L co ~, o o N >- -< 2: >- <.) Z Ul (3 u:: u. ::J (f) 11 _ !~'!i(lg!p 112 ._,_Wm.~_~!J __............._..<:I>"".l'4...__._..._....___.._ . ) + _. --....,,-...-..----.----+---... r:~:-;!:~~~ j I,;. ,.;' .,_.~', J - - ~ frJ -- --.---- L___J ___~''-h_ "'_ :-;1>-__ _ - -'I - - . -. ......- - -...... - - ...- - t \ \ I I I - Ir'l' OdSS/rs.o:1f .------- -- .- ---- --- --- "- - -- .- -- ._.~---- --- - ---- I .-- ;h~ - -' - , ~~r~Jtii{~ ~!l!!tiJy!!ll. i ..----~th . JtC~ffJJ~~~ . J,_ ... -....'u_ll.1,~~~~j Hf.\tftlTNt sel/OO! u;) 1\ _._.._~!".,.--- ,\1u51~1ng ~'~fA~:uNlr)' '\ '0' Gl)lf lrytCGE /~ A1'Ll"..;... .~. t. :~:~.." I I I ..~~;~- -l -"I tl ~ij ii.t. ,Y~ ':'j~ 'I: .. . I ,~ =~ -R TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS,INC. PROJECT LOCATION MAP GOODTURN CENTER Figure 1 REVISED MAY 2008 i 1: TRANSPORTATION .1... K (ONSULTANTS,INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 82 of 157 Collier Boulevard is a four-lane arterial roadway along the western boundary of the subject site. Cun-entJy, funding is available for the six-Ianing of Collier Boulevard from U.S. 41 to Davis Boulevard in Fiscal Year 2010. The six lane conditions on Collier Boulevard are accounted for as a part of the 2007 Collier County Annual Inventory Update Report (AUIR). The mininium Level of Service (LOS) Standard for this roadway adjacent to the subject site is LOS "E". Collier Boulevard has a posted speed limit of 55 mph and is under the jurisdiction of the Collier County Transportation Department. 1 .- Rattlesnake Hammock Road is a two-lane arterial roadway in the vicinity of the subject site. Currently, Rattlesnake Hammock Road between Polly Avenue and Collier Boulevard is being widened to six-lanes by the Collier County Department of Transportation. The six lane conditions on Rattlesnake Hammock Road between Polly A venue and Collier Boulevard are accounted for as a part of the 2007 Collier County Annual Inventory Update Report (AUIR). The minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standard for this roadway adjacent to the subject site is LOS "E". Rattlesnake Hammock Road has a posted speed limit of 45 mph and is under the jUlisdiction of the Collier County TranspOltation Department. P.M. peak hour turning movement counts were performed at the Collier Boulevard/Davis Boulevard, Collier Boulevard/Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Rattlesnake Hammock Road/ Grand Lely Drive, and Rattlesnalce Hammock Road/Polly A venue intersections in 2008. A copy' of the RAW turning movement count data is included in the Appendix of this report for reference. The resultant turning movement counts were factored by the appropriate peak season factor as obtained from the 2006 Florida Traffic Information CD. Figure 2 indicates the resultant 2007 peak season turning movements at the subject intersections. Page 3 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 83 of 157 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Developer of the Goodturn Center is proposing to re-zone the propelty, which is currently zoned for agricultural uses, to allow the site to be developed with up to approximately 100,000 square feet of commercial uses. For the purposes of this analysis it was assumed that the subject site would be completely developed with retail uses. Table 1 summarizes the proposed development on the subject site that will be utilized for trip generation purposes. Table 1 Proposed Land Use GoodtuI"n Center Direct access to the subject site will be provided to Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) via a right-inJright-out site access drive located along the southern boundary of the project. Cross access will also be provided to the existing full median opening on Collier Boulevard at Rattlesnake Hammock Road via an existing cross access easement with the adjacent property to the south. Page 4 j 01 ~ o N >- ." ~ , 0 z UJ (3 i."";:;: 1 / . I i f i . ! 1 , ..L cO ~ o ;: o IJ.. I RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD ~-~~ ill ::> z ill ~ >- ....J -l o 0.. "\. 7 ~t-~ +315 ~ + ~.r85 23..1- ~ t ~ 396+ ~t-r::: 74 ""\r .s> s. ~~ Ov. /'-1. '<(:"v /VO~ , ~t?O '$"ty.s- I .0. __JtR ,.-.. ...... 1:: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, lNC. + 000 S co g 0) '-167 ~ ~~~ +86 ~ ., .. \;. -1'"46 DAVIS BOULEVARD 674; ... ~ 103+ ~ ~ gg 161~ N~~ ill > 0::: o >- ~ ~ (f) '\.. 25 ';!.l.C)0) +326 ~ +- ~+48 38"" ~ t ~ 345+ ~t-~ 105"\, o cc ;g: ill -l ::> o OJ cc ill :J -l o o 1- --I L - .!!!!"'_._J co~ '1 o ~ '---N +2 "+~+3 287 -'" ~ t t'P 2+ g~"- 1 0 5 "" ..- N.. ... 0 ..- CC CC;g: Ww ::J....J -l ::> 00 OOJ o w z>- > <(....J - CC W 0:: (!) -l a LEGEND WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC EXISTING PEAK SEASON TURNING VOLUMES GOODTURN CENTER Figure 2 REVISED MAY 2008 1: TRANSPORTATION K (ONSULTANTS,INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 85 of 157 IV. TRIP GENERATION I 1 The trip generation for the proposed development was detelmined by referencing the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) report, titled Trip Generation, ih Edition. Land Use Code 820 (Shopping Center) was utilized for the trip generation purposes of the retail uses being proposed on the subject site. The trip generation equations for the aforementioned land use are included in the Appendix of this report for reference. Table 2 outlines the anticipated weekday A.M. and P.M. peak hour trip generation of the Goodtum Center as currently proposed. The daily trip generation is also indicated in the tab Ie. Table 2 Trip Generation Goodturn Center The trips shown in Table 2 will not all be new trips to the adjacent roadway system. ITE estimates that a shopping center of comparable size may attract anywhere from 10 to 90 percent of its traffic from vehicles already traveling the adjoining roadway system. This traffic, called "pass-by" traffic, reduces the development's overall impact on the sun-ounding roadway system but does not decrease the actual driveway volumes. According to the ITE report titled Trip Generation Handbook, June 2004, for Land Use Code 820 (Shopping Center) the relationship between the size of the development and the percent of pass-by trips is: Ln (T) = -0.29 Ln (X) + 5.00, where T =Average pass-by trip percentage X = 1000 square feet of gross leasable area P8ge 6 i 1:. TRANSPORTATION .J., K CONSULTANTS, INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 86 of 157 Using this fonnula the percentage of pass-by trips for the shopping center use was calculated as follows; I Ln (T) = -0.29 Ln (100) + 5.00 T = 39% However, the maximu111 pass-by percentage allowed by the Collier County Department of Transportation for Land Use Code 820 (Shopping Center) is twenty five percent (25%). Therefore, twenty five percent (25%) was utilized to calculate the pass-by traffic for the shopping center use. l._. For this analysis, the "pass-by" traffic was accounted for to determine the number of "new" trips the development will add to the surrounding roadways. Table 3 summarizes the pass-by percentages utilized for each land use. Table 4 summarizes the development traffic and the breakdown between the new trips the development is anticipated to generate and the "pass-by" trips the development is anticipated to attract. It should be noted that the driveway volwnes are not reduced as a result of the "pass-by" reduction, only the traffic added to the surrounding streets and intersections. Table 3 Pass-by Trip Reduction Factors Goodturn Center Table 4 Trip Generation - New Trips Goodturn Center Total Tri s Less 25% Retail Pass-h.y .~..!.w T~s 61 -20 -20 -40 I_~!i-=l_~ii. J:I!L. Page 7 1: TRANSPORTATION K (ONSULTANTS,INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 87 of 157 V. TRIP DISTRIBUTION I _I 1 The resultant new external trips shown in Table 4 were then assigned to the surrounding roadway system based on the anticipated routes the drivers will utilize to approach the site in order to perform a concurrency analysis. The resultant traffic disbibution to the surrounding roadway network was determined in the methodology meeting with staff and is illustrated on Figure 3A. Figure 3B illustrate the entering and exiting project traffic distribution at the site access locations. Based on the traffic distribution, the total Goodtum Center site traffic indicated in Table 2 was distributed to the site access locations and sUlTounding intersections. Figure 4 illustrates the site traffic assignment based on the project traffic distribution indicated within Figures 3A and 3B. In addition to the information contained within Figure 4, a separate assignment of the new site traffic after a reduction for pass-by capture (Figure lA) and an assignment of the pass-by traffic (Figure 2A) have been included in the Appendix of this report for reference. VI. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS In order to determine which roadway segments surrounding the site will be significantly impacted, Table lA, contained in the Appendix, was created. This table Indicates which roadway links will accommodate an amount of project traffic greater than the 2%-2%-3% Significance Test. Therefore, the new traffic (after a reduction for pass-by) anticipated to be generated by the proposed development was compared with the Capacity for Peak Hour - Peak Direction traffic conditions as defined by the 2007 Collier County Annual Update Inventory RepOli (AUIR). Based on the infOlmation contained within Table lA, several roadway links are shown to sustain a significant impact as a result of the added project traffic in accordance with the Collier County 2%-2%-3% Significance Test. Concurrency link analysis was performed on all roadway links anticipated to experience a significant impact as:'1 result of the proposed development traffic. Page 8 l "I I , I DAVIS BOULEVARD I " I o <( o a::: z ~ t >- 1 0% g: + z :J o (.) 5% DROP AT NAPLES HERITAGE & CASA DEL SOL f a) " ! 8 N >- <J:: I~ ill o l-U:: W :J Z W > <( >- ..J ..J o +20%+ +30%+ 0.. RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD +35%+ '" l~ 5% DROP AT SHADOWWOOD & LEL Y ESTATES 10% DROP AT LEl Y ESTATES t 20% , + 30% t o a::: ~ t :5 35% ~ + a::: ~l-l ..J 8 ~._ ~ -::~J t 30% , LEGEND +20%+ PERCENT DISTRIBUTION " 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. - PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION TO THE SURROUNDING ROADWAY NETWORK GOODTURN CENTER Figure 3A REVISED MAY 2008 ---....... J I~ . 0 N >- l~ z !!! () l~ 05 ~ o cr: ~ ill ~ 1- en ~I ..J 81 "I I I I I _J , 0 l~ <F. I i ~(3~ -r. ---- . --- ~ o l!) to <f!.?ft. ~ ~ +(35%) ~ ~ .r(30%) 20%.f t I' 15%+ <F.~ LO U) N \ RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD LEGEND +20% ENTERING PERCENT DISTRIBUTION <{}=(20%} EXITING PERCENT DISTRIBUTION . ~ ==='=~~~I3ROJECT TRAFFIC DTsTRIBUTiO~--- 1: TRANSPORTATION AT THE SITE ACCESS LOCATIONS Figure 38 K CONSULTANTS, INC. GOODTURN CENTER REVISEDMAY2008 ., a> 10 o N >- ., ~ Z W o 1.-.-,- I I ) I L ..... <0 ~ I~ I u.. RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD w ::) z w > <( >- ...J ...J o a.. CD '\.. 2 (8) ~ +19 (98) ~ +1 (8) (67) 23+ ~ N 0: ;:n ~ U) ..... + (22)7~ ~ t NID roID Se o 0::: ~ W ...J :::l o ro 0::: w :J ...J o o S IN.T.s.1 DAVIS BOULEVARD 1O o ..... ;;;,[---, ~ I " ~1J.: 14) J If --. N co 1O 0> ..... ~ w 2:: 0::: o >- ~ ~ U) l()O ","co ~~ ~ ~..... +22 (114) ~ 't,J ..r 18 (98) (60) 19.? t I' (45) 15+ ~~ ~U) 10 ..... t::.~ +22 (114) (78) 27 + o & 0::: %~~r o:::~ rz~ -1-1;0 ~ >- ~ ~ ~ ~/:,^ '/i>f:IA C2 oJ ii 66 . 'rv vy& C9...J ClEGEND 00) '. ..... 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT GOODTURN CENTER Figure 4 REVISED MAY 2008 [ 1: TRANSPORTATION .! K (ONSULTANTS,INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 91 of 157 I I In addition to the significant impact criteria, Table lA also includes a Concurrency analysis on the Collier County Roadway network. For the purposes ofthis analysis it was assumed that the proposed Goodturn Center would be completed by 2012, therefore, an analysis year of 2013 was selected. The current remaining capacity indicated within Table 1A was taken from the aforementioned 2007 Collier County AUIR. The cun-cnt remaining capacity was then subtracted fi-om the Level of Service Standard for each roadway link in order to obtain the current 2007 peak direction traffic volume. The current peak direction traffic volume for each roadway link was then grown by the appropriate growth rate as calculated based upon the 2007 Collier County Traffic Count RepOli for five (5) years compounded annually_ The projected 2013 peak direction traffic volume was then subtracted from the Level of Service Standard for each roadway link in order to detennine the remaining capaci ty projected in 2013. , ) I VII. PROJECTED CONCURRENCY AND IMPROVEMENTS Based upon the information contained within Table lA, all roadway segments anticipated to be significantly impacted by the proposed development are shown to have sufficient capacity under the projected 2013 traffic conditions to accommodate the trips from the proposed Goodturn Center. Figure 5 indicates the capacity conditions on all significantly impacted roadway links based upon the existing conditions, the projected 2013 conditions without the proposed development, and the projected 2013 conditions with the proposed development. Figure 6 illustrates the projected 2013 background traffic volumes at the site access locations and significantly impacted intersections. The projected 2013 background traffic volumes were calculated by growing the existing 2007 peak hour peak direction traffic volumes by the appropriate growth rates as indicated in Table lA. The projected 2013 build-out traffic volumes were then calculated by adding the site traffic assignment to the projected 2013 back,ground traffic volumes_ The projected 2013 build-out traffic voh.lmes are illustrated on Figure 7. Page 12 . j <0 I 8 N >- . ! ~ UJ 13 .!.-i:!= I , I L . . I ./ I I <X5 ...... e:> ...... l"- e:> LL. DAVIS BOULEVARD o cr: ~ W ....I ::::> o co 0:: W :J ....I o U 918 (505) [419] o <C o 0:: Z 0:: <C co >- 0:: I- Z :::> o o ill :::> z w > <C >- ....I ....I o a. 1- --- ---1 --J L_ ____ _ 918 ( 505) [344] RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD t 1,528 (1,420) [1,345J 2,437 (2.341 ) [2,254] 1.243 (932) [858] LEGEND 000 CURRENT REMAINING CAPACITY " (OOO) REMAINING CAPACITY WI AM PROJECT TRAFFIC [OOO} REMAINING CAPACITY WI PM PROJECT TRAFFIC 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INe. REMAINING CAPACITY ON SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED LINKS GOODTURN CENTER Figure 5 REVISED MAY 2008 I , I 19 N >- !~ z UJ o 1- I~ -- CO 1~ , I w :::::> z w > <( >- ....J ....J o 0.. -\.. 8 ~ro~ +348 ~ + ~+94 26...1" ~ t ~ 440+ ~ro~ 82 "'\r IS' S. ~q, Ou. i' -1 (~t- IJ;O;y, ~~ 0"tv, o is' RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD s (") ~ '""" '\. 184 IN T S I ;g ...:~ +95 . . . -tI" '+. +51 DAVIS BOULEVARD 744;~ + ~ 114+ ~ro~ 178~ N::-..- w > 0:: o >- ~ >- :,L (f) '\.. 28 ~ <0;:' +360 ~ + ~ .r 53 42;~ t ~ 381+ ~ro~ 116~ o 0:: <( > W ....J :::::> o m 0:: w :J ....J o U .,- ~-I- I .,- "'l-~- ~ o '<t I'-- '""" .,-~ '\..1 <0 .,-_ ..d- N .,- N -..or- 2 ~ + ~-1'"3 317;~tl' 2+ ~gj"- 116 "'" .,- '<t_ ~ 0 .,- 0:: 0:: ~ Ww :J ....J ....J :::::> o 0 U m o z>- w <(....J > 0:: W rY 0....J 0 LEGEND 4-- 000 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC PROJECTED 2013 BACKGROUND TURNING VOLUMES GOODTURN CENTER I. 1: TRANSPORTATION 1"'< CONSULTANTS, INC. .............................. ,/ Figure 6 REVISED MAY 2008 ! I I I ., :g .10 N >- <( 'j t z w <3 .....-7 1 L 03 ~ l~ w ::> z w ~ >- -1 -1 o Q.. -\..16 ~co~ +446 .tI + \;. .r 102 26; ~ t ~ 507+ i8COgj 82 '"\v & &. ~/1Jt 00. )--1. '($'/r 1'<)~ -<Ji?<) '$"t;;.s> RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD 1:.. TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANT5,INC. w > iY o >- ~ ~ (J) '-28 ~<D~ +474 ., + ~ ,r 53 42~ ~ t t'" 459+ 00 co ~ 116"'\. (Y")~"- "\..184 ~ l?5~~ +95 ~ .I + \;. "" 51 DAVIS BOULEVARD 7 44 ~ t I" 114+ 8~~ 200""\. C'1 ~..- o 0::: <( > W -1 ::> o co a: w ::J -1 o o <.D ~ I -l + ~1~ J f?- -- ot!) <;to> 1'-_"- ..- ..- ~ '\. 1 <.D ..- r- 0 .JIL- 6 ;+~ ~ ;:161 377..1'" ~ t I' 47+ ~b;~ 116" ..->1", .... 0 ..- 0:: ffi~ ::J-1 -1::> o 0 om o w z>- > <(-1 - 0::: W 0:: l') -1 0 LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC PROJECTED 2013 BUILD-OUT TURNING VOLUMES GOODTURN CENTER I, , Figure 7 REVISED MAY 2008 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 95 of 157 I Turn lane analysis was perfOlmed along Collier Boulevard at the proposed right-in/right- out site access location. Based on the Collier County turn lane requirements, a nOlihbound right turn lane will be required. This turn lane should be constructed to include 405 feet of taper and deceleration length according to the Florida Department of Transportation Standard Index #301 based upon a 60 mph design speed (5 mph above the posted speed limit). No storage length will be required for this turn lane due to the free- flow conditions that will exist. No other turn lane improvements are walTanted as a result of this analysis. . i I I . I Intersection analysis was performed at the site access connection to Collier Boulevard, Collier Boulevard/Davis Boulevard, Collier Boulevard/Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Rattlesnake Hammock Road/Grand Lely Drive, and Rattlesnake Hammock Road/Polly A venue based on the projected 2013 traffic conditions both with and without the proposed development. The latest version of the Highway Capacity Software, HCS+, and the SYNCHRO software were utilized to conduct the intersection analysis. Based on the results of the intersection analysis, all movements are shown to operate at an acceptable Level of Service condition in 2013 both with and without the proposed development. Therefore, beyond the turn lane improvement mentioned previously, no intersection improvements are warranted as a result of this analysis. Table 5 provides a summary of the intersection analysis. '. Page 16 1 1: TRANSPORTATION L K CONSULTANTS,INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 96 of 157 I j Table 5 Intersection Analysis Summary Goodturn Center i Collier Blvd & 2013 Back 'ound 45.6 D Davis Blvd -2013 Build-Out 47.3 D Collier Blvd & 2013 Back ound 38.2 D Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 2013 Build-Out E 40.8 D I I Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 2013 Back ound A 15.6 c- & Grand Lely Dr 2013 Build-Out A 17.4 C 'J Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 2013 Back round B 14.3 B & Polly Ave 2013 Build-Out B 14.2 B Collier Blvd & 2013 Back round 1 Site Access 2013 Build-Out C 16.6 C *Major approach Delay/LOS repOlted for all TWSC intersections. 1-. VIII. CONCLUSION I I ,I The proposed Goodturn Center is located along the east side of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) north of its intersection with Rattlesnake Hammock Road in Collier County, Florida. The proposed re-zoning request would allow the subject site to be developed with up to approximately 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses. Based on the Concunency Analysis conducted as a part of this report, all roadway segments anticipated to be significantly impacted by the proposed development are shown to have sufficient capacity under the projected 2013 traffic conditions to accommodate the trips from the proposed Goodtul11 Center. Based upon the results of the turn lane analysis conducted as a part of this report, a northbound right turn Jane will be warranted at the site access location on Collier Boulevard. This turn lane will need to be constructed to include 405 feet of overall length. No additional tum lane improvements are wan-anted as a result of this analysis. Page 17 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 97 of 157 Intersection analysis was performed at the site access connection to Collier Boulevard, Collier Boulevard/Davis Boulevard, Collier BoulevardlRattlesnake Hammock Road, Rattlesnake Hammock Road/Grand Lely Drive, and Rattlesnake Hammock Road/Polly Avenue based on the projected 2013 traffic conditions both with and without the proposed development. Based on the results of the intersection analysis, all movements are shown to operate at an acceptable Level of Service condition in 2013 both with and without the proposed development. Therefore, beyond the tum lane improvement mentioned previously, no intersection improvements are wan-anted as a result of this analysis. 1 ! . ~ I I j" K:\2007\1 0\18 CR951 Ralllcsllnke Hammock Rd\Sufliciency May 200S\rcport.REVISED.5. J 6.2008,doc Page 18 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13. 2009 Page 98 of 157 . \ I .' J : j \-. APPENDIX I . I Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 99 of 157 I I . 1 TABLEIA " I L I ~ en >- ..J < Z < >- U Z W 0:: 0:: z=> O~ 1-0 Uu ~c6 <Q< ~~o:: w<(W ..JW!:: roo.O:: <( ~() 1-0::1- =>0 0< J:o. ~a <- wI- a.Z <( U u.. Z (!) en '<f!. l"') . ~ N . ~ N } L_ . . '3 '3 o 0 Ie ~ ! ~ J: J: a. 0- > > ~ R '<t . H t> t> ii: ii: u. u. ~ ~ t> t; w UJ ""7 ..., o 0 C!: C!: 0. 0- 0: C!: is< 5 J: J: :.: :.: ifi ifi 0. 0. :::;; :::;; <( 0. ..J ..J ~ I~ o 0 I- I- ~u "'~~o:l!:!!~ ~ < ~ Ii: ' ~ ~ <( It: t> c (!J ~ ::! ~ ~ u ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ II I I ~ In I- c.!l 1- z Z I- l;~~u :;; It: :;;; ~ ::> Ii.l <( <.1 0: t) a en g: 9 ... 00 '<t ~ I-(,)~Is: [rl ii: i3 u. g:g~~ II II ~ <f) CI) tf) UJ W W >- >- >- ; 1 ~ ." ." N 00... '" ." '" ~ ~ ~ N c-i N ;ft ";l ;ft ::1 ::1 ~ N N N ftf ~ s ... ... 0 N N N ... '" Ul .. ... ... a; a; 3 C 0:: C5 ;ft z ~ t: VI :t ~,~ ~ ~. '~. ,:J' N' . .... ... .. co ~ ..... .... '" ... N .. N ;ft ";l "if( 01) Ul 0 '" Ul (l') ~c 0::00000 ~..JC5$~~~~ Z C'i ri C'i ri ri ~ Ul ~ ~I ~ I- Z w :ill Cl w VI 000 0 ...J ...J ...J ...J (OW<O(O 91 ~ 000 ~ ~ ~ ti o E E '" ::: 1: ti B ~ > U <II ii5 <( ~ .. 0 ~ :; .~ Q; iii <ri o a:: 0':: ::i ti > ii5 '" ~wz~oooo ~ ;i <ri ;i -0 >- > ~ ii5 o ~ <3 '0 a: l> <ri <ri <I) <I) ~ ~ ... ." ~ ~ N ... 0 ;1; ~ N . '" 0 Ul N '" '" "# ;F. o ... o ... N N '" N :e ;; ... ID ~ ~ N ... l~i~1 ~ o ." ~ ;! ~ .... (l') N N "if( ~ il'; ~ '" '" o 0 0 ~ ~ ~ .-.)' N o 0 0 ...J ...J ....l <0 -<t ... ... <0 (') o 0 0 to ..t .-.) .... .... .... "0 0':: -d E > <Ii <1l ffi > []J <( >- ~ ~ ~ "0 "0 0 l> a. l> '0 15 ~ ~ .... u o E E '" ::r: llJ "'" '" c '" ~ ro 0':: '" o q o '" ':! ";l o N .... o ~ I a. 1i ~ .2 i ~ ~ ~ '~ .~ ~ i ~ '! 8i ~ ~ t .,. ~ ~ I (,) o ~ ...J .. <0 6 ~ Iii "" J!! i u ~ o ~ E > ~ ~ ::r: .. Q)Vi~ ta .~i:: c 1: .. '" .. i III lJ') e:: ~ ; i '0 ~ 0 & ~ N '" ~ ;ft o ..: ~ '" "if( o ... o co Il) N o ...J <0 o ci (") o ci ,.. -0 > ffi ~ "0 l> .... o :i ;i -0 > ffi '" .:; (\) o -0 0':: c ro []J >- c: :J o l> o ." ;ft '" N ." N 00 ~ ... 3 ~ I ~!!l ~ ! w :5 ~ f ! ~ !)! .. j ; 2 g 10 I 1 , i 1 l , i ,I : I j' ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULA TIONS Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 101 of 157 I r.- Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 102 of 157 L ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULATIONS 2007 CALCULATED GROWTH STATION BASE YR TRAFFIC YRS OF GROWTH RATe ROADWAY SEGMENT NUMBER TRAFFIC VOLUME GROWTH BAI5 UTILIZED Collier Blvd. N. of Davis Blvd. 573 46,582 49.718 4 1.64% 2.00% S. of Davis Blvd. 602 38,709 39,767 1 2.73% 2.73% S, of Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. 603 27,928 30.641 4 2.34% 2.34% Rattlesnake Hammock W. of Collier Blvd. 518 10,051 10,091 2 0,20% 2.00% W. of Polly Ave. 534 14,537 15,478 3 2.11% 2.11% Davis Blvd. W. of Collier Blvd. 601 22,920 24,495 4 1.68% 2.00% 1 Allt,affic volumes were laken from the 2007 Collier Counly Average Daily Traffic Report , Per the Collier County TIS Guidelines, a minimum 2% growlh rate was utilized , A 2% growth rate was uUlized for Grand Lely Drive and Polly Avenue SAMPLE GROWTH RATE CALCULATION Annual Growth Rate (AGR) .. 2007 ADT ^(1/Yrs of Growth) -1 Base Year ADT AGR (Collier Blvd,) = 49,718 46,582 ^(114) -1 AGR (Comer Blvd.) = 1.64% Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 103 of 157 I i "- j . I I I FIGURE lA '. ',L lro J g N >- <( , \ :2 J>- ;0 IZ W [5 IJE o 0::: ~ w gI- ro ~I .....J 8/ ----.---- o l~ )LL - I'-- ~I + '\..13(51) -- I~- _'_ " ..... to ~ -.....-.. --- _.- ~...--- ~-,._. -.'----... I I , I I __J I , I N'G=> .,... .,... ;; ~ +- (-) ~ \..J" .r 7 (27) (27) 7; t ~ (-) - +- ~~ <;1"--- ~ RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD LEGEND -- -+- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC " <I.'t-(OOO) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC '--~===-==-==~,~~ATE~ LE~S THAN 5~~~~~ SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 1: TRANSPORTATION PASS-BY TRIPS Figure 1A K CONSULTANTS, iNC GOODTURN CENTER REVISED MAY 2008 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 105 of 157 l ! l i . I FIGURE IB I , I ., I ,J...... :1 - l I ~ I :g . I 0 N 'r i , >- ~ " !!d u l-li: --0 0:: ~ 8'- co ~I ......l 81 ------------ cO ... o l~ {LL -I co t- f ~8 (63) 7"'- -::= ~ -..- ._._~ ---- "-' ~.- __._._ "~'v_._ -j I I I I __.J 1.0 '>t - Q) N ....... ....... MLO C'?'>t ....... ....... ~ ~.... +22 (114) ~'V ./"11(71) (33) 12; t I' (45) 15+ ~~ _1.0 .............. !::?........ RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD LEGEND .. 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC -+ (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC - INDICATES LESS THAN 5 TRIPS =r. TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT NEW TRIPS GOODTURN CENTER Figure 1 B REVISED MAY 2008 , ! I I I 1 APPROVED METHODOLOGY MEETING CHECKLIST Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 107 of 157 I L Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 108 of 157 APPENDIX A INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply. "I I I Date:November 13th. 2007 Time: 3:00 P.M. Location: Collier County Transportation Planning Department People Attendine: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers . 1 ! 1) Dave Wheeler. TR Transportation. (239) 278-3090 2) Mike Greene. Collier County. (239) 252-8192 3) John Podczerwinsky. Collier County. (239) 252-8192 4)_ 5)._ ,-, Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title: Dave Wheeler. Transportation Consultant Organization: TR Transportation Consultants. me. Address & Telephone Number: (239) 278-3090 13881 Plantation Road. Suite 11 Fort Myers, FL 33912-4339 Reviewer(s): . Reviewer's Name & Title: Mike Greene. Planning Manager Organization & Telephone Number: (239) 252-8192 Comer County Transportation PlaIUling Department Reviewer's Name & Title: John Podczelwinskv. Project Manager Organization & Telephone Number: (239) 252-8192 Collier County Transportation Planning DeRartment Applicant: Applicant's Name: Mr. K.en O'Leary Address: 27499 Riverview Center Boulevard. Suite 101. Bonita Springs. FL 34134 Telephone Number: (239) 992-0001 Proposed Development: Name: Goodtum Center Location: East side of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) north of Rattlesnake Hal1UllOck Rd Land Use type: C01mnercial (Retail/Office) ITE Code #: Land USe Code 820 Proposed number of d~velopment units: 100.000 square feet Other: C:lDocunlllnls alll! SeJrmgsldl.'llDeskloplMc/llodology M""Ong . GOodlum eM/Of.doc ~ Description: Zoning Existing: Agriculture Comprehensive plan recommendation: _ Requested: _ Findings of the Preliminary Study: Study Type: Small Scale TIS o ~ Minor TIS o Maior TIS : 1 ! , ! Study Area: Boundaries: 2%-2%-3% Si?J1ificance Test Additional intersections to be analyzed: _U9-1V\ 5i5(\\~(Cw^-c.z le<7A- I } I Horizon Year(s): 2013 Analysis Time Period(s): _ Future Off-Site Developments: _ ~"\S HOM Jt~\b ~o qSI Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE Trip Generation. 7th Edition 1- / Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None: Pass-by trips: ITE pa~alCUlatiOn up to 25% MAX Internal trips (PUD): Transmit use: _ Other: Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 109 of 157 -QD \ ,':::.. . (o~L7 ~ W.A1 ~ Horizon Year Roadwav Network Improvements: Methodology & Assumptions: d.-ctS7 Non-site traffic estimates: m>Collier Count Annual Invento Site-trip generation: ITE rip Generation. 7th Edition TIip distribution method: Manual Method based on Methodology Meeting TraffIc assigmnent method: Manual Method Traffic growth rate: 2006 Collier County Traffic Count Re1201i C.1Documents and SemngsldMlDesktoplMerflodology M..ting - Gooalum Cenler,c/oc ,. ,t- i 1._, Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 110 of 157 ~ Small Scale Study - No Fee _ Minor Study - $750.00 Major Study - $1500.00 >< Includes 2 intersections Additional Intersections - $500.00 each All fees will be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and mllst be paid to Transportatwn prwr to our sign-off on the application. -------------------------------------.......--- Applicant C.iDocumen/s and SoningsldJwIDesktoplMoOloclofogy Moofh.g . GoodJum Con/or.doc i I I" l I I I I I I I , -I vI ujl - '1 ::J. I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 . I I <"'--+ o Ir ~ Z ~ a:: u. ~ a o o o I I I I I I I I . 1 I 1 1 I I I I 01 0::, 01 zl ::il ~I ~I r!- r GOLDEN GATE PKWY. 0::, ;r. 0::1 :;(1 I I t I I I r 1 I I I RADIO RD. DAVIS BLVD. I :~t ~OJ;,'o ,,~:N I I LEGEND'., PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE Two Lone RD. way Four Lane Divided RD.way Six Lane Divided RD. way EXIT ,6 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Pa e 111 of 157 PINE RIDGE RD. I() I"-- 1 c:i > ~ (Q <( 0:: <( (Q 0:: <C m ~ z <C III GREEN BLVD. ii) 0> ci U o 0:: Z 0:: ~t ~ ~ ~ ..-- Z ::J o U JS% ~o ~ RATTLESNAKE: HAMMOCK RD. 30% ~ o PROJ.ECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION SIERRA MEADOWS .__ 9-~1_~3 . J.___ JUL Y 99 N w+, s EXIT 15 j? ]_!.IG~R~ ~ Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 112 of 157 L I l .. i J 1-, HCS+ INTERSECTION ANALYSIS I I J I " / , I I COLLIER BOULEVARD @ DAVIS BOULEVARD 1 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 113 of 157 'hort Report Agenda Item NCP~ 1 of ~ 13. 2(; 9 .- II SHORT REPORT Page 114 of 157 I ~enerallnformatjon Site Information lCr..:l.alyst DLW Intersection Collier & Davis .mcy or Co. TR Transportation Area Type All other areas I Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County . pate Performed 5/19/2008 Analysis Year 2013 background ]Time Period PM peak hour I Volume and Timing Input .\ EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT I Number of Lanes 3 1 0 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 3 2 . lane Group L TR L T R L T R L T R 10o!Ume (vph) 744 114 178 51 95 184 285 1457 124 131 1214 583 I j/o Heavy Vehicles 5 .5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 ?HF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 I PretimedfActuated (PfA) A A A A A A A A A A A A , ~tartup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 ZO 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 l'Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 . I ',L\rrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 : JJnit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 I PedfBikefRTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 I' Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N I BarkingfHour Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 . PhasinQ Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT 07 08 , G:::; 23.0 G:::; 27.0 G= G::: G::: 13.0 G = 37.0 G= G= , ,Timing Y = 5 Y- 5 y= y- Y - 5 Y = 5 Y= Y= I Duration of Analvsis (hrs) ::: 6.25 Cvcle Lenath C = 120.0 "'ane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination I EB WB NB SB 1 1534 1278 [l\djusted Flow Rate 783 307 54 100 194 300 131 138 614 I Lane Group Capacity 898 370 640 775 346 362 2026 474 362 1520 839 I ldc Ratio 0.87 0.83 0.08 0.13 0.56 0.83 0.76 0.28 0.38 0.84 0.73 I I Green Ratio 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.22 0.22 0.11 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.31 0.31 ~niform Delay d1 47.1 44.3 39.8 37.1 41.2 52.4 37.4 31.4 49.8 38.7 37.1 'DelaY'Factor k 0.40 0.37 0.11 0.11 0.16 0.37 0.31 0.11 0.11 0.38 0.29 Il'ncremental Delay d2 9.4 14.6 0.1 0.1 2. 1 14.8 1.7 0.3 0.7 4.4 3.3 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 I I Control Delay 56.5 58.9 39.9 37.2 43.3 67.2 39.1 31.7 50.4 43.2 40.4 Lane Group LOS E E D 0 0 E 0 C 0 D D I ~roach Delay 1.57.2 41.0 42.9 42.8 / ,'oach LOS E 0 D D I intersection Delay 45.6 Intersection LOS 0 -.J "';opyright @ 2005 University of Florida. All Rights F<eserved l--/cs~.rM Version 5.21 Generated: 5/2012008 11 :37 AN . ,11e://C:\Documents and Settillgs\dlw\Local Settings\Temp\s2k144.tmp 5/20/200 hort Report Agenda Item NcPage I of i 1'"'I~~~h~r 1 ~ ?nno I SHORT REPORT Page 115 of 157 ) ~eneral Information Site Information i DLW Intersection Collier & Davis (-\nalyst I A C TR Transportation Area Type All other areas gencyor o. Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County - 'bate Performed 5/19/2008 Analysis Year 2013 background & PM Inme Period PM peak hour project Volume and Timing Input J EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 3 1 0 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 3 2 . L TR L T L (Lane Group R T R L T R I Volume (vph) 744 114 200 51 95 184 303 1493 124 131 1259 583 I Wo Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 l PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 , IPretimed/Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A /Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 (Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 'IArrivaJ Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3.0 3.0 ,sUnit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 I, Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 I' Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Ii Parking/Hour I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ( jBus Stops/Hour Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 t PhasinQ Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT 07 08 lTiming G::: 23.0 G = 27.0 G= G= G = 13.0 G = 37.0 G= G= Y= 5 y= 5 Y= y= Y = 5 y= 5 y= v::: ';Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle LenQth G = 120.0 : Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 783 331 54 100 194 319 1572 131 138 1325 614 Lane Group Capacity 898 368 640 775 346 362 2026 474 362 1520 839 I I v/c Ratio 0.87 0.90 0.08 0.13 0.56 0.88 0.78 0.28 0.38 0.87 0.73 I Green Ratio 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.22 0.22 0.11 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.31 0.31 i Uniform Delay d1 47.1 45.2 39.8 37.1 41.2 52.7 37.7 31.4 49.8 39.3 37.1 Delay.Factor k 0.40 0.42 0.11 0.11 0.16 0.41 0.33 0.11 0.11 0.40 0.29 ) 3.3 l'ncremental Delay d2 9.4 24.1 0.1 0.1 2. 1 21.4 2.0 0.3 0.7 5.8 1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 ! Control Delay 56.5 69.3 39.9 37.2 43.3 74.2 39.7 31.7 50.4 45.1 40.4 Lane Group LOS E E D D D E D C D D 0 I Approach Delay 60.3 41.0 44.6 44.1 , D Approach LOS E D D 1 Intersection Delay 47.3 Intersection LOS D _J - eopyright@ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved I-res + ™ Version 5.21 Generated: 5/20/2008 11 :37 AN 'file://C:\Docllments and Scttings\dJw\Local Settings\'Tcmp\s2k l55.tmp 5/20/200 Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 116 of 157 i I,"." I J "I " ) J COLLIER BOULEVARD @ l 1- RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD '. h . . Oft Report Ag~nda Item N~o~ I of n I SHORT REPORT Page 117 of 157 fGeneral Information Site Information ~nalyst DL W Intersection Rattlesnake Rd @ Collier I ~ C TR Transportation Blvd gency or o. Consultants Area Type All other areas iJate Performed 5/20/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County hme Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2013 background r Volume and Timinn Input j EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT I Number of Lanes 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 : lane Group L T R L T R L T R L T R I Volume (vph) 317 2 116 3 2 1 146 1422 1 2 1178 261 I 'Yo Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 ,PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 I Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 , I Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 . If-rrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 I ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I-ane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 I I Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N I Farking/Hour I 0 13us Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G . r Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 "Ehasinq Exel. Left EB Only Thru & RT 04 Excl. Left NB Only Thru & RT 08 ~. . G == 13.0 G == 10.0 G = 11.0 G== G = 13.0 G = 10.0 G = 35.0 G= I',m,ng y= 7 Y = 0 y= 7 y= y= 7 Y = 0 y= 7 y= J puration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cvcle Lenqth C = 120.0 ,lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination I EB WB NB SB fd]Usted Flow Rate 334 2 122 3 2 1 154 1497 1 2 1240 275 I Lane Group Capacity 835 317 269 186 166 141 835 1848 577 186 1438 923 l ~/c Ratio 0.40 0.01 0.45 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.18 0.81 0.00 0.01 0.86 0.30 .) [Green Ratio 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.25 0.38 0.38 0.11 0.29 0.60 !Jniform Delay d1 37.5 40.9 44.4 47.8 49.6 49.5 35.4 33.7 23.5 47.8 40.2 11.7 ,belay-Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.35 0.11 0.11 0.39 0.11 ilncremental Delay d2 0.3 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.8 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.2 ,?F Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 I Control Delay 37.8 40.9 45.6 47.8 49.6 49.6 35.5 36.5 23.5 47.8 45.9 11.9 , Lane Group LOS 0 0 0 D 0 D D D C D D B I Approach Delay I 39.9 48.7 364 39.7 i ~pproach LOS , 0 0 D 0 , I 'Intersection Delay I 38.2 Intersection LOS 0 I --- ~---_. iopyright @ 2005 University of Floricla. All Rights Reserved ~ I-ICS+™ Version 5,21 Generated: 5/2012008 10:45 AW IHe://C:\Documents and Settings\dlw\Local Scttings\Temp\s2kF7.tmp 5/20/200 hOli Report Ag~nda Item N~~ 1 of , 11 I SHORT REPORT Page 118 of 157 I ';enerallnformation Site Information Lqlyst DLW Intersection Rattlesnake Rd @ Collier Blvd ...~ncy or Co. TR Transportation Area Type All other areas I Consultants bate Performed 5/20/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County I hme Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2013 background & PM project r'Iolume and Timina Input l EB WB NB SB I I' LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT J"Number of Lanes 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 l.ane Group L T R L T R L T R L T R I Volume (vph) 377 47 116 101 116 1 146 1497 16 107 1178 261 Vo Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 I~HF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Il'retimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A , Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 . HI I Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 . ~rrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 I Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Jfed/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I_ane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 I Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N P.arking/Hour Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 .. jJhasinQ Excl. Left EB Only Thru & RT 04 Excl. Left NB Only Thru & RT 08 II . G = 13.0 G = 10.0 G = 11.0 G= G = 13.0 G = 10.0 G = 35.0 G= nmlng Y= 7 Y= 0 Y= 7 Y= Y= 7 Y= 0 Y= 7 y= 'puration of Analvsis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Length C= 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination I EB WB NB SB }djusted Flow Rate 397 49 122 106 122 1 154 1576 17 113 1240 275 I ~ane Group Capacity 835 317 269 186 166 141 835 1848 577 186 1438 923 1 J/c Ratio 0.48 0.15 0.45 0.57 0.73 0.01 0.18 0.85 0.03 0.61 0.86 0.30 [Green Ratio 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.25 0.38 0.38 0.11 0.29 0.60 IJnifOrm Delay d1 38.3 42.0 44.4 50.8 53.1 49.5 35.4 34.5 23.7 51.1 40.2 11.7 Ibelay.factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.16 0.29 0.11 0.11 0.39 0.11 0.19 0.39 0.11 I jncremental Delay d2 0.4 0.2 1.2 4.1 15.6 0.0 0.1 4.1 0.0 5.6 5.6 0.2 jJF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 I Control Delay 38.7 42.2 45,6 55.0 68.7 49.6 35.5 38.6 23.7 56.7 45.9 11,9 ,~ane Group LOS 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 C E 0 B ~t-;Eproach Delay 40.5 62.2 38.1 40.9 . oach LOS '0 E 0 0 - I intersection Delay 40.8 Intersection LOS 0 ::::,opyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Ger>eraled: 5/20/2008 10:45 AM rlIe://C:\Docmnents and Settings\dlw\Local Scttings\Temp\s2k 1 OS.tmp 5/20/200 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 119 of 157 , I , I RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD @ GRAND LEL Y DRIVE 1 J L 1 1 . 1 [-, i \ , i HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD & SKYWAY DRIVE Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 2013 BA~Re:nJ:NfJ7 5/20/2008 /' -... ,. ~ oOlI- '- , t \. ! ..I ,... Volume Left VqlymeRight cSH Voiume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Contrpl Delay (8) Lane LOS At>proach Delay (s) Approach LOS ., ttt+ ;,),,;,/ ,,;i' i:; Jfr~~'::':':' ',""" 0% 4~'$fJJ', '>1Jff,:!3~ 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ""'-.';:;'4ij;";,''4p'i,'':' ,; "12~"!'i: "i~~'C ,\"" 408 4.2 """';, ~"."tt~tt,:, ,,",, "i::',o,",",t"'O',':,f+,C,'R,",,' ',' :',;'i.:"..'f',!,~,!~k Q 1"';' " 0% 0% A3~0,28. $1 8 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 :'3'79':\'Z~~":::,'?;&:tf' "8 I.';., 'R~Js~d 1 " :~".:,~@$>;;M:Y/" 'i:}J,!':X;,;;::'.V:i~Q;g"",,,:4~:7'1: 551 '~$$; 809 , ,'tip 6.6 ',~i~ 75 " ,34'4 o 6 1700 ,O.OQ, o 0.0. 523 " ,;';," 4;~;:,:,' :2.g::. 95 1{j1ig,,': 551 5?O: 1071 ',:"p,e, 5.6 ,. kq 97 , .$02': ' :.",y,:, . . o 56 0 0 122"( \0 c. -{r., "0' . ;,-::;. ."', ..' 1700 1019 1700 1700 0.12' ();()5:'O,O~@,09 o 400 O.Q $.7, '0,:0, 0.6 A 1.1 ~ 1+ ,~, ':~'Nfp:" 0% €?17 0.95 0.95 /~;"'~ff :""'1a' El11Q ,,' 0.95 0.95 "::":5',{':':;~':' "1'1 :I~{~ised 1 . . . '. ~ "':; :',. >'~(~~:'";i,;;t($.~>>1':1\1;~;:1;, ';l4~1; 505 505 '?~P~1~ 195 785 1117 141 7;0', .:y.:~; '!~;~i' . ;(~o. 6.6 5.6 'l4 3\~ '4i@. . '3,:4 93 97 98 98 8.P$.,';B,~~> !':2,a~.:':' ""872 o ,"$4 344 .657 ;Org~;::O:09 24 8 j~:~ ' fL1 .c B 15;6 C 11 0 .. , "0 ..~~ 342 567 O;'(j3 .~t04 2 3 .1~t8, ! lt~ C B 1Z:9 B Lane Configurations ~'lg~!;P6htr8r' , , Grade VoI4ltH:\"(vehlh) Peak Hour Factor iH6.UHy':.t!~w :r~te (vph) Pedestrians LJh~,Width,(ft) . .,' Walking Speed (ftIs) P'~fg.~mt!3IQck~~(il .., Right turn flare (veh) M~tJl~hlype ' ";' , ' Medj'an storage veh) UR~tt~~rnsigM~!'m,:.: ,". pX, p'1~to~n,~n~~?~~~~ ,,'....,.' ,'.' . vQj:'c~)nfIIQtlr;1'@:v.pllllm~;"'~'~,;4"l$.';';' ,::' ,i'; vC1. stage f conf voi' " " . vQ2;st~~e2 conf voi vCu, unblocked vol tq;~ingl.e(s) tC. :2 stage(s) tF(s) pO queue free % GtVl :Q~P~clty . (vewlif ' ,,2;~' ,', 96 112~:' ' " 44 : 'd. ' 1126 ,:.Q,P4 3 8.3 . A 0.6 o :0.: 1700 , :O,O~; o 0.0 Average Delay intersection Capacity UHilzotition Analysis Period (min) 3.0 34.4% 15 leU Level of Service A Baseline Metro Transportation Synchro 6 Report Page 1 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2013 BACKGROUND & PMl~1I~Op7 3: RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD & SKYWAY DRIVE 5/20/2008 ...J. ~ "\ t --- t" \. J. .I Lane Configurations SlghXJ$.mtr.Q1 Grade MQI~ri1$(vehllij Peak Hour Factor H.BGtly,Ji6w?ral~ (Vph)' Pedestrians hi:irl~WjdfhH(ft)'" Walking Speed (fUs) p:~~qgrtralqpk~~e, ..' Right turn flare (veh) M@~iciil19P~'" . Median storage veh) QR:$.fr~'~m.~!9h~g(ft}>, , pX, plat()onunblocked Y~;;,G9Hm~tlli1~'YQiy.m~",,' '.' vC1, staQe 1 conf vol vQ~jst~9~2cOhf \/bt vCu, unblocked vol tPi,~jf1@I&t$) . te, 2 stage (s) tF)(~) ,.,. pO queue free % CM.'~p~'~IlYJt~n!h)"',: 4~'" 0.95 )C'44 \~;2~.;; :- g,? 96 1014 Volume Left Vp!Wi'rie'Rlght cSH V6iWnielo C"'P;3city Queue Length 95th (ft) CqMtrbl.p-eiciy (s) Lane LOS Apprqachpelay (s) Approach LOS 44 '0 1014 ,H (W4 3 8.7 A 6.6 Av~rage Dela,y . '. .,. .' IntersectiQn C,wacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) Baseline Metro Transportation -+- 'y .( "'t tt1+ 'Fr~~' 0% 45~ 116 0.95 0.95 48tt'!'1Z~ ',i:t~.~.::"" :F'E~y,. 0% 4:74 '2,8'? 1 0.95 0.95 0.95 4Q9:' ". '..,., '2~ ' "85 "'t 1+ '$18~:>: 0% 8 0.95 "''-it', 'stqt 0% e 0.95 ,...."':"6 t)3 0.95 ;:'56~" : 51 ,1'0 0.95 0.95 -"':$4> '::.11 A~~l$~~; 1 . 'galsed, 1 Q.Os."": '.":"-~"I"'<;-'-'; ,,;~~g1,.t~:;~'t;~<,';A'i~g2' " 633 633 ?~,!lMq' 932 1273 222 7;@! " '~';~'>' ,.t.p , 6.6 5.6 '. ~..~4;Q .,.... '3A 72 97 93 '(3ot\,: '\g~6; "772 /93@::., 625 3d7 933 7i~' 6.6 , .3J~ 96 i:M~O 43.1~: ' 625 6~4 1319 6.6,' 5.6 , 4.0 97 242 528 4;2 605 #.2 2,2, . 94 ,.94tJ o b 1700 0.11 o 0,0., o .'(V;. 1700 0.11 o 0,0 o 122,' 1700 0;13 " o 0.0 56 '0 948 0,06 5 9.0 A b.9 o '0 1700 (UZ o 0,0 o o 1700 0.12 o . 0,0 o 2ff ' 1700 0.08 o 0.6 2.8 35.9% 15 lelJ Level of Service A Synchro 6 Report Page 1 17 0.95 "'1a 1'81 181 7.0 3.4 98 :$.g1 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 122 of 157 I ......., . I I I ,I r" J RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD @ ,t- POLLY AVENUE R 110rt eport Ag~nf'~~~~em Ntfn~ 1 of r 1 ~ I SHORT REPORT Page 123 of 157 , ,?enerallnformation Site Information !~naryst DLW Intersection Rattlesnake @ Polly I Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultants Area Type All other areas I Jurisdiction Collier County pate Performed 5/20/2008 , time Period PM peak hour Analysis Year 2013 background L Volume and Timin!:llnput .. EB WB NB SB I LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT .1 ~umber of Lanes 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 ~ane Group L T R L T R L TR L TR I Volume (vph) 26 440 82 94 348 8 86 8 78 12 8 14 . Va Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 I IPHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 r fretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A I ;Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 I Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 I Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 'I Gnit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 .' Eed/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 , I \::Jarking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N I parking/Hour f 0 0 0 0 J3us Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 I t'hasinq EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 I G = 70.0 G= G= G= G = 40.0 G= G= G= I Timing y= 5 y= y= y= y= 5 y= y= y= puralion of Analvsis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Lenqth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination r EB WB NB SB ~djusted Flow Rate 27 463 86 99 366 8 91 90 13 23 ,I 2875 2875 I Lane Group Capacity 554 897 500 897 448 521 421 544 r/c Ratio 0.05 0.16 0.10 0.20 0.13 0.01 0.20 0.17 0.03 0.04 (Green Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 I Wniform Delay d1 10.7 11.5 11.0 11.8 11.3 10.5 28.6 28.3 26.9 27.0 i I Delay ,Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 flncremental Delay dz 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 I Control Delay 10.8 11.5 11.1 12.0 11.3 10.5 28.8 28.5 27.0 27.1 Lane Group LOS B B B B B B C C C C , j Approach Delay 11.4 11.4 28.6 27.0 l,l\pproach LOS , " B B C C jntersection Delay 14.3 Intersection LOS B I --.J :::opyrighl @ 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved I-/CS+ ™ Version 5.21 Generated: 512012008 11:42 AN /ile:l/C:\Documents and Scttings\dlw\Local Settings\Temp\s2k IM.tmp 5/20/200 . )lOli Report LT 1 L 26 5 0.95 A 2.0 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 N .Irlltlrsection Delay :::opyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved EB TH 3 T 507 5 0.95 A 2.0 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 o o o 3.2 Agenda Item NB.. 1 of SHORT REPORT Site Information Intersection Rattlesnake @ Poffy Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2013 background & PM project RT 1 R 82 5 0.95 A 2.0 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 N 03 G= y= LT 1 L 102 5 0.95 A 2.0 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 N o WB TH 3 T 446 5 0.95 A 2.0 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 o o 3.2 04 G= y- o RT 1 R 16 5 0.95 A 2.0 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 N NS Perm G = 40.0 y= 5 17 LT 1 L 86 5 0.95 A 2.0 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 N o NB TH 1 TR 8 5 0.95 A 2.0- 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 o o 1'< ?nno Page 124 of 157 RT o LT 1 L 18 5 0.95 A 2.0 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 N NB 95 520 0.18 0.33 28.4 0.11 0.2 1.000 28.6 C 28.7 C Intersection LOS 83 5 0.95 A o N o 3.2 06 07 G= G= y= y= Cycle Lenqth C = 120.0 91 448 0.20 0.33 28.6 0.11 0.2 1.000 28.8 C HCS+™ Version 5.21 l:ile://C:\Documcnts and Scttings\dlw\Local Settings\Temp\s2k17 A.tmp I' 'General Information ~alyst DL W TR TransportaUon ncy or Co. Consultants 1 ~ate Performed 5/20/2008 . {im e Period PM peak hour I Volume and Timino Input "1 I J LNumber of Lanes l-ane Group I Volume (vph) 1710 Heavy Vehicles IbHF I Pretimed/Actuated (PIA) Startup Lost Time I I Extension of Effective Green ,I'l~rrival Type , ,Unit Extension .1 ped/Bike/RTOR Volume i-ane Width i I ParKing/Grade/Parking ! E'llrking/Hour Stops/Hour IIYlIIlimum Pedestrian Time phasinq EW Perm 02 L. . G = 70.0 G = I '11m Ing y _ 5 Y _ I Duration of Analvsis (hrs) = 0.25 ~ane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination I EB WB !I\djusted Flow Rate 27 534 86 107 469 I 'I Lane Group Capacity 497 2875 897 460 2875 897 V/cRatio 0.05 0.19 0.10 0.23 0.16 0.02 I (Green Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 IpniformDelayd1 10.8 11.7 11.0 12.1 11.5 10.5 J )Delay.Factork 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 1,Incremental Delay d2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 :PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 I'Control Delay 10.8 11.7 11.1 12.3 11.5 10.5 ~ane Group LOS B B B B B B , Il\pproach Delay 11.6 11.7 I 'oach LOS ", B B 14.2 19 419 0.05 0.33 27.1 0.11 0.0 1.000 27.1 C SB TH 1 TR 8 5 0.95 A 2.0 2.0 3 3.0 o 12.0 o RT o 14 5 0.95 A o N o o 3.2 08 G= y= SB 23 544 0.04 0.33 27.0 0.11 0.0 1.000 27.1 C 27.1 C B I i I I I i I I ----..J Generated: 5/20/2008 11 :42 AN 5/20/200 j I ! ~ . 1 , . i I COLLIER BOULEVARD @ THE SITE ACCESS DRIVE Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 125of157 I \-," j I , I I Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 2013 BACKGROUND & Pl\7l89~t191~Cf157 3: SITE ACCESS DRIVE & COLLIER BOULEVARD 5/20/2008 f '-. t ~ '. ~ im@1~~I!;}:illiI~.i~~fnrl!l~i'IimH~_' '. ,.'", '. -~~&'ii1m ~~!f ~ ------~------------------- - -- '--"'~ ~liffic~!i~~~f.;~Z'~;j:'~':'."';"$J!flp';';;::";;' ,....t,;::~~~l':!i"..,',',.,' ""~'S);"~~i"":' w~~t;:';'f', '.,~!,"\: "';";""';"'.:""'I}.'<it",,:;,,, Grade" " 0% '00/0 ", 00/0 ~p!g:Q!1f,:N~l1zm1}-;::' ,i,':-';'Pf,;;t;:,.;.g;::i, "t14~j'::W4Q ";1~$.1;j;'\." '~'#j~~J~4~ Peak Hour'FaCtor '0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 6.'95 ~~tl~j\~Thl~tfii)~'L-,:!,",."':t~\y/.t;';' , " Walking Speed (ftls) B!r:.~~~j;:~;lQ:~l*J.,9~.;~J::::>;;)}1.'<,:') ,.;. ~iQh!. !u.rll n~,r~ !y~~~ " ,', . 1\."-" ~i!ilJ"I" "".'t' .,,' -"'f ,'s",""',,""'; " ',".y.'i\"l, j;.t.,,"'''' , !:~J,~[J9!J::Ybi~j\~~;#:P':],:;;:!h!1I-Q,rr~W' , Medianstc)rage'veh) "." iJ~~tf~'~mf~~\~fu'~I::'U!)8';'i:f'f~'~!';.':,: " '\ : ."'" ' p,8! '..PI~t919.6: ~~'~'!8~~~j... .'... ..' . .." ~~;itS?~mti~Rl)!9~~Ii1!~JlmgW.~1]~~~~:!:\::~'tt~.1\1';""'I'." vC1, stage 1 conf vol ~!?J~ji'~t~~~;,~i~gHti~.~r ..'.,,;'C;. ' vci..l; unblocl<ed'vof 2374 611 l~!~~f::~:;.::"'~:"i~::::'c pO queue free % 100 72 ~mii~~p~~I~~j~\f~l!ftOCi!J';~Y~{;i:t'j;:,~~~\;t,!::';~~j;):~V'~' ""."'.i~ . ./:" '" . -: ": :'~-. "~ 2037 , ,:.ii'.2:,' q' ' .;~~,...' . ":;:':gt~'\ ;:,' 100 ;,t;~:i:<:;;i;;i;: "~6~>'Y'" ,..\ i,.;;i '.;' .' :, . ,~t5!:t . Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~lgm.~'\~IW.l1t,,:;,;:'~;;'.'W::":;'}~Y>;i;g~' ,<;;;j!}:",~,.:::;~:,Yt~;i :t~' .,.,.,.' '!i~q~::'.: ''''/',Q'''' ,..;"'(ti!~" ,,"'i;~t'....:P'; ",.. " cSH 430 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 M6ium!g(tbiGat$~~lty;!:::' " '/Oi,28:i:03$,\,!'o'iBa"tl.~6:':@ +~;;:032 ,0:32. "0,32, ,; ~~~~;~~ii~i~~~!~'~ft{{..,'~;~;~~"." ',~::'~,;::.:;:;~,~.,;;':~~,;~,,;';" '.':~.~;~;.:'., ..~.g" .' ."".'~lg:',(:~,.~,:'; '.:', lane LOS C ~RPhf~pffi~~~1.@y{!tM--i~,j.i~,.p4:~;~!' .010; .o;(;r Approach LOS C Average Delay iil't'rg"'::ti8f:\\i11ilj'\ ac:i't" U tillzatiol1 "..~..,~C;,. y,'.,p,.".. y, .'.', d, Analysis Period (min) 0.5 47.3% 15 A leu L~ij?31 of Service, " Baseline Metro Transportation Synchro 6 Report Page 1 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 127 of 157 , , i I I ! ,< PEAK SEASON DATA FOR COLLIER COUNTY FROM THE 2006 FLORIDA TRAFFIC INFORMATION CD I . I 2006 Peak Season Factor Category Report - Report Type: ALL Category: 0300 COLLIER COUNTYWIDE Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 128 of 157 L Week Da tes SF MOCE': 0.89 PSCE' ==~==========-~=============~=====~==~=-------=~====-==-====~=====:====~======- ....., 1 01/01/2006 - 01/0712006 1. 04 1.17 2 01/08/2006 - 01/14/2006 1. 01 1.14 3 01/15/2006 - 01/21/2006 0.98 1.10 4 01/22/2006 - 01/28/2006 0.95 1. 07 * 5 01/29/2006 - 02/04/2006 0.93 1. 05 * 6 02/05/2006 - 02/11/2006 0.90 1.01 * 7 02/12/2006 - 02/18/2006 0.88 0.99 * 8 02/19/2006 - 02/25/2006 0.87 0.98 ,. 9 02/26/2006 - 03/04/2006 0.86 0.97 *10 03/05/2006 - 03/11/2006 0.85 0.96 *11 03/12/2006 - 03/18/2006 0.8~ 0.95 *12 03/19/2006 - 03/25/2006 0.86 0.97 *13 03/26/2006 - 04/0112006 0.87 0.98 *U 04/02/2006 - 04/08/2006 0.89 1. 00 *15 04/09/2006 - 04/15/2006 0.91 1. 03 *16 04/16/2006 - 04/22/2006 0.93 1. 05 *17 04/23/2006 - 04129/2006 0.94 1. 06 18 04/30/2006 - 05/06/2006 0.96 1. 08 19 05/07/2006 - 05/13/2006 0.98 1. 10 20 05/14/2006 - 05120/2006 1. 00 1. 13 21 05121/2006 OS/27/2006 1. 02 1. 15 22 OS/28/2006 - 06/03/2006 1. 04 1.17 23 06/04/2006 - 06/10/2006 1.06 1. 20 24 06/11/2006 - 06/17/2006 1. 08 1. 22 25 06/18/2006 - 06124/2006 1. 08 1. 22 26 06/25/2006 - 07/01/2006 1. 08 1. 22 27 07/02/2006 - 07/08/2006 1.09 1. 23 28 07/09/2006 - 07/15/2006 1. 09 1. 23 29 07/16/2006 - 07/22/2006 1.10 1. 24 30 07/23/2006 - 07/29/2006 1.11 1. 25 31 07/30/2006 - 08/05/2006 1.11 1. 25 32 08/06/2006 - 08/12/2006 1.12 1. 26 33 08/13/2006 - 08/19/2006 1.13 1. 27 34 08/20/2006 - 08/26/2006 1. 13 1. 27 35 08/27/2006 - 09/02/2006 1.13 1. 27 36 09/03/2006 - 09/09/2006 1. 13 1. 27 37 09/10/2006 - 09/16/2006 1.13 1. 27 38 09/17/2006 - 09/23/2006 1.13 1.27 39 09/24/2006 - 09130/2006 1.12 1. 26 40 10/01/2006 - 10/07/2006 1.11 1. 25 41 10/08/2006 - 10/14/2006 1.11 1. 25 42 10/15/2006 - 10/21/2006 1.10 1. 24 43 10/22/2006 10/28/2006 1. 08 1. 22 44 10/29/2006 - 11/04/2006 1. 07 1. 21 45 11/05/2006 - 11/11/2006 1.05 1. 18 46 11/12/2006 - 11/18/2006 1. 03 1.16 47 11/19/2006 - 11/25/2006 1. 04 1.17 48 11/26/2006 - 12102/2006 1. 04 1.17 49 12/03/2006 - 12/09/2006 1. 04 1.17 50 12110/2006 - 12116/2006 1. 04 1. 17 51 12/17/2006 - 12123/2006 1.02 1. 15 52 12/24/2006 - 12/3012006 1.00 1.13 53 12/31/2006 - ,12131/2006 0.98 1.10 * Peak Season Page 1 of 7 i_, Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 129 of 157 I I 1 ITE PASS-BY INFORMATION FOR LAND USE CODE 820 SHOPPING CENTER ! i XlI 1 .~ , ~ Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 130 of 157 Figure 5.5 Sh,opping Center (820) . J , :1 , I .'. I , '~: 1 Data Plot !IO 70 Ql g> c: Q) 60 ~ Q) a.. 0. ~ 50 >- en I ~ 40 a.. Ql g> ... ~ 30 n I- 20 10 l' I I' I J '-- r I I~ I 1 J I I' ~~ J. Average Pass-By Trip. Percentage vs: Dna: Number of Studies: Average 1,000 Sq. Feet GLA: 1 fOOD Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area WeeKday, p.m. Peak Period 100 329 90 x, . . , . . . . . . , ... ............... \..... ..............0 "t"'"'''' or""'" "0' 0_'"'' I...... .,......... '0."""" r........ -,"""""" . ......, I . . , . . . t , . . I' , , .... ........... ............................................... -..................................................... . . . . . . . . , . . x X . , . " '. X'XK:"" , ':' . . . , ';' . . .. . ':' . . . . ': . . . . . ':' . . , ' . : ' . . , , ';' . . . . . ';' , " , ': . . , . . ':' . . , . . X: X X . : x. , . . , . : . , ')<X-" . 'x' . " . .. . ,'. . . . .. .. . , . . ,. . . . . . '"' ... . . , . . . , . .., . . . . . ., . . . . .. . , , , . ,'. , . , , . . 'x' 1< . X' . . . . . X: : X . : X : : X: : : X : . . ~ . >$, . . , . .': , . , . . .:. . , . . . ~. . , . . . : . , . . . .:. . . ' , . : ' . , , . ... ' , , . ' .. . . . . .. . , , . , ... ' . . . . 'X'xX'X' . . . :i< X~: ><<: : X: : : X X: : X ' 'X' , x, . , . . , . , . , . .": '~x'~':" .. ."..,'~ .;x'..,~;..... '.'..~.. :'. ';~' ',...... .:.'.' .. r"'" '.".." ;X : : : X: : :x , :X , . ." '.' ' . .x. :. ' . .. '..." X- '.*" x... ,. 'X' '."" ' . ;"':'<". ....' '.' :x : ' ::XX: : Xx X: : : : X .~ X : x. X' x, . . . , , ':. ' . . , , : ' , , . . -;. . . . . . .:' . . . . . *- . . . , . .;- . . , , . : . . . . . ':' . , . , . .:' , . '. , , ;- . . . . . .:- . . . , , X: X : o o 3tJO 100 200 400 500 600 !Joo 700 800 1000 1100 1200 x = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross leasable Area x Actu~l Data Points Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: In(T) = -0.29 In(X) + 5.00 R2 :0.31 to t_ If '. t, I I , j I I I 1 I FDOT STANDARD INDEX #301 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 131 of 157 I ,!- II)! I il~~~~ "" tiCj 'A ~ ~~!!.. i I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, t) ~c5~ I I I m ~ :!tL i I iw m ~ ~ -C r:t ~ ~'t;-1 I I , fa ell cs ~ U-l'ii)!!~: i i ~ ~ QiS ~ i ",,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i i tl lj ~~~..., I I ~ i I ~d.; ~ ~ e !! i i : · I Ii '''is !3 05 ~ !t~iilti!!~g ..l1i tJ'" ') I "" ~ tli ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ IliVl_ "l- ~ '~"lltl ~ ~ la ill Ii! ~~.... r-- ( ! .1/ d .e l~ ~~ I c.k - . ~ili H 1 :! 1._. ! l t_ ~~ ~, u of!. h 8~ ~~ ! ! ~ i _L., .; <l a ... ~ ei i : ~, I .! ls.~ . ~Il d i till f tl.1 ~~ i ~ t~; h: ~ ~ ~ I: I ~1! ~ I fli U ~ )" & ~~ H 11\ ~ i~ it j ~15~ ~~ ~~ lit i ~~ i 15~! 1~~!;j ~ ~ I ~l ~ t:: ll! Cl.. ~ r:t: Cl ~ l! 1 .I!~ j i .i ~ o~ ~~ II ~~ i H! it l ~ "' J~" I. ~,' -, · i '< i! ~ II' 'i., I 1:1 ! ~! ~ ;~.. · a i (CJ ~ ~ ~ ~I i~ i ~ i &~; ~ Jl~ B ~~~ l'" ct: -; ,~ .. k i J 1;\'1i "',; lsL, 'i; ala :&~llli jit~i' i :...! ~i l a ~ H i U l ! .~. I : h d '! !~' - ~ -j I. Ii I 1- -1, {If .ii .' - · ~! :: jt In I Wil. fl.2 ~ll d lie ~! ~ ~H~il~ ~ ~ t ~ .1 ,.; ....n .':!"'~~ctf~_ ":., - ~ ~~:'..... :.. dI ~~~ * ;;~ .1 .n ! tl) ~ H a ~L ! 1 -;~ '.. :! l5 * '"".!I ~~~ (:; \Il ~~ ~ ~~ '" ljj~ ~~ <i ~ !~ i! ~f ~~ ~~ ""! ~ ~ ~o: ,;; B" a il ~ ~~ ~ ,~ II ~- * a~ . I;~ ~ ~l I ~: o. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ i)~ i ~ i! i~ ! l i ~j i)~ t: i~ ! ! J - - -Ti ! ~~ t ~~ id i:i I~ j ~J ~U s~t ~u ~:~ ~ 1': "l:l~ ~i :t~ tt !.s ~ I ~ i3 ~ ~ ~ i:i ~ . ~ ! ~ J__ - T!i !h iH ~~~ ii i~ ~~l ~.i! i~t ~U c"'f H tl< '" i ' ~ & I., ~t- Ji~ :; ~ ~i ~a! h,\ ~t_ ~~i ~ :~ rll~ ~U t&,~ H~ n"'~ ~ f~ ,,"'~ l~ t.:l ~~ .:;'" ~ I" 0: " :: I< .. i j ~ ~ ~ nl! ii .- "e ~~ .::::~ ~ ~ i 1 \Il ~ ~ it "'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (;) '"""TI qj ~A!i HI ... n e i",<i! <::; l:~ i~l j;,~~ ~i~ ,i' ! i ~ .~ ~i~ 1: ~ i ~l ~.. \11:- 1:5 ... 'Ci, ,.- ~"t'- =0 .fi~~M hE! "'I:; -f! I ~ ,~ ::s ~ 5 ~ ~ 1:> 8 l"l h ~l l~ ~'Q' ~u ~~~ ., ~ ~~~ :::'b.!: UiC! ;ti lli"~ ~l~~ ..:;..as al~! ~~~t 2..."10_ gHi g: ~t ~e"{;Q ~i>h' iHi ~~...~ to.<Sd ~ ~ <l Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 133 of 157 I PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE COLLIER BOULEV ARD/ .'1 DAVIS BOULEVARD INTERSECTION I <> Slg ~.. ll" ~, o ~ 3j-W1' r" MUST r ruRtlIUGHT i ~ ~ r+ Ol! ..., <> iil .. ~ ! <) " ,:,:=0;,;,- Q'" t5a. II ,1 II I .,~ , <> .1 ~ I L! I ...,., !t I I; ~ I . ~lt [I \iU ""* ','" o .r;I";i 00' 00/- 10/ . " ", 'tlS " 3NI7H:Jl111f ... .... ~ (. ;, 0 o f......... ...., "'. \ ., ~,~...:'~) ~.' '~.... '. ,..,} ( \ " "__....... ~.. ,. ,. ~.'" ,r1c .,......'..-' -."\ ...~., " .,.-' ) ( } ........,....... i! ,1 I I , , ! '. . " ....,. .... ~- >~\ 1 ',' , I I; ~ 1 : i' 11; 1); :~ IEH I '1,~ ;<i.. I~ ..,jO I I ill I I '~ ~-.. to: .., ~ ~ ~ ~ ;: " '" 7' i.? I I J J I I I ~ I I ::11 ~I ~ " ~ v :: I 0 ... i5 ~ i; 0<.> "0 " rt I~ I I + ,~ " " h I~ I " ..._~"...........,...._'-...-.....--._._- '1" 'Ili I~I .. .., i75 II t, ;::;' '.... .. &,~:....~ S! l' ! _! S8~ O~ J:~~ ~~il g~ I~"H.., ~~ \ii~~~~. f I ~~~.qoS ~~ N~f@:~. i!="'Z::3Jo;to". ~~ ~ ~~o.: '., lil ~i "" U~ a'" ~ I '"' 1 ~ ~ f '" , I ~ ~! ~ ~ , '" . ~ ~ ;~ .{ { <I i. .., .. i , ~ ~ ~ ~ ! 0:: I ~ 8 gj 5 .:rr:l 'rc:c'a..~1tU 31111 1J3ONIt fD1Y1S Oh" 01M~S :mJ/ 31NfM1J.:J1'rj Iff/. Sf ~3'HS SlHi :J() OllOO3fl Wt:JIJJ(J 31U ;':JIJDII ~Ip.~, It:, , , " 1:t-,. :\: I Iii I : : :: 1 !~.,~d: i ~ J! t. ':. .~I :: I I .. ::!I 1'.'1"'111 I;;' : r . ,. ~'III III I ,lli; ~ I I : (j ~ -.Ii It ~. ~ t !, : g,:I~:; ;::.,~: ~ : :'n 111;1 8 g t i : ~~ 1 I:: ~ t 1 "'II I, I': .j & t i ~ ~.I d; !: a t r J 'l II' i: I I Q f }: '," I:: .,.,.,.!, , , II t ~ : I I I' I I :! t : /I +:-:: : : a t t ,// ,,.' .' ':;~ It ~ l I J 1 ~ : ,/ / '!:':i II 1 ' I I Ii. .. .., 13 U I I I l~ ,: ~ "', :' " "1.',1, )( ::...... J.I:: I l I: .,... ...... '" //-.' Th' ,. \l' ~ /....~; :i1;': .. I' 'I ~ , /.. .... ~/ r Ifll ::; ill' \ -- " :i;: : li:; \ ~ : I 1 I :~ ~_ \ , 9:: : :: r il; I, 1"..\;',' f!! . \..>, '" <,i" I 'NO'~ "b : ::: \1 ~ ;/J ' :'<~UTlEJ)g=-- , ="- ~ ' " , k, j.~ :1 'v) ,Ill _. - -~ .... W~ ~~... --... w_. .,' . .--... ~ ':::::t1f4 f I I f --:-~~____ III .. :" t;t;" ~.:!;t-- - r--I"'--'- :~ ~I<~, : ) ~~. ." ~..... ~ I. _I l I I L. I I ~,' t. :,,"t1 ~-t:5iI.:: ~L .. (.' ...lfl I-t . I I ""'II l ~.: ~ :-...;4; ~_ .... _~ ~..::.O&t (0 :;:.oJ1 1 I 1..__( I j :~ 1;. ::~:""': ... $lll ~- .....~ - ~ lS]. _.'+-\' "~ ~"_,,,,________....___._ ._:~-:;:~~::::~.>~~~~~~~~.u=":=ui~\.:.1:. .-.. n::.~;:, ..~ ..:<i In " '" C'-'_ 1.1.Jv}ll. ... !If ~~ '" t ~ ~ ::::.::>') ~~ ~~ i ~~ . ~ ~ ~ i ~ .4 ~, /1 ,"' ,... , ~..: : ~... ,1<1 ;Q Q "';t; ~~ ~i ~i ~~ ";f~ ~;e il? -- .1>>0<.1 Z ~ ~ .' .., I " I .. \ \ I \ \ I ~ ~ \ \ I i ~ \ \ : ~ 'l! ~ ~-t-U'~l lS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L il 05 ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ --5-- --' ... " <t z o ~ ~ z IS II 0::- LU a ti ~s~ L Z ~IHi :;j ~fi~'al ~ !iU~ ... a!d~ _,:,::,=-"'"=-='::::_'~='::::.c;iiJOCi[':::::3~ 'f 1" .' 0, .k6L. ..". ~ \!! ~ ~ ::. '" lo 'O/r78 1:131770:; '" .1~I'l'of ~ ..~. ~ , f;~[SJt'-i ;! ;: .., ~. g;J' ".. ~ . .~ ~ORT~uTffi ~a ... ... ...... ....... ~ ;< (......](-..) '" S \ 951, \ 951 , .. e \<<un'l'J \CCll.llm/ 1+:1 ;::; ~ l___l___ .. .. ~ fIr, ..........' I " ""'" t ~""'''''l " 'ti ...... ~ ~L__ ~ ~ ~ ...... ~ a:l ~ 9; ~ l:i. .... ~: Q;) e:i g~ ~ ~ a; ~~ c' o ~ '<1;>0 .~ .JI .1I .~ ! CXI"~..6JI 'Y16 3NI1I1:>lYII r-: rr-: r-: --- Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 137 of 157 TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT DATA COLLIER BOULEVARD @ DAVIS BOULEVARD Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 138 of 157 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 139 of 157 1:.. TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: March 20, 2008 THURSDAY 4:00 PM . 6:00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951) & DAVIS BOULEVARD H COLLIER BOULEVARD IC.R. 9511 DAVIS BOULEVARD INTER. ~ BE NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4;0 54 378 15 447 30 238 154 422 153 16 33 202 14 18 45 n 1,148 4:15 PM 77 327 24 428 25 265 124 414 145 16 39 200 18 17 59 94 1,136 4:30 PM 44 327 25 396 19 264 127 410 152 21 41 214 13 24 49 86 1,106 4:45 PM 69 342 24 435 32 317 153 502 139 25 32 196 11 15 37 63 1.196 5:00 PM 65 323 23 411 25 264 119 408 184 25 43 252 10 32 42 84 1,165 5:15PM 60 306 36 402 30 264 132 426 194 34 39 267 19 25 57 101 1.196 5:30 PM 63 341 28 432 36 289 140 465 178 22 52 252 7 17 36 60 1.209 5:45 PM 61 326 21 408 37 289 134 460 174 28 47 249 17 27 30 74 1.191 TOTAL: 493 2.670 196 3.359 234 2,190 1.083 3,507 1.319 187 326 1.832 109 175 355 639 9.337 HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951) & DAVIS BOULEVARD HOUR DAVIS BOULEVARD INTER. BEGIN EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTIO~' LEFT T TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTA' 244 1, 1.748 589 78 145 812 56 74 190 320 4,586 255 1,670 101 1,734 620 87 155 862 52 88 187 327 4,593 238 1.644 106 1.746 669 105 155 929 53 96 185 334 4.653 257 1.680 123 1.801 695 106 166 967 47 89 172 308 4.756 249 1,653 128 1,759 730 109 181 1,020 53 101 165 319 4.751 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR COLLIER BOULEVARD C.R.951) OAVIS BOULEVARD INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND " SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND B WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL" LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL" LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 4:45 PM 257 1,312 111 I 1,680 ft 123 1,134 544 1,801 695 106 166 967 . 47 89 172 I 308 4.756 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 140 of 157 -1:. TRANSPORTATION ~--{ CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 20, 2008 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:45 PM - 5:45 PM INTERSECTION: COLLIER BOULEVARD (C,R. 951) & DAVIS BOULEVARD COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951) 3,980 84% 1 I 1,801 2,179 N l t 544 1,134 123 .J . ... DAVIS BOULEVARD ~ 172 ... .. 89 ... 890 ....... j r 47 308 1,857 695 ...... ._.~".. 39% ..... 106 ... 648 -.. 14% 967 166 .,. 340 ~ t ,. 257 1,312 111 ~ Tolallntersection Traffic Percents (%) represent movement volumes 4,756 divided by the tolallnte,seclion traffIC l t 1,347 1,680 t 3,027 64% Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 141 of 157 COLLIER BOULEVARD @ RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 142 of 157 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT T1ME: January 16, 2008 WEDNESDAY 4:00 PM .6:00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951) & RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD COlliER BOULEVARD C.R.951 RATTLESNAKE MMOCK ROAD INTER- NORTHBOUNO SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION FT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 23 344 1 368 2 178 40 no 43 0 13 56 0 1 0 1 645 20 364 0 384 0 196 45 241 38 2 22 62 0 1 0 1 688 27 320 0 347 0 226 49 275 51 0 30 81 0 1 1 2 705 35 313 1 349 0 233 54 287 48 1 30 79 1 0 1 2 717 31 301 0 332 1 183 44 228 75 0 26 101 0 1 0 1 662 28 316 0 344 0 207 50 257 69 1 21 91 0 1 0 1 693 24 222 0 246 1 313 59 373 69 0 18 87 2 0 0 2 708 20 204 0 224 0 262 58 320 62 0 30 92 0 0 0 0 636 208 2.384 2 2,594 4 1,798 399 2.201 455 4 190 6 3 5 2 10 5.454 HOURL Y SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951) & RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD HOUR COLLIER BOULEVARD C. RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUT EASTBOUND WESTBOUND lEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 4:00 PM 105 1,341 2 1.448 2 833 1.023 180 3 95 8 1 3 2 6 4:15 PM 113 1.298 1 1.412 1 838 1.031 212 3 108 323 1 3 2 6 2,772 4:30 PM 121 1.250 1 1.372 1 849 1,047 243 2 107 352 1 3 2 6 2.777 4:45 PM 118 1,152 1 1.271 2 936 1.145 261 2 95 358 3 2 1 6 2,780 5:00 PM 103 1,043 0 1.146 2 965 1.178 275 1 95 371 2 2 0 4 2,699 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR COLLIER BOULEVARD /C.R. 951\ RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND D SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND T WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAlI LEFT THRU RIGHT IrOT AL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL I LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL . TOTAL 4:45 PM 118 1.152 1 I 1.271 I 2 936 207 T 1.145 261 2 95 358 K 3 2 1 T 6 2,780 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 143 of 157 1: T RANSPORTATJON K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: January 16,2008 DAY: WEDNESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:45 PM - 5:45 PM INTERSECTION: COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951) & RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951) 2,559 92% t r 1,145 1,414 N I t 207 936 2 .J . .. RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD t. .-. ... 2 ... 327 ....... J r 3 6 261 .... 685 25% ..... ... 11 2 0% 358 ... 95 .... 5 ~ t r 118 1,152 ~ Total Intersection Traffic Pe,cents (%) rep,esenl movement volumes 2,780 divided by the totallnlersection traffic l t 1,034 1,271 t 2,305 83% Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 144 of 157 RA TTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD @ GRAND LELY DRIVE Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 145 of 157 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY; COUNT TIME: March 12, 2008 WEDNESDAY 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS GRAND LEL Y DRIVE/SKYWA Y DRIVE & RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD GRAND LELY DRIVElSKYWAY DRIVE RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD INTER. 15M1N BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND ~ WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIG,HT TOTA THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4 :00 PM 21 3 7 31 4 2 5 11 4 79 16 99 9 90 4 103 244 4:15 PM 11 2 16 29 1 1 7 9 6 89 14 109 6 68 4 78 225 4 :30 PM 16 1 7 24 3 2 3 8 6 72 11 89 2 98 5 105 226 4:45 PM 15 0 14 29 3 2 5 10 14 87 17 118 7 90 7 104 261 5:00 PM 21 1 15 37 3 1 6 10 12 90 16 118 15 86 8 109 274 5:15PM 17 3 8 28 1 2 3 6 2 87 29 118 6 86 10 102 254 5;30 PM 23 2 13 38 4 1 4 9 12 103 30 145 12 94 3 109 - 301 ~ 16 1 12 29 1 t 3 5 14 83 36 133 17 77 5 99 266 TO 140 13 92 245 20 12 36 68 70 690 169 929 74 689 46 809 2.051 HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS GRAND LEL Y DRIVE/SKYWAY DRIVE & RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD GRANO LELY DRIVE/SKYWAY DRIVE N RTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT 6 44 113 11 7 20 4 52 119 10 6 21 5 44 118 10 7 17 6 50 132 11 6 18 7 48 132 9 5 16 TOTAL 38 37 34 35 30 LEFT 30 38 34 40 40 RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT 327 58 415 24 346 20 338 58 434 30 342 24 336 73 443 30 360 30 367 92 499 40 356 28 363 111 514 50 343 26 TOTAL 390 396 420 424 419 INTER- SEeTIO' TOTAl 956 986 1,015 1,090 1.095 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR GRAND LEl Y DRIVE/SKYWAY DRIVE RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD INTER. BEGIN NORTHBOUND I SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND " WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT ITOTAU LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTA:f:LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 5:00 PM 77 7 . 48 132 I 9 5 16 I 30 40 363 111 514 50 343 26 419 1.095 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 146 of 157 ~I TRANSPORTATION }'< (ONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: March 12, 2008 DAY: WEDNESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 5:00 PM .6:00 PM INTERSECTION: GRAND LELY DRIVE/SKYWAY DRIVE & RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD GRAND LEL Y DRIVE/SKYWAY DRIVE 103 9% 1 r 30 73 N I t 16 5 9 ..J . ... RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD t. 26 .... ~ ... 436 343 ..... j r 50 419 950 40 ...... 87% ..... 363 ... 839 ..... 77% 514 111 ~ 420 .. t r 77 7 48 ~ Total Intersection Traffic Percents (%) represent movement volumes 1,095 divided by the lotallnle,seclion traffic l t 166 132 t 298 27% Agenda Item No. SA October 13, 2009 Page 147 of 157 RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD @ POLLY AVENUE Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 148 of 157 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: April 2, 2008 WEDNESDAY 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS POLLY AVENUE I SAINT ANDREWS BOULEVARD & RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD T POLLY AVENUE I SAINT ANDREWS BOULEVARD RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD INTER- 15MIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 7 2 10 19 4 1 lQ 15 2 97 28 127 19 79 3 101 262 4:15 PM 22 2 21 45 2 3 7 12 6 76 16 100 28 79 4 111 268 4:30 PM 20 2 17 39 3 3 6 12 4 61 21 86 25 60 3 88 225 4:45 PM 17 3 6 28 1 1 3 5 6 86 24 118 24 86 1 111 262 5:00 PM 24 2 23 49 4 4 0 8 3 95 16 114 15 92 1 108 279 5:15 PM 17 1 16 34 1 0 5 6 7 107 16 130 21 65 3 89 259 5:30 PM 20 1 24 45 5 2 5 12 7 106 18 131 25 72 2 99 287 5:45 PM 15 0 13 28 2 3 11 16 15 82 16 113 13 76 7 96 253 TOTAL: 142 13 132 287 22 17 47 Be 52 712 155 919 170 609 24 803 2.095 HOURL Y SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS POLLY AVENUE I SAINT ANDREWS BOULEVARD & RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD POLLY A VENUE I SAINT ANDREWS BOULEVARD RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD INTER. NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT T LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAl 4:00 PM 66 9 56 131 10 6 26 44 20 322 69 431 96 304 11 411 1.017 4:15 PM 83 9 69 161 10 11 16 37 21 320 77 418 92 317 9 418 1.034 4:30 PM 78 6 64 150 9 8 14 31 20 351 77 448 85 303 8 396 1.025 4:45 PM 76 7 71 156 11 7 13 31 23 396 74 493 85 315 7 407 1,087 5:00 PM 76 4 76 156 12 9 21 42 32 390 68 486 74 305 13 392 1.076 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR POLLY A VENUE I SAINT OULEVARD RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND H SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND . WESTBOUND SeCTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL I LEFT THRU RIGHTT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL T LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 4:45 PM 78 7 71 156 I 11 7 13 I 31 23 396 74 I 493 I 65 315 7 I 407 1.067 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD +- 406 ..... .I 899 23 83% .. 396 ~ 493 74 ~ ~ Percents (%) represent movement volumes divided by the IOlallntersectlon lrafflC Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 149 of 157 DATE: April 2, 2008 DAY: WEDNESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:45 PM. 5:45 PM INTERSECTION: POLLY AVENUE! SAINT ANDREWS BOULEVARD & RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK POLLY AVENUE I SAINT ANDREWS BOULEVARD .J 13 I 166 31 l 7 . 68 6% t 37 t 11 ... ~ t r 78 7 71 t 156 t 322 30% I N t.. 7 ... 315 ... r 85 407 .... 885 ~ 81% 478 Total Intersection Traffic 1,087 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 150 of 157 TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 151 of 157 TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS GOODTURN CENTER ITE TRIP GENERATION REPORT, 7th EDITION ., Land Use Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Daily (2-way) Shopping Center Ln (T) = 0.60 Ln (X) + 2.29 Ln (T) = 0.66 Ln {X) + 3.40 Ln (T) = 0.65 Ln (X) + 5.83 (LUC 820) (61 % In/39% Out) (48% 1n/52% Out) T = Trips, X = 1,000's of square feet GLA -- - ., -. . -- Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 152 of 157 Collier Rattlesnake LLC Kenneth J O'Leary Manager 27499 Riverview Center Blvd. Suite 101 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Paradise Gulf Corporation Kenneth J O'Leary Pres. 20% Kenneth D-Goodman, as Trustee of the Colonnade! Collier Blvd Investment Trust dated Nov. 24, 2004 80% "- See attached PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 REV: 1 GOODTURNCENTERCPUD Project: 2004060021 Date: 1/24/08 DUE: 2/22/08 Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 153 of 157 Amount %'9 BRT Coastal Investment ltd Pshlp C&A Carrol Enterprises Kenneth Goodman Goodman 2000 Irrev Trust Hawn Interests Robert & Florence Lake Robert Springborn IRA Gerha~ ~ Gloria Strauss Dale Wame Maryanne Waine Paul Waine 750.000.00 250,000.00 400,000.00 150,000.00 100,000.00 500,000.00 250,000.00 200,000.00 100,000.00 100.000.00 200,000.00 25.0000% 8.3333% 13.3333% 5.0000% 3.3333% 16.6567% 8.3333% 6.6667% 3.3333% 3.3333% 6.5667% Total 3,000,000.00 100.??oo% c. 4069737 OR: a~~~rqZ3~ RlCORDID in OFFICIAL RlCOlDS of C~LIIR COUlt!, It 09107/2007 at 03:28PM DWIGHT .. BlOel, CLIlI UC III 18.50 DOC-.TO .10 This insmanent was prepared without legal opinion by and, after - ,:cording. should be returned to: Kenneth D. Goodman, Esquire Goodman Breen & Gibbs 3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 239403-3000 RetD: EKfRESS FE:l:EX GOODW BUll.' AI. 3838 !AMIANI Tl I '300 RAPtIS PL 3U 03 SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED Tms INDENfURE, made this 31st day of August, 2007, between KENNETH D. GooDMAN, AS TRUSTEE OF THE COWNNADE/COLLIER BLVD INVESTMENT TRUST DATED NOVEMBER 24, 2004, County of Collier, State of Florida, Grantor*, and COLLIER RATTLESNAKE, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose post office address is 3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300, Naples, Florida 34103, Grantee*. outhwest 1/4, less and hip 50 South, Range Folio 004174??oo2. ? Grantor will warrant a: and demands of all persons cIa Signed and delivered in our presence: CJJ4x4lA a ~J)fl DlJ'r1 fl CL (lv, tV ood ~7~-:;.Of~~ KENNETHD. GooDMAN, ASTRuSTEEOFTIIE COLONNADE/COLLIER BLVD INvEsTMENT TRUST DATED NOVEMBER 24, 2004 rI-(S1t\--~ ~. ~:RVG~ Type or print name of Witness No. 2 PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 REV: 1 GOOD TURN CENTER CPUD Project: 2004060021 Date: 1/24/08 DUE: 2/22/08 .. *** OR' 4279~n~~~A~1b~t* , ~~~ 1 ~~M1"157 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 31st day of August, 2001, by KENNETII D. GooDMAN~ AS TRUSTEE OF TIm COLONNADE/COLLIER BLVD INvEsTMENT TRUST DATED NOVEMBER 24. 2004, who rx1 is personally known to me or 0 has prOduced driver's licenses as identification. Sign ffiUBLlC' /j.~ ~ ~ C; . h~AJt.IMu-... State 0 ori at Large My Commission Expires: Print Agenda Item No. 8A October 13, 2009 Page 156 of 157 I I .' . ,..,.;.' .',' ',,-,.., . .... .. I ' " . ~" ',;' AfF'IPAVI):', . " ," ':,-" :,:"..:", We/I, Collier Rattlesnake, LlC being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/I am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. We/I understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted. As property owner We/I further authorize Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. and GoodJette, Coleman and Johnson, P.A., to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. ~d~- Signature ~ro~perty Owner tntt11 t:fley' /{'Blt 11 e fA J. (/leCflf Typed or Printed Name of oWner Signature of Property Owner Typed or Printed Name of Owner The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this of JiOJI._,- __. 2007. by r-D ~ ~ 0' UaY'9 is personally known to me or has produced identification. 11 Cj day who State of Florida County of Collier PUDZ-2008-AR-12773 REV: 1 GOOD TURN CENTER CPUD Project: 2004060021 Date: 1/24/08 DUE: 2/22/08 (Signature of Notary ubljc - State Flori'if~ARY PUBUC. STATE OF FLORIDA l'......,'\ Arcelia G. Trevino {~'~Commission #DD652156 (PM~t~~~~~~J.------- Commissioned Name of Notary Public) Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 1/22107 VTPA7 NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE t8D · Sunday, September'?:!, ~~~,mfft~~~ Page 157 of 157 Notice is, hereby given that on TLJESDA Y, October 13, 2009, in the Boa,d,oom, 3,d Floo" Administration Building, Collier County Government Cente" 3301 East Ta- . miami Trail, Naples. Florida, the Boa,d of County Commissioners will cons ide, the enactment of a County Ordinance, The meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The title of the propo",d O,dinance is as fol- lows: ." AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COlliER COUNTY, FLORID~ AMENDING ORDI- NANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY lAND DEVELOP- MENT CODE, WHlot ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COWER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY' AMEND- ING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZON. ING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DE- SCRIBED REAL PROPERTY 'FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOP- MENT (MPUD)ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE GOOD TURN CENTER MPUD, TO AUOW CON- STRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL LAND USES AND/OR A VARlfTY OF SKILLED NURSING CARE FACILITY USES WITH A . MAXIMUM Of 200 UNITS, IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP SO SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9,S +/- ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ,Petition: PUDZ-200B-AR-12773, Collier Rattlesnake, Inc., represented by 0, Wayne Arnold, AICP, of 0, G,ady Mlno" Ine. and Richard Yovanovlch. of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is -requesting a PUD Rezone ITom Ru,aIAgric!J1tural (A) to Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) to be known as the Good Turn Cente, MPUD, The MPUD proposes a maximum of 1 oo,OOOsqua,e feet of com- me,cial land !Jses andlor a, variel)! of skilled, n!Jrsing care facilities !Jses Willi' a maxim!Jm of 200 !Jnlts on 9,S,' ac,es., The subject property is located on the' east side of Collier BO!Jlevard, app,oximately 660 feet north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Section 14, 'Fownsnip SO SOlrth and Range 26 Ea<l, Collie, County, Florida. ~fl';:it ti:;,e &~~rO;~dth~r~~~Je a~de a~~ available for inspection. All interested parties a,e invited to attend and be hea,d. NOTE: All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must registe, with the CO!Jnty administrato, p,ior to p,esenta- tion of the agenda Item to be add,essed. Individ!Jal speakers will be limited to 5 mi n!Jtes on any Item., The selection 01 an individ!Jal to speak on behalf of an orga- nization or group is encouraged. If rec:- ognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a ilroup or organization may be al. lotted 0 minutes to spea~,on an item. Persons wishing to have written or graph- ic materials incl!Jded in the Boa,d agenda packets mlJSt submit said material a min- ' Im!Jm of 3 weeks p,io, to the respective public hearing, In any case, written ma- te,ials intended to be considered by the Board shall be s!Jbmitted to the appropri- ate County' staff a minim!Jm of seven days p,io, to the p!Jblichearing. All material used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent. part of the re- cord. Any pe"on who decides to appeal a deci- sion of the Board will need a ,ecord of the p,oceedings pertainingthe,eto and the,efore, ,may need to' ensure that a ver- batim reco,d of the proceedings Is made, which record includes' the testimony and evidence !Jpon which the appeal is based. ' If YOl1 a,e a person with a disability who needs,any' accommodation in order to particlpate'in this p,oceeding, YO!J a,e en. titled, at no cost to YO!J, to the provision of certain assistance, Please contact the Collier CO!Jnty Facilities Management De- partment located at 3301 Tamiaml T,ail Ea<l, Building W, Naples, Florida 34112, (239)2S2-83BO_ Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired a,e available in the County ,CommisSlone'" Office: 80ARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUN):Y.,fWRIDA c, DONNA FIALA/CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK" : By: Ann lennejOhn, Deputy Cleric (SEAL) " ' ' _ SePtember 27 '2d09 NolB179B9