The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 03/19/1999 W COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Workshop on Density Reduction, Clustering, Natural Resource & Agricultural Preservation Policies, and the Proposed Remedial Amendments in Response to the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) Finding of Noncompliance. March 19, 1999 9:00 A.M. ~ AGENDA I. Opening Statements by Staff and Introduction of Consultants II. Density Reduction Proposal A. Brian Blaesser I Esq. - Robinson and Cole B. Dr. James C. Nicholas, Ph.D. - University of Florida III. Transportation Analysis - URS Greiner IV. Clustering and Conservation Standards V. Public Comment VI. Stipulated Settlement Agreement A. Staff Presentation B. DCA Comments VII. Public Comment VIII. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process A. Staff Presentation B. County Attorney Comments IX. Public Comment X. BCC Discussion - - TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Consultants Report........................ ............................................. ............... ..1. II. Staff Report......... ... . .. ... . .. ... ... ... ... '" ... ... .., ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . .. ... . .. 57. III. Stipulated Settlement Agreement........ ... ... ... ... ...... ... ......... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..82. IV. Amendment Process............................................................................... ..165. - Evaluation of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Density Reduction Amendments Prepared for The Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida by Brian W. Blaesser, Esq. with James C. Nicholas, Ph.D. University of Florida February 12, 1999 ROBINSON & COLELLP BOSTO:"oi · HARTFORD · STAMFORD · GREENWICH · NEW YORK TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Pa~e INTROD UCTI ON ........... ................ ,................... ................ ...................... ...... .................................. ......... 1 PURPOSE OF REPORT. ........ ....... ..... .......... .................. .......... ........ ........ .............. ........ .......... ............ ............. 1 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS ......... .......... ............ .................... .............. .......... .......... .................... ............ ................ 1 PRO POSE D DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDM ENTS.................. ...................................... ............. ...........1 PLANNIN G POLICY OBJECfIVES............................ ........... ................................................ ........ ............ ......... 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS PROPOSED TO ACHIEVE POLICY OBJECfIVES................................ 2 BA CKG ROUN D ECON OMI C CONSID ERA TIONS....... ...... .......... ...................................... .............. .......... 4 DENSITY AND LAND VALVES ............................... ...................... ........... ......... .......... ........ .............. ........ ...... 4 COLLIER COUNTY URBAN LAND MARKET............... .... .......... ........................ ........... ........... ........ ................. 6 BACKGROUND LEGAL CONSiDERATIONS....... ........ .......... .... ........ ... ................. ...... .... .................. ........ 9 THE BERT J. HARRlS, JR. PRlV A TE PROPERTY RlGHTS PROTECTION ACT ....................................................9 REQUIRED WRITTEN SETTLEMENT OFFER BY GOVERNMENT.................................................................... 11 TI1\-lING OF CLAIM UNDER THE ACT ..................................................................................:......................... 12 EVALUATION OF PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS .................................................13 URBAN AREAS..................................................................................... .............................. .......... ............... 13 R URAL AREAS (EAST Of GOLDEN ESTATES) ......................................................................... ..................... 15 RECOM;\l ENDED ADJUSTMENTS TO COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION MI ENDl\1 ENTS ........... .......... ............ .... .......... .......... .............. ..................... ....17 ECONOMIC AND LEGAL CONSlDERA TIONS. ............ .............................................................. .... .................. 17 RECOMMENDED ADJUSTMENTS TO PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS .............................. 17 REDUCTION IN DENSITY fROM 4 TO 2 UNITS PER ACRE WITH 50 ACRE THRESHOLD ............................... 19 METHODS TO INCREASE DENSITY ................. ...... .................. ...................... .................................. ...... .......20 DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER RATIOS ..................... ...................... .......................................................... .......21 ECONOMIC AND LEGAL EVALUATION OF RECOMMENDED DENSITY REDUCTION A'l ENDl\1 ENTS ......... ........................................ ...... .... .............................. .............. ........................... ...21 FISCAL IMPACT........................................................... ................................ ................................................ 21 POTENTIAL HOUSING COST IMPACT ..................... .................................. .................... ........ .................. ...... 25 LEGAL IMPLiCATIONS..................................................................................... ............................................ 29 ApPENDICES A EMPIRICAL ANAL YSIS OF COLLIER COUNTY URBAN LAND MARKET B ESTlMA TE OF EFFECT OF PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS UPON RURAL TAXABLE VALUES C SALES PARCEL DATA D AUTHORS OF REpORT BOSTI-661985 I. TABLES TABLE 1 TABLE 2 TABLE 3 TABLE 4 TABLE 5 TABLE 6 TABLE 7 TABLE 8 TABLE 9 TABLE 10 TABLE 11 TABLE 12 FIGURES FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4 FIGURE 5 FIGURE 6 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Pa2e BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSED POLICY DIRECTION .... 2 IMPACT OF DENSITY REDUCTION ON LAND V ALUE/PRICES ....................... 7 DISTRIBUTION OF PUD DENSITY ............................................................................8 BCC RECOMMENDED POLICy....... .............. .............. .......................... ............ ...... 14 CONSULT ANTS' RECOMMENDED ADJUSTMENTS TO PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS ..........................................18 EFFECT OF RECOMMENDED ADJUSTMENTS TO DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS ................................................................ 19 RURAL AREA TAXABLE VALUES IN COLLIER COUNfY................................ 23 TAX BASE & FISCAL IMPACT OF DENSITY REDUCTIONS IN COLLIER COUNTY ............. .................... ...... .........................................................25 TAX BASE & FISCAL IMPACT OF DENSITY REDUCTIONS EXCLUDING GROVE LAND COLLIER COUNTY ................................................. 26 DEVELOPMENT COST DIFFERENCE PER UNIT.................................................. 27 DEVELOPMENTAL VALUES..................... .............. .............. ...................... .............28 IMP ACT ON HOUSING COST OF RECOMMENDED DENSITY RED UCTI ON AMENDMENTS. ........................ .............. ....... .....................................30 FUTURE LAND USE MAP ........................................................................................... 3 LAND VALUE PER ACRE WITH INCREASING DENSITY -1.................................4 LAND VALUE PER ACRE WITH INCREASING DENSITY-II................................ 5 LAND VALUE PER ACRE WITH INCREADING DENSITY -LIMITED ................. 6 AGRJCUL TURALP ARCELS 50 ACRES OR LARGER .......................................... 20 DEVELOPMENTAL VALUE PER ACRE RURAL AREA LAND .......................... 29 d. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - This report presents the Consultants' analysis of the economic impact and legal defensibility of amendments proposed by the Board of County Commissioners to the Collier County Comprehensive Plan to reduce density in both the Urban and Agricu]tura]/Rura] Areas, and the Consultants' recommendations. The economic analysis of these Density Reduction Amendments addressed three principal questions: (1) the potentia] impact ofthe Density Reduction Amendments upon Collier County land values in the Urban and Agricultural/Ruralareas; (2) their potential fiscal impact upon the County; and (3) their potentia] impact upon housing cost. The legal defensibility analysis focused upon the potential viability of claims challenging the proposed Density Reduction Amendments ifbrought under the Florida Bert 1. Hams, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act ("Act"), FLA. STAT. ~ 70.001 (1995). PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS The key elements of the Board's proposed Density Reduction Amendments are (1) in the Urban Designation to amend the Density Rating System to (a) reduce the maximum density from 4 to 3 residential units per acre on agricultural properties greater than 200 acres in size where the properties are either underuti]ized or in agricultural use, allowing the density go back up to 4 units per acre where a "traditional neighborhood design" (TND) is proposed for a development; (b) reduce the Density Band around Activity Centers from 3 to 2 units per acre; (c) reduce the density bonus from 3 to 2 units per acre for Residential Infill, and (2) in the Agricultural/RuralDesignation to reduce the density from 1 unit per 5 acres to 1 unit per 20 acres. POLICY OBJECTIVES These Density Reduction Amendments, while directed at reducing the actual number of potentia] future dwelling units in the County, were proposed in the context of the Board's concerns regarding traffic impact and the need for flyovers. Much of the Board's discussion centered on improving the design of development in order to reduce traffic impact and to reduce the number offlyovers. The Board's proposed policy to reduce the residential density in the Urban Area from 4 units to 3 units per acre includes the option for a development to recoup the one unit lost if it were designed as a traditional neighborhood development-using TND. IMPACT OF PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMEl'l'DMENTS ON LAND VALUES URBAN AREAS Reduce J'J.-fa.\:imum Cap From" to 3 Units Under the Density Rating System/or Properties Greater Than 200 Acres and in Agricultural Use or Underutilized The economic analysis indicates that the loss of the one unit of density under the Density Rating System for the Urban Designation area could have an economic impact of as much as $7,453 per acre. A]though the economic analysis also indicates that there may be little economic incentive in the Collier County urban land market to move density from 3 to 4 units to the acre, from an appraisal standpoint, the loss of value could give rise to a potential claim under the Bert J. Hams, Jr., Act, particular]y since the method proposed for recouping the lost unit of density is through TND development. The neo-traditional concept, is relative]y untested in the Collier County urban land - 1- 3. market and this report concludes that it would be unwise to base traffic reduction so heavily upon this design concept. In addition, according to calculations made by staff of the Community Development and Environmental Services Division, the density reduction based upon the 200 acre threshold would result in a reduction of only 1,706 units. Consequently, the proposed policy would accomplish little in the way of actual density reduction or incentive to develop in ways that reduce traffic impact, and yet could give rise to a potential claim under the Bert J. Harris, Jr., Act. Reduce Density Band and Bonus/or ResidentialInfiIl For the same reasons discussed above, the reduction in density in the Density Band around Activity Centers and in the bonus for Residential InfilI, creates a moderate risk for a claim being brought under the Bert 1. Harris, Jr., Act. However, unlike the potential impacts of changes in base density, it is not possible to directly measure potential impact of changes in the bonuses. Given the Law of Diminishing Returns, any impact would be less than $3,000 per unit of density. The precise impact, and extent of potential legal risk, would be a function of the base density upon which the bonus density is to be added. Other Density Reduction Elements The other elements of the proposed Density Reduction Amendments for Urban Areas are (1) to reduce the maximum residential density in Activity Centers from 16 to 12 units; (2) to reduce the Affordable Housing Bonus from 8 units to 5 or 6 units; and (3) to keep the bonus .for providing a collector between two arterials. As a practical matter, there are relatively few parcels in the Activity Centers that are likely to be developed for residential use. The proposed policy will, therefore, have little impact economically. Reduction of the Affordable Housing Bonus would not be consistent with state policy and would not achieve any significant reduction in density. The current density bonus for a development that is located on two arterial or collector roads should be revised to require construction of a collector or arterial between the two roads (arterials or collectors). This proposed revision is consistent with the policy objective of providing roadway interconnections in order to reduce traffic congestion. RURAL AREAS (EAST OF GOLDEN ESTATES) Reduce Density From 1: 5 Acres to 1 :20 Acres Economic analysis of the principal density reduction element proposed for the AgriculturallRural Designation, a reduction in density from 1:5 acres to 1 :20 acres, indicates that the density reduction would not have a significant economic effect and hence would give rise to a minor risk under the Bert 1. Harris, Jr., Act. Generally, agricultural lands carry prices that reflect the value of the land for agricultural proposes, plus whatever development value the land may have acquired. It is the latter value that is potentially affected by the density reduction. Agriculturallrurallands sold in some reasonable proximity to the urban area have sold at base prices of$3,069 per acre, $767 of which is estimated to reflect developmental value. For those agricultural properties in sufficient proximity to the urban area to have acquired developmental value, this density reduction would greatly reduce that value, perhaps even eliminating it. A development value of $737 per acre was estimated from rural land sales in the western part of the rural area. This is an average figure for those properties. As discussed in the report, it would be expected that development value would decrease with distance from the urban area and that such - 11 - ..!:L_ decreases would be exponential with respect to distance. The existing developmental parameters of rural properties adjacent to the urban boundary are not proposed by the County to be changed, so there could be no adverse effects on value. The difficulty of projected value impact results from the estimate of developmental value being taken from properties that are both near the urban area and exempt from the changes. Best available data, together with experiences elsewhere, suggest that average developmental value per acre would go from $767 for rural properties near the urban area to $300 per acre for those remote from the urban area. Available data will not allow the estimation of the rate of decline with respect to distance. Given that the near properties are exempt, the average decline should be approximately $300 per acre. On average, this would represent a diminution of 10%. For this reason, generally speaking, the risk of a significant claim being brought under the Bert J. Harris Private Property Rights Protection Act is relatively minor. However, there could be individual circumstances where the diminution could be greater than 10%, which in such individual circumstances, could strengthen a potential claim under the Act. Reduce Conservation Lands Density From 1:5 Acres to 1:20 Acres No sales of conservation lands were included in the analysis. Examination of the Collier County Property Assessor's data indicate that these conservation lands have an average fair market value assessment of $1,097. This figure may be somewhat low given the difficulty of establishing estimated market values for properties that are thought not to be developable. However, experience has shown that virtually all land will acquire some developmental value. The $767 value per acre discussed above is for rural lands in proximity to the urban area. All properties included in the sample are thought to have some developmental value incorporated into the sales prices. Without a firm empirical basis, any estimate of changes in market value must be judgmental. Based upon the Collier County data analyzed and experience in similar situations elsewhere, a reasonable estimate for average developmental value per acre would be $300. As with agricultural, conservation or preservation lands closer to the urban area should possess higher developmental values than those more remote from the urban area. Unlike agricultural lands, the $300 per acre value will be accepted for all conservation/preservation parcels regardless oflocation. Given an average estimated market value of $1 ,097, the $300 diminution would be approximately 30%. In dealing with lands such as these, it can be difficult to assess developmental values. The market will always assign some developmental value to a property, regardless of how speculative. However, from any other perspective it may well be that the property has no actual developmental potential. Weare then faced with a conflict between a developmental value that the market may assign and the actual developmental potential of the property. If the conservation lands in question had no actual developmental potential before, changing the developmental density should have no effect, certainly not on the actual developmental potential. There was none before and there is none after. However, the market may well reduce any perceived developmental values. There is no known resolution to this conundrum. For purposes of this analysis, it is recommended that Collier County utilize the 30% diminution even though it may be an overstatement, especially for those properties with no developmental potential. Other Density Reduction Elements Other elements of the Board's proposed Density Reduction Amendments are to (1) retain the density of 1:5 acres within one mile of major road corridors; (2) retain the density of 1:5 acres west of Golden Gate Estates; (3) establish an Immokalee TDR receiving area; (4) keep the bonus for providing a collector between two arterials and (5) reduce the bonus for affordable housing from 8 units to 5 units. - iii - ---~-- We do not recommend retaining the density of 1:5 acres within one mile of major road corridors for two reasons. First, a density of 1:5 acres within one mile of such corridors will only encourage sprawl. Second, our analysis of the Collier County land market indicates that there is little if any market for land at 1:5 acres within the one mile areas along major road corridors. As discussed in the report, we recommend a lower density for these areas. We concur with the Board's proposed policy of retaining the density of 1:5 acres west of Golden Gate Estates since these properties are selling at prices that reflect relatively high development values and of the likelihood of the property owners having investment-backed expectations in the existing 1 :5 density regulation. Additionally, it is clear that there is a market for this type of development. With respect to the desire to establish Immokalee as a TDR receiving area, we recommend that a formal TDR program not be implemented for Immokalee. Within the Immokalee urban area there appears to be ample subdivided land at market or above market densities. Additionally, the pace of development in Immokalee is not conducive to an active TDR market. We would recommend that owners of rural properties north ofImmokalee be allowed to cluster their available units in the general area ofImmokalee. While there appears to be little demand for this type ofprogram at this time, conditions can and will change and demand could arise. Additionally, there is virtually no negative to the area or to the County from allowing an Immokalee cluster option. RECOMMENDED ADJUSTMENTS TO COUNTY COl\:L\HSSIONERS' PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTIO~ AAIENDMENTS The report recommends that the Board adopt an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would reduce the maximum density in the Density Rating System in the Urban Designation Area from 4 units to 2 units for properties 50 acres or more, but with the opportunity to 1. Increase density from 2 units to 3 units per acre through design of a development project that satisfiedperyormance standards based upon Travel Demand Management (TDM) techniques; and 2. Increase density from 3 units to 4 units per acre through negotiation and purchase of a conservation easement that either preserves agricultural land in agricultural use or preserves natural resource areas. This type of transaction would be done through a private informal process-not a formal, institutionalized process established by the County. The types of recommended peryormance standards are based upon Travel Demand Management techniques that are set out in the report. The amount of acreage required to be preserved or "quieted" through the informal transaction process (development transfer ratio) to obtain the 4th unit of density would be established by the County based upon the market values. It is recommended that development rights severed from agricultural property be allowed at a ratio of 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres of land. This is the existing zoning and is also the basis for the base ratio. In recognition of conservation land having lower market prices and development values than agricultural, it is recommended that severable development rights be available at a ratio of 1 to 8.5 acres. The basis for the recommended ratio of 1 to 8.5 acres is set out in the report. Analysis prepared by the Community Development and Environmental Services Division indicates that 3,447 acres satisfy the threshold size of 50 acres or more. Staff estimates indicate that a reduction of the density to 2 units per acre will result in a reduction of 6,894 dwelling units. - IV - ~. ECONOMIC AND LEGAL Ev ALUA TION OF RECOMMENDED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS FISCAL IMPACT The fiscal impact analysis in the report is based upon what could be argued to be a worst case scenario. This is an appropriate methodology because the purpose of an impact statement is to point out what might happen, not what analysts thinks will happen. Given this approach, the report concludes that potential fiscal impact of the density reductions could be as much as a $30 million decline in taxable values for a 0.15% decrease in total taxable values. POTENTIAL HOUSING COST IMPACT The estimated total cost of restoring density back to four units per acre is $5,500. This includes the estimated costs associated with modifying the development and also the costs associated with acquiring conservation easements. In many cases the costs will be less that these estimates. Nevertheless, such cost increases could occur. Whether housing cost changes are passed forward to the buyers or backwards to the landowners is a long-standing debate that will not be resolved herein. Suffice it to say that the ultimate incidence of cost changes is the result oflocalized market conditions. Because local market conditions frequently change, the incidence of cost changes also will change. This analysis will present full pass-through of costs. This full pass-through in not a prediction but an impact analysis. The purpose of this analysis is to ask "what if?" What would be the housing cost consequences if all ofthe costs per passed through in the form or higher prices or rents for housing? For this purpose a cost of$5,000 per unit was used. Using an interest rate of 6% amortized over 30 years for ownership, and 15 years forrental, the analysis concludes that if all of the estimated costs of restoring density were to be incurred and also were to be passed through, the impact on housing costs would be $30 to $40 per month, $360 to $480 per year. Using the 25% housing cost rule, the necessar)' income to afford housing would increase by $1,400 to $2,000. lEGAL IMPLlCA TIONS The Bert 1. Hams, Jr., Act requires a written settlement offer from government upon being presented with a claim of loss of fair market value due to specific government action. By structuring the density reduction so as to enable the property owner to regain density through satisfaction of performance standards or consummation of a transaction with another property owner that results in preservation of agricultural land or natural resource conservation, the County would significantly reduce the potential risk for a claim being brought in the first place and, if brought, that the property owner would prevail. - v- L~TRODUCTION On June 2, 1998, the Board of County Commissioners directed staffofthe Community Development and Environmental Services Division to prepare amendments to the Collier County Comprehensive Plan to reduce density in both the Urban and AgriculturaI/RuralAreas (the Density Reduction Amendments), to investigate the potential of a transfer of development rights (TDR) Program focused in and around the Immokalee Urban Area, and to prepare an economic analysis of the proposed changes in density and the legal defensibility of doing so. The law fiffil of Robinson & Cole LLP was retained by the Board to undertake this analysis and to make such recommendations as it deemed appropriate in connection with the proposed density reduction amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Robinson & Cole, in turn, retained the services of Dr. James C. Nicholas, an economist from the University of Florida, to assist it in preparing analyses relevant to the assessment of economic impact and legal defensibility. PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to present the results of our analysis of the economic impact and legal defensibility of the proposed Density Reduction Amendments and of the potential for use ofTDR in and around the Immokalee Urban Area and to recommend certain adjustments in those proposed planning policies to address economic and legal considerations. SCOPE OF ANALYSIS The legal defensibility of the proposed Density Reduction Amendments depends chiefly upon conclusions reached regarding their potential economic impact. The economic impact analysis undertaken by Dr. Nicholas addressed three principal issues in connection with the proposed Density Reduction Amendments: (1) their potential impact upon ColIier County land values in the Urban and Agricultural/Rural areas; (2) their potential fiscal impact upon the County; and (3) their potential impact upon housing cost. The legal defensibility analysis, in turn, focused upon the potential viability of claims chalIenging the proposed Density Reduction Amendments ifbrought under the Florida Bert 1. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act. PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS Before evaluating the proposed Density Reduction Amendments, the following presents a brief overview of the Board's planning policy objectives and the specific policies proposed. PLANNING POLICY OBJECTIVES The Density Reduction Amendments, while directed at reducing the actual number of potential future dwelIing units in the County, were proposed in the context of the Board's concerns regarding traffic impact and the need for flyovers" Much of the Board's discussion centered on improving the design of development in order to reduce traffic impact and to reduce the number of flyovers. In fact, as indicated in Table 1 below, the Board's proposed policy to reduce the residential density in the Urban Area from 4 units to 3 units included the option for a developmentto recoup the one unit lost ifit were designed as a traditional neighborhood development-known as Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND). TNDs are typically human-scale, pedestrian-oriented, interconnected neighborhood projects - I - 'l. that are centered around a village green with a mix of uses including retail, office and civic amenities that complement one another. Residential uses are often located above retail uses. A grid pattern is the basis for the transportation network. The main street component of the TND is integrated in the TND and sized in proportion to the scale of the project. The Board's proposed policy in this regard was to provide an economic incentive for developers to use development design techniques such as TND that will lessen external traffic impacts, especially on arterial roads. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS PROPOSED TO ACHIEVE POLICY OBJECTIVES The Density Reduction Amendments proposed the Board of County Commissioners are summarized in Table 1 below. These proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments are tied to specific areas as indicated on the Plan's Future Land Use Map. See Figure t following Table 1. TABLEt BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSED POLICY DIRECTION URBAN AREAS Residential Den!\ity Rating System Reduce density from 4 to 3 units for properties 200 acres or more but allow 1 additional unit for Traditional Neighborhood Design (lND) Density Band Reduce maximum density of bands around activity centers from 3 to 2 units Activity Centers Reduce maximum density in activity centers from 16 to 12 units Residential Infill Reduce bonus from 3 to 2 units Roadway Access Bonus Revise density bonus for location on two arterials or collectors to require construction of a collector between two arterials. Affordable Housing Bonus Reduce bonus from 8 units to 5 or 6 units RURAL AREAS Reduce agricultural density from 1:5 acs to 1 :20 acs Reduce conservation density from 1:5 acs to 1 :20 acs Reduce Camp Keais Strand, OkaloacoocheeSlough, and CREW Acquisition Areas density from 1:5 acs to 1 :20 acs Retain 1:5 acs within one mile of major road corridors West of Golden Gate Estates: Retain density of 1:5 acs Establish an lmmokalee TDR receiving area - 2 - 9 - ~ + R 26 E RE R 34 E AI. / RURAL . O\II!RLAY8 AND SPECIAL FEA TURE8 D INCORPOft"TtD AMA5 rn CD .. ... FUTURE \)",~f"t L/toOlxED uS[ D1S1IaCT _ SUSOI!lRICT E NIXED USE DISTRICT iAHOOb VIU.AJX C[NftR SU8OlS1f<ICT WUD[ SUIDI!'mC1 [MErrY' AREA. OfSlRlCT -- COASTAL HIOH H.\ZARD AMA ........ TltAf'f'IC CONCE'STION eouHDARY - AM.... Of CRITICAl !TAT[ CONCtAH LAND USE A8 AMENDED. OCTOaER, '.117 Collier County Florida ,TRIAL DISTRICT AAPORl NC)st AfIlU .8IGNA TION ~ [STATU EN OA.TE ESTATE'; rn ..... ... ... ION DEIIONATIOH \J8UC OWNERSHIP DfSTFtICl RlVATt OWHE'RSH!P DISTRICT .r THE COUJEPI cCIV.nv 0R0W1't4 IrMNAODI(NT PlAN. ;[ ELEMENT. MAl' tNClUDE OUTfl'ARa:L'S. THE F'VTuRE [0 us[ + INTEftQ"lAHOC ACTNITY ctNTERS; ~ ANO TH[ MARCO ISlAND MASTtfl: PlMl r(Wl << ., , x' 10 llI00KtR.- .A' NATlQNAl. [STU, , flE"'.ll\CH./IUIi I~, .'" " ,-,' - aa .... ,,~;.. ' 10 N 1ft ... tillllWON ."""",,'\ \",1 1'\,1.'\'." ., :fil\..:X:;" .,"~. r:",~~\~- ~MU_.~ C_"_ " ~ 10 .. 1ft sc.u: I I I I t ,.. ... ,.. .. s.. .....-- LA" U. ..... ADOP1[O - J.t.NUAAv. lWi ! Mf[HD[O - J/tNJ/IIIC'(. 1990 AJ.4trtDED - FEBRUARY, 15191 AMENDED - MAY, 1992 AMENDED - MAY,19SJJ AWEND(O - APRIL. 1994 AW{NO[O - 0C1C8ER,. 1 m ... PREfI'Afl:ED 8Y; G'RAPHlCS Affl) TtCHNfCAl SUPPORT Sl:CTIOH eot.MJNlTY O(VELOPY(NT AND EN\llRCNUEHTAl. SER\I1CES OM9ON DAft; 1/99 fILE: ~7-17.0JllG / PLOT:-,UTOf"U,PAJ.. R 26 E I E R 34 E -4 .... ell M -4 .... -.. M ... .... ell M -4 .... CD M -4 ell .. rn ... en - M ... III ... M ... en w rn 10. BACKGROUND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS Our evaluation of the Density Reduction Amendments proposed by the Board of County Commissioners is derived from certain background economic considerations governing density and land values and the Collier County land market. These considerations are presented first, before addressing the key elements of the proposed Density Reduction Amendments. DENSITY AND LAND VALUES When asked what determines the value ofland, "location, location and location" is the standard, almost knee-jerk, response. Of course location is critical to the value of a parcel of land, but once location is fixed, other factors come into play. The most important of the other factors is the productivity of the land. All other things being equal, i.e., location, the more productive land will command higher prices than the less productive. The precise value of a parcel ofland would be a function of the land's yield per unit ofland, usually an acre. For agricultural land this is commonly measured in bushels per acre, or some other recognized measure of output. The more goods that can be produced on a parcel, the more valuable the land. The same economic forces apply to urban land. LAND VALUE PER ACRE With Increasing Density (I) ::J ro > Density Figure 2 The productivity of urban land is basically the same as agricultural - the yield per acre. Of course the units yielded from urban land are different than agricultural and are measured in dwelling units or square footage of floor area. But the basic point, that the more that can be produced on a parcel ofland the greater the expected value of a unit ofland, remains true for both agricultural and urban land. Unlike agriculture, the production of more urban product per unit of land tends to change the nature and value of the product. In agriculture the 1 oath bushel produced on an acre would have the same market value as the first or the fiftieth. The same is not true for urban products such as residences. The - 4 - .iL. market tendency is for residential unit value to decline with density. I See Figure 2 above. Thus in an urban market the productivityofthe land must be viewed together with the market for the various types of units capable of being produced on the land. Land capability is a function of the physical characteristics of the land and the legal restrictions on the land. Consequently, either physical limitations or legal restrictions will work in conjunction with market forces to determine the productivity ofland in terms of production per acre-density. In a residential land market the general tendency is for value to increase per land unit (hereafter referred to simply as acre) with density, but at a decreasing rate. That is, each additional unit of density will add less to total value as density is increased. In economics this is known as the Law of Diminishing Returns.2 A typical pattern of per acre value with respect to residential density would be as shown in Figure 2 above. In this figure value per acre is increasing with additional units of density, but it is clearly increasing at a decreasing rate. If this process of increasing density on a given unit of land is allowed to continue, it will eventually lead to a decl ining total value, as shown in Figure 3 below. The decrease would occur because each additional unit of density was of negative value, thus detracting from parcel value. Of course, no rational person would knowingly increase density to such a level. Rather, they would cease density increases at levels that maximized total values. LAND VALUE PER ACRE With I ncreasing Density (J,) :J ro > Density Figure 3 In those circumstances where the market demands less density than either the physical limitations on the land or the legal restrictions could allow, the market is the sole determinant of density. When the market would accept, and legal restrictions would allow, higher density than the physical limitations will allow, attempts to modify those physical limitations will occur until either the market or legal I See Arthur O'Sullivan, Urban Economics, 3rd Edition, Chicago: Irwin, 1996, p. 238. This commonly accepted principle is demonstrated for Collier County in the following section. 2 See any edition of Paul A. Samuelson, Economics, New York: McGraw-Hill, numerous years, for a full and in depth discussion of the law of diminishing returns. - 5 - ld!m____ limits became the upper limit. When legal restrictions allow less density than the market demands and physical limitations would allow, requests for rezonings and similar types of regulation changes will follow. Only when the market is the limiting factor will equilibrium prevail. When some limit is imposed on density, regardless ifit is physical or regulatory, the market process will be halted if that limit is less than the density that maximizes values. Figure 4 below shows such a limiting factor. A limiting factor is introduced that results in less than market density and thereby limits value. Of course, if the limit could be eliminated or raised, density of development would rise and so also land values. If this limitation were physical, modifying the land could result in increased value. Likewise, values could be increased by relaxation of any regulatory constraints. In the situation depicted in Figure 4 below, it would be very much to the advantage of the property owner to attempt to increase the density of development. The point here is that in order for density bonuses to be economically attractive, regulatory density limits must be lower than the market based limits. LAND VALUE PER ACRE With Increasing Density -- Limited ell ::J ('(J > ----- ..:.:--::-..;~~".~-~":_--~" ..~~~~. "..0' ...L___.______________. /' Maximum Figure 4 The material presented and the points made here are commonly known. This review is presented in order to set the stage of an analysis of the role of density in the Collier County urban land market. The general theory ofland economics would suggest that density of development would be a significant factor in the setting of Collier County urban land values. Furthermore, theory would suggest that the incremental or marginal value will decline with density. We now turn to the Collier County land market to understand land economic reiationshipswithin the County. COLLIER COUNTY URBAN LAND MARKET The following is an empirical inquiry into the nature and magnitude of the role of density in Collier County urban land markets. The method employed in this report in order to estimate the effects of density reductions in the Collier County urban land market is an analysis of actual land sales within Collier County. The actual sales used can be found in Appendix C to this report. These sales were subjected to statistical analysis in order to derive insight into Collier County land economics. The analysis employed was multiple regression. This is a statistical technique that correlates one set of - 6 - L3L_ .- data, known as the dependent variable, with one or more independent variables. The methodology for this regression analysis is set out in Appendix B to this report. The analysis was concerned with the incremental or marginal value of allowable density (per acre). In order to establish a basis for this estimation, 198 Collier County land sales were analyzed. See Appendix C. The expectation was that per acre values would increase with allowable density and per dwelling unit values would decrease with allowable density. Of course, it was expected that both per acre and per parcel values would vary given the presence or lack of amenities. The amenities included in this analysis were water frontage (non-gulf), golf course frontage and being within a gated community. Given the nature ofthe land market, it is expected that the interactions among these variables will be logarithmic rather than linear. It is not possible to directly measure the worth of amenities. In this analysis each amenity was measured simply on the basis of whether or not it exists for each particular parcel. The regression model then estimated the contribution of such amenities to the sales price of the lot. The objective was not to estimate amenities values. Rather, the objective was to adjust for amenities so that the fundamental land economics could be assessed. As noted above in the discussion of density and land values, there is a market tendency for price per acre to diminish with parcel size and also for price per allowable unit to diminish with density. The results of the regression analysis utilizing the sales data were used to estimate the generalized impact of density reductions on land value/prices. The results are summarized in Table 2 below. TABLE 2 IMP ACT OF DENSITY REDUCTION ON LAl"'D V ALUEIPRICES DENSITY VALUE 4 3 2 Parcel $3,717,047 $3,344,380 $2,881,695 Per Acre $74,341 $66,888 $57,634 Per Unit $18,585 $22,296 $28,817 Change $7,453 $16,707 Within the generalized Collier County urban land market, the fourth unit of density adds an estimated $7,453 to an acre. Additionally, the third and fourth units add $16,707. It follows, then, that a reduction from 4 density units to three units would reduce expected per acre value by $7,453. A reduction by two density units, from 4 to 2, would reduce per acre values by $16,707. - 7 - u14. TABLE 3 DISTRIBUTION OF pun DENSITY Collier County 1981 to 1998 Density An Pre' 92 Post '92 Under 1 10 5 5 1 to 2 12 3 9 2 to 3 29 9 20 3 t04 32 13 19 Over 4 41 22 19 A verage Density 3.23 3.43 3.08 Source: Collier County Department of Community Development, Nov. 11,1998. The above estimates are based upon the assumption that the full four units of density are available for use by property owners/developers. Collier County data suggest that this assumption may not be accurate, at least in all instances. Table 3 above shows PUD densities for different time periods. Looking at all residential PUDs approved by the County, the average density approved is 3.23 units per (gross) acre. However, earlier PUDs tended toward higher density while later projects have been lower. The market, Collier County land regulatory policies, or both, have resulted in a decline in the density of residential developments. These data would suggest that the actual value of a fourth unit of density may be less than the $7,453 estimated and the value of the third and fourth units would be less than S 16,707.3 Nevertheless, this analysis will utilize these higher figures so that there is minimal chance for an understatement of impact or cost. The conclusions reached from this analysis of land sales data are: First, there may be little economic incentive to move density from 3 to 4 units to the acre. It appears that a combination of market demand together with physical and regulatory limitations result in a preferred density in the general area of three units to the acre. If this is the case, there would be little incentive to go from three to four units per acre if such an option were available. Second, there appears to be a substantial incentive for developers to increase from two to three units per acre. 3 If market gross density is 3.08 units per acre rather than 4, the reduced values from a maximum but unused 4 to 3 would result in a decline of only $52 per acre. Additionally, the value of a reduction from a theoretical 4, but a practical 3.08 density to 2, would result in a reduced per acre value of$9,903 rather than $16,707. - 8 - IS: BACKGROUND LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS TH EBERT J. HARRIS, JR, PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS PROTECTION ACT In 1995, the Florida legislature enacted the Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Protection Act ("Act"), FLA. STAT. 9 70.001 (1995). The Act created a new statutory cause of action that does not rely on a traditional constitutional takings claim. The Act, 9 70.001 (2), states that: When a specific action of a governmental entity has inordinately burdened an existing use of real property or a vested right to a specific use of real property, the property owner of the real property is entitled to relief, which may include compensation for the actual loss to the fair market value of the real property caused by the action of the government. .. (emphasis added). The Act defines two types of "existing uses" of property, including: (1) "an actual, present use or activity on the real property," or (2) "reasonably foreseeable, nonspeculative land uses which are suitable for the subject real property and compatible with adjacent land uses and which have created an existing fair market value in the property greater than the fair market value of the actual, present use or activity on the real property." FLA. STAT. 9 70.001 (3)(b). To date, there is little judicial guidance for interpreting the definition of the second type of existing uses. General guidance on the scope of uses that may be included in the second category of existing uses is offered by the language of the Act and by terms related to property valuation that are frequently considered by the Florida courts in the context of eminent domain cases. In addition, terms such as the "suitability" of a property for a particular use or the "compatibility" of a use with adjacent land uses, are factors often considered in making zoning and development permitting decisions. These factors relate to the physical characteristics of a particular site and the physical feasibility and desirabilityoflocating a particular use on a site. The interpretation of the term "reasonably foreseeable, nonspeculative land uses," used in the definition of the second category of existing uses, is critical to determining the scope of uses contained within this category. Issues related to the use of this term are the types of issues that frequently arise when valuing property and are commonly considered by the courts in Florida eminent domain cases. See Broward County v. Patel, 641 So.2d 40 (Fla. 1994). The measure of compensation in eminent domain cases is based on the fair market value of a property. Factors considered in determining fair market value include: the uses for which the land is suited, including the present use or the highest and best use; the existing use restrictions and the reasonable probability of a change in those restrictions; and the period of time within which such sale could reasonably be effectuated.4 Therefore, in determining the present market value of property, the highest and best use of the property must be determined based on the physical suitability of the property and existing use restrictions or changes in use restrictions that have a demonstrated "reasonable probability" (in addition to other factors such as financial feasibility and market support). The term "use restriction," in this context, is broadly defined to encompass not only zoning restrictions on types of 4 See generally 4, Julius L. Sackman, Nichols' The Law of Eminent Domain, ~ 12.02[1] (rev. 3d ed. 1998) (emphasis added). - 9 - / (P. land uses, but also zoning restrictions on intensity of use and density, and in some instances has been interpreted to include use restrictions other than zoning. In eminent domain cases, the burden is on a landowner to introduce evidence to support a finding that there is a "reasonable probability" of a change in a use restriction within the reasonably foreseeable future. The court may make an initial detennination whether the likelihood is sufficient to have an appreciable influence on the present market value of the property.s Even when a court detennines that the factual evidence of a reasonable probability of a change in a use restriction may be considered, this probability is viewed as a future contingency. not a certainty. The future contingency is relevant only to the extent that a knowledgeable buyer would consider this future contingency in deciding the fair market value for a property. Patel. 641 So.2d at 42. Thus, the detennination of a "reasonably foreseeable, nonspeculative land use" under the Act. would involve an analysis similar to the valuation analysis often followed in eminent domain cases. The Act provides that awards of compensation should be detennined by "calculating the difference in the fair market value ofthe real property, as it existed at the time of the governmental action at issue, as though the owner had the ability to attain the reasonable investment backed expectation or was not left with uses that are unreasonable, whichever the case may be, and the fair market value of the real property, as it existed at the time of the governmental action, as inordinately burdened." FLA. STAT. S 70.001 (6)(b) (emphasis added). This calculation attempts to quantify the change in fair market value attributed to the government action changing the use restrictions on the property. A claim brought pursuant to the Act must be based on an appraisal that calculates this difference in fair market value before and after the government action. In calculating the fair market value before the government action, the definition of "existing uses" considers uses that have created "an existing fair market value in the property greater than the fair market value of the actual, present use or activity on the real property." FLA. STAT. S 70.00I(3)(b). This language, although not clearly stated, appears to be designed to ensure that the tenn "existing uses" encompasses not merely the actual present use of the property, but also the "highest and best use" of a property. Moreover, the calculation of the fair market value before the government action is based on the explicitly stated assumption that the property be valued"... as though the owner had the ability to attain the reasonable investment backed expectation or was not left with uses that are unreasonable, whichever the case may be." FLA. STAT. S 70.001 (6)(b). This language would seem to confinn that the fair market value of the property before the government action should based on the highest and best use of the property, the detennination of which could include consideration of a reasonable probability of a change in use restriction. Therefore, claims under the Act will be detennined based on a fair market value prior to the government action that considers not only the actual existing use, but also the highest and best use of the property. This highest and best use. however, should be detennined based not only on consideration oflegally allowable uses, but also physically and financially feasible, market supported uses. The stated assumptions of the appraisal used to support a claim under the Act, therefore, have a major influence on the detennination of value. If appraisals are based on unsupported assumptions that the maximum densities pennitted under existing zoning are otherwise feasible. then the potential could exist for before values of property to be S !d. at ~ 12C.03[2]. - 10 - /7. artificially inflated. The valuation analysis should consider other factors such as: whether the site could physically accommodate the zoned density; whether the market supported such a development; and whether such a project was financially feasible. In interpreting the meaning of the second type of "existing uses" defined in the Act, the question arises as to whether future land uses designated in the Comprehensive Plan may be considered "existing uses" protected under the Act. In other words, could a landowner successfully argue that the provisions of a future land use element of a comprehensive plan create "reasonably foreseeable, nonspeculative" existing uses? A landowner could argue that because Florida law requires zoning to be consistent with the comprehensive plan, that uses (defined to include intensity of use and densities) set forth in a comprehensive plan are "existing uses" for purposes of the Act. A landowner could potentially make this argument even if the zoning regulations allowed the use only as a conditional or specially permitted use. Similar to the "reasonable probability" approach to valuation used in eminent domain cases, a landowner could argue that a change in a comprehensive plan designation creates a reasonable probability of a change in zoning and, therefore, a "reasonably, foreseeable" land use. For example, if a comprehensive plan was changed to provide for future reductions in allowable densities within an area, the appraised fair market value after the plan change may be reduced, based on a reasonable probability of a downzoning in the reasonably foreseeable future. However, Florida law is clear that it is the actual zoning that leads to the creation of reasonably foreseeable, nonspeculative uses. Unlike the comprehensive planning process, it is the zoning and permitting process that makes determinations based on factors such as suitability and consistency, on a site specific basis. The Florida Supreme Court recognized this distinction in Board of County Commissioners...... Snyder, 627 So.2d 469, 475 (Fla. 1993), when it stated that "[a] comprehensive plan only establishes a long-range maximum limit on the possible intensity of land use.... The present use ofland may, by zoning ordinance, continue to be more limited than the future use contemplated by the comprehensive plan. " This distinction is also important in determining when the government's action contemplated under the Act, is sufficiently "specific" to give rise to a claim for compensation. This question is discussed below. REQUIRED WRITTEN SETTLEMENT OFFER BY GOVERNMENT The Act provides that not less than 180 days prior to filing an action against a governmental entity, a property owner who seeks compensation must present the claim in writing to the head of the governmental entity. The property owner must submit, along with the claim, a bona fide, valid appraisal that supports the claim and demonstrates the loss in fair market value to the real property. During the ISO-day notice period, unless extended by agreement of the parties, the governmental entity must make a written settlement offer to effectuate: (1) An adjustment ofland development or permit standards or other provisions controlling the development or use ofland. (2) Increases or modifications in the density, intensity, or use of areas of development. (3) The transfer of developmental rights. - 11 - /2. (4) Land swaps or exchanges. (5) Mitigation, including payments in lieu of onsite mitigation. (6) Location on the least sensitive portion ofthe property. (7) Conditioning the amount of development or use permitted. (8) A requirement that issues be addressed on a more comprehensive basis than a single proposed use or development. (9) Issuance of the development order, a variance, special exception, or other extraordinary relief (10) Purchase of real property, or an interest therein, by an appropriate governmental entity. FLA. STAT. 9 70.000I(4)(a). As discussed below, these required settlement provisions are particularly relevant to the proposed Density Reduction Amendments and how they should be structured. This questions is discussed below. TIMING OF CLAIM UNDER THE ACT Florida case law supports an interpretation of the definition of "existing use" that recognizes the distinction between planning and zoning and bases the determination of "existing uses" on zoning, rather than actions such as amendments to comprehensive plans. In Florida, amendments to comprehensive plans are considered to be legislative policy decisions. Martin County v. Yusem, 690 So.2d 1288, 1293 (Fla. 1997). While the Florida Supreme Court in Snyder, found that rezonings of a limited scope may be considered "quasi-judicial decisions" subject to review under a "strict scrutiny" standard, the Court left uncertain whether amendments to comprehensive plans could similarly be considered to be "quasi-judicial" decisions. Snyder, 627 So.2d at 475. The Court answered this question in Yusem, finding that decisions regarding comprehensive plans are policy decisions that provide for gradual and ordered future growth, and as such, should be considered to be legislative decisions. Yusem, 690 So.2d at 1293. The rationale of the court in Yusem lends support to the argument that amendments to comprehensive plans, as legislative policy decisions, are not the type of decisions that directly limit or restrict the use of a specific property, but rather are broader policy decisions that should be given greater deference by the court. Moreover, Yusem also supports an interpretation of the definition of "existing use" which recognizes the distinctions between planning and zoning and looks to existing uses under zoning rather than relying on comprehensi ve plan elements to determine "existing use." This interpretation is further supported by an opinion of the Florida Attorney General, Fla. AGO 95-78, which recognized that the plain language of the statute requires that real property be "directly affected" by a government action. The Attorney General's opinion emphasized that the provisions of the Act are tied to a specific parcel, where a government action is directed at a separate, specific parcel of real property. This language is similar to the language the court in Yusem used to distinguish quasi-judicial - 12 - I (j. actions governing specific parcels, from broader legislative planning decisions. Similarly, recent decisions of the Florida circuit courts appear to concur that claims under the Act arise from the application of an ordinance to a specific parcel of real property, not from the policy decision of enacting the ordinance. See Holy Trinity Church v. City o/West Palm Beach, BH-97-50-04;First Church o/Christ Scientist v. City o/West Palm Beach, BH-97-50-05. The foregoing analysis leads to the general conclusion that it is not the proposed Density Reduction Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that themselves could trigger a claim under the Act. Rather, it would be the County's decision on a specific development application to apply the density limitation, consistent with the Plan amendments. We now turn to the key elements of the proposed Density Reduction Amendments and evaluate their viability from economic and legal perspectives. Ev ALUA TION OF PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS The key elements of the Board's proposed Density Reduction Amendments are (1) in the Urban Designation to amend the Density Rating System to (a) reduce the maximum cap from 4 to 3 residential units per acre on agriculturally zoned properties 200 acres or more in size where the properties are either underutilized or in agricultural use, allowing the density to go back up to 4 units per acre where a TND is proposed; (b) reduce the Density Band around Activity Centers from 3 to 2 units; (c) reduce th~ density bonus from 3 to 2 units for Residential Infill, and (2) in the Agricultural/RuralDesignation to reduce the density from 1 unit per 5 acres to 1 unit per 20 acres. URBAN AREAS Reduce /~la.rimum Cap From 4 to 3 Units Under the Density Rating System for Properties 200 Acres or More and in Agricultural Use or Underutilized The economic analysis discussed above indicates that the loss of the one unit of density under the Density Rating System for the Urban Designation area could have an economic impact of$7,453 per acre. Although the economic analysis also indicates that there may be little economic incentive in the Collier County urban land market to move density from 3 to 4 units to the acre, from an appraisal standpoint, the loss of value could give rise to a potential claim under the BertJ. Harris, Jr., Act, particularly since the method proposed for recouping the lost unit of density is through TND development. From our review of the Collier County urban land market, we believe that TND, at least the neo-traditional concept, is relatively untested in this market and that it would be unwise to base traffic reduction so heavily upon this design concept. In addition, according to calculations made by staff of the Community Development and Environmental Services Division, as set forth in Table 4 below, the density reduction based upon the 200 acre threshold would result in a reduction of only 1,706 units. Consequently, the proposed policy would accomplish little in the way of actual density reduction or incentive to develop in ways that reduce traffic impact, and yet could give rise to a potential claim under the Bert 1. Harris, Jr., Act. - I3- e?o~ TABLE 4 BCC RECOMMENDED POLICY PROPERTIES ~200 ACRES IN COASTAL URBAN AREA ZONED A, RURAL AGRICULTURAL # S T R Legal Desc. Notes Acres Reduction of Potential DU (4 to 3 DUrA Base Density) 1 7 48 26 Parcel 1 2670' x 3100' plus 2550' x 3780' 411 411 2 16 48 26 Parcel 1 autocad measurement 673 673 3 23 48 26 Parcell 662 (autocad) less A/C acs. 622 622 Sum 1,706 1,706 Notes: I. Individual parcels ~200 acres - does not account Sources: J. 1998 tax maps. for aggregation of small parcels under same 2. Current zoning maps. ownership. 3. Autocad map of "A" properties in coastal urban area. 2. Excludes Urban Residential Fringe as that area is 4. Countywide Future Land Use Map. limited to 1.5 dula - not subject to Density Rating System. 3. Unless indicated as autocad measurement, parcel dimensions/acreage figures are from scaled measurements on zoning maps. 4. AJC = Activity Center. Reduce Density Band and Bonus for Residential/nlill For the same reasons discussed above, the reduction in density in the Density Band around Activity Centers and in the bonus for Residential Intill, creates a moderate risk for a claim being brought under the Bert 1. Harris, Jr., Act. However, unlike the potential impacts of changes in base density, it is not possible to directly measure potential impact of changes in the bonuses. Give the law of diminishing returns, any impact would be less than $3,000 per unit. The precise impact, and extent of potential legal risk, would be a function of the base density upon which the bonus density is to be added. As discussed below, we recommend that the reduction in the maximum density in the Bands around Activity Centers be coupled with the opportunity to regain the density in exchange for satisfying County policies directed at reducing traffic impact and preserving agricultural and natural resource areas. We also recommend against reducing the bonus for Residential Intil!. Other Density Reduction Elements The other elements of the proposed Density Reduction Amendments for Urban Areas are (1) to reduce the maximum residential density in Activity Centers from 16 to 12 units; (2) to reduce the Affordable Housing Bonus from 8 units to 5 or 6 units; and (3) to keep the bonus for providing a collector between two arterials. As a practical matter, there are relatively few parcels in the Activity Centers that are likely to be developed for residential use. The proposed policy will, therefore, have little impact economically. Reduction of the Affordable Housing Bonus would not be consistent with state policy and would not achieve any significant reduction in density. The current density bonus for a development that is located on two arterial or collector roads should be revised to require construction of a collector or arterial between the two roads (arterials or collectors). This proposed revision is consistent with the policy objective of providing roadway interconnections in order to reduce traffic congestion. - ]4 - _':::<L! RURAL AREAS (EAST OF GOLDEN ESTATES) Reduce Density From 1:5 A cres to 1:20 Acres Economic analysis of the principal density reduction element proposed for the AgriculturaVRural Designation, a reduction in density from 1:5 acres to 1 :20 acres, indicates that the density reduction would not have a significant economic effect and hence would give rise to a minor risk under the Bert 1. Harris, Jr., Act. Generally, agricultural lands carry prices that reflect the value of the land for agricultural proposes plus whatever development value the land may have acquired. It is the latter value that is potentially affected by the density reduction. Agricultural/rurallands sold in some reasonable proximity to the urban area have sold at base prices of$3,069 per acre, $767 of which is estimated to reflect developmental value.6 For those agricultural properties in sufficient proximity to the urban area to have acquired developmental value, this density reduction would greatly reduce that developmental value, perhaps even eliminatingit.7 A development value of$737 per acre was estimated from rural land sales in the western part ofthe rural area. This is an average figure for those properties. As discussed below, it would be expected that development value would decrease with distance from the urban area and that such decreases would be exponential with respect to distance. The existing developmental parameters of rural properties adjacent to the urban boundary are not proposed by the County to be changed, so there could be no adverse effects on value of those properties. The difficulty in projecting value impact results from the estimate of developmental value being taken from properties that are both near the urban area and exempt from the changes.8 Best available data together with experiences elsewhere suggest that average developmental value per acre would go from $767 for rural properties near the urban area to $300 per acre for those remote from the urban area. Available data will not allow the estimation of the rate of decline with respect to distance. Given that the near properties are exempt, the average decline should be approximately $300 per acre.9 On average, this would represent an average diminution of 10%. For this reason, generally speaking, the risk of a significant claim being brought under the Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Protection Act is relatively minor. However, there could be individual circumstances where the diminution could be greater than 10%, which in such individual circumstances, could strengthen a potential claim under the Act. Reduce Conservation Lands Density From 1:5 Acres to 1:20 Acres No sales of conservation lands were included in the analysis summarized in Appendix C. Examination of the Collier County Property Assessor's data indicate that these conservation lands have an average fair market value assessment of $1 ,09710. This figure may be somewhat low given the difficulty of establishing estimated market values of properties that are thought not to be developable. However, 6 See Table 1 1, Development Values. These estimates are derived from the analysis discussed in Appendix C. 7 Proximity is not to be interpreted as adjacency. g There were insufficient sales of remote rural lands in order to derive any conclusions. 9 This figure is derived by calculating the root mean square of the difference between $767 and $300. This results in a higher weight being assigned to the properties with more developmental value. 10 See Table 7. ~ 15 ~ ,..1 ~"- experience has shown that virtually all land will acquire some developmental value. The $767 value per acre discussed above is for rural lands in proximity to the urban area. All properties included in the sample are thought to have some developmental value incorporated into the sales prices. Without a firm empirical basis, any estimate of changes in market value will have to be judgmental. Based upon the Collier County data analyzed and experience in similar situations elsewhere, a reasonable estimate for average developmental value per acre would be $300. As with agricultural, conservation or preservation lands closer to the urban area should possess higher developmental values than those more remote from the urban area. Unlike agricultural lands, the $300 per acre value will be accepted for all conservation! preservation parcels regardless of location. Given an average estimated market value of $1,097, the $300 diminution would be approximately 30%. In dealing with lands such as these, it can be difficult to assess developmental values. The market will always assign some developmental value to a property, regardless of how speculative. However, from any other perspective it may well be that the property has no actual developmental potential. Weare then faced with a conflict between a developmental value that the market may assign and the actual developmental potential of the property. If the conservation lands in question had no actual developmental potential before, changing the developmental density should have no effect, certainly not on the actual developmental potential. There was none before and there is none after. However, the market may well reduce any perceived developmental values. There is no known resolution to this conundrum. For purposes of this analysis, it is recomme1'lded that Collier County utilize the 30% diminution even though it may be an overstatement, especially for those properties with no developmental potential. Other Density Reduction Elements Other elements of the Board's proposed Density Reduction Amendments in Rural Areas are to . Retain the density of 1:5 acres within one mile ofmajorroad corridors; . Retain the density of 1:5 acres west of Golden Gate Estates; and . Establish an Immokalee TDR receiving area. We do not recommend retaining the density of 1:5 acres within one mile of major road corridors for two reasons. First, a density of 1: 5 acres within one mile of such corridors will only encourage sprawl. Second, our analysis of the Collier County land market indicates that there is little if any market for land at 1:5 acres within the one mile areas along major road corridors. As discussed below, we recommend a lo.wer density for these areas. We concur with the Board's proposed policy of retaining the density of 1:5 acres west of Golden Gate Estates since these properties are selling at prices that reflect relatively high development values and of the likelihood of the property owners having investment-backed expectations in the existing 1:5 density regulation. Additionally, it is clear that there is a market for this type of development. With respect to the desire to establish Immokalee as a IDR receiving area, we recommend that a formal TDR program not be implemented for Immokalee. Within the Immokaleeurban area there appears to be ample subdivided land at market or above market densities thus there would be little if any economic incentive to increase densities. Additionally, the pace of development in lmmokalee is not conducive to an active TDR market. We would recommend that owners of rural propertiesnorth of - 16 - d3~_ lmmokalee be allowed to be cluster their available units in the general area ofImmokalee. While there appears to be little demand for this type of program at this time, conditions can and will change and demand could arise. Additionally, there is virtually no negative to the area or to the County from allowing an lmmokalee cluster option. The current density bonus for a development that is located on two arterial or collector roads should be revised to require construction of a collector or arterial between the two roads (arterials or collectors). This proposed revision is consistent with the policy objective of providing roadway interconnections in order to reduce traffic congestion. RECOMMENDED ADJUSTMENTS TO COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS ECONOMIC AND LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS The legal implications under the Bert 1. Harris, Jr., Act ofthe Board's proposed Density Reduction Amendments depend upon the impact on investment-backed expectations of implementing the proposed amendments. For this reason, the following conclusions reached from the analysis ofland sales data are important to understanding the rationale for the policy adjustments recommended in this report. These are: First, as summarized in Table 2 above, it is estimated that the reduction of density from 4 to 3 units would reduce the value per acre of agricultural and underutilized parcels in the Urban Area by $7,453 per acre. Second, it appears that a combination of market demand together with physical and regulatory limitations result in a preferred density in the general area of three units to the acre. Consequently, if the option to go from three units to four units per acre were available, there would be little incentive to do so. Third, there appears to be a substantial incentive for developers to increase density from two to three units per acre. Fourth, there is an insufficient number of parcels 200 acres or more in the Urban Area to make 200 acres a meaningful threshold for the application of the density reduction. The sales data findings and the requirement under the Bert 1. Harris, Jf., Act that the government propose a means of settlement to the property owner who presents a claim under the Act for loss of fair market value, are the economic and legal basis for the following recommended adjustments to the Board's proposed policies. RECOJ\1;\-IENDEDADJUSTMENTS TO PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS The adjustments to the Density Reduction Amendments proposed by the Board of County Commissioners are summarized in the Chart on the following page that compares the Board's policies with the Consultants' recommended policies. See Table 5. - 17- d<i - COLLIER COl Proposed Comprehensive j Board of County Commissioners Policy URBAN AREAS Residential Density Rating System Reduce density from 4 to 3 units for prope~es200acffisormoffi Density Band Reduce maximum density of bands around activity centers from 3 to 2 units Activity Centers Reduce maximum density in activity centers from 16 to 12 units Roadway Access Bonus Provide 1 bonus unit for providing a collector between 2 arterials Affordable Housing Bonus Reduce bonus from 8 units to 5 or 6 units Residential Infill Reduce bonus from 3 to 2 units RURAL AREAS Reduce agricultural density from 1 :5 acs to 1 :20 acs Reduce conservation density from 1 :5 acs to 1 :20 acs Reduce Camp Keais Strand, Okloacoochee Slough, and CREW Acquisition Areas density from 1:5 acs to 1 :20 acs Retain 1:5 acs within one mile of major road corridors West of Golden Gate Estates: Retain density of 1:5 acs Establish an Immokalee TOR receiving area c:< 5. - .-.. These adjustments reflect the following principles: First, in order to achieve a meaningful reduction in density, the reduction must be set below the average density found in the Collier County urban land market. Second, in order to mitigate against a potential claim under the Bert J. Harris, Jr., Act, the County policy should provide a property owner with a realistic means to increase density above the new limit under the Density Rating System in a manner that supports County planning policies to reduce traffic impact and achieve other objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Third, County planning policies to achieve reduction of traffic impact should provide flexibility through the use of performance standards rather than any particular design concept. Fourth, the proposed Density Reduction Amendments, as revised, will have some fiscal impact on the County, albeit relatively small. REDUCTION IN DENSITY FROM 4 TO 2 UNITS PER ACRE WITH 50 ACRE THRESHOLD It is recommended that the Board adopt an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would reduce the maximum cap in the Density Rating System in the Urban Designation Area from 4 units to 2 units for properties 50 acres or more. On the following page, Figure 5, prepared by the Community Development and Environmental Services Division, indicates the number of parcels that fall within this acreage threshold. The total acreage is 3,447 acres. Staff estimates indicate that a reduction ofthe density to 2 units per acre will result in a reduction of 6,894 dwelling units. See Table 6 below. .- TABLE 6 EFFECT OF RECOlVDIENDED ADJUSTMENTS TO DENSITY REDUCTION ~"lENDMENTS POTENTIAL DWELLING UNIT REDUCTIONS RURAL AREA Number of DwelIing Units (EAST OF GOLDEN GATE ESTATES) Acreage 1 per 5 acres 1 per 20 acres 1 per 40 acres Conservation 763,994 152,799 38,200 19,100 Agriculture 107,168 21,434 5,358 5,358 Wetlands (OkaIoacoocheeSIough, Camp Keais, 109,836 21,967 5,492 2,746 etc.) Total 980,998 196,200 49,050 27,204 Reduction of Potential Dwelling Units -147,150 -168,996 COASTAL URBAN AREA DENSITY RA TING SYSTEM PROVISION Number of Dwelling Units Density Band (3-2) 8,919 Activity Center (16-12) 2,286 Base Density for >50 ac. "A" parcels (4 to 2) 6,894 Residential InfiIl (3 to 2) 0 Total 18,171 Notes: I. Conservation, CREW Trust, and NRPA west ofGGE excluded - except Picayune Strand State Forest acres included ("f' lands in TAZ 197, 197.], ]97.2, 197.3). 2. Density Band & Activity Center acres reflect Urban Area Build-Out Study assumptions. - 19 - 02..te.~ 26 R 28 -,- ;; AGRICULTURAL PARCELS SO ACRES OR lARGER QUE D - ~ " 1 ,~ ';--; "Tj o ~ r~ \7j ',x', <': o 7 i r -::'00 ~ "'..IND I J 'UD III o "'=" rl..... CUIl~ ~-:. . ~ - .- 1."- .._- .-. .--~ PREPJ,llfOllY: ~~CS~i'KlTEOl"'IC.l'>Up<lORTSEcnClN COIAfIJNITY OCIlUOf'I.IENT jlJ<jO E,..\lPONIl[NTAl SE~\jlcrS OIVlSlClN (lATE. '/199'9 FUe E"'G~-17.D'/JG I PLOT, .o.UTOCAO '" .. .... ... '" en ... ... '" CD ... ... '" ;;; ... d1 METHODS TO INCREASE DENSITY PerformanceStandards In the Urban Area, a property owner/developerwould be able to increase density from 2 units to 3 units through design of a development proj ect that satisfied performance standards based upon Travel Demand Management techniques. Under these performance standards, a project would have to employ one or more of the following techniques to qualify for the additional unit of density. Interconnection . Increased number of connections to the arterial or collector system based on the number of dwelling units in a project. . Provide public access through projects which connect with arterial or collector road network. . Provide vehicular interconnection from commercial projects to residential projects. . Provide a mixture of uses, internally accessible to the development which include: personal service commercial, employment opportunities; home occupations; schools; parks and recreational uses; churches; and institutional uses. Access Management . Limitation and locational restrictions on the number of access points in conjunction with the access control policy (already required by Access Control Policy). . Provide for shared access between projects. . Provide for frontage roads or bypass roads around an intersection. . Construction of a new collector or arterial which connects to other collector or arterial roadways. Bikepaths/Sidewalks . Construction or payment in lieu for an identified pathway in the Comprehensive Pathway Plan. . Provide a Pathway Plan within the development as part of the rezoning criteria. The above techniques were developed in preliminary form by staff and will undergo further refinement if this recommended approach to performance standards is adopted by the Board. - 21 - .....d 8~.__ Presen'ationof Agricultural Use or Natural ResourceArea In order to qualify for the fourth unit of density, the property owner/developerwould need to negotiate and purchase a conservation easement that either preserved agricultural land in agricultural use or preserved natural resource areas. This type of transaction would be done through a private informal process-not a formal, institutionalizedprocess established by the County. The amount of acreage required to be preserved or "quieted" through this informal transaction process (development transfer ratio) would be established by the County based upon the market values. These transfer ratios are discussed below, DEVELOPMENTTRANSFER RATIOS It is recommended that development rights severed from agricultural property be allowed at a ratio of 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres ofland. This is the existing zoning and is also the basis for the land to unit ratio. In recognition of conservation lands having lower market prices and development values than ' agricultural, it is recommended that severable development rights be available at a ratio of 1 to 8.5 acres. The basis for the recommended ratio of 1 to 8.5 acres is set out in the economic analysis below. Because it cannot be known if agricultural and conservation lands property owners will be willing to sell conservation easements at economically feasible prices, the Country should closely monitor easement availability and schedule a review ofthe matter 12 months after adoption. If easements are not available at economically feasible prices, corrective actions should be taken. ECOl"OMIC AND LEGAL Ev ALUA nON OF RECOMMENDED DENSITY REDUCTION A..:\clENDMENTS The following is an assessment ofthe fiscal impact and legal defensibility of the key elements of the Oensi ty Reduction Amendments if revised in the manner recommended by this report. FISCAL IMPACT The taxation of real property is an important source of revenue to Collier County, the School Board and other taxing jurisdictions. Inasmuch as the proposed density changes are presumed to effect land values, it follows that there could be fiscal impacts also. There are three general categories of property potentially affected: . Properties within the urban area that are 50 acres or greater that will have their base density reduced from 4 to 2 units to the acre, with the possibility of restoring that density; . Agriculturally zoned properties outside of the urban area that are in agricultural production and are to be reduced in density from 1 unit per 5 acres to one unit per 20 acres; and . Properties outside of the urban area this are designated as conservation in the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and are to be reduced in density from 1 unit per 5 acres to 1 unit per 40 acres. - 22- ~q. The following analysis addresses the potential fiscal impact of these changes and their impact on housing cost in the County. Urban Area It is unlikely that there will be any observable effect of the density changes on the taxable value of reduced base densities of properties. The bases for this judgment are: . Urban area developments are not using the 4 units to the acre density presently available, thus the market could not capitalize a value for something that is not being used; . The presumption herein is that any observable impact of the base density reductions will be passed forward to ultimate buyers or renters; . The availability options to restore lost density and thus to restore value, albeit at a cost; and . Agriculturally zoned property within the urban area is unlikely to be assessed for tax purposes at values that would be sensitive to the proposed density reductions. However, and not withstanding the above, it will be assumed that each acre of urban area land subjected to a base density reduction will decline $2,500 in taxable value. In the summary table there are two impact columns. The first is the estimated fiscal impact with a threshold of 50 acres and the second is with a threshold of200 acres. Rural Area Very large portions of eastern Collier County are proposed to have density reductions from the existing 1 unit per 5 acres. Agricultural properties are proposed to be reduced to 1 unit per 20 acres and resource conservation areas are to go to 1 to 40 acres. The potential effects of these changes on the Collier County tax base and thus also on receipts are of importance and are set out below, Appendix B sets out the detail of the rural area taxable values calculations. Table 7 summarizes those data. Two possible values for agricultural lands are set out. The first is the weighted average for all agriculturally classified properties. The second excluded groves from this average. The reason for calculating an average exclusive of groves is that citrus groves are taken to be fundamentally different from other agricultural lands and basically immune from development pressures and values. TABLE 7 RURAL AREA TAXABLE VALUES COLLIER COUNTY Including Groves Excluding Groves Agricultural Property: Weighted Taxable Value per Acre $859.71 $285.67 Rural Non-Agricultural Property: Weighted Value per Acre $1,097.26 $1,097.26 Source: Appendix B. - 23 - JO. Rural developmental values of $767 per acre have been estimated above. Of course, that datum would apply to only to rural properties with sufficient proximity to the urban area to have acquired developmental value. It is clear by observation of a map that most of the relevant rural properties are substantially removed from the urban area and thus would have negligible development value. For the purposes if this review, it will be assumed that 25% of rural properties will be effect by a change in development value. Table 8 on the following page sets ofthe estimated fiscal impact of the density reductions. Under the assumptions relevant to this estimate, the potential loss of tax base may be as high as $28 to $32 million. This could be a reduction of 0.14%. The relevant assumptions are: . That urban properties will decline in taxable value by $2,500 per acre; . That the decline in developmental value would apply to 25% of all rural properties; and . That citrus grove taxable values will react to density reductions. Agriculturallyused lands are given assessed and taxable values that are based upon their agricultural and not their market values. The density reductions will not effect agricultural use values. However, in an abundance of caution, it will be assumed that taxable values for agricultural lands will decline by 10%. Table 9 retains the urban area decline of $2,500 per acre by excluding citrus groves from the rural area calculations. If citrus lands, including groves, are excluded, potential decline in the tax base would amount to $25 to $30 million, 0.12%. This view does not adjust agricultural values from $285 per acre. It is thought that there is no developmental value included in this amount. - 24- 3/. TABLE 8 TAX BASE & FISCAL IMP ACT OF DENSITY REDUCTIONS IN COLLIER COUNTY At 50 Acre At 200 Acre Threshold Threshold Total Taxable Value - (a) $21,342,594,299 $21,342,594,299 Tax Rates Per $1,000 of Taxable Value - (a) County - Total $3.551 $3.551 School Board - Total $8.510 $8.510 All Others $0.603 $0.603 Total $12.664 $12.664 Urban Area Impact: Acres Impacted - (a) 3,447 1,706 Possib I e Impact Per Acre - (c) $2,500 $2,500 Potential Decline in Taxable Value $8,617,500 $4,265,000 Rural Area Impact: Agricul tura1 Areas; Acres Impacted - (d) 111,344 111 ,344 Existing Taxable Value per Acre - (e) $860 $860 Post Taxable Value per Acre $774 $774 Portion of Properties Effected 25.0% 25.0% Potential Decline in Taxable Value $2,393,089 $2,393,089 Resource Conservation Areas; Acres Impacted - (d) 111,988 111,988 Existing Taxable Value per Acre - (e) $ I ,097 $1,097 Post Taxable Value per Acre $797 $797 Portion of Properties Effected 25.0% 25.0% Potential Decline in Taxable Value $8,399,100 $8,399,100 Change in Taxable Values $19,409,689 $15,057,189 Per Ceot 0.09% 0.07% Change In Tax Receipts $245,810 $190,689 Sources: (a) Collier County Property Appraiser, "Recapitulation of Taxes - 1998." (b) Collier County Community Development and Environmental Services Div., Jan 4, 1999. (c) Table 4. (d) Collier County Community Development and Environmental Services Div., Jan 5, 1999. (e) Appendix 8. - 25 - .~;;. TABLE 9 TAX BASE & FISCAL IMP ACT OF DENSITY REDUCTIONS EXCLUDING GROVE LAND IN COLLIER COUNTY At 50 Acre At 200 Acre Threshold Threshold Total Taxable Value - (a) $21,342,594,299 $21,342,594,299 Tax Rates Per $1,000 of Taxable Value - (a) County - Total $3.551 $3.551 School Board - Total $8.510 $8.510 All Others $0.603 $0.603 Total $12.664 $12.664 Urban Area Impact: Acres Impacted - (a) 3,447 1,706 Possible Impact Per Acre - (c) $2,500 $2,500 Potential Decline in Taxable Value $8,617,500 $4,265,000 Rural Area Impact: Agricultural Areas; Acres Impacted - (d) III ,344 111 ,344 Existing Taxable Value per Acre - (e) $285 $285 Post Taxable Value per Acre $285 $285 Portion of all property effected 25.0% 25.0% Potential Decline in Taxable Value $0 $0 Resource Conservation Areas; Acres Impacted - (d) 111,988 111,988 Existing Taxable Value per Acre - (e) $1,097 $1,097 Post Taxable Value per Acre $330 $330 Portion of all property effected 25.0% 25.0% Potential Decline in Taxable Value $2 1,4 73,699 $21,473,699 Change in Taxable Values $30,091,199 $25,738,699 Per Cent 0.14% 0.12% Change In Tax Receipts $381,084 $325,963 Sources: See Table 5. The fiscal impact analysis sets out what could be argued to be a worst case scenario. This is an appropriate methodology because the purpose of an impact statement is to point out what might happen, not what the analysts thinks will happen. Given this approach, the potential fiscal impact of the density reductions could be as much as a $30 million decline in taxable values for a 0.15% decrease in total taxable values. POTE!"TIAL HOUSING COST IMPACT Land is an important cost component in the production of housing. As various land development parameters change, so also might the cost of housing change. The primary goal of the proposed - 26- .13. changes in urban densities is not to reduce developed densities as such. Rather, the goal is to lessen traffic impacts and also to enhance environmental and agricultural preservation. However, there should be costs associated with the lessening of traffic impacts and open space preservation. What are argued to be reasonable cost estimates are set out herein. Lessened Traffic Impacts The desired lessening of traffic impacts is expected to be achieved by several possible routes: . Onsite provision of certain types of destinations, principally commercial and office; . Interconnection of neighborhood streets to collector streets; . Provision of non-vehicular modes of transportation, specifically walkways and bikepaths; or . The use of the principles of Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) in planning developments. Undoubtedly there will be other means of achieving the desired ends than those listed above. The problem to be addressed is that with the current mode of development in Collier County, there is a need to use an automobile for most, ifnot all, local or neighborhood destinations together with funneling most, if not all, traffic onto arterial roads. The use ofTND is one means of addressing these concerns and also a means of restoring base density from two units to the gross acre to three units to the gross acre. However, TND is still a relatively new mode of development and it could be unwise to base the traffic reduction program solely on those design principles. The other means listed are all incorporated within TND, but they can be employed without going to a full TND type development. These other means are also routes to achieving densities beyond the base of two units to the acre. The first three means are the ones analyzed for purposes of the cost estimation set out below. Estimated costs associated with the above means of density increases are set out in Table 10 below. It is anticipated that the major cost increases will be in the type of streets to be constructed within the development and also in the provision of curbs and gutters. It is recognized that many developments already provide curbs and gutters and thus some overstatement of cost may occur. TABLE 10 DEVELOPMENT COST DIFFERENCE PER UNIT COST TYPE DEVELOPMENT TYPE Conventional Collier County Norm Street Pavement $2,383 $1,494 Curbs & Gutters $2,140 $0 TOTAL $4,523 $1,494 DIFFERENCE $3,029 Source: National Association of Home Builders, Cost Effective Site-Planning. Washington. 1976, p. ] ] 9. Note: The ] 976 data were brought to 1998 using the Consumers' Price Index (CPI). - 27- ___~3Lj._ __ Nevertheless, Table 10 would suggest that the cost impact of traffic lessening could be as high as $3,029 per dwelling unit. It should be kept in mind that many developments can comply with the traffic reduction policies with little if any change in development cost. However, it would be unwise to proceed on the assumption that there would not be development cost implications for the density reduction/restorationprogram. Open Space Preservation The second means of restoring density is by means of open space preservation. The open spaces to be preserved are agricultural and environmentally sensitive lands. These are the lands designated as agricultural or preservation on the Future Land Use Map of the Collier County Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is that property owners desirous of restoring the fourth unit of density within the urban area could do so by acquiring conservation easements for agricultural or conservation lands. The proposal is that any privately owned agricultural or conservation lands within Collier County would be suitable for open space preservation. A statistical analysis of Collier County real estate sales suggests generalized values for agricultural lands. These values are shown in Table 11 below. I I These data suggest a generalized market value of $3,069 per acre, $767 of which would be attributable to development value. Because the data are for rural land as a general category, it is not possible to differentiate among various subgroups or subareas. Moreover, conservation lands were not included in the sample. However, it would be expected that rural lands closer to the urban area would carry higher development values than those more remote. TABLE 11 DEVELOPMENTAL VALUES PROPERTY TYPE PER ACRE VALVES Total Development Agricultural $3,069 $767 Conservation $1,097 $300 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, January J 999 The expected pattern of development values are shown in Figure 6. The figure of$767 is the estimated average development value, per acre, of the rural properties included in the study. Closer properties should have higher values while more remote properties should have lower developmental values. The proposal is to allow conservation easements to be recorded for any privately ovvned agricultural or conservation land within the County. It would seem likely that the more remote properties would be the lower cost for development right removal. Certainly for some of the more remote properties the development value would approach zero. However, no logical property ovvner would record a conservation easement without some inducement, i.e., payment or some similar type of economic reward. The greatest economic reward would inure to ovvners of properties with the least II The land value estimation model is set out in Appendix B. For purposes of these estimates per acre values of "rural" lands were estimated at density of I unit to 5 acres. - 28- 1.5. development value. It would follow that the first properties to be so restricted would be the more remote and the development values of those properties would be the lowest. The immediate question here is just how low will development values go? DEVELOPMENTAL VALUE PER ACRE. Rura r Area La nd Distance to Urban Area Figure 6 Property that cannot be developed into some type of residential, commercial or industrial use has no real development value. However, the market always seems to attribute some development value, frequently very minor. Nevertheless, the market does ascribe some development value to all privately owned properties. An extensive study was done of the relationship of development value for developable verses non-developable(wetlands) by the New Jersey Pinelands Commission.]2 This study concluded that non-developable (wet) lands commended prices approximately 10% of the market value of comparably located developable (up) lands. Applying the same ratio here would result in an estimated development value for the most remote properties of $300 per acre. At a ratio of one unit increase per 8.5 acres preserved, the expected cost of increasing density would be $2,500 per unit. Thus it is recommended that a ratio of 8.5 to 1 be used for conservation lands and 5 to 1 be used for agricultural lands. Total Cost The estimated total cost of restoring density back to four units per acre is $5,500. This includes the estimated costs associated with modifying the development and also the costs associated with acquiring conservation easements. In many cases the costs will be less that these estimates. Nevertheless, such cost increases could occur. Whether housing cost changes are passed forward to the buyers or backwards to the landowners is a long-standing debate that will not be resolved herein. Suffice it to say that the ultimate incidence of cost changes is the result oflocalized market conditions. J:: See John E. Newman, "The Land Market in New Jersey's Pinelands" New Jersey Pinelands Commission (1967). - 29- ________~ ~ In _ ,- Because local market conditions frequently change, the incidence of cost changes also will change. This analysis will present full pass-through of costs to the ultimate buyer or renter. This full pass- through in not a prediction but an impact analysis. The purpose of this analysis is to ask "what if?" What would be the housing cost consequences if all of the costs per passed through in the form or higher prices or rents for housing? For this purpose a cost of $5,000 per unit will be used. See Table 12 below. TABLE 12 IMP ACT ON HOUSING COST OF RECOMMENDED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS RENTAL O\VNERSHIP Cost Increase per Unit $5,000 $5,000 Design Standards $2,500 $2,500 Monthly Cost $20 $15 Resource Conservation $2,500 $2,500 Monthly Cost $20 $15 TOTAL COST PER MONTH $40 $30 These calculations use an interest rate of 6% and amortize the amount over 30 years for ownership and 15 years for rental. If all of the costs discussed were to be incurred and also were to be passed through, the impact on housing costs would be $30 to $40 per month, $360 to $480 per year. Using the 25% housing cost role, the necessary income to afford housing would increase by $1,400 to $2,000. lEGAL 1;\IPLlCA TIONS As noted above in the discussion of the Bert 1. Harris, Jr., Act, it is significantthat the Act requires a written settlement offer from government upon being presented with a claim ofIoss offair market value due to government action. By structuring the density reduction so as to enable the property owner to regain the density through satisfaction of performance standards or consummation of a transaction with another property owner that results in preservation of agricultural land or natural resource conservation, the County would significantly reduce the potential risk for a claim being brought in the first place and, ifbrought, that the property owner would prevail. - 30- _~L APPENDIX A EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE COLLIER URBAN LAND MARKET The method employed herein to estimate the effects of density reductions is an analysis of actual land sales within Collier County. The actual sales used may be found at the end of this appendix. These sales are subjected to statistical analysis in order to derive insight into Collier County land economics. The analysis employed is multiple regression. This is a statistical technique that correlates one set of data, known as the dependent variable, with one or more independent variables. The objective is to test whether there is significant correlation between the dependent variable and the independent variables. The reliability of the model is measured by a statistic known as the Correlation Coefficient (or Coefficient of Multiple Determination)- R2. This is a percentage measure, although statistical convention does not convert it to an actual percentage but leaves it in decimal form. The Correlation Coefficient is calculated by contrasting the predicted (or estimated) value of dependent variables against the actual value of those variables. The extent to which the predicted values are consistent with the actual values, measured as a percent, is the R2. For this reason, this statistic is commonly known as "goodness of fit," meaning the extent to which the statistical explanation offered "fits" with the actual values observed. The higher the value ofR2, the better the fit. The R2 reported herein are adjusted for sample size and thus the notation is shown as "R2 Adj." Two other statistical measures are employed herein. The first is the T -Ratio. This ratio measures whether the coefficient of an individual independent variable is significantly different from zero. lfthe coefficient is significantly different from zero, then it is accepted that the independent variable effects the dependent variable in proportion to the magnitude of the coefficient. The correlation coefficient, R2, assesses the explanatory power or all independent variables collectively while the T-Ratio is relevant to each individual variable. For samples of the type analyzed, T-Ratios between 1.796 and 2.624 are required. The lower T -Ratio is associated with the 95% level of significance and the higher is 99%. T-Ratios are shown above each coefficient in parentheses. A quick rule-of-thumbis that a T- Ratio must be approximately2 before the independent variable can be accepted. Another measure is the F Statistic. The F Statistic assesses the degree of co-variation between the dependent and independent variables. For the type of data analyzed, F Statistics of 3.09 at 95% and 5.07 at 99% are required. The F-Statistic is an overall test of the multiple regression model. A total of three statistics are used: (1) R2 which measures the percent of variation in the dependent variable explained by the variation in the dependent variable(s); (2) T Ratio which measures whether an individual independent variable contributes to the explanation of the variation in the dependent variable; and (3) F Statistic which measures the degree of co-variation. Multiple regression is used to assess the factors that influence the value ofland sales. The items presumed to influence parcel sales price are: the number of acres within the parcel; the number of dwelling units authorized by existing zoning; the amenities available to the parcel, and whether the parcel is within the urban area. No other factors are given consideration. In the following sections the parcel sales within Collier County are analyzed. The objective is to estimate the value of an additional unit of (residential) development. This value will be used as a basis for projecting the consequences of permitted density alternations. A-I 3 <6. To readers unfamiliar with statistical and multiple regression analysis this may be difficult. Rather than working through the individual equations, a reader may wish to simply employ the T-Ratio rule of thumb (it should be approximately 2) and an F-Ratio rule of 5 or higher. There is no set minimum value for R 2 Adj. Rather, the closer to 1 the better. But for the type of analyses undertaken herein, values ofR2 Adj. of50% (.5) are acceptable. This analysis is concerned with the incremental or marginal value of allowable density (per acre). In order to establish a basis for this estimation, 198 Collier County land sales were analyzed. The expectation is that per acre values will increase with allowable density and per dwelling unit values will decrease with allowable density. Of course, it is expected that both per acre and per parcel values vary given the presence oflack of amenities. The amenities included herein are water frontage (non-gulf), golf course frontage and being within a gated community. Given the nature of the land market, it is expected that the interactions among these variables will be logarithmic rather than linear. It is not possible to directly measure the worth of amenities. In this analysis each amenity is measured simple on the basis of whether or not it exists for each particular parcel. The regression model will then estimate the contribution of such amenities to the sales price of the lot. The objective is not to estimate amenities values. Rather, the objective is to adjust for amenities so that the fundamental land economics may be assessed. The binary (lor 0) inclusion of a characteristic is known as a "dummy variable." It is "dumb" in that the value 1 indicates that the characteristic exists and the value 0 indicates that it does not exist. The model to be used is: Equation 1 LogPrice == A + (bI * LogAcres) + (b2 * LogUnits) + (b3 * Water) + (b4 * Golf) + (b5 * Gate) + (b6 * Urban) + (b7 * LogTime) Equation 1 incorporates an hypothesis that the sales price of a parcel ofJand within Collier County will be a function of the size of the parcel (measured in acres), the allowable density (measured in dwelling units permitted by zoning), the amenities available (water frontage, golf course frontage, and gated community), the location of the parcel within the urban area and the date the parcel was sold. No sales were for Gulf coastal properties so the effect of such locations on price should not be present. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 1. Variable Coefficient T-Ratio Constant 8.915 12.74* Log Acres 0.565 3.45* Log Dwelling Units 0.377 1.98* Waterfront 1.372 8.88* Golf Course Frontage 0.395 1.18 Gated Community 0.386 2.22* Urban Designation 2.088 4.18* Time -0.2314 1.27 '" - Significant at the 95% level or higher. A-2 31. The test statistics resulting from equation 1 are: R = 0.786 R2 = 0.618 Degrees of Freedom = 190 R2 Adj. = 0.605 F = 20.8 Generally the results are good. However, time (when the property was sold) is insignificant in that the T -Ratio is 1.22. Therefore time is dropped as an independent variable and the equation re-estimated as Equation 2.]3 Equation 2 LogPrice = A + (bl * LogAcres) + (b2 * LogUnits) + (b3 * Water) + (b4 * Golf) + (b5 * Gate) + (b6 * Urban) The statistical results for equation 2 are approximately the same as those of Equation 1, indicating that the passage of time within 1997 had do observable effect. 14 Variable Coefficient T-Ratio Constant 8.901 12.70* Log Acres 0.561 3.42* Log Dwelling Units 0.376 1.93 Waterfront 1.371 8.85* Golf Course Frontage 0.400 1.21 Gated Community 0.401 2.33* . Urban Designation 2.080 4.17* * - Significant at the 95% level or higher. R = .786 R2 = 0.618 Degrees of Freedom = 191 R2 Adj. = 0.606 F = 20.8. These equations are able to explain over 60% of the variation in purchase prices of Collier County properties. 13 It is true that golf course frontage also has an unacceptably low T-Ratio. However, this is the result ofmuIticolinarity among the amenity variables and is not a basis for concern. This simply means that many of the golf course frontage lots are within gated communities and vice versa. 14 The sales data are during 1997, thus little time had past from first to last. A-3 L.j. 0 , Putting these data and results back in a more conventional fonn yields: Price = A * (Acres)0561 * Units0367 There are several significant points in this equation. First, the positive signs of both exponents show that increased lot size and increased density add to parcel value. But, the fact that the magnitude of both exponents is less than one indicates that they add to value at a diminishing rate. This is also con finned by the sum of the exponents being less than one (0.928). The effect of a change in acreage on pnce IS: dPrice/dunits = 0.367 * A * AcresO.561 * Units-O.633 while the effect of increased density on price is: d Price / = 0 561 * A * Acres-O.439 * Unitso.367 d acreage . These equations simply demonstrate the oft noted market tendencies for price per acre to diminish with parcel size and also for price per allowable unit diminishing with density. The above results can be used to estimate the generalized impact of density reductions on land value/prices. DENSITY V ALlJE 4 3 2 Parcel $3,717,047 $3,344,380 $2,881,695 Per Acre $74,341 $66,888 $57,634 Per Unit $18,585 $22,296 $28,817 Change $7,453 $16,707 Within the generalized Collier County urban land market the fourth unit of density adds an estimated $7,453 to an acre. Additionally, the third and fourth units add $16,707. It would follow, then, that a reduction from 4 density units to three would reduce expected per acre value by $7,453. It would also follow that a reduction by two density units would reduce per acre values by $16,707. DISTRIBUTION OF PUD DENSITY Collier County 1981 to 1998 Density All Pre '92 Post '92 Under 1 10 5 5 1 to 2 12 3 9 2 to 3 29 9 20 3 to 4 32 13 19 Over 4 41 22 19 A verage Density 3.23 3.43 3.08 Source: Collier County Department of Community Development, Nov. II, 1998. A-4 1/. The above estimates are based upon the assumption that the full four units of density are available for use by property owners/developers. Collier County data suggest that this assumption may not be accurate, at least in all instances. The above table shows PUD densities for different time periods. Looking at all residential PUDs approved by the county, the average density approved is 3.23 units per (gross) acre. However, earlier PUDs tended toward higher density while later projects have been lower. The market, the Collier County land regulatory policies or both have resulted in a decline in the density of residential developments. These data would suggest that the actual value of a fourth unit of density may been less than the $7,453 estimated and the value of the third and fourth units would be less than $16,707.15 Nevertheless, this analysis will utilize these higher figures so that there is minimal chance for an understatement of impact or cost 15 Ifmarket gross density is 3.08 units per acre rather than 4, the reduced values from a maximum but unused 4 to 3 WVUIU ,csult in a decline of only $52. Additionally, the value of a reduction from a theoretical 4 but a practical 3.08 density to 2 would result in a reduced value of$9,903 rather than $ 16,707. A-5 4;),.. APPENDIX B ESTIMATE OF EFFECT OF PROPOSED DENSITY REDUCTION AMENDMENTS UPON RURAL TAXABLE VALUES The estimation of the effect of the proposed density changes of Collier County rural taxable values requires an examination of the tables values in the County. Seven rural areas of Collier County were sampled as a basis to project pre- and post-reduction taxable values. These seven areas are circled on the Future Land Use Map on the following page. The number of parcels, acres ofland and taxable values are shown in Table B-1. A total of 1,057 rural parcels were included in this sample. TABLE B-1 Area No of Parcels Acres Taxable Value 1 245 5,379.33 $2,627,966 2 96 12,816.23 $4,039,490 3 38 16,522.58 $9,357,370 4 142 22,703.63 $8,918,745 5 116 44,652.52 $11,190,992 6 335 33,934.50 $33,425,484 7 85 19,102.40 $27,260,869 Totals 1,057 143,967.94 $90,091,512 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser's Tapes as provided by the florida Department of Revenue, January 1999. Parcels fell into one of the following classifications: Cropland Soil Class 1 Cropland Soil Class 2 Grazing Land Soil Class 1 Grazing Land Soil Class 2 Orchards, Groves or Citrus Ornamentals and Misc. Agriculture Poultry, Bees, Tropical Fish, Rabbits etc. (Rural) Acreage Not Zoned for Agriculture. The rural acreage not zoned for a agriculture is used as the basis to project taxable values for preservation lands. All of the other groups included are used to project agricultural taxable values. Table B-2 shows the calculation of simple and weighted taxable values per acre. The weighted average is included so as not to allow undue influence by extreme values. B-1 '-L~ .- s T 52 S T 51 S T 50 S T U S T 41 S T 48 t -~ /.": ~ / ( ) t ii - -~j: i ~ "c .., )> '" -u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ )> :t: :u ..... '" ;;; '" '" III ..... ;0 )> z o z .., )> r- =! 0 ~ ~ ~ "2 ~ )0- '"' ~ " r"1 r- ~ o ..... r- :t: 'Tj '" '" ;0 5.... " --..... ~ f J ft ~ .. ~ "'D Z ~ ;oJ )> Cl ... ..... (') ~ ~ ~ < )> ;oJ M r- '" lil 111 " . r T 48 S ~i ~~ ~i~; I ill'" ;!!~ & t; i7i.. .... ~c c:B.... c io:~lQ~"~ ~" ~,,~" ~di lQh ~ (~ ;;Ie ~i!2 2 Jlz~~",~~~ g~ '!i~ ~~ n ;!~ ~lQ ~a t; !Ol ill. ~~ ~~ ~ ! oS ~ ~"'....;;; i'" !2 tlIi"'..c Q ~~,,~~~~! ;;l;!e...~~~~ ,,~ ~d~ i i ~ ~~ ~h 8 ~ ;1 ~~ 3 ~ ~ r~ ~i ; ~ l . ~ g~ ~ ~ ~ :: ~~ <' v> ~ ! i~ ~ i ~ ~. F ~ .. .. 8 ~ i:l I 5 ,. '" ~ a ~~l;l o c f~~ ~ ~ w(~,., ~ ; ~~~ 3 !il ~ " _ 2 l! g ~ ~ ~ z o ~ ~ :: ~ ~ a i ~ ~ ~ ~ ." R ii E i ~ ~ ~ C) ~ 'Jl' -f\ ~ (") ~ <D .., (") o s:: tl c+ '< "1j 0' "1 .... C. I>> ( 10 ;..1 ~;a& e I ~ ~ ~~ l & ili ~~ f2J ( ~ i ~ ~~ ~ f i2 ~ I ! l! ~ l? ~ ~lQ ~ i!; ~ ~ !! ~~!ill 5i ~i ~ ~! ~~e..il~~~ ~ J:1 v> ~ lS ~!Ol ~ i ~ ~ :;; ~ ~!I l\ ..... ~~~$a i i l!!" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~ iir 11 ~ 31 ~!i;! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Og~l!1lIm !!i~~! " ~ ~ ... I I ~ ~ z :: ill ! ~... iii ~ iii ~ z iiIlII ;;I ~ !I! i i Iil ~ ~ ~ '" i I ~ v> ~ ~ .. z;;l C5 ~ 11 > v> Z ~ 5 i 011 i i ~ ~ ICl ~ 1l ~ E ~ ~ ; " ~ ~ ~ ~ ! '" . ~ " ~ i .i ~ TABLE B-2 AGRlCUL TURAL & ACREAGE VALVES COLLIER COUNTY AREA VALUE WEIGHT WEIGHTED VALUE Area 1 Agricultural Value $2,627,966 2.92% $76,658 Agricultural Acres 5,379.33 2.92% 156.91 Per Acre $488.53 Non-AgriculturaIValue $2,777,665 25.12% $697,665 Non-AgriculturalAcres 2,467.56 25.12% 619.84 Per Acre $1,125.56 Area 2 Agricultural Value $4,039,490 4.48% $181,121 Agricultural Acres 12,816.23 4.48% 574.65 Per Acre $315.19 Non-AgriculturalValue $699,099 6.32% $44,194 Non-AgriculturalAcres 335.69 6.32% 21.22 Per Acre $2,082.57 Area 3 Agricultural Value $2,627,966 2.92% $76,658 Agricultural Acres 5,379.33 2.92% 156.91 Per Acre $568.87 N on-Agricultural Value $3,293,597 29.78% $980,907 N on- Agricultural Acres 5,789.76 29.78% 1,724.32 Per Acre $568.87 Area 4 Agricultural Value $8,918,745 9.90% $882,925 Agricultural Acres 22,703.63 9.90% 2,247.58 Per Acre $392.83 Non-AgriculturalValue $685,527 6.20% $42,495 N on-Agricultural Acres 848.62 6.30% 52.60 Per Acre $807.81 Area 5 Agricultural Value $11,190,992 12.42% $1,390,123 Agricultural Acres 44,652.52 12.42% 5,546.65 Per Acre $250.62 Non-AgriculturalValue $53,150 0.48% $255 N on- Agricultural Acres 14.23 0.48% 0.07 Per Acre $3,735.07 Area 6 Agricultural Value $33,425,484 31.1 0% $12,401,423 Agricultural Acres 33,934.50 31.10% 12,590.28 Per Acre $985.00 Non-AgriculturalValue $3,425,245 30.97% $1,060,890 Non- AgricuI turaI Acres 512.90 30.97% 158.86 Per Acre $6,678.19 B-3 ___lf~ TABLE B-2 (Continued) AGRICUL TURAL& ACREAGE VALUES COLLIER COUNTY AREA VALUE WEIGHT WEIGHTED VALUE Area 7 Agricultural Value $27,260,869 30.26% $8,248,890 Agricu lturaI Acres 19,102.40 30.26% 5,780.21 Per Acre $1,427.09 N on- Agricultural Value $124,642 1.13% $4,786 N on- A griculturalAcres 21.90 1.13% 0.25 Per Acre $5,691.42 Totals Agricultural Value $90,091,512 $23,257,798 Agricultural Acres 143,967.44 27,053.20 Per Acre $625.77 $859.71 Non-AgriculturaIValue $11,058,925 $2,827,811 N on-Agricultural Acres 9,990.91 2,577.16 Per Acre $1,106.90 $1,097.26 B-2 shows a simple value per acre for agricultural lands of$625.77 per acre and a weighted per acre value of $859.71. It would appear that some very low value properties did in fact draw down the simple mean. The non-agricultural properties had a simple average of $1,106.90 in taxable value and a weighted average of$I,097.26. There is virtually no difference between the weighted and the simple means for these properties. The weighting was done by the percentage of total taxable value within that study area, For example, agricultural lands in Area 5 amounted to $11,190,992 in taxable value. This is 12.42% of the total agricultural taxable values of $90,091,512. Area 5 agricultural lands were give a relative weight of 0.1242. This procedure was repeated for (rural) acreage not zoned for agriculture. A second set of calculations are shown in Table B-3. These data exclude grove and orchard properties for the calculations. The agricultural land average taxable value drops to a simple average of $270.12 and a weighted average of$285.67. These data make it clear that groves constitute a very substantial portions of Collier County's agricultural taxable values. The reason for preparing Table B-3 was to look at taxable values for the two general c1assificationsof rural agricultural properties; groves and all other agricultural lands. This was done on the presumption that there will be no change in the taxable values of groves given a reduction in allowable residential densities. The average taxable value of $2 70 to $285 per acre for non-grove land is so low that it is unlikely that taxable values would be affected by changes in densities. Moreover, all of these properties are in agricultural use c1assificationand thus divorced from fair market values. B-4 _ Ljk2_~ TABLE B-3 AGRICUL TURAL& ACREAGE VALUES WITHOUT GROVES COLLIER COUNTY AREA VALUE WEIGHT WEIGHTED VALUE Area 1 Agricultural Value $1,903,062 7.14% $135,893 Agricultural Acres 4,869.33 7.14% 347.71 Per Acre $390.83 Non-AgriculturalValue $2,777,665 25.12% $697,665 N on- AgriculturalAcres 2,467.56 25.12% 619.84 Per Acre $1,125.56 Area 2 Agricultural Value $1,930,281 7.24% $139,808 Agricultural Acres 10,553.42 7.24% 764.37 Per Acre $182.91 N on-Agricultural Value $699,099 6.32% $44,194 1'\ on- Agricultural Acres 335.69 6.32% 21.22 Per Acre $2,082.57 Area 3 Agricultural Value $1,903,062 7.14% $135,893 Agricultural Acres 4,869.33 7.14% 347.71 Per Acre $390.83 Non-AgriculturalValue $3,293,597 29.78% $980,907 N on- A gricul turalAcres 5,789.76 29.78% 1,724.32 Per Acre $568.87 Area 4 Agricultural Val ue $7,827,844 29.37% $2,299,244 Agricultural Acres 20,463.63 29.37% 6,010.62 Per Acre $382.53 Non-Agricultural Value $685,527 6.20% $42,495 N on- Agricu ltural Acres 848.62 6.30% 52.60 Per Acre $807.81 Area 5 Agricultural Value $5,602,157 21.02% $1.177,614 Agricultural Acres 39,507.80 21.02% 8,304.83 - Per Acre $141.80 Non-Agricultural Value $53,150 0.48% $255 Non-AgriculturaIAcres 14.23 0.48% 0.07 Per Acre $3,735.07 B-5 !:l1. TABLE B-3 (Continued) AGRICULTURAL & ACREAGE VALUES WITHOUT GROVES COLLIER COUNTY AREA VALUE \VEIGHT WEIGHTED VALUE Area 6 Agricultural Value $7,127,058 26.74% $1,905,957 Agricultural Acres 16,842.18 26.74% 4,504.03 Per Acre $423.17 Non-AgriculturalValue $3,425,245 30.97% $1,060,890 Non-AgriculturalAcres 512.90 30.97% 158.86 Per Acre $6,678.19 Area 7 Agricultural Value $357,129 1.34% $4,786 Agricultural Acres 1,555.19 1.34% 20.84 Per Acre $229.64 Non-AgriculturalValue $124,642 1.13% $1,405 Non-Agricultural Acres 21. 90 1.13% . 0.25 Per Acre $5,691.42 Totals Agricultural Value $26,650,633 $5,799,176 Agricultural Acres 98,660.88 20,300.11 Per Acre $270.12 $285.67 N on-Agricultural Value $11,058,925 $2,827,811 N on- Agricul tural Acres 9,990.91 2,577 .16 Per Acre $1,106.90 $1,097.26 B-6 J../ ~. ~ ..J .. - .... ~ - < .. ~ ~ - .~ Z I""- ;..-: - - ~ c "'" ~ - (oJ Z lo.. rn - :J ~ .~ ... :.. - r.r:. :.. <I'; :..: ~ < ;... ~ ::: ~ :.. 0 ::z:: c.. . i z z z z z l/) z l/) l/) l/) z z z z z z z z z z z l/) l/) l/) l/) l/) l/) l/) l/) l/) l/) z z z zz ci IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') 10 10 10 10 '1 '1 '<t '<t'1 ~ N 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ili ili ili ili ili ili - IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') a:> a:> a:> a:> a:> a:> a:> a:> a:> CO CO a:> CO CO a:> CO a:> CO CO a:> CO CO a:> CO a:> CO CO a:> CO a:> CO CO CO a:> COCO c:. g ~ IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') 01 Cl 01 Cl Cl 01 01 01 01 Cl 01 01 01 01 01 IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') 10 10 10 10 '<t '1'<t '<t'<t U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N - - - - - - - ~ CD 8' ~ IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ')IJ') IlJ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ~ a. .]!; . 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CO ~ ~ ~ ~ CO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ '1 '1 .. ..~>,. .ii ... e .a. ~ N '<t Cl 0 0 IJ') M N '<t a:> r-- 01 ~ N M ~ a:> 0 CO N '<t '<t IJ') N r-- IJ') N ~ MIJ') 'tl. . '<t - ..... N '<t M N IJ') M N M N M M M M ..... - N N M CO Cl - M '<t 10 10 ..... '<t1J') ~... .j ~ u <t U N 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 l/) l/) l- I- I- ::> ::> ::>::> .oR a:> N N ~ I- ~ III III III III III III III III III III III III III III III <1> <1> <1> <1> 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 <1> 111 111 co(; iii iii iii iii iii <<i76 iii m~ iii '(010 - - N NN ... III III en en en en en en en UiU; en en en in in in <1> 111 <1> <1> 111 111 111 W W W W W W W W UJ W W W UJ WW III III III III III a a <ll ~ <ll <ll <ll III .r: .I:: .r: .r: .c .r: .r: .r: .I:: .r: .r: .c .c .r: .c III .I:: .c .c.c '" '" III III III U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U III ... Cl. a: Cl. Cl.Cl. C. Z Z 111 <1> 111 <1> CD III CD CD CD lD lD CD III III III III III III III c C 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 :g !2 :g :g :g 0 0 '0 '0 III III .Q -e .c -e en en en CiiVi 14 .c .r: .c .r: .0 ii .0 .0 .0 .0 ii .0 ~ ii .0 .0 ii ii ii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <ll III ;;; '" ;;; '" w w w ww Z <J) III (/) (/) (/) (/) Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj OJ OJ OJ Q; Q; Q; 111 <1> 111 111 111 111 111 r r r r - "0 E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (l) Cl 01 Cl 01 01 (/) (/) 0 0 0 00 D ~ "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 :i :i :i :i j '" c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c W UJ W W W :; :; (9 (9 (9 (9(9 t') Cl. Cl. 0 0 0 0 '" III <ll '" III '" III III <ll '" <ll '" <ll <ll <ll 0 0 (j (j (j (j '" III III CD CD CD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > u.. u.. ~ ~ ~ ~~ u U III III <J) III III <J) III III III III III III III III III ~ Qj OJ Q; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <5 0 0 0 0 0 0 <5 0 0 (l) lIlCD Cl.Cl. Cl.Cl. Cl. C C C C C C C C C C C C C c c ~ E~ EE c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u u u u u u u u u u u u u uu c 0 c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c :;:: '" '" III '" '" '" '" III '" '" '" '" III '" III <ll '" III <ll III III III <ll III '" '" III III <ll <ll <ll <ll <ll '" '" '" '" '" ..0 .0 -e -e .0 -e-e .0 .coO .c .c -e -e .Q .0 -e .c .c .c.c .c .0 -e -e .Q .c .c .c .0.0 -e .0 .0 .0 .D .c 8 :5 5 ::> ::> :5 ::>::> 5 5:5 :5 :5 ::J ::J :5 :5 ::> :5 :5 ::;:5 :5 :s ::> ::> :5 :5 :5 :5 :5:5 ::> :s :5 :s :55 -' CD "0 "0"0 (l) (l) (l) ~ - - iiirii iii iO C C C C cc c c cc c c c c c c c C (j (9 (j 0> ,g ~ ,g ,g ,g ,g ,g ,g ,g ,g ,g ,g 0 o 0 ,g ,g ,g Qj Qj Qj "0"0 ~ .::: tt Q; ~ Q; Qj (jj Qj Q; (jj Q; Q; Q; Q; (jj (jj (jj III <J) III <1> (l) >- (l) (l) <1> :; :; :; rom 1: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ iii iii (j(j & ~ 0 0 0 Q. S S u u u 0 Q. 0 0 0 (j (j (j ~ (,) .!!! :: l"'1 M '<t'<t '<t '1' l") l") l") M l") r'l M l") r'l l") l") r'll") r'll") N N N N N N N '<t 10 10 10 r'l l") l") r'll") '0 & 0 Ol l") l")'<t "i '1' '1' "? "? l") l") "? '? M '? "? l") M '? "? l") M ~ N N N ~ N N ~ <r? 10 ti? "? l") '? rrC( c ~ u.u. u:. u:. Ll... u:. u.. u.. u:. u:. u:. Ll... u.. u:. u:. u:. u.. Ll... 'c u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u- u- ti? u- u.. u- u. u- U. 0 (/)l/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) l/) (/) (/) (/) (/) l/) (/) (/) (/) u.. ~ :E ~ (/) (/) (/) (/)(/) N a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: (/) 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0:::0::: 0::: 15 .-J ;:::, III l") 10 co 01 Cl Cl Nr'l - ..... N N N N N N N N N co co '<t '1' co 0 IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') IJ') N - N N '<t 111 .~ N N - - N r'l N N N N N N N N N N N N N co a:> co co co 0 co co '1' IJ') l") MIJ') etl) 0 c:i c:i 0 0 c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i c:i 0 c:i 0 0 c:i 0 0 0 0 0 0 c:i 0 0 c:i 0 0 0 c:i 00 <II 0.. 4) .u. 0 0 8 0 0 8. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c- o 0 IJ') In. ~ Cl 0 0 0 0 0 IJ') 0 0 0 lO 0 Cl 0 0 0 o. 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 a>. CD en r-: N '<t 10' 0" vi r-: 0" 6 r-: d vi ri N en 6 6 en N 6 0" M" ..... 0" vi vi IJ') 6 d <Ii Cl" a:) 6 l") ~ ~ '1' l") l") r-- ..... co r-- <D l") l") CD 10 10 '1' 10 <D r-- <D N Cl N N N co IJ') ..... co CIl en co r-- 0 <D <D ft1 l") N - - 0> <;j r-- ..... r-- r-- "- r-- r-- ..... r-- ..... r-- ..... ..... r-- ..... r-- r-- "- ..... W r-- r-- r-- r-- ..... "- ,.... r-- r-- ,.... r-- r-- r-- r-- "- r-- r-- r-- .... en 0;> 0;> ~ ~ 0;> 0;> 0;> en 0;> en 0;> 0;> 0;> en 0;> 0;> 0;> en 0;> 0;> en en en en en 0;> en Cl 0;> 0;> 0;> 0;> 0;> 01 0;> 0;> 0 J:. U 0- '" ;;; :i U C 0- J:. ;;; :i :i C :i ;;; :i U ;;; >- c c a. a. >- 0- a. c, 0- :i U :i >- J:. 0- 0. (l) '" ::> (l) :;J (l) <ll ro :;J (l) (l) <ll (l) :;J '" (l) CD 0 <( :E :E ~ -, 0 <t ~ -, -, -, :E -, ~ :E :E <( <( <t -, 0 -, :E <t <( ~ u.. -, u.. -, 0 -, -, (J) (/) (J) u. a u Jj~ . ~ z z C/l (,') C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l Z Z U U U U U U U UU Q. '<T '<T '<T (") ('0') (") (") (") (") (") C") (") (") (") (") C") M (") (") (") M (") (") '<T '<T '<T '<T '<T '<T '<T '<T l/'l ltl l/'l l/'l ltl ltl ltl l/'l ltl ltl ltl g ~ ;r; ;r; ;r; N N N N N N N N 0 0 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO COCO ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl l/'l ltl ltl ltl l/'l ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl l/'l ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO .c;. '0 t: M ~ (") '<T '<T .Q :: '<T :: ~ (") (") C") ~ (") (") (") (") (") (") (") (") ~ (") (") (") '<T '<T '<T '<T '<T '<T l/'l ltl to to to to to to ~ tOtO U - - - - - N N N N N N N N - ~ G> .<;rt ~ ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl l/'l ltl l/'l ltl ltl ltl ltl l/'l ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl l/'l ltl to to to to to to to tOtO C C1J. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N a:: , Q.. '.7; II> ~ co co ~ ~ ~ ~ :..( ~ co ~ ~ co co ~ ~ ~ co co ~ co ~ ~ !:f ~ co ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N N NN 1 '<T '<T '<T oq '<T '<T '<T oq '<T ltl ltl l/'l ltl ltl ltl l/'l ltl ltl ....., "a ltl e (") ltl to ltl <0 N <Xl N : fe r-. oq to co M oq N l/'l en N N '<t - <0 r-. r-. - ~oq 0 - '<T - - N N N ('0') (") (")- '<T ltl to r-. co en Ol!l to r-. co -'<T - (") (") '<T ltl to co to co en en - - - - - N .~... '<T N ...J .::we .'U' co U N '<t'<T .2 - - '<T r-. coco :~ ~ N N oq ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl l/'l ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltl ltlltl <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 41 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 - - oJ) III III III III III III III III III III III III oJ) III III III III III III III III oJ) oJ) 'It: 'It: ~ "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' III "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' <11 <11 <11 CIl CIl CIl II> <11 III oJ) .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: > > > > > > > > II> CIl C p: Cl. Cl. Cl. Cl. Cl. 0.. 0.. 0.. Cl. 0.. 0.. Cl. 0.. Cl. 0.. 0.. Cl. 0.. Cl. Cl.o.. Cl. Cl. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s::.s:: U U U U U U U U u u u u u u u u u 2 ~. Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi' Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi ji .s:: .s:: "' "' "' III "' "' "' "' "' ~ ~ Vi CIl CIl <lJ <lJ 41 CIl <lJ <1> C/l C/l <1> II> II> II> II> <lJ II> 41 <lJ uJ uJ W uJ uJ uJ W uJ uJ W uJ uJ uJ W uJ uJ uJ W uJ uJuJ uJ uJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :x lJ) lJ) lJ) [l) lJ) lJ) lJ) [l)lJ) ~ - - - - "' '" '" "' '" "' "' "' ~ ~ "'0 I:;: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ..; 0 0 u u u u u u u u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 .D P >- >- >- >- >- >- >. >- ~ ~ ~ u u ~ ~ u u u u ::l <.9 <.9 <.? <.? <.? <.? <.9 <.? <.? <.? <.9 <.? <.? <.? <.? <.? <.? <.9 <.? <.?<.? l) <.? c c c c c c c c S! u "' ;;; ;;; "' "' ;;; ;;; ~ ~ ~ c c c c c c c c ~ Cii ~ ~ Cii Cii Cii '" ~ Cii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !2 ~ Cii Cii ~ ~ Cii !2 .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: .s:: J: I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ Q:; ~ ~ ~ t Q:; ;: Q:; Qj Qj Qj ~ t II> CIl II> II> CIl II> -, -, -, -, -, -, -, -, Q. a. a. Q. a. a. a. a. Q. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. c E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E .s EE E E .:i .:i f-= c ..2 c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c ;;; ~ "' '" "' III "' "' '" '" "' "' "' "' "' "' ra '" ra "' ra ra "' "' ra "' ra "' III "' ra "' '" '" "' ra '" ra '" ra '" ra "' ra .D .D .D .D.D -e .D .0 -e .0.0 .D .D .0.0 .D .D -e .c -e-e .D.D -e -e .0 .e-e .D .0 -e .c -e .0 .0 -e -e .c .0 -e .0.0 g P :5:5 :5 :5:5 :::J :5 :5 :::J :5:5 :5 :5 :5:5 :5 :5 :::J :5 :::J:::J 5:5 :::J :::J :5 :::J:::J :5 :5 :::J :5 :::J :5 :5 :::J :::J :5 :5 :::J :5:5 ...J ~ '0 '0 '0'0 <lJ ro ;! 41 41 ;;; <.? ra ;; ;; c c '" ~~ '0 Qj '0'0 '0 '0"0 "0<.9 '0 ~~ "C '0 "0 "0 "C '0'0 "C '0"0 .g,g u.. <1> 41 <1> ~ 41 <lJ <1> C II> C C CIl 41 Qj CIl Qj <1> II> Qj II> <lJ >- ;;; ;; III ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; <ii ;; <;; ;; mro Qj < 3<.? <.? 0 <.? <.? <.? <.? <.? <.? <.? <.9 <.? <.? <.? CJ <.? <.? <.? <.?<.? ~~ 0. U II> Qj '" 0 ~ ~ :x n.. (5 ra ra "' -' -' -' CJ e (,) .!!: ;:. C") ('0') (") (") ('0') (") (") (") C") (") (") (") MM (")(") C") (") r<1 (") (") ('1 (") (") r<1 ('1 ('1 ("')r<1 (") (") (") '<T"f "f"f "f vv V V V '<:t '0 i Q Ol '( '('( '( (") '( '( '( ("') '( '( '( ("') '( '( <? r<1 '( '( (") ('1 <? '( (") "? ('1 r<1 (") "? r<1 (") (") V '<T '<t '<:t ~ ~ "<t ~ ~ '<tv C u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u:. u.u:. c: ~ u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. u.. l.l.. u.. u.. l.l.. <> C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l V) C/l C/l C/l V) V) C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l V) C/l C/l C/l C/l C/l V) V) V) C/l C/l V) C/l C/l C/l C/l Ul C/l C/l C/l V) C/lC/l N a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: 15 ...J ~ - lU N en en N N V N N en N N N 0 to N N 0 ltl r-- ltl ('1 N to (") ('1 ,.., ,.., to ltl to en 0 0 0 '<T N 00 -a; ,~ co ,.., r<1 (") ,.., "f ,.., ,.., ,.., N (") (") (") v (") ,.., r<1 ,.., r<1 ,.., (") (") (") N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NN etl) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a 0 a 0 a 0 0 a 0 0 a a 0 0 0 0 a a a aa "' Cl. ~ U ~. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'I::; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 Q., f',. 0 <fl. 0 0 a. o. 0 0 0 o. 0. 0 0 a. 0 0 N <fl. U") 0 0 <fl. 0 o. 0. 0 a, 0 a. 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0. 0. ltl. G:> ('.i lIi I'- 6 6 co ltl <i \fl- a:i (") 0 lIi lIi <i a:i 6 r-- to 6 "<t' N a:i en- ltl ltl lIi r-- to co <i 6 6 crl 6 6 6 (") N fii Cl 0'1 lJ) to N lJ) lJ) <fl lJ) <fl to <fl co co <fl lJ) lJ) l/'l l/'l l/'l lJ) <fl lJ) l/'l N N l/'l lJ) (") (") N l/'l to N N N N N N N N N W '" (ij I'- I'- r-. I'- I'- f',. I'- f',. f',. I'- I'- I'- I'- r-- I'- r-- I'- I'- I'- f',. r-- r-- I'- I'- r-. r-- I'- f',. I'- V) ~ I'- I'- I'- r-- I'- r- r-- r-- I'- I'- f',. 1'-1'- '- 0'1 q> q> 0'1 0'1 O'l q> q> O'l q> ~ q> O'l q> q> 0( C'I O'l O'l q> O'l 0( O'l 0'> q> en 0( 0'> en O'l 0( 0( ~ 0'> en 0( 0( en 0'1 O'l 0'l0'l 0 6.. > C C U > 0, >- 6.. > 6.. C 6.. Ol 0, U U ;. >- >- 6.. 6.. 0, C C U U U ' , U> ~ <1> a. 0 ::1 ::1 Qj :i 0 ::1 U :; '" <1> :; :i 0 Qj ::1 CIl ::1 ::1 <1> <1> 0 :; '" '" '" CIl ::1 ;;; a. ra '" ra :; ;;; <1> 41 II> u:; ;;; C/l <t Z -, -, 0 -, Z <t 0 -, ~ C/l -, -, z V) -, C/l <l: <l: 0 0 z -, ~ ~ V) C/l <l: ~ <l: ~ -, -, -, ~ 0 0 0 0-, a (', v 50 .. ~ l) l) lD l) l) l) II) Z Z Z II) Z Z Z Z Z Z 2 2 2 2 2 2 II) II) Z Z II) (/) Q. lJ') N M l{) lJ') lJ') 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 <Xl CXJ <Xl <Xl <Xl CXJ CXJ M M M M M M 01 01 01 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ M- ~ lD lD lD lD lD lD N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N co CXJ CXJ 010 :E :E :E :E :E :E 10 8 10 10 10 8 10 10 :g 8 10 10 lJ') lJ') If) lJ') lJ') If) l{) l{) If) lJ') U'l N N N N N M M M M M M N M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CXJ <Xl CXJ CXJ CXJ <Xl <Xl <Xl <Xl <Xl <Xl c r-- 0 ~ 01 co CXJ CXJ M M ~ 0 0 r-- r-- r-- r-- "'" "'" NCXJ '" ~CXJ CXJ ~ c.:J ~ 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 CXJ CXJ co CXJ M M 01 01 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NN N N N N N N M M N N ~ 10 - G> go ~ 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 lO 10 10 10 10 10 10 lJ') U'l U'l l{) If) l{) U'l U'l U'l Lll U'l Lll Lll 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 1010 lIS N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N -a:: a. ]; .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ co ~~ ~ N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co ~ CXJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l{) l{) Lll l() l() l() l() U'l l() Lll U'l U'l U'l Lll U'l l() l() l() "'" "'" "'" l- ~. ,... 0 N "'" U'l 10 r-- "'" N- O - '<f '<f "'" N N N N ~ - r--'<i ... Qj Qj N N N Qj lQ ~ M "'" N N 0 CO 0 CXJ 01 N N CXJ ~ ~ 0 M U'l ~ U'l N Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj ~Qj !l. N N ~ N M N r-- 10 N M ~ N M "'" ~ lJ') M N ~ N l.l l.l l.l l.l l.l l.l l.l l.l ~ CO r-- iii ;0 ~ l.l 0 :;; :;; :;; :;; ;0 iii to ~ Q c.. c.. '" iii :;; c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..~ -J c.. c.. c.. ::It 0 N 01 01 01 0 P ~ N ~ M ~ M ,... N N Or-- .2 N M 01 01 01 U "'" N V M CXJ CO NIf) ~ ~ ~ N N MM <lD ~ r-- r-- r-- e e e c e c )( )( )( .2 ,2 Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl g g g g Q.I Q.I Q.I Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Q.I Vl Vl Vl Q.I Q.I Q.I Q.I ~ -5 -5 -5 -5 e e e e c Q.I Q.I Q.I Q.I 0 <U <U 111 -'" -'" -'" -'" c .c .c.c .c.c .c u 0 0 "0 "0 "0 "0 e e e <U Q.I -'" .x -'" -= -'" -'" -= C;; C;; C;; iO '" C;; -'" -'" .x '" '" '" '" Q u u u u u u u < e e < < < < < < < x x ;:;; iii :0 :0 iii Vi Vi Vi Vi cr:: '" '" '" -J -J ..J ..J '" '" '" '" '" '" <II '" '" 0 0 ... w w '" '" W W W W ~ ..J ..J ..J 111 Q.I Q.I Q.I Cll Cll :E :E 0 (5 (5 (5 0 c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. .... Cll ~ Q.I Q.I Q.I -'" -'" -'" .x <!. OJ lD lD lD CD > e e e 0 0 Vl :v :v :v :v Ol 0 0 o 0 0 e c e e '" '" '" Vl Vl oil Vl oil Vl (5 ~ 0 2 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 oil II' '" <II '" e e Cll <1> Q.I Q.I Q.I Q.I Q.I > ~ ~ 0:: 0 0 e E u Q.I G. '" :E :E :E ~ ~ .c ..c u u := := ~ ~ ~ a. a. ~ ~ :E :E '" '" a. a. a. a. a. a. a. 0:: ~ 0:: 0:: :> Q.I Vl Iii oil .0 .0 .0.0 ;:) ~~ '" '" '" '" ro ~ Vl oil Vl ~ :E <II ro '" '" '" '" '" .c Ol Ol Ol Q.I Q.I Q.I Q.I II) ~ :E ~ :E :E '" '" oil oil oil <Il <1> Q.I Q.I <Il oil 2 Z 2 2 2 Z 2 ~ ~ E ~ Q.I l- e c e :c :c :c:c >- 2 2 <1> '" '" <1> a. a. a. a. a. a. a. Q.I 111 '" '" iO '" .c 0 0 0 .0 .0 .0.0 :E '" ro '" a. a. c.. c.. c.. c.. I- ..J ..J ..J Q.I Q.I Q.I Q.I '" '" <II <II Z 2 2 c.. c.. c..c.. 2 2 2 Z ro '" 2 2 c .Q e c e e e c e e e e e c e e c e e e c e e e e e e e e e e c e e e e e e e e e e e c c iO ~~ <II '" '" '" '" <II '" <II ro <II '" '" '" '" '" <II <II '" '" '" '" <II '" <II '" <II '" <II ro '" <II '" ro '" <II '" '" '" ro <II '" .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 -e .0 -e-e .0 .0 -e -e .0 -e -e .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 -e -e .0 -e .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 -e .0 .0 .0 .0 -e .0 -e g :5:3 :3 :3 :3 :3 :3 :3 :3 ~ :3 ~~ :3 :3 ~ ~ :3 ~ ~ :3 :3 :3 :3 :3 ~ ~ :3 ~ :3 :3 :3 :3 :3 :3 ~ :3 :3 :3 :3 ~ :3 ~ -J Q.I ~ '" C;; cc c cc Vl c C Q> ,g ~ ,g ,g ,g :; ,g e u... >- :v :v :v 0 :v di l) "t: iO ~ iO iO ~ ~ -'" & '" 0. S S S 0 0:: ..J 0 I:) ~ ~ '-' ~ J::' '<tv '<f V lO lD 10 (O'<fV VV '<f V'<f '<f v"'" "'" lD lOlD (OlD (0 lOM M MM. . . . . . . . . . . ;;; ~ ~ t::::'~ c 4> 0 lD iD (0 ell 'T'T 'T "'" - - - (0 'T 'T 'T ~~ "",v 'r "",'<f "'" <!? (0 (0 lDlD lO lD <? M M <? c ~ N N N ~ Ilu:. u:.w:. u:. ~ ~ ~u:. ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 c ~~ u.. - ~ LL u.. u.. LL LL LL LL LL u.. ~ ::l ::l ~ ::l ::l~ ::l ::l< < << 0 tio:: II) II) LL ~ LL :E II) II) U) (/)11) II)(/) II) II)(/) II) ~ ~ :E ~:E :E :E II) II) (/) (/) c.. c.. c.. c.. c.. c..c.. c.. c.. N 0:: 0:: ~ ~ ~ 0:: 0:: 0:: a:: 0::0:: a:: a:: 0:: a:: 0:: 0:: a:: a:: 0:: a:: a:: 0:: 0:: a:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: cr: cr: 0 .oJ ~~ CXJ 01 '<f N o <Xl 0 :::, Q.I ,... 01 CO r- lDm 01 010 0 0101 01 0101 01 l() If) M LllN Lll lJ') 01 01 LllOl N 0 co~ MO Q.I .!::i M "'" lD M Ol~ ~N N ~ N N N "",N <Xl <Xl co "'" 0 lO"'"": Lll CO"'" 0 r-o 2(/) 00 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 co N N .0 cieri 0 oo.ci <IS M lO M ~M ~ ~ N c.. 4> 88 00 00 0 88 0 !~. 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 8 0 0 00 0 00 0 08 8 88 0 0 t: 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 80 0 88 il.. 0 0 0 01 O. 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 8Lll -0 0 0. 0_0 0 0 o. ci .n 0_0 0 00 co 01_ Lll_ 0 0_"", 0 0_ 0 OLll 0 00 CXJ ccici o . ci r-.: ,...- r-- r-- - ci 00 G> .n N If) Lll - .n .n lD- N 6 o - ai M 6<Li .n '<fai <Li r--- CXJ- O'lLll MO MM M MO ci6 Ii .;:.~ '<f N 0 r- 0 N"'" r- lO ~Ol N N N N MM <Xl r--M v r-- lO o If) lOr-- r- ~ ~ _0 O'l Mil) V V v Mr-- r- ...:l() {/) "':cci - ~ <11 ~ ~~ r-- r-- r-- r- r- r-- r--r-- r-- r--r-- r- r--r- r-- r-- r-- r--r-- r-- r-- r- r--r-- r--r- r-- r-- r-- r--r- r-- r--r-- (/) r-- r-- r-- r-- r--r-- r-- 0;> 0;> Ol O'l 0;> O'l 0;>0;> 01 0'l0l 0;> 0l0'l 0;> 01 01 0101 01 0l0l 01 0l0l 010;> 0l0l 01 0'l0l 01 0l0l 01 0101 <:; u a. >. c >- 0;> .6 0;> .0 ... .6 Cn~ ""' >'6.. 0;> ""' 6. >. > C: .6 0..> 0 ~ 0, ...!. U C C C .0.0 .6 .0 0, ;. 0.6 G> ~~ U U '" :J '" "5 Cll "5 <1> a. '" :J a. ro '" Q.I "5 '" '" '" o ro '" Q.I 0 Q.I o :J :J Q.I :J :J :J Q.I Q.I Q.I Q.I :J 0 Q.I Q.I ~ 0 0 :E -, :E -, LL -, u..< LL etet :E ~II) -, ~ (/) ~ 2-, LL (/)2 0 0< -'0 -, -, -, LLLL LL LLet 2 OLL 0 r-. u 51 -. 1t ~ (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 <0 (0 (0 C"1 ~ C"1 0'1 0'1 0'1 co 0'1 0'1 co 0'1 N N N N N N N N N 0 g 0 CO N (0 <0 U) ,... ,... ,... ,... a. <l"l to ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... M <l"l <l"l <l"l l/'l l/'l <l"l <l"l l/'l <0 U) (0 U) <0 U) U) U) 10 U) U) U) ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,...,... ~ N N N N N N N N N C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 <"l C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 <"l C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 l/'l 1.0 l/'l 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 l/'l Ltl 1.0 1.01.0 t:. 0 ~ <0 U) <0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N ~ ~ :: 1.0 N <0 0 0 0 ." 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M M MM 0 C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 C"1 (") (") (") (") (") (") C"1 (") (") (") (") (") (") C"1 (") ~ - N N C"1 (") (") ~ W ~ Ol fl (0 (0 <0 10 <0 (0 <0 10 U) <0 <0 U) ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... C N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N III a: a. 1! ~ ~ CO CO CO ~ CO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CO ~ 0'1 Ol 0'1 Ol Ol O'l Ol O'l Ol O'l Ol O'l Ol -~ ~ CO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .., ~ ~ ~.., {! --- 4i :: CO 0 0 <l"l .., N (") '<l': - .., <0 0 O'l ,... <l"l l/'l <0 ,... Ltl ,... O'l .., Ol 0 (") ,... 0 N ~ C"1 .., 1.0 0 0'l1.O ~ ~ U) - N l:: ~ N ,... - N ~ 1.0 (") ,... ~ N N .., N M (") (") ~ 10 <0 ,... .., 1.0 l/'l .., - - ~ U) NLtl ... a; Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj Qj 'Q; 'Q; 'Q; 'Q; 'Q; 'Q; 'Q; Qj 'Q; 'Q; Qj 'Q; 'Q; 'Q; 'Q; 'Q; ="ii tJ. u u u 'Q; u u 'Q; 'Q; U ~ ~ U U 0 U U U U ;;; 0 0 !:! u u 0 ;;; 0 !:! 0 !:! u !:! u 0 u 0 u u u 0 u 0 0 OJ U ~ ;ij ;;; (;j ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ~ ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; (;j ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; (;j ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; 0 0 U ~ III Il. Il. Il. III Il. III Il. l'Cl l'Cl l'Cl ;;; ;;; ~ <Il 0 .J.. c.. c.. Il. Il. c.. Il. III Il. c.. Il. 0- Il. c.. Il. Il. Il. 0- Il. 0- Il. 0- Il. Il. Il. Il. Il. Il. 0- Il. 0- 0- Il. Il. ~Il. ..J Il. 0- 0- ~ 0 .2 (Q c 2 !S ~ '0 -0 . :J U) c -2 c: '" '" mm '" ~ <0 com ni~ <0 ~<O ~ <0 run; ~ 5 m~ III <0 <0 III <0 III '" ~ III <0 ~ III <0 <0 III <0 III <0 (ij'j; ;;; Z :; :; :5 :; :; :; :; :; :5 :; ~ :; '5 :; :; :; :s :; :; :; :s :; :; :s :; :; :s :; :; :s :; :; :; :; :s :s :s :; :s ~ :s g :3 0::: 0::: 0:::0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0:::0::: 0:::0::: 0::: 0:: 0::: 0:: 0::: 0:: 0::: 0:: 0::: 0:: 0:: 0::: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0:: ..J ; i& <It tJ- >- 1:: G> a. 0 n. ll) u !!! ~ ::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'l2 'l2 ~ 'l2 ~ ~ 'l2 ~ 'l2 \!2 ~ \!2 ~ \!2 ~ 'l2 ~ 'l2 \!2 'l2 'l2 ~ ~ ~ 'l2 ~ \Q \Q ~~ \Q ~ \Q \Q~ '0; '-- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ai " 0 Ol 1-1- 1-1- l- I- 1-1- 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 c <t~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'c <l:<t (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) (/)(/) <t <t ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <t <t <t :<l: <t <t <t<t <t <t <t <t<t 0 <t <t <d: <d: <d: <d: <d:<d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: <d: N .::: <t a ..J ~~ 0 0 0 00'1 0 0 - OJ 0 0 00 0 '" 0 (01'- 0 ~ l/'l co l/'l 0 0 0 0 l/'l 1.0 '" 1.0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 ~ 0; .~ 0 0 0'1 0 0 00 0 N 1.0 N ,... ~ ,... .., co ON I'- 0 0 0 Cl '" '" N COOl 0'1 0 0'1 0 00 0 0 0 0 N N ,... c:i ~ '" ~N 0 '" <l"l '" '" li"i", li"i N ~"<T Ol 0'1 l/'l "<i ~~ ~ <0 l/'l li"i '" l/'l (0 l"i"<i "<T li"i "t li"ili"i li"i <l"l '" l/'l "<T ~ '" N '" 0- ~ ~. ~. 0 0 0 0 <) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 00 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 8 0 00 0 N 0 0 8 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- co. <l"l co. l/'l "'. '" 0 co. O. N 0.0. O. 0 0 01'- 0 ri 0 0 0 C"1' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 1.0 0 0 M 0 CXJ N co N N N <ri co "<T' <ri <ri <ri o"N 0" 0'1 to <ri l/'l- ",- 0'1 0'1 00 0 0" a;j 0" ri 00 0" O.<l"l ~ Ol <ri M' 0 ~ 0 N 0 N N N 0 N ~IJ) N ~ ~ to a;j 00 - oi co' '" _ 0'1 N ~N 0'1 <0 N N <O~ N "t. N N N N "t. N N N M _00 N If) ;;; ;J;q; I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- ,... ,...,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... I'- ,... ,...,... ,... ,... I'- ,... I'- (/) ,... ,... I'- ,... ,... 0> 0> 0> 0> 0'1 0> 0> 0> q 0> 0> q q q ~ q 0>0> q Ol 0> q q 0'1 0'1 q 0'1 0> 0'1 0'1 q q 0'1 O'l 0l0l Ol q 0'1 q 0'1 '0 0, 6. c" 6. 6. 6. ::- c" c c . . c c c c U .D U U c ::- ~ en u >- .D "c > U "5 a. "5 "5 ~ Ol >- a. a. "5 ;;; "5 ;;; >- Q) .=;~ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ 0 OJ OJ OJ III c.OJ III III OJ '" '" OJ OJ III OJ '" 0 '" OJ OJ '" III OJ ;;; .::: (/) <t (/) (/) (/) Z <t: 0 --, --, --, <t --, ~ --, <t:<t ~ --, --, <t <t --, --, --, 0 u. 0 0 ~ --, --, Z ~<t: 0 ~ ~ ~ u. 0 "1' (..I 5" _____________.12 . a. f2 a a a a a Ie 01 01 01 01 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a ~ 10 10 10 N N N N N N N N N N 10 10"1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (") (") (") l"l l"l (") (") l"l (") (") "1 "11'- ~ I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- - - - - - - - - - - - -l"l C 0 ~ .;;; N N N N N N "1"1 "1 "1 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 - - - - ~ I'- I'- ~ I'- I'- ~ I'- I'- I'- a gN (.) - - - - - - - (") ~ G> 8' ~ 10 10 10 \0 10 10 ,... ,... ,... I'- ,... ,... ,... ,... I'- ,... I'- I'- I'- ,... ,... I'- I'- ,... ,... I'- ,... ,... I'- ,... I'- ,... I'- ,... ,... I'- ,... I'- ,... ,... I'- I'- as N N N N N ('oj ('oj N N ('oj ('oj N ('oj N ('oj ('oj N N N ('oj ('oj N ('oj ('oj N ('oj ('oj ('oj ('oj N ('oj N N N N N N ('oj N N N N it: Q. :z: U> ~ ~ a a a a a a a a a a a ~ a a a a 0 a a a a ~ a ~ ~ ~ a ~ a a a a 0 g a g a a a a a_ 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 o.n 10 10 o.n o.n o.n 10 o.n o.n o.n 10 10 o.n 10 o.n 10 10 10 10 10 o.n 10 10 10 10 10 to- .1i.. ~ a ('oj 10 I'- N N \0 "1 o.n co 01 ('oj (") o.n N "1 o.n N (") I'- N ~ 10 a 01 "1 o.n I'- CQ 01 a (") 'V o.n 10 ,... (") CQIO .0 l"l 'V ('oj I'- N N N (") (") (") "1 10 ,... - N N N N N -";;'-' .lQ. Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; 4i Q; Q; 4i 4i Q; Q; 4i Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; Q; 4iQ; Q.. <lJ ~ U U U U (.) U U (.) U U ~ U ~ U U U U U ~ ~ ~ u ~ u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u u u u u u u u u ~ u ~ u u u i;; io u ~ u u u u (.) ~ fa ~ ~ ~ '" '" ~ io io io ~ ~ i;; io io io ;a '" ;a ~ ~ ~ '" '" ;a '" ;a ;a ~ ~ io Q a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. c- a.. a.. c- a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. -J ;:c (.) .Q ~ c 2 !/l ~ -0 .0 ;:) V) c .9 ~ ~ '" rot;; '" rii '" ftirti Ci1l;:i '" rii riirii rii '" rii rom rii rii ram '" rii m~ '" riirii '" rii mm '" ctini rii rii '" '" i;; :; :; :; :i :; :; :; :3 :5 :5 ::; '5 :; :i :; :; :; :; ~ :; :; :s :s :; :; :; :s :; :; ~ :; :; :s :s :; '5 :i :; :s :; :; :; g y a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: ....J G> :i -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 --' ....J --' -1 -1 -1 --' ....J --' --' -1 ....J ....J -1 ....J i;; 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1..1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. IJ.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. <V 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1..1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. 1.1.. IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. lJ... lJ... 1.1.. IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. U. 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 >- UJ UJ uJ uJ UJ uJ uJ uJ UJ uJ UJ uJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ uJ UJ uJ uJ uJ UJ UJ UJ uJ uJ UJ UJ UJ uJ UJ uJ 'l:: f- f- f- f- f- f- f- r- f- f- f- r- f- r- f- f- f- f- f- f- f-f- r- f-r- f- f- r- f- r- f- f- f- Q <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(<( <( <( <( <(<( <( <( <( <( <1:<1: <I: <( <I: <( <( <( <( <( <( <1:<( <( <( a. 0 f- r- f- f- f- f- f- r-f- f- f- l- f- r- l- I- r- l- I- f- f- f- r- f- l- f- l- I- l- I- r- f-I- i:L en en en en en en en en en en en en en en If'! en en (/) (/) (/) en (/) (/) (/) (/) en (/) (/) en (/) (/)(/) (/) ~ u ~ ~ ::- <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q <Q ~~ iii ~ 0 Ol c: c fr: <(<( <(<( <( <( <( <( <1:<( <( <( <( <( <I: <( <I: <( <( <( <( <I: <( <( <I: <( <( <( <( <( <I: <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(<( 0 N '0 -J ~ 0 0 a a 0 ('oj "1 I'- 01 a a a 01 .... .. 0 co 0 M 10 N M <t o.n l"l <t a a a 8 a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a 0 a~ 1; 0 0 a a 0 CQ I'- 0 a a 0 N l"l 0 a a 0 a 0 a a 0 a a .t:/ a 0 ,... 10 '<t 0 a a a oeo e CI) 0 0 10 0 0 ~ M eo 10 o.n 10 ,... o.n 0 iii 0 o.n I.() iii iii I.() o.n l() 10 a iii iii 0 a a 0 0 o.n 0 0 0 a o.n .01 {O:S ~ N I'- l"l N ~ N 10 ~ ('oj "t N N ('oj lO_ a.. <II 0 ~ 0 0 a a 0 a a 0 8 a a 8 0 a a a a a a 0 a a a a 8 0 0 0 a a a 0 a .C 8 0 a a 0 a a 0 0 a 0 a a a a a 0 I'- a 0 0 a a a a a a a a a 0 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a a a_ 0_ a M 0 a 0 (") a a 0 a a a a 0 a_ a_ a 0 N 01- ~- CQ "t 10 N o.n N (") I'- I.() o.n l"l q eo I'- a I.() I'- CQ Ol <5 <5 <5 o.n. I'- 0_ 0_ a a. N a G> l()- o.n o.n 0" ..n OI- l'- en ~- Ol I.()- en- (/) Ol- ai ai ai ai N ai ai 01- cri <5 o.n- ,...- <5 ..n 10- ,... Ol- 01 Ol M- 0" ('oj' -;;; N N ,... (") I'- I.() ('oj N 10 eo I'- lO a Ol ('oj I'- (") o.n o.n o.n N I'- 10 (/) ('oj ~ ~ <V rii I'- I'- ,... I'- ,... r-- I'- ,... r-- I'- (/) ~ I'- ,... I'- I'- r-- ,... I'- r-- I'- eo I'- ,... I'- ,... ,... r-- I'- I'- r-- I'- I'- I'- ,... r-- ,... r-- r-- r-- I'- r-- 1'-1'- - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ol ~ ~ ~ ~ Ol 01 Ol Ol ~ ~ ~ m ~ 01 m en m ~ m 01 m ~ ~ ~ 01 ~ ~ ~ 01 Ol ~ 01 m ~ OIm 0 c U :0 U :0 C: >- 0.. 0.. .0 .0 .0 .0 ~ :0 io .0 .0 C: C: .0 ~ C: C: .0 >- >- .0 0.. .0 >. .0 C: ~u G> ~ '" '" '" '" <lJ <lJ <1l <1l <1l '" <lJ ::J ::J <1l '" ::J <1l ""5 '" '" <lJ 0.. 0.. <lJ '" '" <1l '" ""5 '" <lJ iii 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ -, ~ <( <I: ~ IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. IJ.. ~ ~ ~ 1.1.. ~ IJ.. -, -, lJ... ~ -, -, IJ.. -, ~ ~ IJ.. <( <( <( 1.1.. ~ ~ IJ.. -, -, ~o 0 'r. l., 53. I · 1:r1'11 '11 .0. l"- I"- ~ :<1t") t") <:: 0 NN N .,. U .~ ~ Q) 1"-1"- .'.gt.. ~ NN m Q:; 1 r-- Q.. I .:E . '.~..:,;. :nii1;;; 1.... .~.. - :'.,# :DOl N '0 .<; <Il Qj Qj "<Q , f1. u u u Ai jij iij ~ p..Cl. Cl. ..J - :::t! 0 .Q <<l ~ r- c. 2 !B ~ '0 .0 :J (I) - -c ~Iiii iii .Q m ~ :i ~ g O:Cl:: ..J Q> I,' ~ :s G:'w:..... m 0""'''''' 41 00 ~ flJUJUJ >- 1:: r-........ ~~~ 0. t-........ 0 C/lC/l a: ~ 0 ~ ~1 '!: >- 'q; ~ 0 - - I OJ c ~~ ~ c 0 N 0 00 ::<Il~ 00 Qj .~ ~ 2lJ"l ~C/l ;l3 a. 4) ~oo 0 'C ::5~g a.. Q) .j OJ!>' Ie toN (;f} - -41 I .:: m I"- ..... C/l ~q> en - u c C 0 p~ "' Q) --, m 1 J Q J - -= G 54. APPENDIX D AUTHORS OF REpORT Brian \V. Blaesser, Esq. Brian Blaesser heads the Land Use and Development Group in the Boston office of Robinson & Cole LLP, where he practices in the areas of commercial real estate development and leasing, multifamily residential development, land use and environmental law , planning law, condemnation law and litigation. He represents real estate owners, investors and developers in analyzing and securing requisite land use and development approvals from local governments, negotiating and drafting development agreements and handling development projects which involve a wide range of environmental transactional and regulatory permitting matters with the U.S. EP A and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Blaesser also has extensive experience in state and federal trial and appellate courts in real estate and land use litigation, including the taking issue, vested rights, condemnation, U.S. EP A enforcement actions and violations of Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act.. He served as Special Assistant Attorney General for eminent domain actions brought by the Illinois Departments of Transportation and Conservation. In addition to his real estate development practice, Mr. Blaesser has years of experience around the country in conducting regulatory analysis needed by local governments and governmental agencies to address growth management and vested rights issues, and to implement zoning and subdivision controls, urban design principles, sequencing of public facilities, agricultural, open space and historic preservation policies, and highway corridor preservation programs. Mr. Blaesser is the author or co-author of numerous publications on land use and development regulations, including the books: DiscretionaT)'Land Use Controls: Avoiding Invitations to Abuse of Discretion (West Group: 1999); Condemnation of Property: Practice and Strategiesfor Winning Just Compensation (Wiley Law Publications: 1994); and various articles and papers, including: Official Maps" in Modernizing State Planning Statutes (The Growing Smart Working Papers), Planners Advis01Y Service (PAS) Report No. 480/481 (September: 1998); "Growth Management: A Developer's Perspective," in Development (Vol: XXIX, No.3: 1998); "Impact Fees: The Second Generation," 38 Journal of Urban and Contemporary Law 401 (1990); and "Practical Concerns of the Private Developer in PubliclPrivate Real Estate Ventures," in Developing Real Estate Through Public/Private Ventures (ABA National Institute: 1990). Mr. Blaesser is the appointed Chair of the National Environment Subcommittee of the National Association of Industrial Office Properties (NAIOP), and is an elected member of Lambda Alpha International, the honorary land economics society. From 1986-1990, he served as the elected chair of the Planning & Law Division of the American Planning Association (AP A). Mr. Blaesser received his B.A. from Brown University and his J.D. from Boston College where he served as an editor of the Law Review. He also holds a masters in city planning from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was a Fulbright Scholar. D-l 55: James C. Nicholas, Ph.D. James C. Nicholas is professor of urban and regional planning and affiliate professoroflaw at the University of Florida. He has held this position since 1985. He received his under-graduate education in business administration at the University of Miami, Florida, and graduated in 1965. He earned a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Illinois in 1970. Prior to assuming his present position, he was at Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida, as professor of economics and acting director of the Joint Center for Environmental and Urban Problems. Professor Nicholas has written widely on the subject of growth management. Among his publications are the books A Practitioner's Guide to Development Impact Fees, Calculating Proportionate Share Impact Fees and The Changing Structure of InfrastructureFinance. He has authored a number of articles in the professional literature including "The Progression ofImpact Fees," in Journal of the American Planning Association, "Impact Exactions: Economic Theory, Practice, and Incidence", in Law and Contemporary Problems," and "Debt for Nature Swaps: Modest But Meaningful Response to Two International Crises," Florida International Law Journal. In addition to his academic duties, he has worked with many national, state and local governments in coping with the problems of environmental and land management. He worked with the state of Florida in drafting pioneering environmental and land use management legislation. He has assisted the states of Georgia, Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts,New Hampshire and Washington in developing similar growth management programs. He has worked with many local jurisdictions in developing growth management programs. Thesejurisdictionsare in the states of California, Colorado, Georgia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wyoming. Professor Nicholas also has lectured in Canada, Brazil, El Salvador, the United Kingdom, Poland, Puerto Rico and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands on matters of natural resource management. D-2 5(P. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT ON AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING DENSITY REDUCTION, TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, AND CLUSTERING CRITERIA IN THE AGRICUL TURAU RURAL DESIGNATION OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT. OBJECTIVE: To review in a workshop format proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan regarding density reduction; transfer of development rights; clustering of development in the Agricultural Area; and water and sewer provision outside of the Urban Designated Area. CONSIDERATIONS: In October, 1997, and after five public meetings, the Board of County Commissioners directed staff at their June 2, 1998 meeting to prepare proposed comprehensive plan amendments to include: density reduction in the urban and rural areas; investigation of a transfer of development rights program; criteria for clustering development as a requirement in the Agricultural/Rural Area; and a review of the water/sewer service areas' outside of the Urban Area for central county operated systems and/or privately owned package plants. Attachment 1 contains those proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to implement these provisions. Density Reduction Amendments and Transfer of Development Rights Brian Blaesser, with the law firm of Robinson and Cole, and Dr. James Nicholas, Economic Consultant and Professor of Urban and Regional Planning with the University of Florida were retained on June 23,1998 to evaluate the Board's recommendations for density reduction and to provide their analysis and recommendations. Attachment 2 is the Consultants' report regarding the economic impact and legal defensibility of the Density Reduction Amendments proposed by the Board of County Commissioners. The economic analysis addressed three principal questions: (1) the potential impact of the Density Reduction Amendments upon land values in the Urban and Agricultural/Rural areas; (2) their potential fiscal impact upon the County; and (3) their potential impact upon housing cost. The legal defensibility analysis focused upon the potential viability of claims challenging the proposed Density Reduction Amendments if brought under the Florida Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act ("Act"), FLA.STAT. 70.001 (1995). 1 S7. The Consultants have made the following recommendations: . Amend the density rating system in the Urban Area to reduce the base density from 4 units to 2 units per acre for parcels 50 acres or greater in size that are agriculturally zoned, but with the opportunity to: 1. Restore density from 2 to 3 units per acre through design of a development project that satisfied performance standards based upon Travel Demand Management Techniques; and 2. Restore density from 3 to 4 units per acre through negotiation and purchase of a conservation easement that either preserves agricultural land in agricultural use or preserves natural resource areas. This type of transaction would be done through a private informal process - not a formal, institutionalized Transfer of Development Rights process established by the County. . Concur with the BCC desire to reduce the Activity Center from 16 to 12 units per acre and the bonus for land within the density bands around Activity Centers from 3 to 2 units per acre. . Concur with BCC desire to modify the density bonus for Roadway Access to require that the density bonus be awarded for providing a collector as an interconnection between two arterials. · Recommend no change be made to the density bonus of 3 units per acre for infill properties and the density bonus of up to 8 units per acre for affordable housing. · Concur with the BCC desire to reduce density in the Agricultural/Rural area from 1 unit per 5 acres to 1 unit per 20 acres. · Recommend that the density in the Conservation Areas and Natural Resource Protection Areas be further decreased from the BCC recommendation of 1 unit per 20 acres to 1 unit per 40 acres. The estimated cost of restoring density from two units per acre back to the density of four units per acre is $5,500. This includes the estimated costs associated with modifying the travel demand management techniques and the conservation or agricultural easements that may be acquired. Table 3 of the Consultants' report illustrates that PUD' s approved after 1992 have been building at a density of 3.08 unit per acre, therefore, the market may not be demanding the 4th unit. The potential risk for a claim being brought and prevailing under the Bert J. Harris Private Property Rights Act would be significantly reduced with the ability to regain the density reductions through satisfaction of performance standards or an informal TOR program that provides for the preservation of agricultural and conservation lands. The density reductions result in a decrease in the total number of dwelling units in both the Urban and Rural areas. Table 1 describes the extent of the reduction in dwelling units in both the BCC recommendations and the Consultants' recommended modifications. It should be noted that the density reductions in the Conservation Areas are units that in all likelihood would never be built, except for private in-holdings, because the lands are under public ownership. Therefore, to be conservative, no units were assigned to the Conservation - Publicly held lands for the transportation analysis. The total reduction in dwelling units minus the Conservation lands is 45,732 dwelling units under the BCC's proposal and 53,468 dwelling units with the Consultants' modifications. 2 Sr? Table 1 Recommended Adjustments to Density Reduction Amendments Number of Dwelling Units Rural Acreage Existi ng Comp Plan 152,799 21,434 21,967 BCC Recommendations 38,200 5,358 5,492 Consultant Recommendations 19,100 5,358 2,746 Conservation Agricultural Wetlands Okaloacoochee Camp Keais Crew Acquistion Total 763,994 107,168 109,836 980,998 196,200 49,050 27,204 147,150 168,996 114,599 133,699 32,551 35,297 8,991 8,991 2,286 2,286 1,706 6,894 198 13,181 18,171 160,331 187,167 45,732 53,468 Reduction in DU NRPAlPublic Ownership lands Net Density Reduction/Rural Area Urban Area Density Band (3-2) Activity Center (16-12) Base Density Reduction Residential Infill (3-2) Total Total Reduction in Urban & Rural Area Net Reduction minus Public Ownership lands Transportation analysis URS Greiner Woodward Clyde were asked to prepare a transportation analysis of four scenarios: . Scenario I A: · Scenario I B: . Scenario II A: Buildout of all Traffic Analysis Zones Buildout of all Traffic Analysis Zones with the Immokalee Urban Area T AZ's at 50% buildout Buildout of all Traffic Analysis Zones that include the proposed density reductions. Buildout of all Traffic Analysis Zones that include the proposed density reductions with the Immokalee Urban Area TAZ's at 50% buildout. . Scenario II B: The assumptions for density reduction utilized for the Transportation analysis include: · Activity Center (16-12) · Density Band (3-2) · Residenitallnfill (3-2) · Base Density for Agricultural properties 50 acres or greater (4-2) · Agricultural land 1 unit per 5 acres west of Golden Gate Estates · Agricultural land 1 unit per 20 acres east of Golden Gate Estates · NRPA (Okaloacoochee Slough, Camp Keais, CREW Trust) 1 unit per 40 acres 3 5fl-!- . Golden Gate Estates I unit per 2 1/4 acres . The Immokalee Urban Area was analyzed at 50% and 100% of buildout . No density was allocated to the publicly owned conservation lands The Immokalee Urban Area was factored at two scenarios because of the significant increase that would occur at buildout from the 1990 estimates of 5,244 units and 17,000 population to 100% buildout of 40,000 units and 175,000 population. The Revised Needs Assessment Network was used with the latest version of the FSUTMS model and the level of service volumes are the most up to date generalized tables produced by FOOT. The number of links over capacity in each scenario are identified in Table 2. Table 2 Number of Road Links Over Capacity Buildout of T AZ's Buildout of T AZ's with Density Reduction Amendments Immokalee Urban Area 100% build out 50% buildout Scenario I A 66 Scenario I B 68 Scenario II A 55 Scenario II B 48 Calculating the Immokalee Urban Area at 50% buildout, with no density reductions was the worst scenario for road links over capacity. Comparing scenario I A and II A , which shows the Immokalee Area at 100% build out, illustrates the effect only of the proposed density reduction measures. The sum of the simulated volumes decline 5%, and 85% percent of the segments show reduced volumes. Comparing scenario I B and II B preserves the assumption of 50% build out in Immokalee, and illustrates again the effect of the proposed density reduction amendments. The sum of the volumes decline 11 %, and 89% of the segment show reduced volumes. Exhibit 1, prepared by the MPO, summarized the results of Scenario IA (Existing buildout) and Scenario II A (Buildout with the density reductions) and identifies that 85% of the road links will have reduced volumes. The extent of the decrease is measured as follows: number of road segments with decreased volumes at 0 - 5% = 54 links 28% 0- 10% = 34 links 17% over 10% = 76 links 39% Clustering development in the Agricultural/Rural Designation The criteria in Attachment 1 has been developed pursuant to the BCC's direction to. work with The Conservancy to address clustering in the Agricultural/Rural Area in response to the Twin Eagles project. The objectives of these preservation requirements are: to maintain the land's rural character by preserving large contiguous natural areas, to restore impacted sites to natural areas as these site are converted from agricultural uses to other uses, and to preserve interconnected wetland systems and wildlife corridors. This is first accomplished by preserving existing natural areas on site by directing land uses to existing impacted areas. If there are insufficient natural vegetative communities on site to meet the required set aside, then the natural area preservation requirements 4 ~o. can be met by restoring impacted areas on site so that they can eventually become colonized by natural vegetative communities or by purchasing lands in or adjacent to Natural Resource Protection Areas as identified on the Future Land Use Map. The required natural areas shall be protected by a conservation easement limiting the uses of the land to passive recreational activities. The amendments to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element for clustering development in the Agricultural and Conservation land use designations are included in Attachment 1. Modifications to Policies and Service Areas in the Potable Water & Sanitary Sewer Sub-elements The Board of County Commissioners directed staff to review the current district boundaries for County supplied water and sewer and areas where private package plants and water systems may be appropriate in conjunction with the requirement for clustering development. The proposed changes are as follows: . Modify the district boundaries for county owned and operated water and sewer service as shown on Maps PW-1 and SS-2 attached. These areas were selected because of the proposed county acquisition of the Orangetree package plant by the year 2010 and an existing county water line that extends to Collier Seminole State Park. This investment in County owned facilities makes these limited areas appropriate for the provision of water and sewer facilities at a point in time when the rate payers justify the expansion. . Modify the policies to allow for package plants of a threshold size of 100,000 gpd. The size of the plant was utilized because under that size there are operational problems. Effluent reuse is permitted for plants rated at 100,000 gpd and greater. . Modify water policies to allow for central systems in projects that are utilizing private package plants. . Allow school and school facilities to provide central water and private package plants for their limited facilities. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The proposed language in Attachment 1 will amend the Future Land Use Element; the Conservation & Coastal Management Element; and the Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Sub-elements of the Growth Management Plan and amend the Future Land Use Map. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact identified in the Consultants report provided a worst case scenario that the density reductions could result in a $30 million decline in taxable values for a 0.15% decrease in total taxable values. For illustration purposes, this decline in taxable values has the potential to raise the County-wide millage rate by an additional 51 cents for every $100,000 in assessed value. Although difficult to quantify, it can be assumed that a reduction in population would result in a reduction on public services and facilities. See Attachment 2 "Evaluation of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Density Reduction Amendments for a more detailed explanation of fiscal impact. 5 {Pl. RECOMMENDATION: No formal recommendation is offered at this time. Reviewed By~!1IlJj am D. Lorenz. Jr., Dire r- Natural Resources Department Date: "'3 · 3 - ~~ Reviewed By: ~ - Date: J - J ".5'f Rooert J. Mullhere. AICP I Director p~~erv~ces Departm~ APprovedBY:~ a. ~ Date: 3-3- '1~ Vincent A. Cautero. AICP I Administrator Community Development & Environmental Services Division 6 10 ;;) . Attachment 1 PROPOSED LANGUAGE TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Urban Area Density Reductions DENSITY RATING SYSTEM This Density Rating System is only applicable to areas designated Urban, Urban - Mixed Use District, as identified on the Future Land Use Map, exclusive of the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, and exclusive of Urban areas encompassed by the Immokalee Area Master Plan, Golden Gate Area Master Plan, and Marco Island Master Plan. The Density Rating System is applicable to the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the extent that the residential density cap of 4 dwelling units per acre is not exceeded, except for the density bonus for Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights. This Density Rating System only applies to residential dwelling units. Within the applicable Urban Designated Areas, a base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre is permitted, though not an entitlement. This base level of density may be adjusted depending upon the characteristics of the project as identified under a. Density Bonuses. b. Density Reduction. and c. Density Conditions. a. Density Bonuses Consistency with the following characteristics may add to the base density. Density bonuses are discretionary, not entitlements, and are dependent upon meeting the criteria for each bonus provision and compatibility with surrounding properties, as well as the criteria in the Land Development Code. All new residential zoning shall be consistent with the Density Rating System, except as provided in policies 5.9, 5.10 and 5.11 of the Future Land Use Element. 1. Conversion of Commercial Zoning If the project includes conversion of commerci31 zoning which is not located within a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center, orv.'hich is not consistent with the Neighborhood Village Conter Subdistrict, a bonus of up to 16 dwelling units may bo added for every 1 acre of commercial zoning which is converted. These dwelling units may be distributed over the entire praiect. The praiect must be compatible with surrounding land uses. 6 1. Proximity to Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center If the project is within one mile of a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center and located within a residential density band, J 2 residential units per gross acre may be added. The density band around a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center shall be measured by the radial distance from the center of the intersection around which the Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center is situated. If 50% or more of a project is within the density band, the additional density applies to the gross acreage of the entire project. Density bands are designated on the Future Land Use Map and shall not apply within the Estates Designation or for properties within the Traffic Congestion Area. 7 IfJ.3L J. 2. Affordable Housing To encourage the provision of affordable housing within the Urban Designated Area, a maximum of up to 8 residential units per gross acre may be added to the base density if the project meets the definitions and requirements of the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Ordinance (Section 2.7.7 of the Land Development Code, Ordinance #91-102, adopted October 30, 1991). In the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, Affordable Housing projects must provide appropriate mitigation consistent with Policy 13.1.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. 4,. 3. Residential In-fill To encourage residential in-fill in areas with existing development, 3 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be added if the following criteria are met: (a) The project is 10 acres or less in size; (b) At time of development, the project will be served by central public water and sewer; (c) The project is compatible with surrounding land uses; (d) The property in question has no common site development plan with adjacent property; (f) There is no common ownership with any adjacent parcels; and (g) The parcel in question was not created to take advantage of the in-fill residential density bonus and was created prior to the adoption of this provision in the Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989. 5. 4. Roadway Access If the project has direct accoss to 2 or more artorbl or collector roads as identified in tho Traffic Circulation Elemont, 1 residential dwelling unit per gross acre may be added. Density credits based on future roadways v.'i11 be awarded if the developer commits to construct a portion of--tRe a roadway that will function as an arterial or collector (as determined by the County Transportation Department) or the road is scheduled for completion during the first five years of the Capital Improvements Plan. Tho Road..~'ay Access bonus is not applicable to properties locatod within the Traffic Congestion Area. 5. Travel Demand Management Techniques To encourage the maximum utilization of the transportation network. those properties zoned agricultural and 50 acres or greater in size as of January 1. 1999 that have a base density of 2 units per gross acre may add one additional unit per gross acre provided the following travel demand management techniques are included in the project: Mixed Use Developments . Provide a mixture of uses. internally accessible within the development including: residential land uses. personal service commercial. employment opportunities. home occupations. schools. parks and recreational uses. churches and institutional uses. Interconnection · Increase number of connections to the arterial or collector system. consistent with the Access Control Policy. based on the number of dwelling units in a project. · Provide public access through proiects which connect with arterial or collector road network. · Provide vehicular interconnection from commercial projects to residential projects. · Provide for shared access between projects. 8 ltL . Provide for frontage roads or bypass roads around an intersection. . Construction of a new collector or arterial which connects to other collector or arterial roadways. Bikepaths/sidewalks . Construction or payment in lieu for an identified pathway in the Comprehensive Pathway Plan. !... Require a Pathway Plan within the development as part of the rezoning criteria. -- 6. Transfer of Development Rights To encourage preservation/conservation of natural resources and agricultural preservation, density transfers are permitted from properties within the Agricultural- Mixed Use District and the Natural Resource Protection Area-Private Ownership to properties zoned agricultural and 50 acres in size as of January 1. 1999. , within that portion of the Urban designated are3 subject to this Density R3ting System. However, density shall not be transferred into the Coastal Management Area from outside the Coastal Management Area. Lands lying seaward of the Coastal Management Boundary, identified on the Future Land Use Map, are within the Coastal Management Area. Density may be increased above and beyond the density otherwise allowed by the Density Rating System in accordance for agricultural properties 50 acres or greater in size as of January 1. 1999. that have a base density of 2 units per acre with the Transfer of Development Rights (TOR) Section 2.2.24.11 of the Land Development Code adopted by Ordinance #91 102, on October 30, 1991, as 3mended. This section of the Land Development Code will be amended within one year in order to be consistent with the requirements of this section of the Future Land Use Element. b. Density Reduction Consistency with the following characteristic would subtract density: 1. Traffic Congestion Area If the project is within the Traffic Congestion Area, an area identified as subject to long range traffic congestion, 1 dwelling unit per gross acre would be subtracted. The Traffic Congestion Boundary is shown on the Future Land Use Map and consists of the western coastal Urban Designated Area seaward of a boundary marked by Airport- Pulling Road (including an extension north to the Lee County boundary), Davis Boulevard, County Barn Road, and Rattlesnake Hammock Road consistent with the Mixed Use Activity Center's residential density band located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and County Road 951 (including an extension to the east). Properties adjacent to the Traffic Congestion Area shall be considered part of the Traffic Congestion Area if their only access is to a road forming the boundary of the Area; however, if that property also has an access point to a road not forming the boundary of the Traffic Congestion Area it will not be subject to the density reduction. 2. Base density of 2 units per acre For properties 50 acres or greater in size and zoned agricultural as of January 1. 1999: and property previously zoned that has not commenced construction pursuant to section 2.7.3.4 and 2.7.2.12.3 of the Land Development Code as the Code existed as of January 1. 1999: the base density shall be 2 units per gross acre. The base density may be increased based on the followin~r one unit per gross acre may be added if the 9 L-'L project is designed to meet the standards identified under the travel demand management techniques. An additional unit per gross acre may be added if the prQject meets the requirements under the Transfer of Development Rights Provision. c. Density Conditions: The following density condition applies to all properties subject to the Density Rating System. 1, Maximum Density The maximum permitted density shall not exceed 16 residential dwelling units per gross acre within the Urban designated area. , oxcopt when utilizing the Transfor of Development Rights (TOR) Section 2.2.24.11 of the Land Devolopment Codo adopted by Ordinanco #91 102, on October 30,1991, as amended. 8, Urban Commercial District This District is intended to accommodate almost all new commercial zoning; a variety of residential uses, including higher densities for properties not located within the Urban Coastal Fringe or Urban Residential Fringe Subdistricts; and a variety of non-residential uses. 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict ...For residential development, if a project is within the boundaries of the a Mixed Use Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict or Urban coastal Fringe Subdistrict, up to ~ .12 residential units per gross acre may be permitted. This density may be distributed throughout the project, including any portion located outside of the boundary of the Mixed Use Activity Center. Agricultural/Rural Designation Density changes Policy 1.2 THE AGRICUL TURAURURAL Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. RURAL FRINGE - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. North Belle Meade Subdistrict 2. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict a-A. AGRICUL TURAURURAL - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Rural Commercial Subdistrict C.,.-B.,.... RURAL - INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT D. G-: RURAL - SETTLEMENT AREA DISTRICT Policy 1.4 The CONSERVATION Future Land Use Designation shall include a two Future Land Use Districts for: A. NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREA/PUBLIC OWNERSHIP DISTRICT B. NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREA/PRIVATE OWNERSHIP DISTRICT Policy 1.5 Overlays and special features shall include: A. AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN OVERLAY 10 &,Ip. 8, AREAS OF iN'JIRONMENTAl CONCERN OVERlAY C.JL AIRPORT NOISE AREA OVERLAY II. AGRICUL TURAURURAL DESIGNATION The Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation is for those areas that are remote from the existing development pattern, lack public facilities and services, are environmentally sensitive or are in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. The oQjectives of clustering residential units and the preservation of natural areas are to maintain the land's rural character by preserving large contiguous natural areas: to restore impacted sites to natural areas as these site are converted from agricultural uses to other uses: and to preserve interconnected wetland systems and wildlife corridors and to discourage urban sprawl. A. Rural Fringe-Mixed Use District ~ :+the following uses are-may be permitted in this District: a. Agricultural uses such as farming, ranching, forestry, bee-keeping; b. Residential uses at a maximum density of one dwelling unit on each five acre tract, except for legal non-conforming lots of record; 1, North Belle Meade Subdistrict Only the following uses may be permitted in this Subdistrict: a. Residential dwelling units at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per five gross acres. except for legal non-conforming lots of record less than 5 acres in size. 2. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict The purpose of this subdistrict is to allow for small scale retail. offices and service facilities to serve the daily needs of the residents of a PUD in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. The acreage eligible for Neighborhood Village Center uses shall be sized in proportion to the number of units to be served. but in no event shall the acreage exceed 15 acres. The Neighborhood Village Center uses may be combined with recreational facilities and other amenities of the PUD and shall be conveniently located to serve the PUD. The Village Center shall not have independent access to any roadway external to the PUD and shall be integrated into the PUD. Phasing of construction of the Neighborhood Village Center shall be controlled so that it occurs concurrent with the residential units. The Planned Unit Development district of the Land Development Code shall be amended within one (1) year to provide standards and principles regulating access. location or integration within the PUD of the Village Center. allowed uses and square footage and/or acreage thresholds. The maximum floor area ratio for commercial development shall be .45. B. Agricultural - Mixed Use District The purpose of this District is to protect and encourage agricultural activities, conserve and preserve environmentally sensitive areas, provide for low density residential development, and other uses identified under the Agricultural/Rural Designation. These areas generally lack public facilities and services. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. Residentk:ll uses 3rc allowed as follows: 11 &,z a. Low density residential dwelling units at a maximum density of one d\':elling unit per five gross :lcres, except for leg:ll non conforming lots of rocord; Only the following uses may be permitted in this District: b. Residential uses at a maximum density of one dwelling unit for each 20 acre tract. except for legal non-conforming lots of record; A. Natural Resource Protection Areal Public Ownership District These Natural Resource Protection Areas are owned, primarily, by the public, although private in-holdings and privately owned conservation areas do exist. The boundaries .of these Natural Resource Protection Areas/Public Ownership are expected to Conservation Designation m:lY periodically change in the future as properties are acquired as additional lands are purchased by the County. State. Federal Government. and their respective agencies and boards. As additional lands are purchased the County shall amend its future land use map series to include these additional lands within the NRPA's and to assign a density of one dwelling unit per forty acres to all such ~ This Design:ltion District includes SYGA-the following areas: . Everglades National Park . Big Cypress National Preserve . Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge . Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve . Collier-Seminole State Park · Rookery Bay · 10,000 Islands National Estuarine Research Reserve . Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Recreation Area . Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary (privately owned). · Corkscew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) Trust · Clam Bay · Picayune Strand State Forest St:lnd:lrds for development in the Conserv:ltion Designation are found in the Conserv:ltion and Coast)1 M:lnagement Element :lnd the County's L:lnd Development Regulations. The Conserv:ltion Designation will :lccommod:lte limited rOE:identi:l1 development and future non residential uses. ~ + the following uses may be aFe permitted in this District Designation: a. On all lands not in private ownership as of January 1. 1999. residential Single bmily dwelling units, :lnd mobile homes where the Mobile Home Zoning Overlay exists, at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per five ~ gross acres..,GJ:- On all lands that are in private ownership as of January 1. 1999. the following densities shall apply: .:h-- Within the Big Cypress National Preserve and Addition one dwelling unit per 3 gross acres for private in holdings within tho Big Cypress I'btional Preserve or. Each dwelling unit muct be physically situated on a minimum five :lcre p:lrcol, or minimum 3 :lcre p:lrcel for private in holdings 'Nithin the Big Cypress t'obtion:ll Preserve; L Within the Picayune Strand State Forest. excluding Southern Golden Gate Estates. one dwelling unit per 5 gross acres. ~ Within Southern Golden Gate Estates. one dwelling unit for 2 % acres or less if the lot is a legal non-conforming lot of record. 4. Within any Natural Resource Protection Area/Public Ownership. any legal non- .- conforming lot of record less than 40 gross acres in size may be developed at its non-conforming density. 12 tas B, Natural Resource Protection Areasl Private Ownership District These Natural Resource Protection Areas are privately owned. The boundaries of this District include large. interconnected wetland systems and are identified as follows: . CREW aCQuisition areas . Camp Kaeis Strand . Okaloacoochee Slough Only the following uses may be permitted in this District: a. Residential dwelling units at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per forty gross acres. except for legal non-conforming lots of record less than 40 acres in ~ Proposed language to Amend the Conservation and Coastal Management Element Clustering Criteria in the Agricultural/Rural Designation & Conservation Designation Add new policies to provide for clustering development in the Agricultural/Rural and Conservation Designations. OBJECTIVE 6,4 Development as specified in Policies 6.4.1 and 6.4.2 shall cluster its impacts on site in order to preserve native vegetative communities and protect wildlife habitat. Policy 6.4.2 Within the Agricultural! Rural and Conservation Designation residential developments: golf course developments: mixed use developments: commercial development and industrial developments shall set aside 25% of the total site area as natural areas for projects less than 40 acres and 50% of the total site area as natural areas for projects equal to or greater than 40 acres. Within the Agricultural/Rural and Conservation Designations. the following criteria apply to the above preservation requirements: a. The preservation requirements for the preservation and restoration of natural areas are calculated on the gross acreage of the project site. less the non- littoral zone area of any existing man-made waterbody. b. The purpose of these preservation requirements in the Agricultural/Rural and Conservation designated areas is to set aside the required portion of the site to preserve existing native vegetative communities and/or to restore the required portion of the site to support the establishment of native vegetative communities. Natural areas therefore can be comprised of: (1) Existing native vegetative communities: (2) Enhanced or restored wetlands and uplands. including areas that are currently disturbed and can be re-colonized with future native vegetation: .and (3) Littoral zones of man-made water bodies. including canals and stormwater ponds that support wetland vegetation. Natural areas shall not include areas such as the non-littoral zones of constructed lakes. the actively managed portion of golf courses such as the 13 ~ fairways. greens and rough. tennis courts and other active recreational areas. mowed common areas and other areas that are planted with turf grass or non-native s~s. c. Selection of the areas that comprise the preservation requirement shall reflect the follown,g criteria in descending order of priority: (1) Wetland f10wways through the proiect shall be maintained; (2) Natural areas. especially preserved wetlands. shall be interconnected within the si~ and to other wetland areas or wildlife corridors off-site: (3) Wetland and upland areas known to be utilized by listed species or serve as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall be preserved and protected in order to facilitate the movement of wildlife through the site: (4) Upland habitat shall be part of the preservation requirement when wetlands alone do not constitute all of the requirement. Upland habitats have the fo~ng descending order of priority: (a) Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland area. (Q) Xeric Scrub. ee) Dune and Strand. Hardwood Hammocks. (d) Dry PraHM. Pine Flatwoods. and (e) All otheqpand habitats. d. The destructiontl any naturally functioning native vegetation found on-site shall be compensated for by the purchase of lands within or adjacent to an identified NRPAata ratio of 2:1. Vegetative communities having less than 90% invasive emfics shall be defined as naturally functioning since these exotics can be (etnoved to provide the vegetative community with a sufficient degree of fun~ity for the purpose of these criteria. e. Where the per~ge of naturally functioning native vegetation for a site is initially less thaolte preservation requirement. the stated requirement can be obtained by (1) C@!ation of wetland or upland areas on site. (2) purchase of lands within or .cent to an identified NRP A on a 1: 1 basis or (3) a combination of '11) or (2). f. Preserved nata areas shall be connected throughout the project area and be connected lQdf site natural areas to the greatest extent possible. g. A minimum v~ buffer area of 200 feet shall be provided for all structures fromh nearest external roadway. This buffer area shall contain at least 80%'1l;;jg- vegetation. Natural areas can be used for this buffer requirement. h. Passive uses sUdt as nature trails are allowed in the natural areas. i. All lands to be maint;!ined as natural areas within the project or purchased as off site mitigati~shall be protected by a permanent conservation easement. prohibiting furthEldevelopment. and setting other standards safeguarding the site's special re&GIces from negative changes. i. A management:1Ibn shall be submitted to identify actions that must be taken through the lifedihP. project to ensure that the natural areas will function as proposed. Th~'dlM shall address exotic control and treatment. fire management. aftImaintenance of facilities that provide protection to listed species. k. The criteria cC~din Policy 7.1.1h shall also apply. I. Earth mining stdR!quire the approval of a conditional use. Approval of the conditio~ll include a requirement that 50% of the total 14 project area be set aside as a natural area should the earth mining conditional use be converted to a land use specified in Policy 6.4.2. m. Golf Courses shall adhere to the set aside requirements contained in 6.4.2. The standards found in 6.4.2a through 6.4.2k shall be used in the design of the golf course lay-out in order to protect significant portions of native vegetation and wildlife habitat. Landscaping plans shall require at least 75% of the trees and 50% of the shrubs to be native Floridian species with at least 75% of these trees and shrubs to be drought-tolerant species. Golf Courses shall also be designed to incorporate those Best Management Practices recommended in the publication. Best Management Practices fo r Golf Course Maintenance Deoartments. FDEP. May 1995. Policy 6.4,3. Agriculture shall be exempt from the above preservation requirements contained in Policy 6.4.1 and 6.4.2 provided that any new clearing of land for agriculture shall not be converted to non-agricultural development for at least ten years. For any such conversions in less than ten years. the requirements of 6.4.1 and 6.4.2 shall be applied to the site at the time of the conversion. Within the Urban Designated Areas. the percentage of naturally functioning native vegetation preserved shall be calculated on the amount of vegetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearing. and if found to be deficient. a native plant community shall be restored as outlined in 6.4.1 e. Within the Agricultural/Rural and Conservation designated areas. the required amount of natural areas shall be those specified in 6.4.2 and any naturally functioning native vegetation destroyed at the time of agricultural clearing shall be compensated for by the requirements addressed in 6.4.2 d. The clearing of agricultural land shall be permitted after all applicable federal and state permits are obtained. Policy 7.1 h. Projects located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation and Conservation Designation shall cluster development away from natural areas subiect to the criteria contained in 6.4.2 in order to protect wildlife habitat and wildlife corridors, These projects are also required to provide the following: (1) Utilize the open space requirements to maintain buffer areas between important wildlife habitats areas and areas dominated by human activities. (2) Facilitate wildlife movement along natural trails by preserving appropriate areas and by utilizing fencing and walls that encourage wildlife to use natural corridors. (3) Locate roads away from identified and potential natural travel corridors used by wildlife. (4) Provide elevated road crossings when a road must cross an identified travel corridor used by any listed species. (5) Utilize appropriate roadway crossing and signage when it is unavoidable for roadways to cross wildlife trails. (6) Provide for the appropriate use of fences. walls or other obstructions to encourage wildlife to use natural corridors or to separate wildlife corridors from areas of human activity. 15 1 (7) Where bears are present. provide a system where garbage can be placed in bear-proof containers. preferably at a central location. Potable Water Sub-element Consistent with the urban growth policies of the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, provision of central potable water service by the County is limited to the service areas shown in this Plan and to areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and services identified on Map PW-1 as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Policy 1.5.1 Discourage urban sprawl by pormitting Iimitin9 central potable water service systeme ~ the County only in the Designated Urban ".rea of the Future Land Use Element of thie ~ to the service areas shown in this Plan and in areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities or services outside the Urban Areas identified on Map PW-1 as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Policy 1.5,2 The County will discourage urban sprawl and the proliferation of private sector and/or package potable water treatment systems by limiting private systems to the Rural Fringe-Mixed Use District and within the service district as identified on Map PW-1. in conjunction with clustering criteria required in Obiective 6.4 and subsequent policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Those proiects which meet the requirements for a private package sewage treatment plant over 100.000 gallons per day may also be permitted to provide a private potable water treatment system. through tho development order approval process to insure maximum utilization of the existing and planned public f3cilities. School and school facilities will be permitted to have private potable water systems for their single purpose facility. No existing private sector or potable water treatment systems will be permitted to add customers unless all Levels of Service standards are met, and operations are in conformance with all DER .E permits. Within the Agricultural - Mixed Use District private wells will be permitted. Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Policy 1.1,2 Consistent with the urban growth policies of the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, provision of central sanitary sewer service by the County is limited to the service areas shown in this Plan and to areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and services identified on Map SS-2 as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Policy 1.1.4 Within the designated Urban Area of this Plan. Permit the development of package sewage treatment plant systems only v:ithin the Design3ted Urban Area of tho Plan shall be permitted only in areas where County wastewater services-is not currently available, and allow only on an interim basis until County service is available. Allow individual septic systems within the County only when connection to an existing central system is not readily accessible to render service and note th3t where septic system are allowed, and future County sewer services becomes available, said septic systems will be required to connect to the County regional system. 16 _'1 Policy 1,5.1 Discourage urban sprawl by pormitting limiting central sanitary sewer service systems: by the County only in the Dos:ignated Urban /\rea of the Future Land Use Element of this: Plan, to the service areas shown in this Plan and in areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities or services outside the Urban Areas identified on Map SS-2 as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Policy 1.5.2 The County will discourage urban sprawl and the proliferation of private sector and/or package sanitary sewer treatment systems by limiting private system to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District and the service district as identified on Map S5-2. in conjunction with clustering criteria required in Objective 6.4 and subsequent policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. No private sanitary sewer package plant treatment system may be permitted under 100.000 gallons per day capacity, Schools and school facilities may be permitted to provide smaller private package plants for their single purpose facility. through the development order approval process to insure maximum utiliz3tion of tho existing and planned public f-3cilities. No existing private sector or potable water treatment systems will be permitted to add customers unless all Levels of Service standards are met, and operations are in conformance with all DER E permits. Within the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District septic tanks will be permitted.. 17 '73 ?f!. LO r:: ~ .r. ...- III III oS! ~ o ......_~ < E o ~ - a. o ~ Q cu E :::l o > ~ co C'< E ,... a> <'l III CIl E It) ::: '0 ..,. ,... CO> > < ~ .. .... CIl tIl :c CO 0 > ~ ,..: ..J N -5 ~ .. III 1: III CD "" ..>C tIl ,g c: CD C "" E :::i ~ :::i c ::: 0 CIl 0 :::i % 0.. (J) (J) >- ....I <( Z <( en z o E Cl z o (J I- ::::> o Cl ...J ::::> CD >- I- Z :J o (J "'-0:: W :J ...J o U I- CD J: X W III >< ~.... c o ~ '" c.. E o III U E ::: III I- Z w :!: (J) (J) W (J) en <C (J) Cl W W Z o N o N It) ..,. co It) 10 N '" o '" ... a> '" '" '" .... o a> 0> I[') N .... .. CIl :c .S! c: CIl <J .. CD 0.. CJ) o a: <I: z w U CJ) w CJ) :::I Cl z <I: -1 u... o >- ~ <I: ~ ~ :::I CJ) '0 > '" '0 E .S!Jl 0; c:: -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - D- CD ;~ .. o 0 0 >.. E .::;0 0 ... .... g.S~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 ~ a~~ 'Og.:;~ ... ~ .... .... ... .... ... .... .... ... .... .... .... .... .... .... ~ ... ~ .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ... .... .... .... .... .... >Ci~-5'" 0<< ,... a> CO ,... III COO CO 10 It) '" <0 '" .... CO ,... <0 0 CO a>,... lOa> CO .... <0 ,... <0 <0 ,... ,... ,... 0> c:Da> c:D a> 0>0 a> a> a> a> a> a> c:D c:D c:D c:D 0 c:D C> C> c:Da> 0> a> C> c:D a> a> a> Q) a> o=~ c:i c:ic:i c:i c:i ci~ c:i c:i c:ic:i c:i 0 c:ic:i c:i c:i ~ c:i c:i c:i c:ic:i c:i c:i ci c:i ci c:i c:i c:i c:i ~o~ a: > III a> ci %'0" w>~;< ~~.s!;.... < o t2 < % W U III ... CD > o :>0 <I- =CIl .1- 1-0 :3:i ~ o Ii: c( % W U III .. CIl > o :>0 ~~ ...:1- III 0 w:i %O..J -1-0 ~1Il> ~:3 .% ~j o I- ~ o c:: L<. w ~ c( % >- ~ o c( o c:: - e Cl c:D N N ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~-~~~-~--~~- o--o--o-oooo-oooo_ooooo_oooo_o~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~go~~~~~g~~~~~~~~~~ o--o--o~ocoo~dooci~cioodo_oo6o_ It) ,... It) a>ClCl 0__ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2~g~~~~0~~E~~~~~:~ ~~~~~~~.m.~..~~~' ~~~~M._~~M~~~~~~ ---0--0-0000-_00__00_00_0000..-0__ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ---6--0"-0006--06__06_00_6600_0__ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~M~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~v~~~~~~~v ~~V~M~~~~MM~~~~N~ 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 ~~~~~~mO~~~~~N~M~~~~~~MNM~~~N~~N NNNNNNro~NNNNN~~m~N~N_NN~~MNN~~M~ ~~~~~~VM~~~~~~~N~~~~M~M~NN~~~~NV N C aaaaoooaoaoaaaooaaoaao~ooooaoooo w~~"''''''''''~~~'''~www~~'''~'''~'''~~..,.~co'''~'''~''' '" c::: .. c.. Q) 0> " ~ ,,1:1 .. ex: ex: >. ~ 1:1 -5 ~~Ci~ffi '" :!2 a.. C o.!!l ~ex:1!!.g'i5:> Q) ca '- ~ co .- C (j 0 ex: 0 ~C:c(j.9o ".9~ZQ); ~"o.9.g'.g' 0 >0::0 >-'\::';:; o.co~ClJClJ(I):Q ;~;et:QjQ)::>Qi ex: ~ c:: Q) .~ .~ 0 " Q) Illtiiex:a:::;~ .9!:o.g'(j g g~ ..: ~.- c""C-oa)o o",O:Q)Ioo...\..C/,I E -g III '0 c3 c3 .S; iii E~~;3z(l)~~ 1:1 ex: .c u "O"O"C"O""O"O"'C~ ex: ex: c::c::ex: ex: ex:ClJ tttttttro 000 0 0 00::::: a.a.a.a.a.a.a.c .: ,:: .::: ::: .= .:: .= 0 <l:<l:<l:<l:<l:<l:<l:ClJ 1:1 a:: -'" u 0" E :> Eiii "0"0""'0'''0 :t:n:J ex:ex:c::ex: Q)ro ~~~~~~ .x~ ClJm:!2:!2:!2:!2~~CO C a::a:a:ex:OllllO "'~ClJ(t)ClJd>:a=c ~ .3 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ & & ~I ~ ~ g ~Il~ ~ ~I;; :1 ~ ... ~ ~ ~I~ ~i Q) 0> 32 cD a; :> Ci " a:: 5 x '0 u -c ::; oE ~ :> CJ 1:1 ~ iii .c:>E III ex: -c'"-c 5iii~ ~ ~ c::~a: ~~~ cD ~ ~~~ E~~ ~ 5~ wOOc."O "O~c~ C ~-c >.~<~ ffi~~~ ~ c:: ~c: ~0~BB~~~B&~8 ;~ ~; -c~r-~Cii""OoO:C6Q,)U) e>a::: U.9ex:c'~€:>:>_Q)~.g'~~ o.c o~~:~S~~ffi~~_o~B:~~-u ;~~~o"Cn:Jc~," ,- ~m~~ a::c~_ex:_o~.9~O-gO.9c::a::~ 2i~rV"Og~~~j:E~~ ""OtI)~ ~~~~~~~mm2o~~~B~~ O>c-cto>o.c,"~"">-Olllta>a::Q) E~o&.~~~~'5.~~~[N~~ 38c3<3~~~~~~~~~ffi~~ >.>..>->~ ~~~~-'" a. a. a. .c a..a..a..Cl.~ UjUjUj~t::" ~U:!1!!1!!u: ~~~~~ex: ~~bb00d>~g-g-g-g-Ill~ iiiiiicccc~COUUUU~iij ,!!! '5 ~ ~ ~ ~ =0 ~ '0 '0 '0 '0 f; ~ ~moooog~~~~Q,)~E oa(j(j(j(j(j(j~~~v;_E ~ ~'~I~ NMVI.O(ClCOc:n:!N~~~M~:;; U")O')N"- to r.D """"0'> "0 :> -c iii a: lO t ro o ~ _~ ~ ra <l:c-gco .9.9iii~ -0 tIJ C ~ ex:g>~UJ x'S 0 0 ::;:~::i....J; UJu:.9.9ex: :J2~ClJ~g oait tii v;:g8.~~:;: QJ 0 .... co '5 en ~(j<O:::i~ >- ~ x Cl. QJ -Co; CI:(j C C ro QJ coJ2 ~c3 5 .9 O-c U :> .9iii c III QJ t5 7 ";/!. tn c: ~ ~ ... rJl rJl 2 ~ E- E o ~ .... a. o ~ C ~ E :3 o > (jg.l!li~ >o~=~ (jg.S~ >o~~ _a..C... oe:.--- >0...1=10 0<< o=~ io} ll: > z(j~c w>_lo.< g~ =~ ~ o ~ < Z LU o en ~ ~ o >0 <~ =en .~ ~o f3~ ~ o it: < % W o en "- CD > o >0 <~ ~en ...:~ enc w~ ZC-' ~~g l<.en Ow .% 0<( %-, o ~ ~ o a: l<. w ~ < z >- < ~ C <( o 0:: '*" 9 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0> 0> N ~ N ~-~-~~~~~~~~--------~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~ oociociciciciciociciciocici~oci~cici -~~--------------~---- -_0000_00__0_____0___0 M 0> 0> lO en lO 0 ;:r;o>...~ N<:l>OMCOr-.<:l>O lO .10 "': ... M lO . ... 0>00 CONNMCOr-.COlO ~ ... N ... ...... ci ci ci ci ...... cio""':"": c::i~....;....;....;~ci~ ~ ~ci ..., r-. 0 ~ lO 0 10 co It>lt>r-. 0 N (; CONCOr-.IOlt> 10 ~ M co (; 1010 lO co NOlO It> r-. ....,CO.ION C; 0 ..., CO r-....... ;;; 0 ;:!;"'O 0> Cl en ~~;~:g:g <0 C> ..., N ..., N ~lO 0 ClM N Cl lO M lO 10 .., ...... ..It) '" 10 It) (0_..-...",("') ..., --0000-0-__0_____0___0 10 V 0 .... ..., r-. 10 10 ..., ..., V It) It) ..., It) ...... r-. N 00 10 10 It) "': ~ ... 10 '" ... ~ M C! 0 C! 00 "'? ~ "'? ~ r-: '" ~ ...... ...... N ...... ~ ci 0 0 0 ~ ci ~ ...... ...... ci ...... ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ...... 0 It) It) r-. ..,. It) ...... It) CO r-. CO CO Cl C") C") 0 ...... r-. Cl r-. 0 "'0 M r-. 00 '" 00 CO ...... ... '" ION N N C") ..,. ...... ... 0> N '" It> ...... r-. It) ... M<O <0 0.... 10 10 It) Cl N r-. ~;.: ..,. '" ...... ~ '" N "'0 0 0... V M 0 10 It) ... .., M <0 lO It) '" N N to M ~ 10 10 It) V r-.lO 10 ~ ~ ..,. It) .., ~M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 000 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 000 0 00 0 0 '" N '" .... r-. M (; .., 0>'" \t) \t"J N N "'NN CO .... .... r-. to V ... 0 ...... ...... M 0> CO 00 N N V '" ~OOOO r-. ...... ~ '" N '" ..,. ...... M M ~ .., N ..,.V 1.O1.l11,()...,. ..,. M .., M ~ "0 N OO~OO~OOOOOOOOO~~OOOO~ Cll OJ <0<0'" ... ... N... vlOlO 10 10 0010<0"''''10 "'......'" '" 0.. " a:: '0 a:: o '6 '" 0:: E >v 3;00 a:ffi .2 0 "'- C)-o cO:: Cll 0 31'6 o '" C)Cl: o t5 2 o ~lJ Oen ~Z '" 0 w- -0"0 (tjCl: 1Il~ o <0 ;u: cii~ Gi ~~ o 0 lJC) .c. :; III o C ~ ~ ,,~ ~~ ~"O~ "O';]~ ~~ UO::"O Cl: 0>'0 ~ "0"00.. .xCl:-o 111:9.2: <05. Cl:Cl:",Z N<goCo::~a::alalU t5.E~ ooEE "'CllIllO lI1~iii~<! ~~mEi:~~'~;~ .5'~~c55 en..."'c"'E OCl:Cll"'...I<!._>...... to~~3~ESo~~N~g....I~B~......... g,-Clla::Cll:il!:!--o-g a::c ~clJ~o~Ea::~EE ~-oo~ocn <!--c-O> ~ -o~oo::;. ;~ E~~~~5~~~~a::_U-"'a::~o::o _~_._> ~ ~~_~c _ -c~~~o~~~~Ex~~~~~- n5~~~;~~~Cll~W"'~Uc::~O 2U",oC",0..=Cll~ ~O.~co.._ o>2-~ "'€~~ooOOE~al~"'c€ "~-o-E~~cnCIl1~Cll 0>-"'0> Cll "-' "l:t""":J.o"O"Oo;Cii 0; N "00 = c'&-o cnC Cll"Ot~C -~- c_~c Z~~~~6~~~~~~ffi~~~~~ Cll Cll 0> 0> "0"0 "0-0 ~~ mCo n:I~"QCu~ ~ ~ a::.~.~ .<:l.<:loc::a:: ~~~55 ~~~~~ <O"'~C)C) cncncncncn '" en N N Cl:Cl: cncn .c..c..c..c. ~ ttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ~ooooca(Q(Q(Qftl.J:; '"0 :>ZZZZuJuJuJuJuJ~ c:: iD on; 'cu 'co 'n; O(ij on; 'C; '(i .f; OJ 0 Q 0 ~ CI).=~.=.=.=.=~.::~Ol co 3 ._ ._ ._ i:E 0.. ~ .E .E .E .E .E .E .E .E .E ~ € € € '" ~ o~ o~ .~ o~ o~ o~ .~ o~ o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .S <! E E E E E E E E E c: c:-g-g g U5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t;; to ~ ~ ~ r:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ 0 ~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~_~N I j ~ '" o .- "t:l c: nl 'ct- ll) c: (l) (l) ~ .... (l) CD tJl v .... <{ E o ... .... a. o ... o Cl E en en >- .....J c:( Z <{ en z o t:: o z o U f- :::> o Cl ....J ::> CD >- f- Z ::> o u f-a:: w CD.....J I....J xO wu - -' o > .- ~ E <II o E :J o >< ..... o III ~ > ..J s::. ~ III .;;e c ::::i III >< ~... c o ~ '" c. E <II <3 E :J tJl f- Z w :E en en w en en <( en o w w z o N o N .. III o.;;e .Q c E::::i :J_ z 0 '" '" N <0 o <0 0> <0 <0 <0 r-- o 0> 0> '" N r-- <0 r-- "'" M "'" on on "'" <0 .. o ~ ~ ~ o l: o ll. Cf) Q 0::: - 0::: <l: ~ ~ ::l Cf) ~ 0> M ~ .... ~ <0 ,..; N c': II C ~::i :0 on CJ> ci (i > <II o E .2 ~ j;j 0:: og-~;~ >cE=~ (ig-S.-e >c~~ og.:i~ >c~='" o 3_ ~ .2 ta"O"O 0:: > > ZO"c w>;~< g~.2"'" ~ o ~ < z w (,) tJl .. .. > o >0 ~:;; t-=b ~~ ~ o ~ < Z W (,) III .. <II > o >0 <to- ...1Il t-=b III < w< ZO..J -to-O ::E1Il> U.1Il Ow .z 0< Z..J o to- ::E o 0:: u. w ::E < z >- ~ o < o 0:: 'It o 00000000000000000000000000000000 ~~~~--~--~---------------------- 0> 0> N N 00000000000000000000000000000000 ~~m~~~S~~~~~~~~gS~~~~~~~~~~~~~m~ cicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicicici -------------------------------- 0000000000-000-_____0_0_00_0_000 ~M~.~~~mo-~~~~__mN.~m~N~~~~~__m~ ~MN-~~~~~~~~~~o~~~oO.O~-~~-M-~W~ ciciciciociciQoci-cicio~___~~ci~o~dci~o~ci6o ~o~~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~~~m~~~~~~8 :~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~g~~gm~~~g~~g~ 00000-0000-000----__0_0_00_0_000 ~~~-NM~~~~~MONNNONMvm~M_OM_om~~ 66666~6666~666:~~~~:d:~~66~6~ci6~ ~~M~~~g~~~~~N~~~~~~~~v~~m~~~~Mre~ ~~m ~~OOVVNM~~~~~~.ON~~~mM~~_~O~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~ gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg ~~~omW~N~~~~~~W~~~~~~N~N~~N~~~MN NNNM~WN~~~N~~N~~~_~~_~~m~~VM_~M~ ~NN-.~~.~~~~~~~~vM~~M~~V~MV_M~~~ N '0 ooo~o~oooooooou.~ooooooooooo~oooo <O","~N<ON<O<O<O<O<O<O<O~<O<O<O~<O<O","<O<O<O<O","<ON~<O<O<O <ll Cl '" (L <ll Cl -c ~ Qj ~ > "'C -0 ~ -c ~~x ~~ 0:: >~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ -cn~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~CIl"~ ~ ~ 0~ ~ ~~~~~O~ ~ ~~ ~o~ ~~ 0 -c ~CIlo~~Clo <ll-o ~o -u~ ~ Uc~;~~~ _2~O=E~j~; "5~ ~~~_~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~.~~;~5~~~~~~~ ~~ ffi~~~~~~~ 5 w~E~0B~~m~~Bc;BEoOO~x~ ~oo~~~~~g -0 -c~~~ -co-~o~-o~O::>E ~ W' -0 ~~~Cl,~Cl 5 ~2~~'O~;~3E<ll~~ ~ ~<llCIJ ~ >~c~cio ClNCIl~~CIl<llCIl~~"'EZ~_nw~~~~~i~~-c~<(~~~_ C1J0>~~~ ~~CIlll.O~O;-o~~_(L ~CIl-o~"'O::$-c~-o(L~ _o5~~B~~~~~~~;~~~~~~5o~g~~E~~SOC~w ~U"'C~-€~~"'C~~'~_~~~~_rn~~~rnoca"'Cw~~ -o~~oO::CIJ-o~ClCl~~<ll~~~o~Clo~CloO"'CIlo~~~Clo ~_m- _~mccro~~~._~~ c~-c- oo~-~ "-CU o~~-too~wm~w~-~~~tm ww_O~-v~tOC~~ ~m-~&~~~B~.5EC~W~"5[~€~~~~E~roc&~~~ ~~~OO~~~~oo~rnrno,5~>,~ooroom~~o~CIJ~~~~~.o 0::IIlCIJ~~wO::ClJClClO~~Cl(L>~<ClZ>0~ 'ClJUCIJ _~u ~ 0:: .:.f:,)( ~ u W Cl ~~~IIl-> oE-o> :gEE- > ~~~-~ ECIl- CIlo~o~~ ~ c.c.c. ~~~~~ zzw ~~~wxwxwx~ ----- $~~w o x ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~ "'C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,2 ~ 'm 'ro ~~ _-o>~.2~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ .:.f:,~Ou~~~~ "'C~~ >~m~~~~~ ccccc>~~~rnm_ ~_~ CIlCIl~cUUUUUrn ~~~~~ffi~~~~CIl~~~~~ tW~m~ ~~-----~ ~~~~~c~~owm~~rorom ~ -0_ ~ N > '5 's, "'C 0 0 0 0 0 E ...... ,..... ,~> .s:> .50> .s:> .s:> ~ .~_ .~_ ~ B c c: ,9., "E 'E 'E r .~ co ~ c:r: "; ra ~ (5 .9:! ~ .!!:! .9;? ~ ,... "'"I "'1 ~, ~ -- '... C'J ...... I ~CIlUUOOOCl~~~~~C~~~~~~~~(L(L~~~~CIJ~~~i (0") ~ ll) 0> Olll) ~ 0> co ~ '" 0 N r-- N <0 "'" '" ",I ....:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;:!; [;; ~;; <0 r: 0> C"l 0> 0 0;:;::: ~ ~ ~;:: ;::!~I~ ~ ~I~; 1. ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ it: "'C < C Z III W ~ U en 0 It) c Cl Cl ~ - Cl al .!!! < = 0 - 4: E 0 ... - a. 0 ... Cl Cl E :J 0 > 00 -Q.l!c:~ Ol Of 050 Ol >OE - N - -g..s~ - - N o :.eO >0:0- 00 'Og.:~~ >....c:'" O..J.. CO) _ oc< Cl>Cl> 0=..... 00 --'0 i ~ > z'O = c:... W>~"'... U<~=_ 0-_ ~ o it: < z w u en .. . > o >0 <... :0 .... "'0 13~ .. . > o >0 ~~ .... "'0 13~ zQ..J -"'0 ::E0> U-0 Ow 'Z ~j o ... ::E o a: u. w ::E < z i Cl < o a: * 9 -- -0 <0- <'!lI:! -0 Olr- r-Cll 0100 It'l00 <OM -0 COo, MOO ~6 ~Ol M;e ~N r- ~ 00 N 00 '0 It'loo N r- N It')~ '" C> '" 00 0- <.0<0 -0 0:: .x: U o E E '" I-o ",0:: .x: c: ~.9 "' "' Ql C> = c: ~ :? 0::--, EE -0 -0 0::0:: 't:'t: o 0 0.0. ~ ~ ~~ "l:l -0:: ~-fj W", ,., Ql "'aJ ~= .- :.0 E ~ '" Q) .- -0 E c: '" '" f-> c r;: t..: c.: O>M ~~ I J 7' <F- e .... c: I1l .c: ~ <1l ... o :E II) <l:: ~ E o ... - C- O ... o <1l .... t: = C/) en >- .....I <l:: Z <l:: C/) Z o ~ o z o () ~ :::::l o o .....I :::::l al >- ~ Z :::::l o () t;ffi al.....l :r:.....I xO W() o > ~ .= ., ., E :: "'0 >< ~ .... ., .. ~ > ..J :: ~ .. j&, c ::::i .. >< ~.... c o ~ ftj a. E .. <3 E :: en I- Z w :E C/) en w CJ) C/) <l:: C/) o w w Z e N e N ~ .. 4>>.... .Q c E- ::..J zo ll'l ll'l N <0 o '" en '" '" '" r- o en Ol ll'l N r- '" I'- ..,. '"" ..,. ll'l ll'l ..j. a::> ~ ., ~ ~ C 4>> U CD 0. (f) o 0:: <( Z UJ U (f) UJ (f) ::> Cl z <( ...J U. o >- 0:: <( :E :E ::> (f) ~. .---..--. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .... ~ ~ .... .... ~ .... ~ .... ~ ~ .... ~ ~ .... .... .... .... .... ~ ~ "0 CL!c::::e 00"- > CE=~ "0 ~S~ 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 >o::;~ g.:;~ 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 "0 > r._"c." O..J_ - 0> a::> N '"" I'- a::> a::> N '" ..,. ..,. 0 a::> ll'la::> en 0 <0 ~ ll'l <0 en 0 I'- I'- .... <0 ll'l0 en '"" en 0 c< <01'- a::> I'-a::><o I'- I'- a::> a::> <0 0> a::> a::> a::> a::> en a::> <0 I'- a::> a::> en a::> a::> I'- a::> <0 en a::> co co ~ =.... 00 0 000 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 c:i c:i 0 c:i c:i c:i 0 c:i 00 c:i 0 c:i c:i c:i .'0 "'0 a:: > > N .,; .., It> I'- .... ~ I'- N .. .. c.... ClI c u- ~..J ClI_ o. 0 It> en c:i ffi~~;< (,)<~.c"" 0-~- < o a: < z w (,) o ... 4>> > o 5:0 <I- =0 ...=l:i ~~ ~ o a: < z w (,) en ~ 4>> > o 5:0 <I- ....0 .1- 1-0 ~~ "'0 > ., '0 E ~Jl -; 0:: ZO..J -1-0 :lien> ll..0 Ow .z 0< z..J o I- :li o 0:: u. w :li < z >- < ~ o < o 0:: "* 9 0> 0> N ~ N ~~-~~~--------------~--~-------- 0000000-000000000000_____000000_ ~m~~~~~~~~~~~m~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~o ociciocicici-ciddciciciciciocioci____~cicicicioci~ ~~~MN:~~go~~~~~~~~~M~~-NNoNNmOV. ~~~~~~~~~~~om~.Moo8~~o~~~~~8~~~~ ~~~M~~~~~NN~~~~~~~~M~~~~~~NN~~~~ --ooooo-oooooooooooo_____oooooo~ ~~.~m~~~~o~o~_~_~~~~~~o~~~~~~vm~ ~:6d~~6~666666~66666~:~~~666666: ~en~~:~~~8~~~~~~~~~8R~~~~~~~~~~~; ~~~.~~~~~~~~~ffi~~~~~~~~~~~~~M~~~~ 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 ~~~o~~m~~moo~~~~N~~~NNNN~~~~~~~ o~mNM~N~~m.~~~~~~ON~Nm~~~N~~ro~~~ WMNN~V~-VN~~~~~~~~MM~VV~V~v~v~~~ N '0 oooo~oo~oo~oooooo~ooooooo~oooo~~ VVVVNV~N~VNV~~~~~~vvw~~~w~~~~vW~ 11> c> <:l a.. X "'0 UJ "'0 > ~ CX::~"'O"CiIi iIi"C "5wo::O::~ cx:: ",~.,.c", ~..c "'OlU"OQ)~t? >- "C ~g "C cx::roCX::~.,~ ~ a: ra >. .2 "0 0.'- B ~ CD ~ "0 a.. 0 *~ ro=o roCX::"'~~E=o2~ ~o '" ~~U~C>E~0rom ~ -0 ~~..,.~s "'Oi~'O~~~~si0 ~ ~~~ E~w~5~2~~~>~~-;"C~i "'Oll'l _'., Ecx::~oenenro~l1>~oo >CX::0-o ~~ ~mm -~cx::-oCX::~>= -- O.cOO~N> "'O~CX::o:: Sou"C-u~W~~€~~-~-0-moo>3uu -0- CX::"Co~So-oo~"C"'OI1>"Corocx::-;iIi 0 cx::.cS~CX::-~ 02z cx::CX::roCX::-~u5cx::~o-S ~-o~I1>"'O "C0ro ~ 11> 11>"'0> ~-"C co>~~>o.2 ~~cC~~~>mo~c~"O>~ ~z~~~~:CDs~~~~~~~~o~~~O~ffi~ ~~.~~~~~~;~5U~~~~~E~~cOS0~~ "- >::E~ ~ c~I1>-E~I1>I1>ll'l =-~j&,~cx:: ~ffi88E3~~3~~~~E~~0~~6~~o~u Ol ~ :.:J "'0 o cx:: u ~ ~ >-:E -g"C~ 3;CX:: Olcx::a::> a:~ J:_o ~ CX::u Q) 0:: Ol m 0 "Ct5~ 0- CX::<("'Oen<oi~ a.'t::C::NV"O~ g~~cx::~oc.. -'~0l~CX::02 *<ctjoUo'" (ijo<(-o-CJ ~;;;~~;;;ll'li ONOCONO)"'C Ecx::gcx::o::cx::o E~<(u~~CJ X "0"0"0"'0 UJ >- a:::cx::cx::cx:: "'0 "C~~~~ "C"C"C"C"C"C~"C.c ~~~~ 3 ~ ffi~~~~"C5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3~3 "Ca:::NO") (0-0 ~C6n;n;rn > Q) g-~g-~g.~~~OJ> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ roo::"C0000iIiouuuuuuuu<((ij~(ij~~(ij~(ij~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ll'l <c<(8u~~~~~06~~~~~~~~~EEEEEEEEE~r- __ 0 U") W f"--, eX) en 0 ...... It) <0 r- co (j) (""') l.O c.o a:) r- ~ I'"" -r II,{) to r- ""I;f' to r- 0:::. 01 N ~~~NNNMMVVVVVl.Ol,{)~~wm~~~~r-~~~~~~ , ~I ~I 7 :::.e o o .... C l'O .c I- eu ~ o :E .!!1 <( ..-. E o ~ - 0. o ~ o eu E ::J o > og.!i~ >..0.1:0 oE-.... -Oc.S~ e..... ~ >o~"" o8-:;t!- >c~;." 0<0( .2=~ .'00 a: > > Zo" w>~io( g~.g:5"" ~ o it: < Z w <.J II) .. . > o :>0 0(1- =(1) ~I- (1)0 w~ ~ o it: 0( :z w <.J II) .. CD > o :>0 <I- ....(1) ~I- (1)0 w~ ZO..J -1-0 ~II)> "'(1) Ow .z ~~ o I- ~ o a: ... w ~ < Z ~ < :!: o < o a: "" o ,-~------------------~--------------~-~------ 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0> 0> N N 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ~OOM~~~MNN~~-~~N~MNOOM.~~~O~M~~m~~~~___m~MM~ ~....O>~~~~~~N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M~~~~~~~~~~~~ 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 -------------------------------------------- _00___000000_000000000_00000000000_000000000 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O~~~~M~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -oo___oooocid_ciocicicicicicici~ciocicicicicici_cici_ciociciooocio ~~~~~~~8g~~~~~~_~m~g~~~~~~~~~~MM~8~~~~~~~~~~ ~~;~~~g~~~5~~~~.~~~~~8~~~~~~~~m~~~~~~~~~re~~~ __0___000000_000_00000_00000000_00_000000__0 ~m~OMMM~~N~N~~~N~O-Nv~_~~~~~m~O~N.~_.~omONmN ~~~~:~6666~~~ci66~~666~:666~6~66~66~d66666~:6 m~8~~~~~~~~~~OOM~~~.~g~~~~~~~M~~~~~~~~~M~g~~ ~b~~~~~~$~~~~~~g~~~~2g~~M~~~8~~~~~~o~~~g~~~~ ~~~~~~MNN~NM~~~ ~NN~~~~NNMVM~~-~_N_~~~~VM_M~~N gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~g~~~~~~~~~ ~v~~vv~MMMNVVMMMNNN~NN~VV_~V~.~ v~vWvvv-vvvN ...oooooooooooooooooo~ooooo~~ooo~~ooooooo~oooo ~~~WW~~VVVV~~~VV~VVNVvIDv~NNv~vNNVWW~VVVNWWWV N '0 N <Il o '" 11. "0 "0 cr:cr: >- <Il ~ .g';;:ll. crw~ ~~t:) ii:COai .9~:E "0 <Il 0 cr:(5t:) .caE ~:;x <llcr:w co<ll"O :c~~ ~a::c; c~~:g ~ii:t:)O <IlS-.c ,5 <: ~ ~~~ c"O ::lcr::.o 8s~ ~ Vi ~ ...Jg'> o '5 0 ;.;~~ cr:.scr: ~ Ci5 ~ ~ni~ E.~ E E E E o-"O"OC'E <Il<cr:cr: ~"C~Q.)-5 o cr: a. <Il m _~"~U~~ (J)..c:ra-o Z5u~E:.o :;Z02Edi 0::: o <Il.s.s-g c::2 S-~ .9~o <: "'z-<l:w.s .~ :; 0 ~ :;; "C :3 cr: ~ '''' cr: cr: .9~gg-5~ ~.oUiii~ C).coc>>o ,~ 5 <Il'~ E ::Jziii::JE x W "0 > iIi ~ 0 t:)U ~ Co ~u oen t:)- oZ -.s "0"0 O:::cr: .c"", u C :;'l m coLi: :.o~ QjQ) "0'0 C 0 m 0 >t:) ~-o-o "C € wo:::cr: cr: <l: 0 ~<ll.c o..~"O Z C'E~~ -0 m ocr: 0>"0 m<ll 0::: U:EO Ncr:CO ~~a:J a '0 QJ~"Ca:::g-~ "O-ou;E a. "0 "O't",cr:uo cr:O:::OlE~<ll-cr: <IlO:::Ill~a.=...JO::: :.0 tC~~~~Cc ~c~gg~<Ilu di oO"-_c 00 EEtoo~_~B ~~ "~~Ol...Jo~>~~;cr:i~,"C~o ~~~"C N~ ~ >g'z.s~cr:ocr: 0:::> <~; .s~"",~~iIi300~a.Ea. en.s E~"5-"Cuc~"C~~~"C~g~g~B~ 2.s~~cr:~~.scr:m.sOVE...Jo...J' <Ilcr: u~~c~~~~c€"C~~-~~~B'~~ ~cr:::l.s~.s=cr:.s~cr:~~.s~N~~~m 8t8~~....~t~mtW.cN~cr:~~c~ eni<llEE~o&Ec&:Et~EUEcr:::lE z~~:3E~~~:3~~~~ffiE~Eu8E "0 cr: .c u co "C )( ~~"O<l:O:::w <llcr:oO-o ~>-~~ffi ;;;~~~~.... :::!:ai;;;;"",~ ~U'Jen.c:en .9t:)oo.s~o ~.s--"O- ~<l:cr:~ ~-o.....ooO ~c;~~~~ U <Il :t m m 0 oc;;c~~.c c~r::c:~ ~~(5~~c3 <Il <Il <ll 01 01 01 :E:E:2 03mm UlUlUlUlUl~~~~ zzzzzwUJUJw_ ---------xx ~~~oo ~~~~~~~~~~~"Ocr~cr~~ C ~ C C r:: c c c r:: > > > r:: ceO 0 .s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.siIiiIiiIioooOO ~~~~~~~~~CCC~~~D~ E~E~EE~EE~~~~t:)t:)5€ ~~~~~~~~~~~~Szzz~~ ~~~~g~~ 00 E E 00"0"0 "0"0 ~~cr:cr: cr:cr: "C ~ 0 0 ~ ~ 0 0 >~CDCD.g.g"CUU iIien<ll<ll,--o:::ti;i;; "'~ 01010:::0::: o~~ ~:2~~~d)13cc OOOOil.~~~U5 €CiiU;V;U;Vj o ca tV (V cu (U zwwwww .~ "~ "~ on; 'co "m f-f-f-'='='= 'E 'E 'E 'E 'E 'E :.0 co co co n3 ro rc Q) 'EE 'E 'E 'E 'E -g ~~~~~~~ O'l O'l 0') en en N NNNNNCX) o:::cr:cr:cr:cr:cr: enen(flenenen ~~~~~~~~N~~~~~~~~M~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~-~-~-~~-~~~~-----~~~--~- ..-.--,--.--.--."" "0 cr:"O "'" > iiiiIi u:~ 20 Qi :0.2 0"0 ocr: t:)c"O ~~ffi :; .~ ~ en > III ~::JO "0 0::: a. ~ m iIi~ c 0 ~~ o '" ...J- ,9.3 "0 > 1ii c III 0: o ...J "0"0"0"'0"0 o:::o:::cr:o:::cr: .c.L:.:=..c.c u (,) U U U co fa rc (tJ rc Q) QJ QJ QJ OJ CO CO CO coco i:i:C ~ a; "O;;? ~ (ij >> ~I~ :c:e di <ll "0"0 C C '" '" >> <0 or; GlO'l ,1 0'11-' SE"NER COLLIER ~ . .. u \ .\ I -------------, ,-------- I . . . . ----- NAPlLS lWWO<ALI:E IIll Co...... b ~ PIN( IIlOCE lID I I . . . I I ,.-------... .. .. ..: P'lPC MOCt N) u a TY Of" NAPLES WA ltR SERIo1CE AREA ~ I!' 3 ! :;: .. :i RAlllO lID lNmtSTAn: - 1~ a.A.F OF l.IElCICO 0A'dS BCUlEVAKJ II ~ . l: g .. .. .. ,.; li1 ~ u ItA rtlDHAK!: H.-xx All ~ ~ -----------... I --, .._-... I . ._ 0# . . . I __I . - - - "'lEII~ mTRICT I 9Ol.O<0ARID 'qLE ,.... z.... PREPARED BY': GRAPHICS AND TEOiNICJ.L SUPl'ORT SEcnON COUIolUNIIY DE\'UOPl.IENT AND ENIo1ROHIolENTAL SERIo1~ 01'0\900 SOURa:: COlUER COUNTY ununES 114\'1SlON. 1995 DATE: 1/99 FILE: PW-I.owe \ ~ ',lAP S5-2 Cc::..UER CCL;~JT'('S 7:...;REE (3) WA Tc.~~,~O /O~ SEWER ! i .. '" - - -. C;STRICTS - aOUNOARIES ~ I \ ? ~ i Collier County. Florida , I \Z4J ~,-\._-~~-- ---..-.-.-.- _._.1 I '~i:3 \ II __-----------, \ a ,-------- I ~ \ oe I I \ .!. I I I I I I . I --- I \ .---- _ NA1'\L5 lIAlOCAlfE lID C,R. II4lI \ \ ~ I I I I I ~ ,,-------... ;;; .. "'Nt: IlIlCI[ lID I ~ ~ III OTY OF NAPlLS "A It:R SER\'IC( AREA RACoO lID lNTtRSTA~ - 75 CIJlF OF WEXlCO OA..s 8OUL(VAllO i ~ .. C ~ u " .. ..: .. :i! II! ~ u ~ "" T1lOIWC[ H......ool lID ... ~ -----------... . I .. - . .._-.. . ---==.,~ I o SCALE II.. :!:wL PREPARED BY: CRAPHICS .....0 TE01NICAL SUPPORT SECnoN COIoIWUNITY OE'fEI.OPtoIENT .....0 ENWlONWENTAL SDlVla:S DIVISION SOURa: CQ.1JER COUNTY UnU11ES DIVISION. 199~ OAI'E: 1/911 F1LE: SS-2.0WC 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT ON THE PROPOSED STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS TO RESOLVE A STATEMENT OF INTENT TO FIND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS NOT IN COMPLIANCE AS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT ON DECEMBER 24,1997. OBJECTIVE: To resolve a notice of intent to find the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan not in compliance issued the by the Department of Community Affairs on December 24, 1997 by entering into a Stipulated Settlement Agreement with the Department and adoption of remedial amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. CONSIDERATIONS: The Department of Community Affairs issued a notice of intent to find the Comprehensive Plan amendments prepared as a result of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report not in compliance on December 24, 1997. The elements of the Comprehensive Plan that were found not in compliance and are not effective are as follows: 1) Intergovernmental Coordination Element; 2) Public Facilities Element - Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element; 3) Public Facilities Element - Drainage Sub-Element; 4) Housing Element; 5) Golden Gate Area Master Plan; 6) Conservation & Coastal Management Element; and 7) Future Land Use Element & Future Land Use Map. The Statement of Intent from Department of Community Affairs (DCA) is included as Attachment 1. A summary of the objections are as follows: 1) Intergovernmental Coordination Element - Policy 1.2.6, nor policies elsewhere in the Comprehensive Plan, establish guidelines or criteria to ensure that schools are located proximate to residential development; does not identify what land uses may be incompatible with schools, and does not provide that schools not be located on environmentally sensitive lands such as unique native habitats and habitats for endangered species. 2) Public Facilities/Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element - Objective 1.2 does not define an aim, intent or effect that can be meaningfully measured and does not define the level of protection that is to be afforded ground water resources and aquifer recharge areas by application of the Ground Water Protection Ordinance. Policies 1.2.1 through 1.2.4 are vague and do not establish guidelines, standards, or criteria for applying the Ground Water Protection Ordinance to development to protect groundwater recharge areas. 3) Public Facilities/Drainage Sub-Element - Policy 1.1.2 does not specify guidelines, standards, or criteria for discharge rates and adequate water management capacity, and, therefore does not provide for the protection of natural drainage features. <i?.~ 4) Housing Element - The County does not use the best available data or provide alternate data on the estimates of the number of farmworkers and does not include policies which provide guidelines or criteria for the location of farmworker housing. 5) Golden Gate Area Master Plan - Policy 2.2.3 as revised deletes the provision for the application of Chapter 28-25 F.A.C. Area of Critical State Concern regulations to Southern Golden Gate Estates, provide the data and analysis which demonstrates that natural resources, such as wetlands, native habitats and listed species will be adequately protected within that portion of the SGGE area. 6) Conservation & Coastal Management Element Appendix D Natural Resource and Appendix E Hurricane Evacuation were not provided in the adopted amendment therefore data and analysis was not provided. (It should be noted that both of these appendices were included in the support document which is adopted by Resolution and provided to DCA). The Coastal High Hazard Area was not defined correctly by definition or on the Future Land Use Map. Objective 6.3 does not provide for the protection of wetlands. Objective 7.3 is vague as to the level of protection to be afforded listed species. Objective 9.4 regarding local storage tank compliance is vague and does not provide protection of ground water resources. Objective 9.5 regarding regulation of septic tanks serving industrial activities is vague to the extent of the protection of ground water resources. Objective 11.6 regarding the Coastal Barrier and Beach system is vague as to the level of protection to be afforded coastal resources. 7) Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map - Policy 3.1 d does not specify what are appropriate land uses in wellfield protection areas. The Future Land Use Map does not accurately reflect the Coastal High Hazard Area. A list of suggested remedial actions were provided by DCA and these have been the focus of our discussions with regard to settlement. Several parties intervened in this issue: Florida Wildlife Federation; Collier County Audubon Society; and the District School Board of Collier County on behalf of the County. An Administrative Hearing was held the week of May 4th, 1998 where the County staff defended the Comprehensive Plan as submitted to DCA. The Administrative Law Judge, Robert E. Meale, has not issued his recommended order in this case and is aware of ongoing settlement discussions. A Mediation hearing was conducted on August 4th and 5th between DCA and the County and a report issued by Mr. Simon M. Harrison. Several other meetings have been held between county staff and staff of the Department of Community Affairs, as well as the intervenors in this case. The outcome of all of these meetings is represented in Attachment 2, the proposed Stipulated Settlement Agreement, for the Board's review and consideration. We have requested that a representative of the Department of Community Affairs be present to answer any questions the Board may have. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The proposed Stipulated Settlement Agreement, if adopted by the Board of County Commissioners and the Department of Community Affairs, and mayor may not include the intervenors in this case, would be reviewed by the Governor and Cabinet and result in remedial amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to resolve the disputed issues. ____23 FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of the density reduction amendments is provided as part of the agenda package for the density reduction amendments as Attachment 2 "Evaluation of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Density Reduction Amendments" prepared by Robinson & Cole. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners review and provide any recommended changes to the proposed Stipulated Settlement Agreement. Reviewed By: Date: '3 - ':! - ~<3 Reviewed By: ~ ' Rohert J. Mullhere, AICP, Director p~eNices& Approved By: q. Vincent A Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development & Environmental Services Division Date: 3-3.<>'1' Date: 3-3-~/ < ( STATE OF flORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS .Helping Floridians create safe, vibrant, sustainable communities. December 24, 1997 JAMES f. MURlEY Secretary ~~!lWrE DEe 3 0 1997 LAWTON OiILES Governof COMltUNITY DEVELOP'" The Honorable Tunothy L. Hancock, Chairman Collier CountY Board of County Commissioners 2800 Nonh Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 33942 Dear Chairman Hancock: The Department has completed its review of the adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendments for Collier County (DCA No.97-1ER), as adopted on October 28, 1997, and determined that portions of the Ordinance Nos. 97-56, 97-59,97-61,97-63,97-64, 97-66 and 97-67 do not meet the requirements of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.), for compliance and that portions of Ordinance Nos. 97-53, 97-54, 97-55, 97-57, 97-58, 97-60, 97-62 and 97-65 do meet the requirements ofChaptcr 163, Pan II, F.S., for compliance. The Department is issuing a Statement of Intent and Notice of Intent to find the Comprehensive Plan Amendments Not in Compliance for portions of Ordinance Nos. 97-56, 97-59,97-61,97-63, 97-64,97-66 and 97-67 and In Compliance for portions of Ordinance Nos. 97-53, 97-54, 97-55, 97-57, 97-58, 97-60, 97-62 and 97-65. The Notice of Intent has been sent to the Naples Daily News for publication on December 25, 1997. Please note that a copy of the adopted Collier County Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the Department's Objections. Recommendations and Comments Report dated December 19, 1997, the Notice ofIntent and the Depanment's Statement of Intent to find the Comprehensive Plan Amendments Not in Compliance must be availableJor public inspection Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays. during normal business hours, at the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section. 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 33942. 2355 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD. TJ,lLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2100 Phone>: B50.4118.8~('f>:~'_-:om ~-B.B406 F^X: 8S0.9:!1.Q781i~;,;r.("om ~91..;:'7Bl <:(; Inll'rnpl acc'l'SS: "~'I'l:J/ww" ~~ale.il.us/comaiilcica.h~ml IlOUlA em IV& aI CrilInl !uIt Canmn f.-e Oftn 2:'96 o.......~. s..tt l!~ ..~ ;;'''n;J llO;o..2~~:- CUTh !\H'" ..1 iii CriIiaI5ln ::. :!~ hrIcI Oiono :55 ur.~. --...... ~ C'\.. il(,I' :: .' :....:.(,.l. !Ol TII flOllD~ 1fCO\'(1Y Off ~O !Ia\~ .'-'.10' \\" j..... $e ..~:'-:: :\ ..:c.; The Honorable Timothy L. Hancock December 24, 1997 Page Two In addition, the Notice of Intent and the Statement of Intent will be forwarded to the . Division of Administrative Hearings of the Department of Management Services for the scheduling ofan administrative hearing pursuant to Section 120.57, Florida Statutes. I am interested in meeting with you and your designee at your convenience for the purpose of negotiating an agreement that will bring yo~ plan amendment into compliance. My staff and I are available to discuss your plan amendment with you. Another letter will be sent to you that includes additional information about the administrative hearing process and compliance agreements. . If you have any questions, or are interested in discussing a compliance agreement, please contact Steve A~ Planner IV, Roger Wilburn, Community Program Administrator, or Charle:! Gauthier, Growth Management Administrator at (904) 487-4545. SCl~~4~_{f~) J. Thomas Beck, Chief Bureau of Local Planning JTB/saj Enclosures: Notice of Intent Statement of Intent cc: Vmcent A Cautero, AlCP, Administrator Wayne E. Daltry, Executive Director, Southwest Florid Regional Planning Council <610 ~-~'_.. I -., STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNllY AFFAIRS NOTICE OF INTENT TO FIND nIB COWER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS ADOPTED B,Y ORDINANCE NOS. 97-56, 97-59, 97-61, 97-63, 97-64, 97-66, AND 97-67 NOT IN COMPLIANCE AND TIm COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NOS. 97-53, 97-54, 97-55,97-57,97-58,97-60,97-62, AND 97-65 IN COMPLIANCE I DOCKET NO. 971ER.-NOI-llOl-(A)-(N) Tho Department gives notice of its intent to fand the Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for Collier COWlty, adopted by Ordinance Nos. 97-56, 97-59, 97-61, 97-63, 97-64, 97-66 and 97-67, on October 28, 1997, NOT IN COMPLIANCE, and Amendments adopted by Qrdinance Nos. 97-53, 97-54, 97-55,97-57,97-58,97-60,97-62 and 97-65, on October 28, 1997, IN COMPLIANCE, pursuant to Sections 163.3184, 163.3187 and 163.3189, F.S. The adopted Collier.CoWlty Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the Department's Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Repon (if any), and the Department's Statement of Intent to find the Comprehensive Plan Amendments Not In Compliance will be available for public inspection Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays, during normal business hours, at the Collier County Com- prehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Hors~oe Drive, Naples, Florida 33942. .- . ... :. Any affected person, as defined in Section 163.3184, F ,S., has a right to petition for an admin- f istrative hearing to challenge the proposed agency detennination that the Amendments to the Collier County Comprehensive Plan are In Compliance, as defined in Subsection 163.3184(1), F.S. The peti- tion must be tiled within twenty-one (21) days after publication of this notice, a copy must be mailed ~r delivered to the local government and must include aU of the infonnation and contents described in Rule 9J-l1.012(7), FA.C. The petition must be tiled with the Agency Clerk, Department of Community AtTairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. Failure to timely tile a peti- tion shall cOnstitute a waiver of any right to request an administrative proceeding as a petitioner under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.,.S, If a petition is tiled, the purpose of the administrative hearing will be to present evidence and testimony and forward a recommended order to the Department. If no peti- tion is filed, this Notice ofIntent shall become final agency action. This Notice ofIntent and the Statement ofInteDt for those amendments found Not In Compliance will be forwarded by petition to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) ofthe Department C?f. Management Services for the scheduling of an Administrative Hearing pursuant to Sections 120.569 *d 120.57, F.S. The purpose of the administrative hearing will be to present evidence and testimony on the noncompliance issues alleged by the Department in its Objections, Recommendations, and CommentS D.nn'" .ftd C;:".A"'_". ",~Tft"'". :.. ""........... .........-. _ _____~..a_... _~__ ~__ ~__..._..I:__"_ A .I_._!_ ,.....-....... .. ~7. STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COM:MUNlTY AFFAIRS IN RE: COT I ,~ COUNTY ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ) AMENDMENT 971ER. ) ADOP?JID BY ORDINANCE ) NUMBERS 97-53, 97-54,97-55, ) 97-56,97-57,97-58,97-59,97-60,) 97-61, 97-62, 97-63, 97-64, 97-65,) 97-66, AND 97-67 ON ) NOVEMBER 14, 1997 ) ) DOCKET NO. 971ER-NOI-II01- (A)- (N) S1 ATEMENT OF INTENT TO FIND . COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS NOT IN COMPLIANCE The Florida Department ofComnnlDtty Affairs hereby issues its Statement of Intent to find Collier County's Comprehensive Plan Amertd"1ent 971ER, which modifies the eletT\ent!ll of the Comprehensive Plan, Not in Compliance based upon the Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report issued by the Deputment on July 6, 1997, in relation to Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 971ER.. The ORC Report is hereby incorporated by reference. The Department finds that plan amendments adopted by Ordinance Numbers 97-56, 97-59,97- 61,97-63,97-64,97-66, and 97-67 are not "in compliance," as defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes (F.S.), b~u~ they are not consistent with the requirements of Section 163.3177, F.S., the State Comprehensive Plan, and Rule Chapter 9J-5, Florida Admini.strative Code (F.AC.), for the following reasons: 1. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDlNA nON ELEMENT (Ordinance Number 97-56) A. Inconsistent Provisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan am~rlment under this subject heading are as follows: 1. The County's comprehensive plan permits schools to be located in all land uses, including rural and conservation. It excludes schools only from jurisdictional wetlands. This permissiveness, especially with regard to rural and conservation lands, could encourage urban sprawl. Neither Policy 1.2.6, nor policies elsewhere in the comprehensive plan. establish guidelines or criteria to ensure that schools are located proximate to residential development; does not identify what land use~ may be -incompatible with schools, and does not provide that schools should not be located on environmentally sensitive lands such as unique native habitats and habitats for endangered species. [Section 163.3177(6)(a), F.S.] <g~ B. Recommended Remeqial Action(s): Revise OrdinAnce 97-56 to establish to establish guidelines or criteria in Policy 1.2.6 to ensure that schools are located PfOxima.te to residential development; identify land uses which may be incompatible with schools, and provide that schools should not be located on environyn~1y sensitive lands . ../ n PUBLIC FACn..ITIES F.l1~ I N~TIJR.AL GROUNDWATER AOUIFER. RECHARGE SUB-Fl.F.MFNT (OrrlinSlnce Number 97-59) A. Inconsistent Provisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan ameatimP.l1t under this subject heading are u fonows: 1. The County revised Objective 1.2 to provide that the Ground Water Protection Ordinance shall be implemented to protect ground water resources and aquifer recharge areas. The objective does not define an aim, intent or effect that can be mMningfully measured. Specifically, the objective does not define the level of protection that is to be afforded ground water resources and aquifer recharge ar~ by application of the Ground Water Protection Ordinance. [Rules 9J-5.oo3(86) and 9J-S.Oll(2)(b)5., F AC.] 2. The County revised Policies 1.2.1 through 1.2.4 to provide that the Ground Wate: Protection Ordinance will be applied to existing and future developmeut. These policies are vague and do not establish guidelines, standards, or criteria for applying the Ground Water Protection Ordinance to development and thereby protecting the functions of groundwater recharge areas. [Rules 9J-5.oo3(95) and 9J-5.011(2)(c)4., F.AC.] B. Recommended Remedial Actions: 1. Amend Ordinance 97-59 to define an aim, intent, or effect for Objective 1.2 that can be m~ningfully measured. - - 2. Amend Ordinance 97-59 to establish guidelines or criteria in Policies 1.2.1 through 1.2.4 for applying the Ground Water Protection Ordinance to development and thereby protect the functions of gfroundwater recharge areas. Ill. PUBLIC FACILITIES ELE1v1ENT I DRAINAGE SUB-ELEMENT (Ordinance Numb 97-61) A Inconsistent Provisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan. amendment und this subject heading are as follows: 1. The County revised Policy 1.1.2 to provide that procedures in the land 2 ~l development code as well as those delegated by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) will be implemented to ensure that pre- and l'ost- development discharge rates are monitored and adequate water management capacity will be available to serve approved developments. The policy does not specify guidelines, standards, or criteria for discharge rates and adequate water mRnllgement capacity, and, therefore does not provide for the protection ofn.amral drainage features. [Rules 9J-5.003(95) and 9J-5.011(2)(c)4., F.AC.] B. Recommended Remedial Action: I. Amend Ordinance 97-61 to establish guidelines or criteria in Policy 1.1.2 for discharge rates and adequate water manllgement capacity and thereby provide protection for natural drainage features. IV. HOUSING ~ (Ordinance 97-63) A. Incon!ci!ttent Provisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under this subject heaning are as follows: 1. The County has not used the best data available for determinAtion of farmworker housing needs. The University of Florida, Shimberg Center has provided recent (1996) estimAtes offarmworker housing needs for each county in the State; for Collier County, these data indicate a deficit of2,645 units. Collier County has declined to include such data in its Housing Element because they believe it does not reflect recent. downturns in agricultural business there. The County, however, does not include any information to support their contentions. Without inclusion of the best available data, development of pertinent objectives and policies to address ~worker housing needs is hindered. [Rules 9J-5.005(2)(c), 9J- 5.010(2)(b), 9J-5.010(3)(b)I., and 9J-S.OIO(3)(c)5., F.A.C.] 2. Ordinance 97-63 does not include policies which provide guidelines or criteria for the location offarmworker housing. [Rule 9J-5.010(3)(c)5., ~.A.C.] B. Recommended Remedial Actions: 1. Amend Ordinance 97-63 to include the best available data regarding housing needs for farmworkers in Collier County, and revise or add plan objectives and policies, as necessary, to address any deficiencies. 2. Amend Ordinance 97-63 to include policies that provide guidelines and criteria for the Ipcation offarmworker housing. Such guidelines and criteria may provide that farmworker housing shall be located proximate to places of work, transit services, hospitals, etc. 3 qo. V. GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER. PLAN (Oroin~nce Number 97-64) A. Inconsistent Provisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan ~mM1timeut under this subject heading are as follows: 1. The County added a policy (policy 2.1,4) which provides that Chapter 28-25, . F .A.C., will be applied to those South Golden Gate Estates (SGGE) units located within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC) and deletes a policy (policy 2.2,3) that had provided Chapter 28-25, F.A.C., was to be applied to all lands in SGGE, not just those within the ACSC. Chapter 28-25, F .AC., establishes limitations on site alteration, construction of drainage facilities, and construction of transportation facilities. By excluding application of Chapter 28- lS,F.A.C., to those lands within the SGGE area, but outside of the ACSC, the County'provides for.a Jesser degree of protection for natural resources there. The County has not provided data and analysis which demonstrate that natural resources, such as wetlands, native habitats, and listed species, will be adequately protected within that portion of the SGGE area located outside the ACSC. [Rules 9J-5.005(2)(a), 9J-5.013(2)(c)3., 9J-5.013(2)(c)5., 9J-5.013(2)(c)6., 9J- 5.013(2)(c)9., 9J-5.013(3)(a), and 9J-5.013(3)(b), F.AC.] B. Recommended Remedial Action: I. Amend Ordinance 97-64 to include data and analysis which evaluates existing resources, including wetlands, native habitats, and listed species, within the South Golden Gate Estates area; evaluates the level of protection provided to said resources via implementation of relevant Plan policies; and to amend Policy 2.1.4, or add new, additional policies to provide for the protection of said resources consistent with that provided in Chapter 28-25, F.AC. VI. . CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT (Ordinance Number 97-66) A. Inconsistent Provisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under this subject heading are as follows: 1. Objective 1.3, as well as an associated objective (Objective 1.1) and policies (Policies 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, and 1.3.1) provide for the protection of natural resources through establishment of Natural Resource Protection Areas. The County revised Objective 1.3 to provide that Natural Resource' Protection Areas shall be nominated in accordance with a Board-approved process. The County indicates that this process is described in a new Appendix D in the support document. However, this Appendix was not provided in adopted Ordinance 97- 66. In the absence of this information relative to the nomination process, it is uncertain whether the Natural Resource Protection Area program can serve as an q {~-- effective means for protecting the County's resources. The County's objectives and policies relative to the Natural Resource Protection Areas are therefore not supported by adequate data and analysis. [Rules 91-5.005(2)(a), 91-5.012(3)(b), ~J-5.012(3)(c), 9J-S.013(2)(b)2.- 4, 91-5.013(2)(c), and 91-5.013(3), FAC.] 2. Although the County indicated that an analysis and inventory of natural disaster concerns (to include estimAtes of the DUmber of persons requiring evacuation, the . munber of persons requiring public shelttJ:, the number of shelter spaces available, evacuation routes., constraints on evacuation, and evacuation times) was to be .. included in a new Appendix E in the support document for the Conservation and Coastal Managemeot EJfl!lTlfI!nt. Appendix E was not included in the adopted am~d1'Uent. The County therefore does not include data and analysis ~sary to support Objective 12.1, which serves to mAintain or reduce hurricane evacuation times, or Policy 12.1.2,. which serves to promote maintf!nAn~ and reduction of Imrricane evacuation times through regulation ofland use amP-ndmf!nt~ [Rules 9J- 5.005(2)(a), 9J-S.012(2)(e)1., 91-5.012(3)(b)7., F.AC, and 91-5.012(3)(c)4., F.A.C.] 3. The County revised Policy 12.2.5 to define the Coastal High Hazard Area as that area "lying within the Category 1 evacuation zone as determined by the Emergency Management Director." This definition is inaccurate and should be the Category 1 evacuation zone as defined in the Regional Evacuation Studv. [Rules 91-5.003(19), and 91-5.12(3)(c)7., F.A.C.] 4. Objective 6.3 was revised to clarify that transitional zone wetlands shall be those . defined by State and Federal permitting requirements. The revised objective lacks a meaningful measure, requiring only that a "portion" of said wetlands shall be preserved in non-agricultural development. The objective therefore does not provide for the protection of wetlands. [Rules 91-5.003(86) and 91-5.012(3)(b)1., F.A.C.] 5. Objective 7.3 was revised to provide that the County shall continue to develop am implement programs for protecting wildlife by including measures for the protectioclrelocation of listed species. The revised objective rem3in~ vague as to the level of protection to be afforded listed species and, therefore, does not provide for the protection of said species. [Rules 9J-5.003(86) and 91- 5.013(2)(b)4., F.AC.] 6. Objective 9.4 was revised to provide that the County shall implement the existing local storage tank compliance program to protect water quality. The revised objective remains vague as to the extent water quality is to be protected by this program and, therefore, does not provide for the protection of ground water resources. [Rules 9J-5.003(86) and 9J-5.013(2)(b)2., F.AC.] 7. Objective 9.5 was revised to provide that the County shall implement its Ground q~.- Water Protection Ordinlln~ to regulate the use of septic tanks serving industrial activities. The revised objective ff'!I'I1l1;nc vague as to the extent water quality is to be protected by this Ordinance and, therefore, does not provide for the protection of ground water resources. [Rules 9J-5.003(86) and 9J-5,013(2)(b)2., F .AC.] 8. Ql?jective 11.6 was revised to provide that the County shall implement the Coastal Barrier and Beach System Management Program (of the IDC) by conserving habitats, species, shoreline and dunes within the coastal zone. The revised objective r~airnt vague u to the level of protection to be afforded coutal resources and, therefore, does not provide for the protection of coastal resources. [Rules 91-5.003(86), 9I-5.012(3)(b)1., 9J-5,013(2)(b)2., 9I-5.013(2)(b)3., and 91- 5.013(2)(b)4., F.AC.] B. Recommended Remedial.Actions: 1. Amend Ordinance 97-66 to include data and analysis relative to the nomination process for Natural Resource Protection Areas and which demonstrate that the Natural Resource Protection Area program is viable and sufficient to protect the County's natural resources. 2. Amend Ordinance 97-66 to include an analysis and inventory ofnatural disaster concerns (mcluding the number of persons requiring evacuation, the number of persons requiring public shelter, the number of shelter spaces available, evacuation routes, constraints on evacuation, and evacuation times). 3. Amend Ordinance 97-66 to define the Coastal High Hazard Area (cmIA) in Policy 12.2.5 consistent with Rule 9J-5.003(19), F.AC. The CHHA should be defined as the Category 1 evacuation zone as delineated in the Regional Evacuation Study. 4. Am~d Ordinance 97-66 to define an aim, intent, or effect for Objective 6.3 that can be mf".aningfully measured and thereby provide for the protection of wetlands in non-agricultural development. 5. Amend Ordinance 97-66 to define an aim, intent, or effect for Objective 7.3 that can be meaningfully measured and thereby provide for the protection of listed specIes. 6. Amend Ordinance 97-66 to define an aim, intent., or effect for Objective 9.4 that can be meaningfully measured and thereby provide for the protection of ground water resources. 7. Amend Ordinance 97-66 to define an aim, intent., or effect for Objective 9.5 that can be meaningfully measured and thereby provide for the protection of ground water resources. . 93 8. Amend Ordinance 97-66 to define an aim, intent, or effect for Objective 11.6 that can be meaningfully measured and thereby provide for the protection of coastal resources. VII. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP (Orninanc:e Number 97-67) A Inconsistent ProvisioDS. The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under this subject heaning are as fonows: 1. The County indicates that policies for the protection potable water welIfields are included in Policy 3.l.d of the Future Land Use Element and revised Policies 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 of the Natural Ground Wakr Aquifer Recharge Sub-ElemePt These refex:enced polices provide only that the County's Ground Water Protection Ordinance shall be implemented to protect wellfields. They do not specify what arc appropriate land uses in wellfield protection areas. [Rules 9J-5.003(95) and 9J-5.006(3)(c)6., F.AC.] 2. The CountY revised the Future Land Use Map to delineate the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) based on the Category 1 storm evacuation zone as determined by the Emergency Management Director. This delineation is inaccurate and not based on the best available data. The CHHA should be delineated based on the Category 1 storm evacuation zone as defined by the Re~onal Evacuation Study. not as by the Emergency Management Director. The CHHA identified on the revised Future Land Use Map is inconsistent with the Regional Evacuation Study (1995 update) because it does not include all of the Copeland.lI:Alrah::ltchee evacuation zone, [Rules 9J-5.003(19), 9J-5.005(2)(c), and 9J-5.006(4)6., F.AC.] B. Recommended Remedial ActiQns~ . 1. Amend Ordinance 97-67 to provide guidelines or criteria in Policy 3.1.d for applying the Ground Water Protection Ordinance to land use approvals and which identify land uses which are inappropriate for protection ofwellfields. 2. Amend Ordinance 97-67 to delineate the Coastal High Hazard Area on the Future Land Use Map based on the Category 1 evacuation zone as defined in the Regional Evacuation Study. The CHHA. may include an area greater that that defined in the Regional Evacuation Study; but in no case should it be less than that area. ..{l~ VIn. ADDmONAL COMMENTS In addition to the .non-<:ompfiancc issues noted above, Department advises of the following as Comm~s to the respective ordin~Qce: A. 1;RANSPORTATION ELEMENT (Ordinance 97-62) 1. Ahhough the County indicated that the support document will be Amf'll'lded to include an evaluation ofits storm eva~tltion facilities, a revised support doQtroent containing SUch evaluation was not provided in the adopted Atn~dT1'lent as required by Rule 9J-S.019(3)(c), F .AC. B. HOUSING ELEMENT (Ordin."cc 97-63) 1. Objective 2 is inconsistent with Objective 1 of the Housing Element. Both objectives refer to the County's anmtal goal for the provision of housing units affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households; however, Objective 1 indicates the goal is 500 units, while Objective 2 indicates it is 750 UDits. IX. CONSISTENCY WITII 1lIE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A Inc:onsj~ent Provisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan ~m~dT1"Jent under this subject heading are as fonows: 1. Amendment 971ER is inconsistent with the following policies of the State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, F.S.): a) Water Resources. Policy 8.2, to protect the functions of water recharge areas. b) Water Resources. Policy 8.9, to protect aquifers from depletion and cont~minSltion. c) Water Resources. Policy 8.10, to protect surface and groundwater quality and quantity. d) Water Resources. Policy 8.12, to eliminate discharge of inadequately treated stormwater runoff into waters of the state. e) Coastal and Marine Resources: Policy.9.4, to protect coastal resources from to adverse effects of development. . t) Coastal and Marine Resources: Policy 9.9, to prohibit development which disturbs coastal dune systems. g) Natural Svstems and Recreational Lands. Policy 10.1, to conserve wildlife. h) Natural Systems and Recreational Lands. Policy 10.3, to protect endangered species. i) Natural Systems and Recreational Lands. Policy 10.7, to protect wetlands. j) Plan Imolementation. Policy 26.7, to ensure local plans implement and reflect state goals and policies and address problems of concern in a particular region. qs: B. Recommended Remecua1 Action. These inconsistencies may be remedied. by' ~ the following action: 1. Revise the plan ameQdmeat to be consistent with the State Compreh~~ Plan ~ding the above-referenced policies. CON$+JJSIONS 1. The plan am~dm~ts adopted by Ordinances 97-56, 97-57, 97-59, 97-61, 91-63, 97-64, 97-66, and 97-67 are not consistent with the State Compreheosi.ve Plan. 2. Tbe plan amendments adopted by Ordinan(".es 97-56,97-57,97-59,97-61,91-63, 97-64, 97-66, and 97-67 are not consistent with Chapter 9]-5, FAC. 3. Tbe plan amendments adopted by Orninan("e5 97-56, 97-57, 97-59, 97-61, 97-63, 97-64,97-66, and 97-67 are not consistent with Section 163.3177, F.S. 4. The plan amendments adopted by Ordinances 97-56, 97-57, 97-59, 97-61, 97-63, 97-64, 97-66, and 97-67 are not "in compliance," as defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), F.S. 5. In order to bring this portion of the plan amendment into compliance, Collier County may complete the recommended r~ial actions described above or adopt other remedial actions that eliminate the inconsistencies. Executed this ~ day of December, 1997, at TJllaha~see, Borida. ttLP~ Charles G. Pattison, Director Division of Resource Planning and Management Department of Community Affairs 2S55 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Borida 32399 910. COLLIER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DCA NO. 97-1ER) (ORDINANCES 97-56, 97-59, 97-61, 97-63, 97-64, 97-66 AND 97-67) Stipulated Settlement Agreement Draft 2/9/99 971ER-NOI-1101-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT # I(A)1 Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1. Amend the Intergovernmental Coordination Element Policy 1.2.6 to read as follows: Policy 1.2.6: The County shall continue to coordinate with the Collier County School Board on the site selection for new schools and the provision of infrastructure, particularly roads, to support existing and proposed school facilities in ::iccordanco with the Interlocal J\graemont adopted in 3ccord::ince with Ch3pter 163.3177 F.S. on June 25,1996. Add the following to the Urban Designated area permitted uses description section, Section I, b. 5: Urban Designated Areas will accommodate the following uses: b. Non-residential uses including: 5. Community facilities defined as public facilities and institutional uses which serve the community at large. such as churches. group housing uses, cemeteries, and schools and school facilities. Add the following as a new paragraph to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Section B.2 entitled "Estates Designation": Schools and school facilities shall be a permitted use in the Estates land use designation North of 1-75 and shall not be permitted in the Estates land use designation South of 1-75. Add the following to the first paragraph in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Section B.3 entitled "Agricultural/Rural Designation - Settlement Area District": Schools and school facilities shall be a permitted use in the Agricultural/Rural Designation - Settlement Area District. 971 ER-NOI-11 01-(A}-(N} STATEMENT OF INTENT #11 (A) (1) and (2): Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1. Amend the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-element by deleting Objective 1.2 and Policies 1.2.1 through 1.2.5 and add a new Objective 1.2 and Policy 1.2.1 as follows: OBJECTIVE 1.2: Imploment tho Collior Count'} Ground ""::iter Protection Ordinance th::it includes: rogu13tion of I3nd uso ::ictivities County wide as well as within 'Holifield protection zonos surrounding idontified public water supply wellfields ::ind identified sensitive roch::irge oroos; and County ',vide ground water quality criteria. to protoct the County's ground wotor racources 3S well os consitive rechargo afea&.- Policy:1.2.1 : Apply action criteria cpecified in the Collier County Ground Water Protection Ordin::ince to both existing :md future regu13ted development according to procedures specified in the Ordinance to protect tho County's ground '....::iter resources. Policy 1.2.2: ^pply criteria for ground W::iter protection specified in enforcement proceduras cpecified in tho Ordinance, to provide ::in appropriate level of protection to sensitivo rech::irgo areas. 1 q1~__ Pelicy 1..2.3: Apply the critoria of those soctions of the Collier County Ground \^}ater Protection Ordinance that address; breaching of confining units by improper well construction, rock mining and othor exc3'.(3tions, blasting, 3nd other similar 3ctivities to protect rech3rgo of the Surficial Aquifor System, to pl3nned!permitted futuro development. Pelicy 1..2.4: Implomentation of tho Collier County Ground Water Protection Ordinance will follow Ordin3nce procedures, 3nd othor internal County procedures in a manner to minimize duplic3tion of offort among County, municipal, and State agenGies. PoliG)' 1.2.5: The County 'f:i11 apply existing regul3tions and permitting reviow procoduros for to the evaluation of proposod dovolopment within sensitivo aquifor rech3rge 3roas. Objective 1.2: Ground water Quality shall meet all applicable Federal and State water Quality standards. Policy 1.2.1 Land development standards for protection of the County's ground water supplies are prOVided in Policy 3.1.1 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. 971 ER-NOI-1101-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT #11I (A) (1) Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1 . Amend Policy 1.1.2 of the Drainage Sub-Element to read as follows: Policy 1.1.2 Implement procedures within the County's Land Development Code (Section 3.2.8.4.22) and those procedures delegated by the South Florida Water Management District pursuant to Florida Statutes chapter 373, and chapter 17-40 and title 40-E, Florida Administrative Code, to ensure that at the time a development ~ ~ is issued, pre-development versus post development discharge rates are monitored to assure that adequate water management facility capacity is available or will be available when needed to serve the development. Current development discharge rates, as allowed by Collior County Ordinance 90 10, for tho various stormwater managoment basins within Collier County are as follows: Off-site discharge contributed by a development is limited to amounts which will not cause adverse off-site impacts that may include but are not limited to flooding and over drainage. These amounts may be.am determined by the following: (most restrictive applies) Historic pre-development discharges; a.) Amounts determined in previous South Florida Water Management District permit actions; b.) Amounts specified in South Florida Water Management District criteria (Basis of Review Appendix 2); c.) Amounts based on system capacity for selected County primary outfall canals, unless special engineering studies are provided by a Registered Professional Engineer, shall be as follows: 2 tf (j. .Qan.al Airport Road North Sub-Basin (North of Vanderbilt Beach Road) Allowable Run-off 0.04 cfs/acre Design FreQ./Dur. 25 year/3 day Airport Road South Sub-Basin (South of Vanderbilt Beach Road) 0.06 cfs/acre 25 year/3 day Cocohatchee Canal Basin Lely Canal Basin 0.04 cfs/acre 0.06 cfs/acre 25 year/3 day 25 year/3 day e.) In all other areas of the County off-site discharge shall not be in excess of 0.15 cfs/acre. Variations to the 3bove roquirements may be allowed with County staff approval ba&od upon special engineering studios prepared by a Registored Professional Enginoor. Unless Florid3 'N3ter Managoment District critari3, a storm event of 25 ya3r return froquency 3nd 3 day dur3tion shall be used in computing off site discharge. /\lIow3ble disch3rges will bo designated by South Florida Water M3nagement District on a casa by C3se basis upon requoe::t. 2. Add the following as a new Appendix II and renumber the subsequent Appendices accordingly to the Drainage Sub-element (Attachment 1) 971ER-NOI-1101-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT #IV (A)(1) and (2) Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1. Add the following new Objective and Policies to the Housing Element: *Obiective 8: To ensure an adequate supply of farmworker housing in Collier County an evaluation of future needs for farmworker housing will be completed and the Plan amended as appropriate. COUNTY POLICIES *Policy 8.1 : In 1999. Collier County will evaluate the data from the migrant farmworker study conducted by the University of Florida. the Florida State Department of Labor and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. An examination of the farmworker housing conditions and demand projections for future housing needs will be completed. *PoJicy 8.2: By 2000. Collier County will amend the Growth Management Plan. as necessary. based upon these studies. to ensure an adequate supply of farmworker housing. which meet the locational guidelines as identified in the Future Land Use Element and the Immokalee Master Plan. The County shall also consider and amend the Growth Management Plan in accordance with this study. if and to the extent necessary. to insure that farm worker housing may be sited in locations proximate to transit. health care. employment. and shopping opportunities. *PoJicy 8.3: Collier County will utilize the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) program. Low Income Housing Tax Credits. HOME Funds. and other State. Federal and private funds for the provision of farmworker housing. Asterisked (*) pOlicies are only adopted by the iurisdiction listed directly above the policy County Only. 3 19. 971ER-NOI-1101-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT #V (A)(1) Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1. Amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to add Policy 2.2.3 and to delete Objective 2.3 and Policies 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 and add Policy 2.2.3. Policy 2.2.3 Southern Golden Gate Estates. south of 1-75. as depicted on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. shall be desi<)nated on the Future Land Use Map as part of the Picayune Strand State Forest with permitted uses identified in the Conservation Designation. Natural Resource Protection Area/Public Ownership District. Obie~tivG 2.3 In ardor to further this Goal, Cgf/ier County rocognizes the DEP's Work Plan and time frames for complotion of the ro3ppr3isal 3nd purchase of lands in SGGE as follows: ... Reappr3isal of lands by December, 1998 using the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Pr3ctice&, without Iimitod conditions. ... Complete purch3&o of the SGGE project by Decombor 31,2000. Pglicy 2.3.1 Recognizing the time fr3mos described in Objective 2.3 above, if oither the reappr3isal or purchase is not completod by the datos specified in the '.ll/ork Plan, tho Board of County Commissionor's will initi3to the proces& to amend the Growth Man3gement Plan to delete goal 2 and its related Objectivos and Policies during the first 3mendmont cycle following the first scheduled completion d3to of Decembor, 1998 doscribed in the Work Pf3n. 2. Amend the Future Land Use Element, Conservation Designation to add Southern Golden Gate Estates as part of the Picayune Strand State Forest as follows: A. Natural Resource Protection Area/ Public Ownership District These Natural Resource Protection Areas are owned, primarily, by the public, although private in-holdings and privately owned conservation areas do exist. The boundaries of these Natural Resource Protection Areas/Public Ownership are expected to Consorv3tion Designation may periodically change in the future as proporties are 3cquirod as additional lands are purchased by the County. State. Federal Government. and their respective agencies and boards. As additional lands are purchased the County shall amend its future land use map series to include these additional lands within the NRPA's and to assign a density of one dwelling unit per forty acres to all such lands. This Designation District includes sool:l-the following ~: . Everglades National Park . Big Cypress National Preserve . Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge . Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, . Collier-Seminole State Park . Rookery Bay . 10,000 Islands National Estuarine Research Reserve . Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Recreation Area . Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary (privately owned). . Corkscew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) Trust !... Clam Bay !... Picayune Strand State Forest 4 foe. St3ndare€ ror development in the Conservation Design3tion are found in the Conservation and C03stal M3n3gomant Eleffiont 3nd the County's Land Devolopment Regulations. The Consorvation Designation will 3ccommod3te Iimitod residential dovelopmont 3nd future non residenti31 uses. ~ +-!he following uses may be aF9 permitted in this District Designation: a. On all lands not in private ownership as of January 1. 1999. residential Singlo f3mily dwelling units, and mobile homes where the Mobile Home Zoning Overl3Y oxists, at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per f:jl.le f2r1Y-gross acres..;-eF- On all lands that are in private ownership as of January 1. 1999. the following densities shall apply: 1. Within the Big Cypress National Preserve and Addition one dwelling unit per 3 gross acres for private in holdings within the Big Cypross National Prosorve or. each dwelling unit must be phycically situatod on a minimum fivo acre p3rcol, or minimum 3 3cre parcel for private in holdingc within the Qig Cypress Nation:!1 Precerve; 2. Within the Picayune Strand State Forest. excluding Southern Golden Gate Estates. one dwelling unit per 5 gross acres. 3. Within Southern Golden Gate Estates. one dwelling unit for 2 % acres or less if the lot is a legal non-conforming lot of record. 4. Within any Natural Resource Protection Area/Public Ownership. any legal non- conforming lot of record less than 40 gross acres in size may be developed at its non-conforming density. b. Dormitories, duplexes and other staff housing, as may be provided in conjunction with conservation uses at a maximum density of 12 units per gross acre; , at a density in accordance with that permitted in the Land Development Code; c. Group housing u&es at a density in accordance with th:!t permitted in tho Land Developmont Code; 4~ Staff housing in conjunction with safety service facilities and essential services, at a density in accordance with the Land Development Code; e. F3rm I3bor housing in accord3nco with tho Farm L3bor Housing provicion in the L3nd Dovolopmont GOOe; f. Recre3tion camps as dofined in, 3nd at tho density allowod by, the Land Development Code. g.!:!.. Essential services-as defined in the Land Dovelopment Code; as services designed and operated to provide water. sewer. gas. telephone. electrical transmission and distribution lines. cable television or communications lines. water pumping stations. sewage lift station and emergency power structures to the general public: R..e. Parks, open space and recreational uses and camps; j,. Community facilities such 3S churches, group housing usos, cemeteries; 3nd schools which shall be subject to the following criteria: ... Site area 3nd school sizo shall bo cubject to the Goneral Education31 Facilitios Roport submitted annu311y by the Collier County School B03rd to tho B03rd of County Commicsioners. ... The Site must comply with the St::lte Requirements for Educ3tional F3cilitioG adopted by the State Board of Educ3tion. ... The site shall be subject to all applicable St:Jto or Federal regulations. b- f. Commercial uses accessory to other permitted uses, such as restaurant accessory to operatipn of a Park or Preserve; k-:g. Safety service facilities; I. Utility and communication facilities; m. Earth mining; fhn. Agriculturem uses. such as. farming. ranching. forestry. bee-keeping-; and, e.i. Oil extraction and related activities limited to those required to support the extraction and transport processffig,. 971ER-NOI-1101-(A)-(N} STATEMENT OF INTENT #VI (A)(2) Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: Include "Appendix E - Hurricane and Disaster Planning" in the Support Document of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (Attachment 2) 5 10/. 971ER-NOI-1101-(AHN) STATEMENT OF INTENT #VI (A)(3) Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1. Amend Policy 12.2.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to read as follows and the Future Land Use Map to depict the coastal high-hazard area: Policy 12.2.5: The coastal high-hazard area is that area lying within the Category 1 evacuation zone as dotormined by the Emergency Management Director as defined in the Southwest Florida Regional Evacuation Study (Update 1996). 971 ER-NOI-11 01-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT #V1(A)(6) and VI(A)(7) Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1. Within the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, add a new objective 3.1 to address ground water quality. New policy 3.1.1 will address Objective 9.4 and its policies. Revise Objective 9.5 and Policy 9.5.1 to be incorporated into a new policy 3.1.2 Renumber the remaining Objective 3.3 and subsequent policies accordingly: GOAL 3: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT THE COUNTY'S GROUND WATER RESOURCES TO ENSURE THE HIGHEST WATER QUALITY PRACTICAL. OBJECTIVE 3.1: Ground water quality snail meet all applicable Federal and State water quality standards. Policy 3.1.1 Wellhead protection areas identified on the Future Land Use Map Series shall be protected as follows: 1. Wellhead protection areas shall consist of four (4) Wellfield Risk Management Zones defined as follows: a) W-1 is the land area surrounding the identified potable water wellfield wellheads and extends to the five percent ground water capture zone boundary line (which approximates the one year ground water travel time to the weJ/field). b) W-2 is the land area between the W-1 boundary line and the ten percent ground water capture zone boundary line (which approximates the two year ground water travel time to the potable water wellfield). c) W-3 is the land area between the W-2 boundary line and the twenty-five percent ground water capture zone boundary line (whiCh approximates the five year ground water travel time to the potable water welltield). d) W-4 is the land area between the W-3 boundary line and the 100 percent ground water capture zone boundary line (whiCh approximates the twenty year ground water travel time to the potable water wellfield). 2. The following restrictions and prohibitions upon selected activities and land uses shall apply within the potable water wellfield protection zones: a) Future solid waste disposal facilities are prohibited in zones W-1. W-2. W-3 and W-4. b) Future solid waste transfer stations shall be prohibited in zones W-1. W-2. and W-3. c) Future solid waste storage. collection and recycling facilities storing hazardous products and hazardous wastes shall be prohibited from zones W-1. W-2. and W-3. d) Existing and future non-residential use. handling. storage. generation. transport. or processing of hazardous products in quantities that exceed 250 gallons for liquids or 1.000 pounds of solids are subiect to the following restrictions within zones W-1. W-2. and W-3: 6 /D~" (1) Provide for absorption of not less than the equivalent volume of the product or provide secondary containment of at least 110 percent of the laroest container. (2) liquid hazardous products in tanks oreater than 250 oallons shall be stored in secondary containment which has a volume of at least 110 percent of the largest container plus the displacement of that and any other tank (s) within the containment area. e) Existing and future non-residential facilities oeneratino hazardous wastes accumulating more than 220 pounds per month or 110 oallons at any point in time shall: (1) Provide for absorption of not less than the equivalent volume of the waste or provide secondary containment of at least 110 percent of the largest container. (2) liquid hazardous wastes in tanks greater than 250 oallons shall be stored in secondary containment which has a volume of at least 110 percent of the largest container plus the displacement of that and any other tank (s) within the containment ~ f) Future domestic wastewater treatment plants shall be prohibited within zone W-1. g) Future industrial wastewater treatment plants which are subiect to pretreatment standards or effluent limits for toxic pollutants as promulgated in 40 CFR Part 401.15 as the rule existed as of January 1. 1999. are permitted in W-1. W-2. W-3. and W-4. subject to establishment of industrial pretreatment programs as noted in 40 CFR part 135 as the rule existed as of January 1. 1999 and monitoring of influenVeffluent and groundwater. h) Future land disposal systems are allowed to apply treated effluent within zone W-1 subject to the following restrictions: (1) Systems applying more than 2.500 acres per day shall meet high level disinfection standards identified in 62-610.460 FAC as the rule existed as of January 1. 1999. and (2) State monitoring requirements shall be followed. i) Future on-site disposal systems requiring a soil absorption area greater than 1.000 square feet are allowed to discharge in zone W-1 subiect to the following restrictions: (1) State construction standards shall be followed. (2) Wastewater shall be distributed onto the infiltration surface by means of an automatic dosing device and a low-pressure lateral distribution system. (3) The design shall be certified by a registered engineer to be capable of providing a 24 inch separation from the bottom of the drainfield to the wet seasonal high water table when operating at design flow. iL- OBJECTIVE 9.5: The County shall implement construction, pretro3tment, monitoring, and effluent limit requirements of the Cellier County Ground Water Protection Ordinance regul3ting the use of septic tanks serving industrial and m3nufacturing activities. Policy 9.3.1: Implement a monitoring progr3m for sm311 quantity generators that dispose of hazardous w3ste into septic tank systems to detormino hazardous constituents in the septage 3nd in the ground w3ter. On-site sewage disposal systems serving existing industria' uses and subject to the thresholds in d) and e) above within wellfield zones W-1. W-2. and W-3 shall be subiected to the following restrictions: (1) reporting to the County of all hazardous products stored or used. (2) implementing a ground water monitoring system. and (3) meeting all construction and operating standards contained in 64E-10. F.A.C. as the rule existed as of January 1. 1999. k) Land application of Class A domestic residuals shall be allowed in zone W-1. Land application of Class B domestic residuals in zone W-1 shall require a wellfield Conditional Use Permit. Land application of domestic residuals within zones W-1. W-2. and W-3 shall also conform to the follOWing restrictions: (1) Metal concentrations shall not exceed the limits set forth in 62-640 F.A.C.. as the rule existed as of January 1. 1999: (2) The total rate of domestic residuals shall not exceed the nitrogen uptake of the vegetation upon which the residuals are applied: 7 /OJL__ (3) If domestic residuals are applied to a site that is receiving recfaimed water. the nitroQen uptake calculation shall include the combined effect from both the residual and reclaimed water: and (4) The residuals application zone shall meet the setbacks as specified in 62-640. FAC.. as the rule existed as of January 1. 1999. I) Excavation and mining activities are allowed within all welltield zones subiect to the application of best management practices for handling vehicle fuel. hydraulic fluids. lubricants and related materials that will divert stormwater runoff from material processing and vehicle maintenance and storage areas away from mining excavation areas. m) Petroleum exploration and production facilities shall be permitted subject to the fOllowing restrictions: (1) Expansion of existing petroleum exploration or production facilities shall be prohibited in zones W-1 and W-2. (2) Existing petroleum exploration and production facilities shall be allowed subject to primary and secondary containment system of all drilling and production related fluids in zones W-1 and W-2. (3) The siting of future petroleum exploration and production facilities in zones W-1. W-2. W-3 and W-4 shall require the approval of a Wellfield Conditional Use. (4) Future petroleum exploration shall be prohibited from directional drilling through any potable water aquifer within the vertical projection of the map boundaries of W-1. W-2. W-3 and W-4. 3. The Board of County Commissioners may grant a conditional use subject to the following criteria: a) Special or unusual circumstances exist which are peculiar to the particular development which are different than any other regulated development: or b) Adequate technology exists which will isolate the development from the Surficial and Intermediate Aquifer Systems: or c) Site-specific hydro-geologic data provides reasonable assurances that the existing water Quality data in Surficial and Intermediate Aquifer Systems will not be degraded as a result of the development. d) In granting the Wellfield Conditional Use Permit. the Board may prescribe any conditions and safe guards which it deems necessary to protect the existing well(s). future identified well(s) or future potable water supply resources. e) The Board. after public hearing. may find that certain existing or proposed public or quasi- public regulated development is exempted and may issue a Wellfield Conditional Use Permit upon finding that:: (1) The public benefit to be realized by the propose or existing regulated development outweighs the purpose of this Policy: (2) The proposed or existing development cannot. for economic or scientific reasons. be relocated elsewhere: (3) The scope of any Wellfield Conditional Use Permit granted under this Section shall be narrow to avoid derogation of the purpose of this Policy and the Board may impose special conditions of approval to ensure implementation of the intent of the same. 4. All facilities shall meet the minimum state siting requirements as identified in 62-521. FAC.. as the rule existed as of January 1. 1999. Policy 3.1.2 OBJECTIVE 9.4.: The County shall implement the existing local storage tank compliance program to protoct ground and surface w3ter quality including site inspoctions and inrorm::Jtion tr::Jnsfer. based on the following guidelines: 8 /Q4#____ .1... Policy 9.4.1: The County shall implement provisions of the contract with the Department of Environmental Protection under the Super Act provisions in order to avoid any duplication of effort. 2... Policy 9.4.2: The County shall concentrate on storage tank installation, inspection, and contractor certification and oversight of maintenance and monitoring of petroleum contamination sites. The County shall assess the need for secondary containment of storage tank and line systems especially in areas close to potable~wellfields. 08J&CTIVIi 3.3: Implement and amencl ::1S neoa8a, the Csllior County Ground W3ter Protection Ordin3nce th3t inclucloE: regul3tion of land use 3ctivitios County wido 3S 'Nell as within wellfield protection zones surroumling exiE:ting identified public water supply wellfields ::1nd future public water E:upply '!Iellfields to protect existing and future potable wellfields. (Refer to Objoctive 1.2 in the Natur31 Ground Wator /\quifer Rech3rge Sub Elomont.) Policy 3.3.1 : The Ordinance 3ddressos both existing and projected future land uso and surface activities including, but not limited to: a. Petroloum storage t:Jnks, b. Other idontified h:Jz3rdous matorbls and wastes of::1 specified quantity, c. Mineraloxtr3ction, d. Industri31 and domestic w:Jstes, e. Stormw3ter. Policy 3.3.2: The Ordimnco provides for an appropriate lovol of protoction for all of Collier County :Jnd includes demonstrated performance st3ndards. Policy 3.3.3: Tho Ordin3nce :Jddressos the breaching of confining units by improper well construction, rock mining, exc:Jvatiom:, bl:Jsting :Jnd other similar activitieG. Policy 3.3.4: Tho County will continue to imploment the Ordin3nce in 3 manner to minimize duplication of offort bOPHoen tho County and other St3te agencieG. Policy 3.3.5: Tho County will continue implemonting and rofining rogulationG 3nd permitting review proceduros. 971 ER-NOI-11 01-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT #I(A) (1), VI(A)(1), VI(A)(4), VI(A)(5), VI(A)(6) and VI(A)(8) Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1. Amend Future Land Use Policies to add a new district Rural Fringe - Mixed Use and subdistricts of North Belle Meade and PUD Neighborhood Village Center; amend and rename the Agricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District; add two new districts under the Conservation Designation Natural Resource Protection Area/Public Ownership and Natural Resource Protection Area/Private Ownership and provide description sections for each district and subdistrict. Delete the Area of Environmental Concern Overlay. 9 I oS. Policy 1.2 THE AGRICUL TURAURURAL Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. RURAL FRINGE - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. North Belle Meade Subdistrict 2. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict B,...-A. AGRICUL TURAURURAL - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Rural Commercial Subdistrict C,..-8,..- RURAL - INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT D. G: RURAL - SETTLEMENT AREA DISTRICT Policy 1.4 The CONSERVATION Future Land Use Designation shall include a 1wQ..Future Land Use Districts f2c. A. NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREA/PUBLIC OWNERSHIP DISTRICT B. NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREA/PRIVATE OWNERSHIP DISTRICT Policy 1.5 Overlays and special features shall include: A. AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN OVERLAY B. AREAS OF iNVIRONME:NTAl CONCERN OVERLAY C...6.. AIRPORT NOISE AREA OVERLAY II. AGRICULTURAL/RURAL DESIGNATION The Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation is for those areas that are remote from the existing development pattern, lack public facilities and services, are environmentally sensitive or are in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. The obiectives of clustering residential units and the preservation of natural areas are to maintain the land's rural character by preserving large contiguous natural areas: to restore impacted sites to natural areas as these site are converted from agricultural uses to other uses: and to preserve interconnected wetland systems and wildlife corridors and to discourage urban sprawl. A. Rural Fringe-Mixed Use District ~ +the following uses af&-may be permitted in this District: a. Agricultural uses such as farming, ranching, forestry, bee-keeping; b. Residential uses at a maximum density of one dwelling unit on each five acre tract, except for legal non-conforming lots of record; c. Habitat preservation uses; d. Parks, open space and recreational uses, golf courses; e. Essential services-as defined in the Land Development Codo as services designed and operated to provide water. sewer. gas. telephone. electricity. cable television or communications to the general ~=- f. Safety service facilities and governmental facilities; g. Community facilities defined as public facilities and institutional uses which serve the community at l.ar9.e... such as, churches, group housing uses, cemeteries; and schools and school facilities provided that the property shall have reasonable access to an existing arterial or collector road or to such roadways which are included in the County's current Capital Improvement Element. -w!:HGR shall be &ubjoct to tho following critoria: -- Sito 3ra::! 3nd school &ize sh311 be subjoct to the Genoral Education31 F3Cilitio& Roport submittod 3nnu311y by tho Collior County School Board to the Board of County Commise;ionors. ... Tho ~ito mu&t comply with the Stato Roquiroments for Educational F:Jcilities 3doptod by tho State Board of Educ3tion. ... Tho site shall be subjoct to all 3pplicablo Stato or Fedoral rogul:Jtions.h.Communicotion and utility f3cilities 10 Iota. i. Migrant labor housing in conjunction with agricultural uses at a maximum density of 12 units per acre sUQject to the development standards for farm labor housing as provided in the Land Development Code; j. Earth mining, oil extraction and related processing; k. .8o..aAsphalt plant shall reQuire-as a Conditional Use 3S defined in the Land Dovelopment Code provided that the 3sphalt pl3nt: and shall at a minimum be subiect to the following criteria: ffi compatible compatibility with surrounding land uses; is not located wi1b.in a County, State or Federal jurisdictional wetland area and any required buffer zones; ffi not located within 1,000 feet of a Florida State Park; is not located within the Area of Critical State Concern as depicted on the Future Land Use Map; aM; is not located within 1,000 feet of a natural reservation;. and is not located within 1.000 feet of a Natural Resource Protection area. I. Commercial uses accessory to other permitted uses, such as restaurant accessory to golf course or retail sales of produce accessory to farming, so long as restrictions or limitations are imposed to insure the commercial use functions as an accessory, subordinate use. Such restrictions or limitations ~include limiting the size and/or location of the commercial use and/or limiting access to the commercial use; m. Commercial uses, within the Rural Commerci31 Subdistrict, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict based upon criteria of the Subdistrict: n. Industrial uses within the Rural - Industrial District; o. Travel trailer recreational vehicle parks, provided the following criteria are met: 1. The maximum density is 12 units per acre; consistent with the Land Development Code; 2. The site has direct principal access to a road classified as an arterial in the Traffic Circulation Etement, direct principal access defined as a driveway and/or roadway connection to the arterial road, with no access points from intervening properties; and, 3. The use will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 1. North Belle Meade Subdistrict Only the following uses may be permitted in this Subdistrict: a. Residential dwelling units at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per five gross acres. except for legal non-conforming lots of record less than 5 acres in size. b. Dormitories. duplexes and other staff housing. as may be provided in conjunction with conservation uses at a maximum density of 12 units per ~ c. Essential services defined as services designed and operated to provide water. sewer. gas. telephone. electrical transmission and distribution lines. cable television or communications lines. water pumping stations. sewage lift station and emergency power structures to the general publiC: d. Parks. open space and recreational uses and camps: e. Commercial uses accessory to other permitted uses. such as restaurant accessory to operation of a Park or Preserve: f. Safety service facilities: g. Agricultural uses such as farming. ranching. forestry. bee-keeping: and. h. Oil extraction and related activities limited to those required to support the extraction and transport process. 2. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict The purpose of this subdistrict is to allow for small scale retail. offices and service facilities to serve the daily needs of the residents of a PUD in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. The acreage eligible for Neighborhood Village Center uses shall be sized in proportion to the number of units to be served. but in no event shall the acreage exceed 15 acres. The Neighborhood Village Center uses may be combined with recreational facilities and other amenities of the PUD and shall be conveniently located to serve the PUD. The Village Center shall not have independent access to 11 jtJ7. any roadway external to the PUD and shall be integrated into the PUD. Phasing of construction of the Neighborhood Village Center shall be controlled so that it occurs concurrent with the residential units. The Planned Unit Development district of the Land Development Code shall be amended within one (1) year to prOVide standards and principles regulating access. location or integration within the PUD of the Village Center. allowed uses and square footage and/or acreage thresholds. The maximum floor area ratio for commercial development shall be .45. B. Agricultural - Mixed Use District The purpose of this District is to protect and encourage agricultural activities, conserve and preserve environmentally sensitive areas, provide for low density residential development, and other uses identified under the Agricultural/Rural Designation. These areas generally lack public facilities and services. Urbanization is not promoted. therefore most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. Rosidonti:lI uses are allo'Ned 3S follows: 3. Low dem;ity residential dwolling units at a m3ximum density of one dwelling unit per fivo gross :lcres, excopt for legal non conforming 10tE: of record; b. Dormitories, duplexos and other st:lff housing, as m3Y be pro'/idoa in conjunction with conseIV3tion uses, 3t 3 density in accord3nco with the Land Development Code; c. Group housing uses at a density in accord3nco with that permittod in the Land Development Codo; d. Stnff hou&ing in conjunction with s3fety servico Klcilities 3nd essenti31 services, :It 3 donsity in 3ccordance with tho Land Devolopment Codo; o. F3rm 13bor housing in 3ccordance with tho F3rm Labor Housing provision in tho L3nd Devolopmont GOOai f. Rocreation c:lmps 3E: dofinod in, 3nd 3t the density 3110w€ld by, the L3nd Dovelopmont Codo. Only the fallowing uses may be permitted in this District: a. Agricultural uses such as farming. ranching. forestry. bee-keeping: b. Residential uses at a maximum density of one dwelling unit for each 20 acre tract. except for legal non-conforming lots of record: c. Habitat preservation uses: d. Parks. open space and recreational uses. golf courses: e. Essential services defined as services designed and operated to provide water. sewer. gas. telephone. electricity. cable television or communications to the general public: f. Safety service facilities and governmental facilities: g. Community facilities defined as public facilities and institutional uses which serve the community at large. such as. churches. group housing. cemeteries: and schools and school facilities provided that the property shall have reasonable access to an existing arterial or collector road or to such roadways which are included in the County's current Capital Improvement Element: h. Migrant labor housing in conjunction with agricultural uses at a maximum density of 12 units per acre. subiect to the development standards for farm labor housing as provided in the Land Development Code: i. Earth mining. oil extraction and activities limited those required to support the extraction and transport process: i. An asphalt plant shall require the approval of a Conditional Use and shall at a minimum be subiect to the following criteria: compatibility with surrounding land uses: is not located within a County. State or Federal iurisdictional wetland area and any required buffer zones: is not located within 1.000 feet of a Florida State Park: is not located within the Area of Critical State Concern as depicted on the Future Land Use Map: is not located within 1.000 feet of a natural reservation: and is not located within 1.000 feet of a Natural Resource Protection area. I. Commercial uses accessory to other permitted uses. such as restaurant accessory to golf course or retail sales of produce accessory to farming. so long as restrictions or limitations are imposed to insure the commercial use functions as an accessory. subordinate use. Such restrictions or limitations include limiting the size and/or location of the commercial use and/or limiting access to the commercial use: 12 I D~. m. Commercial uses. within the Rural Commercial Subdistrict. based upon criteria of the Subdistrict: n. Industrial uses within the Rural - Industrial District: 1. Rural Commercial Subdistrict Within the Agricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District, commercial development, up to a maximum of 200 acres, may be allowed providing the following standards for intensity of use are met: a. The project, or that portion of a larger project which is devoted to commercial development, is 2.S acres or less in size and the maximum floor area ratio for commercial development shall ~; b. The project, or that portion of a larger project which is devoted to commercial development, is no closer than S miles, measured by radial distance, from the nearest developed commercial area, zoned commercial area or designated Mixed Use Activity Center; c. The proposed uses are those permitted in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zoning Districts of the Land Development Code; d. The project is located on an arterial or collector roadway as identified in the Traffic Circulation Element; and e. The project is buffered from adjacent properties. B. Rural - Industrial District The Rural - Industrial District, which encompasses approximately 600 acres of existing industrial areas outside of Urban designated areas, is intended, and shall be reserved, for industrial type uses. Besides basic Industrial uses, limited commercial uses are permitted. Retail commercial uses are prohibited, except as accessory to Industrial uses. The C-S'Commercial Zoning District on the perimeter of lands designated Rural - Industrial District, as of October 1997, shall be deemed consistent with this Land Use District. All industrial areas shall have direct access to a road classified as an arterial or collector in the Traffic Circulation Element, or access may be provided via a local road that does not service a predominately residential area. No industrial land uses shall be permitted in the Area of Critical State Concern. For the purposes of interpreting this District, oil and gas exploration, drilling, and production shall not be deemed to be industrial land uses and shall continue to be regulated by all applicable federal, state, and local laws. Intensities of use shall be those related to: a. Manufacturing; b. Processing; c. Storage and warehousing; d. Wholesaling; e. Distribution; f. Other basic industrial uses as described in the Industrial Zoning District in the Land Development Code; g. Support commercial uses, such as child care centers and restaurants. IV. CONSERVATION DESIGNATION The overall purpose of the Conservation Designation is to conserve and maintain the natural resources of Collier County and their associated environmental, recreational and economic benefits. All native habitats possess ecological and physical characteristics that justify attempts to maintain these important natural resources. Barrier Islands, coastal bays and wetlands deserve particular attention because of their ecological value and their sensitivity to perturbation. It is because of this that all proposals for development in the Conservation Designation must be subject to rigorous review to ensure that the impacts of the development do not destroy or unacceptably degrade the inherent functional values. The Conservation Designation is intended to protect certain vital natural resource areas of the County. A. Natural Resource Protection Areal Public Ownership District These Natural Resource Protection Areas are owned, primarily, by the public, although private in-holdings and privately owned conservation areas do exist. The boundaries of these Natural Resource Protection Areas/Public Ownership are expected to Conserv3tion Designotion m3Y periodicolly change in the future as proportios ora ocquirod as additional lands are purchased by the County. State. Federal Government. 13 / Dr;. and their respective agencies and boards. As additional lands are purchased the County shall amend its future land use map series to include these additional lands within the NRPA's and to assign a density of one dwelling unit per forty acres to all such lands. This Design3tion District includes ~the following ~: . Everglades National Park . Big Cypress National Preserve . Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge . Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, . Collier-Seminole State Park . Rookery Bay . 10,000 Islands National Estuarine Research Reserve . Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Recreation Area · Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary (privately owned). · Corkscew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) Trust . Clam Bay ~ Picayune Strand State Forest St3nd3rds for dovolopment in the Consorvation Dosignation are found in the Conserv3tion 3nd Coastal M3n3goment Elemont 3nd the County's Land Dovelopment Regulations. The Conserv3tion Designation will accommod3te limited roe:identi31 dovolopment 3nd future non roe:identi31 uses. ~ ::J:...!he following uses may be aFe permitted in this District Design3tion: a. On all lands not in private ownership as of January 1. 1999. residential Singlo f3mily dwelling units, :md mobilo homos whero tho Mobile Home Zoning Overlay oxiste:, at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per five ~gross acreS~;-Gf- On all lands that are in private ownership as of January 1. 1999. the following densities shall apply: 1. Within the Big Cypress National Preserve and Addition one dwelling unit per 3 gross acres for private in holdings within the Big Cypress National Proserve or. oach d'Nelling unit must bo phye:ic3l1y situ3tod on a minimum five acro parcol, or minimum 3 acre parcol for priv3te in holdings within the Big Cypross National Proe:erve; 2. Within the Picayune Strand State Forest. excluding Southern Golden Gate Estates. one dwelling unit per 5 gross acres. 3. Within Southern Golden Gate Estates. one dwelling unit for 2 % acres or less if the lot is a legal non-conforming lot of record. 4. Within any Natural Resource Protection Area/Public Ownership. any legal non- conforming lot of record less than 40 gross acres in size may be developed at its non-conforming density. b. Dormitories, duplexes and other staff housing, as may be provided in conjunction with conservation uses at a maximum density of 12 units per gross acre;, 3t 3 donsity in accord3nco with th3t pormittod in the L:md Devolopment Codo; c. Group housing ue:ee: 3t 3 donsity in accordanco with th3t permitted in tho L3nd Dovelopment Codo; Eke. Staff housing in conjunction with safety service facilities and essential services, at a density in accordance with the Land Development Code; e. Farm labor houe:ing in accord3nce with tho Farm Labor Housing provision in tho L::md Dovolopmont GOOe; f. Rocre3tion c3mps 3S dofined in, 3nd 3t tho density 3110'Nod by, the Land Dovelopmont Codo. 9.Q. Essential services-as defined in tho L3nd Developmont Codo; as services designed and operated to provide water. sewer. gas. telephone. electrical transmission and distribution lines. cable television or communications lines. water pumping stations. sewage lift station and emergency power structures to the general public: R.~ Parks, open space and recreational uses and camps; h Community f3cilitios such as churches, group housing ue:os, cemoteries; and schools which shall bo subjoct to the following critoria: 14 / /0. ... Site are3 and school size shall be sl::Ibject to the Gener31 E:c:lLlcation31 Facilitios Report submitted :mnu::lIly by the Collior County School B03rd to the Board of County Commissioners. ... The Site must comply with tho St3te Requirements for EdLlcation31 F3cilities 3Gfopted by the State B03rd of Education. ... The site Sh311 be subject to 311 3pplicable St3te or Fedor31 regl::llations. ~ 1. Commercial uses accessory to other permitted uses, such as restaurant accessory to operation of a Park or Preserve; k,g. Safety service facilities; I. Utility and communication f3cilities; m. Earth mining; fhh. Agriculture.al uses. such as. farming. ranching. forestry. bee-keeping-; and, e.l. Oil extraction and related activities limited to those required to support the extraction and transport proces~ B. Natural Resource Protection Areasl Private Ownership District These Natural Resource Protection Areas are privately owned. The boundaries of this District include large. interconnected wetland systems and are identified as follows: .!.. CREW acquisition areas .!.. Camp Kaeis Strand .!.. Okaloacoochee Slough Only the following uses may be permitted in this District: a. Residential dwelling units at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per forty gross acres. except for legal non-conforming lots of record less than 40 acres in size. b. Dormitories. duplexes and other staff housing. as may be provided in coniunction with conservation uses at a maximum density of 12 units per acre. c. Essential services defined as services designed and operated to provide water. sewer. gas. telephone. electrical transmission and distribution lines. cable television or communications lines. water pumping stations. sewage lift station and emergency power structures to the general public: d. Parks. open space and recreational uses and camps: e. Commercial uses accessory to other permitted uses. such as restaurant accessory to operation of a Park or Preserve: f. Safety service facilities: g. Agricultural uses such as farming. ranching. forestry. bee-keeping:: and. h. Oil extraction and related activities limited to those required to support the extraction and transport process. V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES A. Area of Critical State Concern Overlay The Big Cypress Area of Critical' State Concern (ACSC) was established by the 1974 Florida Legislature. The Critical Area is displayed on the Future Land Use Map as an overlay area. The Critical Area encompasses lands designated Conservation, Agricultural/Rural, Estates and Urban (Port of the Islands, Plantation Island and Copeland). Chokoloskee is excluded from the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern. Schools and school facilities shall not be permitted in the Area of Critical State Concern. All Development Orders within the Critical Area shall comply with Chapter 28-25, Florida Administrative Code, "Boundary and Regulations for the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern". Those regulations include the following: 15 /11. B. Areas Of in'Jironmental Concern Overlay Aroos sf environmental concern are identifies en the Fl:Jture Lans Use Map series. Primarily, those represont c03st31 se::lches, m3rshos, h3rd'A'ood s'.vamps 3nd cypross forests; wet prairios 3ns low pinel3nds; ana, br3ckish I'fInrshos. This overby conklins geneml reprosentotions for information31 purposes only; it does not com;tituto new devolopment st3nG3rOS :and has no regul3tory effect. St3ndaros for development 3re found in the Conserv3tion and CO::lstal Management Element ::lnd the Land Developmont Rogul3tions. B-G. Airport Noise Area Overlay FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Centers Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9,5.10,5.11) Collier County Wetlands 1994/95 SFWMD Wellhead Protection Areas 2. Amend Policies 1.2.2, 1.5.1, 1.5.2 of the Potable Water Sub-Element and replace the existing Map PW-1 with a new map of the County Water and Sewer Service District boundary (Map PW-1 attached). Policy 1.2.2: . Consistent with the urban growth policies of the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, provision of central potable water service by the County is limited to the service areas shown in this Plan and to areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and services identified on Map PW-1 as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Policy 1.5.1 Discourage urban sprawl by permitting limiting central potable water service systems by the County GfHy-ffi the Design::ltod Urban Area of the Future L3nd Use Element of this Pbn, to the service areas shown in this Plan and in areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities or services outside the Urban Areas identified on Map PW-1 as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Policy 1.5.2 The County will discourage urban sprawl and the proliferation of private sector and/or package potable water treatment systems by limiting private systems to the Rural Fringe-Mixed Use District and within the service district as identified on Map PW-1. in coniunction with clustering criteria required in Obiective 6.4 and subsequent policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Those proiects which meet the requirements for a private package sewage treatment plant over 100.000 gallons per day may also be permitted to provide a private potable water treatment system. through the development ordor appro'.'::!1 process to insure maximum utiliz3tion of tho existing ::md plannod public facilitios. School and school facilities will be permitted to have private potable water systems for their single purpose facility. No existing private sector or potable water treatment systems will be permitted to add customers unless all Levels of Service standards are met, and operations are in conformance with all DER 2 permits. Within the Agricultural - Mixed Use District private wells will be permitted. 3. Amend policies 1.1.2, 1.1.4, 1.5.1 and 1.5.2 of the Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element and provide a new map of the Water/Sewer Service District boundary (Map SS-2 attached). Policy 1.1.2 Consistent with the urban growth policies of the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, provision of central sanitary sewer service by the County is limited to the service areas shown in this Plan and to areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and services identified on Map SS-2 as of the date of adoption of this Plan. 16 II;). Policy 1.1.4 Within the designated Urban Area of this Plan. Permit the development of package sewage treatment plant systems only within tho Doe:ignntoa Urban /\:'03 of the Plan shall be permitted only in areas where County wastewater services-is not currently available, and allow only on an interim basis until County service is available. Allow individual septic systems within the County only when connection to an existing central system is not readily accessible to render service and note th3t where septic system are allowed, and future County sewer services becomes available, said septic systems will be required to connect to the County regional system in accordance with County ordinances and Section 381.00655. Florida Statutes. Policy 1.5.1 Discourage urban sprawl by permitting limiting central sanitary sewer service Eye:tome: by the County GRIy in the Designated Urb3n !\rea of the Fllturo Land UEe Eloment of this PI3n, to the service areas shown in this Plan and in areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities or services outside the Urban Areas identified on Map SS-2 as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Policy 1.5.2 The County will discourage urban sprawl and the proliferation of private sector and/or package sanitary sewer treatment systems by limiting private system to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District and the service district as identified on Map SS-2. in coniunction with clustering criteria required in Obiective 6.4 and subsequent policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. No private sanitary sewer package plant treatment system may be permitted under 100.000 gallons per day capacity. Schools and school facilities may be permitted to provide smaller private package plants for their single purpose facility. through the devolopment order 3pprov31 procee:s to insure maximum utilization of the existing :and pl:Jnnod public facilitios. No existing private sector or potable water treatment systems will be permitted to add customers unless all Levels of Service standards are met, and operations are in conformance with all DER .E. permits. Within the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District septic tanks will be permitted. 971 ER-NOI-11 01-(A}-(N} STATEMENT OF INTENT #V1(A}(1) 1. Delete Objective 1.3 and 6.1 together with their attendant policies in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and replace with a new Objective 6.1 to address the NRPAs. (The new Objective 6.4 addresses the intent of the existing Objective 6.1.) OBJfiiCTIVE: 1.3: Continuo with the ph3sed delineation, d3ta gathoring, m3nagement guidelinoe: and imploment3tion of tho County N3tur31 Resourcos Protection ArO:JE (NRPA) progr3m by implemonting tho B03rd . approvod procee:s for nomin::Jting petontial are3S for review. Tho purpose of N3tur31 Rosources Protection Areas will bo to protect endangored or potontially ondangorod specios (3S listed in curront "Offici31 Lists of End3ngered and Potentblly End:Jngorod F3un3 3nd Flor3 in Florid3", publishod by the Florid3 Game 3nd Fresh W3tor Fish Commis€ion) and their h3bitat€. Policy 1.3.1: The progr::Jm will include the following: a. Identification of the NRPA€ in map form 3S 3n overby to the Futuro L3ns Use PI::Jn M::Jp; b. A proCOSE: for verifying the existence 3ns bound3riee: of NRP/\s during development pormit applicatione:; c. Guidolinos and E:t::Jnd3rd€ for dovolopment of ~JRP/\e: including conser\'3tion guidelines to protoct natur31 rewurce v31uos, to m3int3in ecologically functioning E:ystoms, 3nd to restore or mitigate NRP/\s alroady dogradod; d. P. review process, integr3tod into the normal developmont 3pplication review, to ensure that the guidolinos 3nd stand::Jrds 3ra being mot 3nd, in thoso cas os where En'lironmontallmpact Statomonts aro prop::Jrod, that the site e:pecific ::Jnd cumubtive onvironmental imp3cts of development 3ro boing adoqu3tely assoe:e;ed and addressed; 17 //3. . fon should be fee simple "elo ment et NRPAs. First consld~ra I l:In::hases). Other options o. ^ ~"'Sra'" Ie ~ofer ~o, li:rOfero.~a a~~_iAS an~ "'.~'.S ~ r.f ~o"ol.~"'oAI "g~te; ~urGtla.. (ba.o~ o. ~~:. [i"'.oo I.. tax in.o.ti"". a.~ tr~~~~ Stale ...~ F.d.",1 ~O""iIliAS .~.ul~ i.Glu~o. but .ooolosalio. of ^ut~O"ty ^sroO"'OA~ "~i.I.SiGalaA~ ~hy.i..[ f. ^ program tel ~u~:oulali.A of aGliviU.. I~at ",ay aller 0 . ag.AGi.. fer .... · ^. ^RL SOR).r F.d.ra[ laA. ch3r3cteristics of NRP. " . t e from ::md support St3to (o.g. C. . , The County Sh311 seek assls a~~ areas qualifying 3S NRP/\s. g. 'S'i..lon "'rogFams for Coun J acqUl t t' '. GAt'" LDC th3t provido for the PoUsy 1.3.3. "'.AI sui~.[i.o. a. ~O.A.~ w,tIl," thOt . ~~~~.rOlino aA~ ~UA. .\'<lle"'. for C.Alinu. w~ "':":::OO""li.. of Ih. habilate. .~o..~;~:.~~.. pr.l.clio. ar.a. m3nagemen an t31 b3rrier and estuarine n3 ur3 the undevelopee C03S . do t m3n3goment €luidelines 3nd PoUsy 1.3.3. h' I ^~"io."' C.",,,,iU... ~.o's.alo a~d a or'::'. I"'p[.",..tali.. G~all.GGur ;::~~:~G~~~:a~~" k,; G.UA~ ~~:':~~:~~:t~~~:I~~I~r~a are ~'ov.l.po~ 31 basis as NRP^s 3n on 3n 3nnu h II be coordinated with the Poli.y 1.3A~[ t~. i"'pl.",.ntali.A .f 1M NRP^/ro:'~:i~ :anag.m.nl plan.. Whom pOSSI e,. t fon of watershed 3n su propar3tion and Imp lemon 3 I tand3rds 3nd criteri3 for all Objoolivo 6.1: . '. ~..n. an~ propare ~o".[.p"'onl. .".1. ",.nt .ritoria. Ih. County By JUA. 1. 1990. '~..I'f}h i'late' U.lill~. ado~ti.n of .p..,"G ~ I' Gli:. G.noiol.nl wilh p.Ii.,o. imp.rlant nali"" C.unty a ; r;cliGo..f habilal an~ Op.0I0. ~ro ~ I. "'.nl inloreow a. part of will ..nlinuolo follow ~urr.;oliali.n. bolwo.A COUA', Stall aA~ ~?;;;.:. in th. C.IIi.r C.unly 64.6 and 6.1.7 throug no Th e ne"'otiations are b3sed on pro. . . l3F9cess -rHes l:l the public hearing t-jo 91 102. Land Devolopmont Code 0 ~ ds 3nd propare critoria, . 6 1 l' ~.".[.p"'onl ol.n..r ~. P.lisy ....... '.. 10IV doliA.. aA~ pro~aro ,n:.... f . torti~.1 and Goa.lal.lran . By JUA. 1. 1098. ,n,.n f d~min.nl .r iR~iooliv. .p..'.o .""-t '. for d.voi.pm.nl an~ basod on the prosence 0 . d xeric scrub habitats, with Crl erl ~ stal earners, 3n undovolopeu coa . on these h3bitat 3reas. standards for land clearing I . t standards and critori3, basod on PoliGY 6.1.3: . I AI ~..n. .nd pro~ore d.v.[.pmo~ ~'''alor .n~ Iran.ilioRal ZOAO By June 1, 1 99g, In~on 0 J' . dicati"e species. For marine, res.. , rosonco of dominant or In . the p ~ n~ hardwood hammocks. wotlant:ls, a t:l t stand3rds and criteri3, based non PoliGY 6.1.3 . I' I.", do.no. aRG proparo d.voiopm~n G aA~ ~A' prairio habilat.. By Juno 1, 199a,_ln:en t Jr'indicative spocios, for plno f1ar..oo s J tho presonce of domlnan 0 o croto h3bit3t community will be P.I i GY 6.1.4: . . r .n. I~al may bo G..no~ aG a G'. I . 9 a. p.rt of I~i. ~ro..... ^II othor species aSSOCl3 I .t. 3nd stand3rds for land c 83nn ~~nsidorod for dovolopment Crl erl3 . a ropriate as individual Policy 6.1.5: 0 . 3nd e:t3nd3rds shall bo modlfiod as pp Tho above developed crltorla d NRP,^,s 3ro devoloped. watershed m3n3goment pl3ns an 18 / /1. Policy 6.1.6: Floxibility, in the form of 3re:] tradeoffs or mitigation, should be 3110wed in the dotormin3tion of aro3s within 3nd among Go':elopments to be proserved. Policy 6.1.7: Until definitions for h3bitat 3s&ociations 3nd st3ndards for development are adopted 3S land development stand3rds, criteri3 specified in other objectives and policies of this Element will ~ Policy 6.1.8 Incentives should be cr93ted ",:hiGh would allow development to continue, but 3t tho same timo would also insure th3t some of the most ecologic311y sonsitive habitat 3nd vegel3tive communities 3re ret3ined. Policy 6.1.9 In the event th3t tho County 3dopts an open space recreational system, consideration should be gi'len to incorpor3ting the link3ge 3nd protection objoctivos of the rotainod habit3t. OBJECTIVE 6.1: Natural Resource Protection Areas shall be mapped as districts of the Conservation Designation on the Future Land Use Map in order to protect wetlands. native vegetative communities and endangered and threatened wildlife by preventing the fragmentation of large natural systems. This obiective shall be made measurable by implementing the following policies. Policy 6.1.1 Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs) are areas within Collier County that the County has designated as environmentally sensitive based upon one or more of the following criteria: .!.. having large connected wetland systems. .!.. providing critical habitat to a number of listed species. . providing connections to other preserved and protected areas. and not being excessively fragmented by current transportation systems and residential development patterns unless an active acquisition and restoration plan addresses these impacts. Policy 6.1.2 Based upon the application of the above criteria. Collier County has determined that the following areas qualify as NRPAs: .!.. Big Cypress National Preserve and Addition .!.. Camp Kaeis Strand .!.. Clam Bay .!.. Collier-Seminole State Park . Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary .!.. CREW .!.. Delnor Wiggins Pass State Recreation Area . Everglades National Preserve and Addition . Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge .!.. Fakahachee Strand State Preserve . Okaloacoochee Slough · Picayune Strand State Forest · Rookery Bay .!.. Ten Thousand Islands National Estuarine Research Reserve 19 /l~_ Policy 6.1.3. Incompatible land uses shall be directed away from NRPAs in order to protect large areas of connected wetland systems and associated critical habitats for listed species. The Future Land Use Element provides a listing of allowable uses and residential densities that have been selected to protect these environmentally sensitive areas and their associated wetlands and wildlife habitats. Policy 6.1.4. The functions of these areas are also protected by the application of clusterinQ criteria found in Policy 6.4.2 and wildlife protection criteria found in Policy 7.1.1 h. In addition to these criteria. stormwater management systems discharQinQ in a NRPA shall provide one-half inch of dry retention pretreatment. Policy 6.1.5. Non-aQricultural development within 1.000 feet of an NRPA boundary shall meet the followinQ criteria in order to reduce the impact of the development on NRPAs and natural reservations: 1. The proiect shall be located as far from the NRPA boundary as possible. 2. ReQuired open space shall be used to buffer the NRPA from the most intense uses of the project. 3. The project shall demonstrate protection for listed species in proximity to the proiect within the NRPA. Where applicable. provision shall be made to accommodate the movement of wildlife through the project to the NRPA. 4. Stormwater management systems discharging to the NRPA shall be designed to provide at least one half inch of dry detention or retention pretreatment. Policy 6.1.6. Within one year from the effective date of these policies the County shall adopt Land Development Regulations to implement the NRPA protection standards. 2. Renumber Objective 6.7 and its policies to Objective 6.2 and modify Policy 6.2.2. Policy ~ 6.2.2. The County shall continue to meet periodically with the appropriate counties to discuss upcoming land development projects that would lave an impact on ecological communities in the Counties. 3. Renumber Objective 6.8 and its policies to 6.3. 6.3.1 and 6.3.2. 971ER-NOI-1101-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT #V1(A)(4) 1. Delete Objectives 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 and their respective policies and replace with the new Objectives 6.3 and 6.4 and their respective policies. OBJECTIVE 6.2: Thoro shall be no un3cceptable not loss of viable naturally functioning m3rine and frosh wator wetl3nds, excluding transitional zone wotlands which ::Iro 3ddrossed in Objectivo 6.3. Palisy 6.2.1 : Until such timo that Natural Resource Protection progr3ms/plans (Objectives 1.3, 2.5 3nd 11.6) and dovelopmont e:tand3rds for h3bit3t 3roas (Objoctive 6.1) are adopted, the following policies shall serve as interim critoria for incorporation into all development orders. 20 / /~. :oJ 2' II' eRsiti"e are3s. Policy 6. . . . atod as environmenta y s . ^ II wetlamls are design .. .. .. ra... . t natLlr311y functioning, dog . 23' . d t ee Rot vlablo, no Polley 6. . .' w llands are cansldere a Altered or dlstLlrbed .. e "'OlIa.. ...".y.to",.. . .. . I .g a. ti"'~.n.g . " nt timbering afler3llons so 0 Policy 6.2.4. ., hall not be Gonstl1:led to pre:~. the offects on the wetlands. The fgllO'.dng fl911Qles s t practices to minimize oper3lians utilize l;)e&t man3gemen . . encaur3ged first in upland :lr03S where Policy 6.2.5: tl ds whore mitig3tion is reqUired, IS f Reo" u'e 3n ," Creation 0 .. .. exotics agminate. . tarmined prim3rily by tides an? the Policy 6.2.6: ad :IS are3S \...ith 3 w3ler regl~e do ose s ecies listod in Subsection Marin. w.lI.... ar. ..fi.1t tol.rant plant .p..i.. i..lodlng 111 SP:'i... .n. .."",ar. of t~. d min3nt vegot3tlon IS S3.. ." Code, "Submorged Manno exclusive of subtidal 1 ~ <1 02 (17) Florid3 /\dmlnlstratl. e ho"'n on tho Future L3nd Use m3p I . 'ement Qound3ry as s .. C03St31 M3nag d. Objectivo 6.6. h3bit3tS as addresse In includo enh3ncomont or re~tor3~~~n ~~ P.li.y &.2.7; t 'n alt.,.. ",ari.. wetl.nd. .hall t I...t.n .qu.l.ro. ba.,. or ..h. '4ilig.lion lor ..',.I.p",.n, r of n.... ....U.nd. ",th.r .n a.. r. mitigat.. any .It.r.d .' I d ., or.a ,.n .. .. ~, G.",,,,,..,.no . . other 31tored wet an s ro riate by the Board of ~oun J Coost31 wetl3nd and wildlife :In altern3ti'le found ~p~ p bti"e and specific Imp3cts on wotl3nds in order to limit cumu . rosources. Id occur in tho Coost31 area. Policy 6.2.8: t in C03stal ::1m3 wotl3nds shou ^II mitig3tion for developmon n .. 1111. t to the current definitions 0 . g. 8 €I fiRe€lI3Ursu::m Polley 6.2. . T n::ll "'etl::lnds, sh31l 0 0 . I €I. 9 tFanSI 10 .. Wotl3nds, Inc u In E ,,' onment::ll Protection. Florid3 Doportment of n ..Ir . ~cla . . frosh wator v:otlond not p::l Policy 6.2.10: .". ,within a viable n3tur311y ~unctl~nlng ront South Florida W3tor Any d"".I.p",.nt aot,.rt;II'~ "'itigatod in a.oordan.. w,th .u~ d r.oloration 01 provi.u.ly . flo'" way sha e .. r FRay also mc u 0 Gont,go:;~ni'Di~riOI mitig.tioA roi.., ~:Ilg~;::orv.ti~~ 01 .imilar habitat ~3nag w tl nds or ::Icquisition for pu IC d,.torb.d ..e 0 . first considoration sh311 be gl.'1en Pel i.y &.2..11; 1 1 h'''ater wetland. out<id. 01 the ,coa.:~o~t~:~ou. area. Iollew.. ~y mitigat'oA ~o~~~~:;'::: .i~:~ U:i,~~~~:~ ~~li;'~~~:ti:A~: :::::1 wal.r.h.d.. in tho .a",. watoroh... 0 . . , desi n:ltod rosponsiblo to monitor Policy ~.2.12: uire \Votland mitigation an entlt~ shall be g For proJo~ts that ~~~e mitigation stipulation. tho compliance 0 21 1/7 . . frosh"'3ter 'Nstl3nds . .. "itlble n3turally functioning cilC3bls and shall be PolIGY &.2~1~: 1.~"oAI.A ~",G.I. ..AIOI~'A9 ~.I ooAligo.o. w.tland araa ~ra aAd lG ~r..OIvo Ih. Pro~o..d ..... I ~m.Allo ..aiAtaln lA. a:.g '" UaAd v.g.lali.A ~",GlI" . sh311 clue:ter oe.o 0 I e:t amount of ntltl.e ..0 . ed to sie:turb the e3. design t hydreJ'lonod. ~r. d.v.I.~".A aAago".AI ~Ian. 8 . tEl stermwtltor m I ftEl'" t "'otl3n Sin. .pI of natur3 .. P.II.y &.2.14; . ",.r.I..n .".lro.~wa.r .. . d aAd .A.O'" lA. ..AIIAO' , where 3pprepriate, InCEl h nce the hie:toric hydro~ene .. aR8 en a in ordor to ree:tore way, db' Stale aAd .. al zone wetlanse: define )" 10 mont Olljo.11ve &.3, ..' .1. Aa..rally fuAGli.AiAg tr"A~'I:~A aAY A.'" A.A agri6Ullural d:d.a;r<>vod by 1\ p.rti.A of Ill.. .10 'oi"'''OAI. .hall b. ~""'.". th ^ CaE ~.rmilliAg pr...... a Fedor31 perml~lng r.e.C1 t d through the St3to 3nd e.. I otherv'le:e FT1Itlga e un ese: .. 1110 COOAIy. 15Q'. i. iAhabilod by Elf "'Rich 3t 103e: . . G an area .. R Flond3 PolI.y &.3:1; I .A. wollaAo .hall b..ofiAa.i:. ';:ollaAo dofiAili.A 0.00 .Y t . Tho transltlon3 z . . 311 str3t3 he:ted In 0.. . GElnsldenng , . those species, . nt31 Regulation. rtmont of Envlronme Do~a . . .d .A a .00. by ..00 . .. 0 ",oa. .hall .0 ..,tlgat , 0.01 miligatloA Polley &.3.2. . . 'lAiA Iho Ir.A.,II.Aal Z.A I 1<>"".. A..ong Iho Ij.~ I aGli"III o. WI 'tak. oovora tl 0 ar.ao. or DOY.lop..oA. n. 'Iional w.llaAdo lOa, 1 ro.loratioA of we aA Too or baoi.. MiligatioA.1 lranol .GolVali.A. oAhan.omaAI or 0 I Ad Aaliv. vogolalivo .0mmUAII th3t are appropri3to 3ra P~t or ;ostor3tion of important up 3 prosorv3tio~, enh3ncome . wildlife habll.t. " bo!fur or . ny con e: 01'\ 3tlon '. . ct Foe shall be glvon 3 redit sh311 bo sot P.hGY ~'~:'~~d lAo Park aAd Ro.mallonal '~=::r ~a..ivo ro.roalloA OGOO. :~~:di.ali.n ohall o. Crod,lG ." '''ollaAdo proo.",od.A .'. om.AI or oth.r pormaA. traA.ilioAal Z.A... . ba.i.. A GOAo."",IIOA 000 11<>0 Grodil i. 9ivOA. on a per acre presol'\ e '" t13nd for which 3n Imp3c I buffer or .. e OIoatod I<>r aA,. . J7J 421 . nd Section . . 73 019 Florida Statutes 3 Policy 6.3.4: b delineated 3ccording to Section J . Wetl3nds sh311 0 Florida Statutoe:. . I 0 Sh311 be prosorvod d nativo h3blt3t t) P OBJECTIVE 6.4: . I atur311y functioning non wetl3n ^ portion of each VI3b ~, n . . rOprl3to. or rotaiAod a. a~~ n . . . idoAtill.d OA all . . . n3tivo h3bit3t communltJoe: 0 Policy 6.4.1. . 910 n3turally functioning Continuo to require that '113 uiring sito developmont pl3ns. f r de"olopments roq ~loA. 0 . . . I d' tho dotormlAatloA 0 9 IIEl"'e In .. r should e a .. Policy 6.4.2: f 3 tradooffs or mltlga Ion . tR feFFR 0 are Flexibility In e nts to be preservod. areas within dO'Jolopmo 22 / I ~ Policy 6.~.3: RoqlJire new develepll1ents to s\;JBFrlit and implement a plan fer exotic pl3nt removal 3nd long term control. Such implement3tion may be considered 3S mitigatien. Policy 6.~.~: Any development prepos31 in a "sr zoneE! area or any other 3roa designated "environment3l1y sonsitive" shall have 3 sito inspection, where appropriate, by County staff 3nd be reviewed for approv31 as E!euned in tho "Sr zoning procedure. Policy 6.~.5: Devolopments groater than 2.25 acres Sh311 be roquired to receive 3 tree remo'>'31 permit 3ccording to the requirements ef the Protected Tree Ordin3nce. Until the adopti9n of comprehensive land devolopment regul:ations, tree removal permits shall incorpor3to criteri3 contained in all applicable objectives and policies of this Conservation 3nd C03stal M3n3gemont Elomont. Policy 6A.6: /\11 nevI resiGlontial developments gre3tor th:m 2.5 3cres in the Coast31 Area 3nd gro3ter th:an 20 3cres in the coast31 urban :are:a sh311 rotain 25% of the vi3ble natur311y functioning n3tive vegot3tion on sito, including both the understory and the ground cover emph3sizing the 13rgest contiguous :are3 possible. Whon sevor31 different native plant communities oxist on site, the dovolopment pl3ns will r03son3bly :attempt to preservo oX3mplos of all of them if possiblo. I\roas of 13ndsc::Iping ::Ind open sp3ce which ::Ire pl3nted with n3tive species Sh311 bo includod in tho 25% requiremont considering both understory and groundcovor. Whoro 3 projoct h3s included open spaco, rocreation:al amonities, or preservod 'Netl3nds that meet or oxcoed the minimum open sp3ce criteri3 of Collier County, this policy Sh311 not be construod to require a 13rgor porcont3go of open sp3ce set 3side to moet tho 25% n:ativo vogot::ltion policy. This policy Sh311 not bo intorpreted to 3110w dovelopment in wetlands, should the wotl3nds ::Ilono constitute more th3n 25% of the sito. Exceptions shall be gr3ntod for p3rcels th3t c::lnnot reasonably 3ccommod3te both the n::ltive veget::ltion 3nd the proposed 3ctivity. Policy 6A.7: 1\11 other types of now development shall be required to proserve 3n appropri3te portion of the n3tive vegetation on tho site ::IS detormined through the County development rovio'l.' process. Presorvation of different contiguous habitats is to booncour3god. When sovor31 difforent n3ti'/o pl3nt communitios exist on site, tho development plans will reason3bly 3ttompt to prosorvo eX3mplos of 311 of thom if possiblo. Ho'....ever, this policy sh311 not bo interpreted to 31101/: development in wetl3nds, should the 'Netl3nds 310ne constitute more than the portion of the site required to bo prosorvod. Excoptions shall be gr::lnted for parcols which can not reason3bly 3ccommod3to both tho pro&orv3tion 3rO::l 3nd the proposed activity. Policy 6A.8: l\griculture sh311 be oxempt from the 3bove prosorv3tion roquiromonts providod th::lt 3ny now cle3ring of 13nd for 3griculturo sh311 not be converted to non 3gricultural development for 3t least ten ye3rs. For 3ny such convorsions in less than ten Y03rs, 3ny County imposed rostor3tion moasures of tho site must be rostored to n3tive 'legetation OBJECTIVE 6.3 There shall be no net loss of marine and fresh water wetland functions. 23 / /9. Policy 6.3.1 Wetlands identified by the 1994-95 SFWMD land use and cover inventory are mapped on the Future Land Use Map series. All wetlands. as verified by jurisdictional field delineation at the time of project permitting. are designated as environmentally sensitive areas and shall be protected by policies contained within this objective. Policy 6.3.2. Wetlands shall be defined pursuant to the Section 373.019 Florida Statutes and Section 373.421 Florida Statutes as the law exists as of January 1. 1999. Policy 6.3.3. Marine wetlands are defined as areas with a water regime determined primarily by tides and where the dominant vegetation is salt tolerant plant species. Policy 6.3.4. Large. interconnected marine and freshwater wetland systems supporting many listed species and located in areas that have not been subiected to negative impacts are considered to have high environmental value and are classified by the County as priority wetlands. Protection of these systems is accomplished by the criteria found within the identified Natural Resource Protection Areas (Objective 6.1 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element) and standards for Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern in the Future Land Use Element. Policy 6.3.5 Incompatible Land Uses are directed away from wetlands by the following mechanisms: 1. Natural Resource Protection Areas identify those wetland systems that have a value high enough to iustify residential densities as low as 1 unit per 40 acres. Densities for these systems and the prohibitions of other non-residential land uses are identified in the Future Land Use Element: 2. Residential densities are limited to 1 unit per 20 acres in the Agricultural/Rural areas of Collier County: 3. Asphalt Plants shall not be located in wetlands (Reference Future Land Use Element): 4. Clustering non-agricultural land uses away from wetlands is required in all of Collier County: 5. Development shall first avoid wetland impacts and then minimize impacts when they are unavoidable. Policy 6.3.6 Marine wetlands shall also be protected through the following mechanisms: 1 . New and expanded wet slip marinas and multi-family facilities shall not exceed densities of 18 boat slips for every 100 feet of shoreline. 2. The following priority ranking for siting of shoreline development and the resultant destruction or disturbance of native vegetative communities for water dependent/water related land uses shall apply (Reference Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 10.1.4): a. areas presently developed. b. disturbed uplands. c. disturbed freshwater wetlands. d. disturbed marine wetlands. e. unaltered uplands. f. unaltered freshwater wetlands. g. unaltered marine wetlands. 3. Mangrove alterations shall conform to applicable FDEP standards. 24 I ;!Q. Policy 6.3.7. Where appropriate. freshwater wetlands shall be incorporated into stormwater management plans in order to restore and enhance the historic hydroperiod and ensure the continuity of natural flow ~ Policy 6.3.8. Proposed development on parcels containing wetlands shall direct land uses away from wetlands by clustering the development to maintain the largest contiguous wetland area practicable and to preserve the pre-development hydroperiod. This policy shall be implemented through the application of federal and state wetland permitting programs where the applicant shall first avoid wetland impacts and then minimize impacts when they are unavoidable. This policy is not intended to duplicate any federal or state wetlands permitting program. Policy 6.3.9. Where proiects have unavoidable adverse impacts to wetlands. mitigation shall be required in order to ensure that the proiect does not result in a net loss of wetland functions. A no-net loss of wetland functions is presumed to occur for projects receiving federal and state permits and having an overall mitigation ratio of not less than 1 acre mitigated for 1 acre impacted. Removal of invasive exotics vegetation shall not be considered as part of the overall mitigation ratio. Guidelines for mitigation are as follows: 1. All mitigation shall occur in Collier County. Mitigation for development in Coastal area wetlands shall occur in the Coastal area. For mitigation of freshwater wetlands outside of the Coastal area. first consideration should be given to mitigation on site. followed by mitigation in the adiacent contiguous area. followed by mitigation in the same watershed. followed by mitigation in adiacent watersheds. 2. For projects that require wetland mitigation an entity shall be designated responsible to monitor the compliance of the mitigation stipulation. Policy 6.3.10. All non-agricultural development proiects and individual single family residential building permits in Southern Golden Gate Estates and the Area of Critical State Concern impacting wetlands shall obtain the appropriate federal and state permits before Collier County issues its final approval of the proiect. Policy 6.3.11. Collier County shall inform applicants for individual single family building permits which are not part of a development proiect receiving a wetlands permit. such as North Golden Gate Estates. that federal and state wetland permits may be required prior to construction and shall notify the applicable federal and state agencies of single family building permits applications in these areas. Policy 6.3.12. These policies shall not be construed to prevent timbering operations so long as timbering operations utilize best management practices to minimize the effects on the wetlands. Policy 6.3.13. Credits toward the Park and Recreational Impact Fee shall be given for any upland conservation buffer preserved on site for passive recreation uses and serves to protect a wetland. The credit shall be set on a per acre preserve basis. A conservation easement or other permanent dedication shall be created for any buffer for which an impact fee credit is given. OBJECTIVE 6.4 Development as specified in Policies 6.4.1 and 6.4.2 shall cluster its impacts on site in order to preserve native vegetative communities and protect wildlife habitat. 25 Jd/. Policy 6.4.1. Within the Urban Designated Area the percentage of native vegetation and natural areas preserved on site shall be as follows unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State concern where the standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element apply: Coastal High Hazard Area Non-Coastal High Hazard Area Residential and Mixed Use Development < than 2.5 ac. Equal to or > than 2.5 ac. 10% 25% < than 5 ac. 5 and 20 ac. Equal to or > than 20 ac. 10% 15% 25% Golf Course Development .1Q.% .1Q.% Commercial and Industrial Development < than 5 ac. Equal to or > than 5 ac. 10% 15% < than 5 ac. Equal to or > than 5 ac. 10% 15% Within the Urban designated area. the following criteria apply to the above preservation requirements: a. The preservation requirements are calculated on the amount of naturally functioning native vegetation found on-site. Vegetative communities having less than 90% invasive exotics shall be defined as naturally functioning since these exotics can be removed to provide the vegetative community with a sufficient degree of functionality for the purpose of these criteria. b. The preservation of the native vegetation shall include both the understory and the ground cover emphasizing the largest contiguous area possible. c. The preservation of different contiguous habitats is encouraged. When several different native plant communities exist on site. the development plans will reasonably attempt to preserve examples of all of them if possible. d. Where a project has included open space. recreational amenities. or preserved wetlands that meet or exceed the minimum open space criteria of Collier County. this policy shall not be construed to require a larger percentage of open space set aside to meet the native vegetation requirements. e. Exceptions. by means of mitigation in the form of increased landscape requirements. shall be granted for parcels which can not reasonably accommodate both the preservation area and the proposed activity. Where native preservation requirements are not accommodated. the landscape plan shall re-create a native plant community in all three strata (ground covers. shrubs and trees). utilizing larger plant materials so as to more quickly re-create the lost mature vegetation. f. Previously cleared parcels. void of native vegetation. shall be exempt from this requirement. g. This policy shall not be interpreted to allow development in wetlands. should the wetlands alone constitute more than the portion of the site required to be preserved. Policy 6.4.2 Within the Agricultural/ Rural and Conservation Designation residential developments: golf course developments: mixed use developments: commercial development and industrial developments shall set aside 25% of the total site area as natural areas for proiects less than 40 acres and 50% of the total site area as natural areas for proiects equal to or greater than 40 acres. Within the Agricultural/Rural and Conservation Designations. the following criteria apply to the above preservation requirements: 26 I~d. a. The preservation requirements for the preservation and restoration of natural areas are calculated on the gross acreage of the proiect site. less the non-littoral zone area of any existing man-made waterbody. b. The purpose of these preservation requirements in the Agricultural/Rural and Conservation designated areas is to set aside the required portion of the site to preserve existing native vegetative communities and/or to restore the required portion of the site to support the establishment of native vegetative communities. Natural areas therefore can be comprised Qt (1 ) (2) Existing native vegetative communities: Enhanced or restored wetlands and uplands. including areas that are currently disturbed and can be re-colonized with future native vegetation: and (3) Littoral zones of man-made water bodies. including canals and stormwater ponds that support wetland vegetation. Natural areas shall not include areas such as the non-littoral zones of constructed lakes. the actively managed portion of golf courses such as the fairways. greens and rough. tennis courts and other active recreational areas. mowed common areas and other areas that are planted with turf grass or non-native species. c. Selection of the areas that comprise the preservation requirement shall reflect the following criteria in descending order of priority: (1) Wetland flowways through the project shall be maintained: (2) Natural areas. especially preserved wetlands. shall be interconnected within the site and to other wetland areas or wildlife corridors off-site: (3) Wetland and utlland areas known to be utilized by listed species or serve as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall be preserved and protected in order to facilitate the movement of wildlife through the site: (4) Upland habitat shall be part of the preservation requirement when wetlands alone do not constitute all of the requirement. Upland habitats have the following descending order of priority: (a) Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland area. (b) Xeric Scrub. (c) Dune and Strand. Hardwood Hammocks. (d) Dry Prairie. Pine Flatwoods. and (e) All other upland habitats. d. The destruction of any naturally functioning native vegetation found on-site shall be compensated for by the purchase of lands within or adjacent to an identified NRPA at a ratio of 2:1. Vegetative communities having less than 90% invasive exotics shall be defined as naturally functioning since these exotics can be removed to provide the vegetative community with a sufficient degree of functionality for the purpose of these criteria. e. Where the percentage of naturally functioning native vegetation for a site is initially less than the preservation requirement. the stated requirement can be obtained by (1) creation of wetland or upland areas on site. (2) purchase of lands within or adjacent to an identified NRPA on a 1:1 basis or (3) a combination of (1) or (2). Preserved natural areas shall be connected throughout the project area and be connected to off site natural areas to the greatest extent possible. g. A minimum vegetated buffer area of 200 feet shall be provided for all structures from the nearest external roadway. This buffer area shall contain at least 80% native vegetation. Natural areas can be used for this buffer requirement. h. Passive uses such as nature trails are allowed in the natural areas. All lands to be maintained as natural areas within the project or purchased as off site mitigation. shall be protected by a permanent conservation easement. prohibiting further development. and setting other standards safeguarding the site's special resources from negative changes. f. i. 27 /:13. j. A management plan shall be submitted to identify actions that must be taken through the life of the proiect to ensure that the natural areas will function as proposed. The plan shall address exotic control and treatment. fire management. and maintenance of facilities that provide protection to listed species. k. The criteria contained in Policy 7.1.1 h shall also apply. I. Earth mining shall require the approval of a conditional use. Approval of the conditional shall include a requirement that 50% of the total project area be set aside as a natural area should the earth mining conditional use be converted to a land use specified in Policy 6.4.2. m. Golf Courses shall adhere to the set aside requirements contained in 6.4.2. The standards found in 6.4.2a throu<,Jh 6.4.2k shall be used in the design of the <,Jolf course lay-out in order to protect si<,Jnificant portions of native vegetation and wildlife habitat. Landscaping plans shall require at least 75% of the trees and 50% of the shrubs to be native Floridian species with at least 75% of these trees and shrubs to be drought- tolerant species. Golf Courses shall also be designed to incorporate those Best Management Practices recommended in the publication. Best Management Practices for Golf Course Maintenance DeDartments. FDEP. May 1995. Policy 6.4.3. Agriculture shall be exempt from the above preservation requirements contained in Policy 6.4.1 and 6.4.2 provided that any new clearing of land for agriculture shall not be converted to non-agricultural development for at least ten years. For any such conversions in less than ten years. the requirements of 6.4.1 and 6.4.2 shall be applied to the site at the time of the conversion. Within the Urban Designated Areas. the percentage of naturally functioning native vegetation preserved shall be calculated on the amount of vegetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearing. and if found to be deficient. a native plant community shall be restored as outlined in 6.4.1 e. Within the Agricultural/Rural and Conservation designated areas. the required amount of natural areas shall be those specified in 6.4.2 and any naturally functioning native vegetation destroyed at the time of agricultural clearing shall be compensated for by the requirements addressed in 6.4.2 d. The clearing of agricultural land shall be permitted after all applicable federal and state permits are obtained. Policy 6.4.4. Non-agricultural developments shall submit and implement plans for invasive exotic plant removal and long-term control. Policy 6.4.5. In the event that the County adopts an open space recreational system. consideration should be given to incorporating the linkage and protection objectives of the retained habitat. 971 ER-NOI-11 01-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT #VI(A)(5) 1. Delete Objective 7.3 and its policies and replace with a new Objective 7.1 and renumber Objective 7.1 and 7.2 and subsequent policies to Objectives 7.2 and 7.3: OBJeCTIVe 7.3: Tho County shall cGntinue to dovelop and implement progr3ms for protocting fishories 3nd othor 3nim31 wildlifo by including m03suros for protection and/or roloc3tion of ond:mgerod, thre3tenod. or spocies of speci31 concorn or status. 28 J ;;;1-. .he Count'"' shall continLJe to & emeRt officers, t "I... 1€l'RC Poli.y 7.3.1 : !olI a. .... .n"'ro....:---. ..' .Ian.ar.. 19r .,,[. [ . By a..r..iling Not.",1 R~.::::":':I.Gli.n Or.inano. wh[,", ~:~[~~Vili.O, an. ,"1...ling nool.. enforce its existing Se:l. u sts from surrounchng construe ..I...r lighling, p,.l.obng n. ,. I.. e'" fer croteCtlng 1... I.. evnl3'lns tile no u ,.... B .I€lers WHICH -",.... Policy 7.3.2: 'de for hemee'/mers :lnd UI 00 ContinLJe to upl:l3te thl..~ gLJ~n be acceml3lishel:l. turtles :lnd how tHIS C .oo I f 0 19, .. be incorpor:lted :lS e:tipu 3 ~on lio . 7.3.3: ",anag.",.nl gUl..I[n.o to .blio 01 ~ro~.r ~raGl1.oo lG ~: J.UAtv wiII..nliA.. to pro~'7 10 Ian. 0Wll.,. .A.th. 90AO~1 ~.a P'AIA.r, .n. wo.. .lGrI< e .. I' "Al.nl.r.e", aA. to [A or k.... w...~.ok.r., .n 13nd do. 0 0,.... t e3gle nests, red eoc roduce disturb:lneee: oOeies of speci31 St3tuS. h bit3t and for othor sp a .., .. 1..10 .nd a~ply .~pli".I.. . . 7.3.4: . re. Ihe Ce.Aty ..i1I..a a Floh .n. W[I.hfe ~:::~.n.g.meAI 9~~.I~n~:.~r;::~:~a~.e 'I. lo.'1 G.v.m::='.:~:i~' ';'1.. .. olipulati.n. to rocommond3tlons .0 . oc arding the protection of specl Service foderal gUidelines rog ..vol.pmeA! .rdoro. . . tl=l v are found. It IS . 8 Fe"'e: u'horover 0" I feR of Polioy 7.3.~: ',' I. ~rotool goph., I.rt.[.. ..u, "00 fli~l. whi.h will ,oquiro '0." [ Th. C.unty · p.ho; [. ....II.. .A.VOI...lo .on I . . d howover, th3t there nl. h uld bo oV81u3tod 8S o. recognize , 't bility of 31tern3to &lte& S 0 B FFe"'s The SUI a .t Un., I 'tabilitv of the SI e, · phy.[.a. .U[ ~ A. b: long torm protoctlon, oment objectivos for the 18nd, 3 conflicts with other m:lnag ~. ...t. 01 roloooli.n. . . knowA to iAha.[t . ~ ecial status th3t 3re .tl=l tho Poli.y 7.3.6: . .1. minimum, .p..[o. 0 .p nduol.. in '...rO.n.o w[ A .po.los .UNDY to.[A.IUd.l.r t. tho.o o.i.ling.n .[t. 'A~ G. Ali..ioA .h.1I b. r.qui,.. for . I sOmmun[lio. .["'[ F h "'ale' FlOh .'" .. biolog[.. - I 'd. G.Al. an. . r.... ..... ty' Ela r.viow pr..o . requiroments of the F O~I 10 acres as part of the Coun S da',al.p",aAls g,..I., I 'A . f ' 'n of the eXlstenco 0 I=l \M3tor Fish Commlsslo. " FOEluirod Polioy 7.3.7: n" th. FI.ri.. G.m. .nd Fr.,~" .~ as a '..ult.f Ih. .p..[.. .."., Tho County Sh811 no I ~ t that may be dlsco.ere eS.les ,u'lth snec131 st8 us 3ny sp--.- 00 ,.... in Policy 7,3.6. .g. ~er ' its existing codes provl Ing , f P.lioy 7.3'~:"'1I .nlinu.l. p.'i..io?lIy r.vlaw aAd :[r~~al po.....i.A, U.., and haN..t"'g . The Count'" 001 ~ .. d rostrictlons on the com 3ppropri3to prohibitions. 3n l:lndosir3ble exotic species. ., filer R..overy Plan ' G '^'ildlikl Servlco s P3n "^ro3S P.lioy 7.3.9: . rt Ih. _rls of th. U.a. F[.h aA.. i.: fIl. C.un~/. FI.ri.a Panlh.r.. .. Tho County W[II ..ppo rt. A. 01 fIl. kA.wn haM.!., 4 by designating significant ~~nl~he County Futuro L3nd Use ~ 3p. of Environment31 Concern 29 /~S. OBJECTIVE 7.1 The County shall protect fisheries and other animal wildlife and their habitat by including measures within development orders for protection and/or relocation of endangered. threatened. or species of special concern or status. This obiective shall be made measurable by implementing the following policies. Policy 7.1.1 Non-agricultural development. excluding individual single family residences shall comply with the following guidelines and standards: a. Habitat and management plans for species of special status shall be submitted for County approval and shall comply with current federal. state and local policies. b. USFWS guidelines addressing habitat management for the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and the wood stork (Mvcteria americana) shall be used for protecting these species and incorporated into required management plans. c. The developer shall be responsible for a conservation and management plan for the red- cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and the Florida panther (Felis concolorcoryl). d. Projects within 300 feet of the MHW line shall minimize outdoor lighting to that necessary for security and safety in order to protect loggerhead (Caretta caretta) and other listed sea turtles that nest along Collier County beaches. e. In order to protect the West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus) and its habitat. new and expanded wet slip marinas and multi-family facilities shall not exceed densities of 18 boat slips for every 100 feet of shoreline. Densities shall be less than this mpximum based on water depths. impact to marine habitats. and manatee concentrations. f. Guidelines for the protection of the gopher tortoise (GoDherus polyphemus) shall follow those contained in Policy 7.1.5. 9. Guidelines contained within Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Technical Reports 8 and 13 shall be used to protect the habitats of the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens coerulescens) and south eastern American kestrel (Falco sparverius Da/us). respectively. h. Proiects located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation and Conservation Designation shall cluster development away from natural areas subject to the criteria contained in 6.4.2 in order to protect wildlife habitat and wildlife corridors. These projects are also required to provide the following: (1) Utilize the open space requirements to maintain buffer areas between important wildlife habitats areas and areas dominated by human activities. (2) Facilitate wildlife movement along natural trails by preserving appropriate areas and by utilizing fencing and walls that encourage wildlife to use natural corridors. (3) Locate roads away from identified and potential natural travel corridors used by wildlife. (4) Provide elevated road crossings when a road must cross an identified travel corridor used by any listed species. (5) Utilize appropriate roadway crossing and sign age when it is unavoidable for roadways to cross wildlife trails. (6) Provide for the appropriate use of fences. walls or other obstructions to encourage wildlife to use natural corridors or to separate wildlife corridors from areas of human activity. (7) Where bears are present. provide a system where garbage can be placed in bear-proof containers. preferably at a central location. Policy 7.1.2. A species survey to include at a minimum. species of special status that are known to inhabit biOlogical communities similar to those existing on site or the site is within habitat areas identified in the "Closing the Gaps in Florida's Wildlife Habitat Conservation System. 1994 report shall be required for developments greater than 10 acres as part of the County's Environmental Impact Statement review process and shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. The County shall notify the Florida Game and 30 / ~I Fresh Water Fish Commission of the existence of any species with special status that may be discovered. Policy 7.1.3. By accrediting Natural Resource staff as code enforcement officers. the County shall continue to enforce its existing Sea Turtle Protection standards which provides standards for shielding outdoor lighting. protecting nests from surrounding construction activities. and relocating nests. Policy 7.1.4. The County shall continue to update the guide for homeowners and builders which explains the need for protecting sea turtles and how this can be accomplished. Policy 7.1.5. The County's policy is to protect gopher tortoise burrows wherever they are found. It is recognized. however. that there will be unavoidable conflicts which will require relocation of burrows. The suitability of alternate sites should be evaluated as to: a. physical suitability of the site. b. long-term protection. c. conflicts with other management objectives for the land. and d. costs of relocation. Policy 7.1.6. . The County will support the efforts of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Panther Recovery Plan by designating Priority 1 Habitat as areas that Qualify for a transfer or purchase of development ~ Policy 7.1.7 The County will continue to periodically review and revise its existing codes providing for appropriate prohibitions and restrictions on the commercial possession. use. and harvesting of undesirable exotic species. 97ER-NOI-1101-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT#VI(A)(8) Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1. Modify Objective 10.6 and its policies as follows: OBJECTIVE 10.6: The County shall continue to implement the C03st31 Barrior ::md Beach System M::magoment Program by conserv~ffig the habitats, species, natural shoreline and dune systems contained within the County coastal zone. Policy 10.6.1 In addition to those applicable policies supporting Objectives 10.1.10.2.10.3.10.4. and 10. 5. development within the County's coastal zone shail also meet the following criteria: a. Densities on undeveloped coastal barriers shall not exceed 1 structure per 5 acres of fastland. Undeveloped coastal barrier units include the Wiggins Pass Unit FL-65P. Clam Pass Unit FI- 64P. Keywaydin Island Unit P-16. Tigertail Unit FI-63-P. and Cape Romano Unit P-15. b. Site alterations shall be concentrated in disturbed habitats thus avoiding undisturbed pristine habitats (Reference Policy 10.1.4). c. Beachfront developments shall restore dune vegetation. d. Projects on coastal barriers shall be landscaped with native Southern Floridian species. e. Boathouses. boat shelters and dock facilities shall be located and aligned to stay at least 10 feet from any existing seagrass beds except where a continuous bed of seagrass exists off of the shore of the property. in which case facility heights shall be at least 3.5 feet NVGD. 31 I;) terminal platforms shall be less than 160 sQuare feet and access docks shall not exceed a width of four (4) feet. f. In addition to the marina siting criteria specified in Policy 10.1.6. boat slip densities shall conform to the reQuirements in Policy 7.3.1e. Q. For development proiects where an EIS is reQuired. an analysis shall demonstrate that the project will remain fully functional for its intended use after a six~inch rise in sea level. h. Wetlands shall be protected by the criteria contained in all other applicable policies. Policy 1 O.6.~2: The progr3m incll:le8& The reQuirements of Policy 10.6.1 identifies the management, guidelines and performance standards preparod for the undeveloped coastal barriers...and estuaries contained within the previous coastal barrier and estuarine NRPA (Policy 1.3.2). These standards therefore satisfy the requirements of that previous policy. Policy 10.6.2: Tho program addresses County ro!>ource m3nagoment pOlicie& and proceduros for all County jurisdiction beache!>, dunes and coast31 b3rriers (both devoloped and undovoloped). Policy 10.6.3: The program is based in part on the boach, clune and coastal barrier data. an3lyse!> and man3gement recommendation!> contained in the County's cO::lstal m3n3gement progr::lm technic31 reports :md the Collier County Beach M~magomont Studies. Policy 10.6.4: The program considers the implications of 3 potential rise in sea level. Policy 10.6.S~: Collier County supports federal and state agency efforts to deny permits and establish a permanent moratorium on the offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling along the west coast of Florida, and to the extent allowed by law, shall take appropriate actions to oppose any offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling projects 971ER-NOI-1101-(A)-(N) STATEMENT OF INTENT #VII(A){1) and (2) Collier County and the Department of Community Affairs agree to the following language: 1. Amend Policy 3.1.d of the Future Land Use Element to read as follows: Policy 3.1 d. The Groundw3tor Protection Ordin3nce !>h311 be implemented to protect existing ::md future wellfields, n3tural aquifer rechargo areas ::lnd groundw3tor resourcos through standards for dovelopment involving the use, stor3ge, goneration ::lnd dispo&::J1 of h::Jzardous waste products, disposal of sewage and effluont, stormwater m3nagoment, e3rthmining, petroleum explor3tion, solid wasto ::lnd other related aspocts of land u&e and dovelopment within the mapped wellfield protection zones. Identified potable water wellfields are depicted on the Future Land Use Map Series as wellhead protection areas. Policy 3.1.1 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element specifies prohibitions and restrictions on land uses in order to protect these identified wellfields. 2. Delete pages 40-51 of the Future Land Use Support Document which include Wellhead Protection Areas and add to the Future Land Use Map Series of the Future Land Use Element. (See attached Wellhead Protection Areas) 32 I;) 3. Amend the Future Land Use Map to show the Coastal High Hazard Area as defined by the Regional Evacuation Study; amend Map 12 (attached) in the Future Land Use Support Document showing the revised Coastal High Hazard Area. 4. All amendments as described herein are included in the Future Land Use Map attached. 33 /dq. ATTACHMENT 1 Appendix II Drainage Sub-element COLLIER COUNTY DRAINAGE BASIN DISCHARGE RATES In 1989 and 1990. durino the final development of the Collier County Stormwater Management Master Plan. an ad hoc committee was formed under the direction of the Water Manaoement Department (now named the Stormwater Management Department). The volunteer members of the ad hoc committee consisted of County staff and representatives from several of the local enoineering consulting firms involved in the daily development of stormwater management plans. The purpose of the ad hoc committee was to develop a consensus on establishing drainage basin average discharoe rates and maximum post-development discharge rates for new developments while considerino the following obiectives: .al utilize information and recommendations from existing engineering studies when available. bl. consider the existing capacities and conditions of the stormwater management canal systems. d consider the impacts to the environment. .dl consider the potential physical and economic impacts on existing and future public and private development activity. ,-. One of the first areas of the County evaluated by the ad hoc committee was the geographic region known as Water Management District NO.6 which is located in the southeastern portion of the urban area. The Big Cypress Basin funded a study of the area in 1985 by the consulting firm of Wilson. Miller. Barton and Peek. Inc. Their conclusions. in a report titled "Master Plan Update for Water Management District No.6". identified the typical rate of discharge from undeveloped areas as 0.12 cubic feet per second per acre (cfs/acre) for the region studied. The typical rate of discharge from developed areas was higher and varied with the size of the area. The Study's recommendations included many channel and drainage structure improvements which were based upon a basin average discharge rate of 0.12 cfs/acre. In order to achieve the average discharge rate of 0.12 cfs/acre. the County had been unofficially requiring new developments to restrict their discharge rates to 0.06 cfs/acre to offset the impact from older existing developments. This restriction was based upon the fact that approximately half of the land area within the Lely Main and Lely Branch Canal Sub-basins was currently undeveloped. These two sub-basins formed the heart of the Water Management District NO.6 study area where future public water management imQrovements were proposed. The ad hoc committee evaluated this restrictive discharge rate and agreed that it was necessary to officially establish a maximum post- development discharge rate of 0.06 cfs/acre for all areas discharging into the Lely Main Canal. which includes the Lely Branch Canal. The next area of the County evaluated by the ad hoc committee was the northern portion of the urbanized area served by the Cocohatchee River Canal. This region was studied by the consulting firm of Gee and Jenson Engineers. Architects. and Planners. Inc. in 1981. One of the recommendations of their report was that a maximum post-development discharge rate for any new development within the basin study area should be established as 24.6 CFS/square mile which equates to 0.04 cfs/acre. The ad hoc committee evaluated this recommendation in relation to development activities that had occurred subsequent to 1981 and determined that the 0.04 cfs/acre discharge rate would still be valid for all areas discharging into the Cocohatchee River QanaJ.. For the remaining portions of the County. the ad hoc committee spent considerable time and effort in arriving at a consensus. For the existing Airport Road Canal South Sub-basin. the decision was made to recommend a maximum post-development discharge rate of 0.06 cfs/acre based upon the strong similarity of conditions to the Main Lely Canal Basin. The Airport Road Canal South is 34 /30. a fairly restricted canal with little possibility of enlargement. The basin was approximately half developed for residential or commercial purposes with sizable agricultural tracts that would soon be facing redevelopment. It was agreed that a restrictive discharge rate of 0.06 cfs/acre would help the basin approach an overall average of approximately 0.15 cfs/acre which was manageable for the existing canal capacity. All other areas of the County were identified as reasonably similar to undeveloped lands within both the Water Management District NO.6 and Cocohatchee River Basins. Utilizing the previous studies it was finally agreed that an average discharged rate of approximately 0.1 to 0.3 cfs/acre would be derived if a detailed analysis were performed for the entire area. Subsequent consensus building discussions arrived at a final ad hoc committee recommended maximum post- development discharge rate of 0.15 cfs/acre for all portions of the County not specifically identified as having more restrictive discharge rates. The ad hoc committee also developed provisions for variances from these discharge rates based upon site specific engineering studies to confirm historical pre-development discharQe rates. Subsequent usage of these variance provisions has proven to be very minimal in number and area affected. On January 23. 1990 the Collier County Board of County Commissioners accepted the recommendations of the ad hoc committee and established them as official regulatory policy by placinQ them in Ordinance No. 90-10. which ordinance was then incorporated into the Drainage Sub-element Support Document of the County Comprehensive Plan. 35 /3/. ATIACHKENT II APPENDIX E HURRICANE AND DISASTER PLANNING /3J. 9.0 HURRICANE AND DISASTER PLANNING 9.1 HURRICANE VULNERABILITY The hurricane vulnerability of Collier County has been analyzed using a numerical storm surge prediction model know as SLOSH, short for Sea, Lake and Overland Surges from Hurricanes. This model is described in detail in the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan. 1996. prepared by the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council; as well a A Storm Surge Atlas for Southwest Florida. prepared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, updated 1990. These reports analyzed some 727 separate storms for their potential impact on Southwest Florida, including Collier County. Both reports provide an assessment of methodologies and provide assumptions that can act towards increasing or decreasing forecast flood and wind conditions. However, in summary, the following assumptions can be made; 1. Landfalling storms provide the worst flooding potential 2. . Flooding will be worse south of the eye of the hurricane 3. Wind conditions making roads unsafe for travel will arrive well before the eye of the hurricane, and usually before flood waters inundate evacuation routes 4. Storm landfall prediction is not an exact science. Any approaching storm has the capacity to strengthen or veer, decreasing or increasing the flooding and surge potential of the storm. The SLOSH model used thirty-three points in Collier County for time history analysis. These points are depicted on Map 1. The SLOSH model also provided maps of the flooding that may be expected in Collier County. The 727 different simulations have been summarized by flood category, and a zone for each category has be created depicting the maximum extent of flooding resulting from all of the storms of that category. The five zones thus created are also depicted on Map 9. /83. COLLIER COUNTY - TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page # Hurricane VuInc:rability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ll-A-l Demographic Socio-economic Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ll-A-3 R.ocent Storm ffistory ............................................................... ll-A-4 Analysis and Manipulation of Data Bya Computer Spreadsheet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. II-A-6 Affoctcd Population.. ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ., . . . . ...... .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. .. . . . . ...... II-A-7 Motor Vehicles ................................................................... ll-A-IO Shelters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " ll-A-IO Special At Risk Population .......................................................... ll-A-18 Routes .......................................................................... n-A-18 Clearance TiiDc:s ...:................................................................ ll-A-25 1998 Forecasts........... .. . . . . .. . . . ......... . .. .......... . . . .: . .'. . ....~... . .. ..... II-A-32 Location of Critical Facilities ........................................................ II-A-45 LIST OF MAPS Map Page # L SLOSH Model Storm History Points ............................................ II-A-2 2. Evacuation Zones ........................................................... II-A-8 3. Red Cross Managed Public Shelter Locations .................................... ll-A-15 4. Life Safety Facilities ........................................................ ll-A-19 S. Evacuation Routes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. II-A-20 6. Routes Subject to Rainfall Flooding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " ll-A-26 7. Critical Facilities Map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ll-A-SI LIST OF TABLES Table Page # L 1995 Housing Units. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. II-A-9 Occupancy Rates by Unit Type. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " ., .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... II-A-IO 2. Population Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. II-A-l1 3. Vehicle Estimates .......................................................... II-A-12 4. Shelters .................................................................. II-A-14 5. Public Shelter Capacity. . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. . ... . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . '" II-A-16 SA. Percent Shelter Space Increase Due to HotellMotels ............................... II-A-16 6. Population Displacement Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. II-A-17 6A. Percent Shelter Space Increase Due To FriendsIRelatives ........................... II-A-17. 7. Total Public and Private Shelter Satisfaction ..................................... II-A-18 7A. Total Vehicle Leaving County. . . . . . ... .. " . . .... .... . ... . . " . .. . . . . . . . . ...... II-A-18 8. Existing Evacuation Route Capacities .......................................... II-A-21 9. Time to Clear. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. II-A-27 10. Shelter Designations and Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . . . . . . . . .. II-A-29 II. Ultimate Constricting Route .................................................. II-A-30 12. County Exiting Routes ...................................................... ll-A-31 /31. 13. Total Evacuation TiInc:s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. U-A-32 14. Housing Units, 1998 ........................................................ U-A-34 15. Population Estimates, 1998 . . . . .. .'.. . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . .,. . . .. .. . . . . . . .... . .. .... ll-A-35 16. Motor Vehicle Estimates. 1998....... . . . . . . ... ... .. . ... ...... . . . . . ..... ....... ll-A-36 17. Capacity Additions, 1998 .................................................... ll-A-37 17 A. Public Shelter Capacity Additions by 1998 ...................................... IT-A-38 18. Primary Shelter Capacity, 1998 ............................................... ll-A-38 18A. Percent Shelter Space Increase Due To HoteVMotcls . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ll-A-39 19. Population Displacement Ratio. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. ll-A-39 19A. Percent Shetter Space Increase Due to FriendslRelativcs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ll-A-39 20. Total Public and Private Sheltering Capacity, 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ll-A-40 20A. Total Vehicles Leaving Collier County. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ll-A-40 21. Evacuation Route Capacities, 1998 ............................................ ll-A-41 22. ' TiInc to Clear, 1998 .. . . . . .,. ....... . ... . . . . . .. . . . . .... . ... . .., . ..... ..... . .. II-A-42 23. Ultimate Constricting Route, 1998 ..... ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .-' .;. .. . . .... ........ ll-A-40 24. Exiting Routes, 1998 .. . . . . ......... .... .. ...... . . ...... ....... . ....... ."..... II-A-44 25. Total Evacuation Time, 1998 ................................................. II-A-45 26. Critical Facilities in Collier County. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. II-A-46 /35: COLLIER COUNTY HURRICANE EV ACUA nON STUDY HURRICANE VULNERABILITY The hurricane wlnerability of Collier County has been analyzed using a numerical storm surge prediction model known as SLOSH, short for Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (complied by the National Hunicane Center). This model performed in 1990 is an update over the model used in previous Council reports (S~uthwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan, 1981-82 and 1987 Update, prepared by the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council;) (A Storm Surge Atlas for Southwest Florida, prepared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Updated, @ 1983). This Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study Update 1995 is based on the hazard analysis results contained in the Hurricane Storm Tide Atlas for Collier County. "1991, both prepared by the staff and approved by the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council which is an appendix to this report but is a separate volume (See Map 1 which is a County summary of this Atlas). This updated SLOSH Model analyzed some 727 separate storms for their potential impact on Southwest Florida, including Collier County. In summary, based on the results of the Model and Atlas the following assumptions can be made: (1) Landfalling storms provide the worst flooding potential, (2) Flooding will be worse south of the eye of the hurricane, (3) Wind conditions making roads unsafe for travel will arrive well before the eye of the hurricane, and usually before flood waters inundate evacuation routes, (4) Storm landfall prediction is not an exact science. Any approaching stonn has the capacity to strengthen or veer, decreasing or increasing the flooding and surge potential of the storm. The results of the 727 different simulations have been summarized by five flood categories: tropical storm, category one, category 2, category 3, and category 4/5. A zone for each category has been created depicting the maximum extent of flooding resulting from all of the storms of that category (e.g. Maximum of the Maximums (MOM)). The five zones thus created are depicted on Map 1. The SLOSH model used thirty-three points in Collier County for time history analysis. These points are depicted in the Tide Atlas and on Map 1. The greatest height of stormwater flooding for each category storm (indicated in the Legend on Map 1) and each point are summarized on each plate of the Atlas. II-A-l /34" ,- . STCJRloI HISTORY POINT I. OOIIl.DSI([t ISl.AND 2. ~STlNN 3. Jl]YM. PAUl 1-.:1( 4. G1lDIIUIlD :l. ~ ISl.AND 6. MMCIl JRIJIO[ 7. ISLES c.- ~I D. ~VUS'41 S. GII\IUIlIOlT lXNTtR 10 ClTY c.- IWLES/nut CIlRNDtS IL PIM: IlII1Gt RDIU$41 J2.~P_ 13. IIlNlT4 ItaCH RalUS41 14. LD.. T __lIIlT KlICH IS. ~ CIlJ.IQl _IT.oL 16. HYII[ _ ~1U4 17. Cl."" PASS 1& DOC'''S PASS 19. CiIIItlIJIIl PASS 20. aultR YMCA 21. VD€Y_ Q.DCNTNIY 2l!. SANT'" IIMIIMA/llll.Jl[N GATt PKYT 21 aEIlIIUT RIVDI [ST",~ 24. MYVlEV _ l!5. RllID1TS IAT 26. lIIollNliETRU 27. FlIRD TEST TIW:1C n. IWLES_ e9. IWLES SHlIIlC 3D. PlI1'T c.- TI1E ISL_S 31. EVEAGl.411U/L TllOl a. 1111. 32. tvDlGL4IE3i CITY 33. u:E CYPIlEU =:.-- T-f>~-;;h{ -.--. -'1 i I I I ~ ~ ~ .', .-. LECEND " " ilnlll. '--. .. ~~~~ '~luwPU1' iii loW Iii .... ~~~... ~] ~ . 1 I J 4_ -.""- MAP 1 SLOSH MODEL STORM HISTORY POINTS COLLIER COUNTY ~ /37. DEMOGRAPmC SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE . The population of Collier County was 152,099 in 1990. In 1960, it was 15,753. . The projected population for the year 2010 is 288,603. . Median age for Collier County is increasing. In 1970, the median age was 35.2, in 1980 it was 38.0, and in 1990 it was 40.7. . In 1990, the age distribution of the population was as follows: 0-14 15-24 25-44 45-64 65+ 17.1% 10.9".10 27.4% 21. 9% 22.7% . In 1990,3.3% of Collier County residents between the ages of 16 and 64 had a mobility or self-care limitation. Among residents 65 and older, 11.3% had a mobility or self-care limitation. . In 1990, the racial composition of Collier County's population was as follows: White Black Asian American Indian Other 91.4% 4.6% 0.4% 0.3% 3.3% . In 1990, 13.6% of Collier's population was of Hispanic origin. . In 1990, the Collier County migrant and seasonal farmworker population was estimated to be 22,010 (including farmworkers' families). . In 1990, the median family income in Collier County was $38,428. The per capita income was $21,386. . In 1994, the average annual unemployment rate was 8.0%. This represented a decrease from the 1993 rate of8.3%. . In 1990, Collier County had 94,165 housing units. Of these, 46% were owner- occupied, 20% were renter-occupied, and 34% were vacant or held for seasonal use. II-A-3 13~ . In 1990 in Collier County, 78% of the population lived in urban areas while 22% lived in rural areas. RECENT STORM HISTORY Hurricane Andrew was the last major hurricane to affect Collier County since Humcane Donna in 1960. Below is a Hurricane Andrew Fact Sheet created by the Collier County Office of Emergency Management. Collier County activated:........ ................... ...............................................22 Aug 92 4: 15 PM State of Local Emergency Declared:....... .......... ........ .............. ................. .23 Aug. 92 8:00 AM Recommended Evacuation Issued:..................................................... .....23 Aug. 92 8:00 AM Mandatory Evacuation Issued for the following areas:. ................ ...... .... ........ ... ....... .... .... .... ..... ....... ................23 Aug. 922:00 PM . All mobile homes . Chokoloskee Island . Plantation Island . Everglades City . Goodland . Marco Island . Isles of Capri . Port Royal (South of 18th Ave. So.) . East Naples & Vanderbilt Beach . (1st Floor elev. less than 7 ft) Estimated # of people who actually evacuated............................................................... 43,000 Estimated # of people who should have evacuated..........................................................32,000 Emergency shelters opened at 23 Aug. 92....................................................................6:00 PM Shelters opened: . Immokalee HS (Special Needs/General) . Immokalee Mid (General) . Barron Collier (Special Needs/General) . East Naples Mid (General) . Lely HS (General) II-A-4 /39. . Golden Gate Comm Center (First RespondersIFamilies) . St. John's Episcopal (Homeless) . First Assembly of God (Homeless) # of people sheltered:......... .... ........... ....... ............... ....... ..... ............................ ...............3.450 Special Needs shelters activated:.... ... .......... ............. ..... ..... ............ .... .............. ............. ........2 # of Special Needs clients: ............ ................ ........ .... ....... ..... ............ ............. .....................54 Estimated time to evacuate: ...... ........ .......................... ...... ......... .................. ....... ........14 hours # NU.fsing homes! ACLF evacuated.... ........... ................................ .............. ......... ......... .NONE # Hospitals evacuated:....... .......... ...... ......... .............................. ......... .:.......... .......... ............1 Estimated time between evacuation order and tropical storm force winds:...............24 hr. 30 min. Closest point ofappmach to Collier:.......................................... ...........8 mi so ofChokoloskee Estimated lowest barometric pressure:............ ........................................ .................. .Unknown Estimated highest wind speeds:...............................EOC 75 MPH Marco Island 85 MPH Chokoloskee 98 MPH G 100 G 110 (E) G 120 (E) Total rainfalL......................................... '" ... ..... ............................................................. .1. 8" Highest Storm Surge.......7 Ft. measured on causeway between Chokoloskee and Everglades City Collier County EOC deactivated:...............................................................24 Aug. 92 7:00 PM Total estimated cost public and private from Hurricane Andrew in Collier County was $35,000,000. A total of 5,200 properties were affected mostly in the southern half of the county as was expected based on the highest wind speeds as indicated in the fact sheet above. When Hurricane Donna hit Collier County in 1960, the County's population was 15,753 (1960 Census) concentrated primarily in Naples, Immokalee and Everglades City. Except for the Immokalee area, the greater part of the County's inhabited areas were inundated by flood waters. Damage in Everglades City was so great that plans to relocate the County seat were finalized, and relocation was completed in the following year. Hurricane Alberto was a near miss for the County. This storm fonned off the Southwest Florida Coast in 1982, but decreased in intensity to such a degree that it was a tropical depression when it made landfall. However, its actions mimicked those predicted by the SLOSH model to the extent that high waters again inundated the Southeast Collier Shoreline, submerging Everglades City II-A-5 / 1/-0- below approximately three feet of seawater for several hours. There was, however, no surge force resulting in significant damage to property. Hurricane Floyd provided the area a scare on October 16, 1987. However, it veered due east before the County received any impacts beyond gale force wind gusts and somewhat higher tides. A voluntary evacuation order put approximately 600 persons in public shelters and an unknown number in area hotels, homes, and out of region locations. ANALYSIS AND MANIPULA nON OF DATA BY A COMPUTER SPREADSHEE.T In an effort to give local, state and regional agencies involved in comprehensive emergency management planning for hurricanes more control over the assumptions and data results (e.g. the ability to create scenarios or input the assumptions to fit the real time hurricane event) a computer spreadsheet has been developed to calculate all the results of the following tables in the text of this county report. All the tables with the exception of Tables 10 and 26 are in fact "linked" to the text of this county report. With this linking process the user of this text, which must be read from a personal computer with the appropriate software, is able to more fully interact with the data by determining how the results wer~ derived by viewing the fonnulas within the spreadsheet. Furthennore, development of the computer spreadsheet offers the user greater ability to rapidly evaluate a different set of assumptions which drive the results. Rapid manipulation of the hurricane evacuation data is extremely necessary to all levels of government throughout all phases (mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery) of a hurricane emergency. One of the primary examples of an assumption which can be varied in the spreadsheet is the percent evacuating. For example, prior to a hurricane evacuation being recommended or ordered it may be known (based on traffic movements) that 10 percent of the vulnerable population has evacuated early and that (based on behavioral surveys) 10 percent may not evacuate, an 80 percent evacuating assumption can be entered into the spreadsheet cell which will change the results of all tables in the spreadsheet with the exception of Tables 4 (County Shelters) and Table 8 (Evacuation Route Capacities). The primary assumptions, and multipliers, including the occupancy rates discussed in the next section, some of which can and should be changed particularly if new infonnation becomes available to support different assumption or multipliers to fit the specific hurricane scenario threatening Collier County are listed below and are discussed more fully in each section below. PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD 2.4 VEHICLES PER HOUSEHOLD 1.1 PERCENT EVACUATING 100% PERCENT GOING TO FRIENDS OR RELATIVES 13% PERCENT LEA VING THE REGION/COUNTY 34% PERSONS PER VEHICLE 2.18 PERCENT GOING TO PUBLIC SHELTER 16% II-A-6 / t.J I. AFFECTED POPULATION Each hurricane flood zone depicted on Map 1 encompasses large segments of the County population. Each one has a certain degree of wlnerability to the threat of hurricane induced flooding. Excluding tropical storm zones, category 1 zones have the most repeated threat potential, whereas it is highly unlikely (but the potential exists) that category 4/5 areas will need to someday evacuate. Mobile homes and recreational. vehicle residents will be the only persons recommended to evacuate for those tropical storms approaching hurricane strength. This 1995 update assumed all mobile homes were built to pre-1994 code, while future updates may not make this assumption for the additional mobile home units placed in Collier County. Each hurricane flood zone mimics the coastline. Geographically, however, these zones are too cumbersome to effectively assess the timing and shelter needs of the population. Consequently, in 'association with CoUier County Emergency Management and Planning Departments, some of the new hurricane evacuation zone boundaries created with the 1991 Update are consistent with the socio-economic blocks used by the County.The hurricane evacuation zones are boundaries based on locally known communities or geographic areas which have commonly understood names. This 1995 update makes no changes to these evacuation zones as def)icted on Map 2. In order to forecast population and vehicle usage for these evacuation zones, it is necessary to determine the number of dwelling units, and dwelling unit types. The source for the number of single-family, duplexes, multi-family and mobile homes is from the "Demographic and Economic Profile of Collier County, September 1994" compiled by the Collier County Long Range Planning Section. The source for the number of recreation vehicles is from a Department of Health and Rehabilitation Services, Health Program Office document titled "Mobile Home Park and Recreation Vehicle Park Registration. The source for the number of hotel/motel units is from the Department of Business and Professional Regulation Division of Hotel and Restaurants, Master Listing of Accounts sorted by county, class and file number. It is estimated that in 1995 there are 111,610 total dwelling units in the areas affected by the worst case category 4/5 hurricane flooding or required to evacuate due to high winds within the County. The greatest concentration of these, 47.7%, are located in the category 1 zone. This can be seen in Table 1, which provides the estimate of dwelling units in the County by category hurricane storm surge zone and by evacuation zone name. Using the housing unit estimate, a population estimate is then made based on persons per household, and vacancy rate. Persons per household were estimated to be 2.4 in Collier County, regardless of unit. Whereas, this assumption has inaccuracies, the end result does not differ significantly from a more detailed analysis (e.g. by evacuation zone/County socio-economic zones). More detailed analysis, however, is required to assess the impact ofvadmcy rates for unit types, since different unit types have different wlnerability to flood or wind hazards. Using the telephone survey estimates from SWFRPC Hurricane Evacuation Study, Update 1987 , Appendix L the Florida Hotel/Motel Association for hotel/motel occupancy and concurrence from the Collier County Emergency Management Office, two estimates of seasonal vacancy for Southwest II-A-7 / 'I-~. o - 1.[[ COUNTY .- --coUJ"u-CO:-' MrllOllT co. r'---'-'-'-'-'-'-'''''Cciij'ij,co.---'------'l . I I ' , t , . . I I . . t I . , I r.-.-.-.-.-.J 0 I . I I . . I I . I ! . , , ' . I I . . , I . . I i i I i ---- ~..., Gale ~ot.. 4/5 HURRICANE \lOOEl Ut.llT 'our s.w_ ) P..... Iloy ..... I P...... Iloy E... 2 PaoU -.1 ~W"'l 1 ~ e r ~ C4lo ~ Coldan Cot. [.~. ) r..-leM. '-5 Porb 'Shorel "-'""" too. 2 fIo,;Qo S_ P.... 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1li9CW- ) SoutIl __ 2 rokOhOtcr... 2 ~;r.....I\ol<- I 0000 lDl<. 2 "" ~ . ..n ~ CX1 1~ COWtR C1l" --;oHiioct'O.-;;;;;;- - MAP 2 EVACUATION ZONES ""_______ COlli ER CQU NT)'_ ll-A-8 /4, TAIl.El lTT 11FI{0l.NIY -19J5l1l.'SN:;lNIS SRHd EV..v::nmCN SH:ll MBI.E :m: M.1Jl. IIJllIJ CAIEII:m' 2'!N: FAMU' 11M: IDI<US FAMIY IlH.EX MmL 1UrAL 1 V~PARK\'\fSr 2,~ US 15 3,lm m ~ 6;E1 1 ~ ]) 1 0 l,9I2 0 D 2,871 1 P~\\iST '1J1 1 0 4$1 -14 N 5,?6 1 N\lU5BW 4,J>> -912 105 J,S2.9 6Z1 an 10."" 1 ~ 2,10l (B "us 2,(gI 18S Sl6 5.2lS 1 ~B<\Y S) .(J7- .rJT 2HZ 21 ~ 1$T7 1 HNEi&:NCREEK ~ 1.516 713 1,007 3 0 3,6tl 1 V~P~ ~lN) 72 31 7$16 133 2,SU 14tm 1 RJ'lALP~<F1SI.ANli J) 0 229 19 0 Uf) a 1 ~~ r.u ~ .m 12 22 l'U 1,00 1 <lHl..AN}'F~ 12 Z3 0 5 2 0 4Z TOW.. 2Il'€ 1 l.5,197 J,1,I) 1,.E :u..m l,ZJ) 6,~ SU57 2 AlD.B:N m 1 0 SD 2 0 611 2 P~ARK ?D 3 0 9Q ~ . 5t l,8i8 2 NAlUSPARKEAST I,nl 0 0 la :us 0 1,3l2 2 m.ICANB\YEAST 1,113 1- 0 ~ 14 1m 2,~ 2 P~wr ~ 0 0 1,.t7J 51 m 3,lf:B 2 ~ 199 n 0 17 9 0 :3ri 2 FAI<AB\1UH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 InPIAl<E .u 14 0 2 0 0 m 2 ~rwu5 6,lm 1,-1J7 (J1 9,8i9 5lS s;y) 19,1rn TOW.. 2'0'1:2 11JW 1,-W (J1 JA,~ ~ 1,(5) 31,mo 3 ~41 G ~ s:n J.tt 3J 0 1)l8 3 TIRIl.EI.AI<fSHlI€~ 2,00 6 0 3,WlS liS CJ1 5,E 3 WN:EMH: ~ 1 0 1,-W (l) 187 2,~ 3 H<HR:JNI' l,!ffi 141 31 ~ 292 :m 3,00 3 Rl.R~ 1,6lI 2 0 3Sl 2 0 ClU 3 <nDNGm:<IIY 4,53 2 0 3,072 628 1&3 l\.m 3 a:IJE"{ Gm:FSTA1ES l,9?5 33 0 1 1 0 2,mo 3 FURIl\~PARK 6 -W 0 0 0 0 .tSJ 3 IIGC\lRES5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOW.. 2IN:3 13.161 ~ $4 8.%6 1,00 !fi) ~8S5 ~ ~ 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 ~ QM...<:mm<RAlI{;E'IRFE ?'i2 12 0 46 32 0 812 ~ <nDNGm:FSTA1ES 2,~ % 2} 29-4 6 0 3,1H) ~ F~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOW.. 2Il'€~ 3,621 lIB 2} J.I) :JI 0 4, us ffiAN)1UfAI.S ZJ:NSl-~ oU,8B 3,35S 3,610 47,se 3,:Dl 8.6S7 111.610 aJISnE ::2I:N:s :!1J (B 157 II-A-9 141. Florida were prepared. These are as follows: COLLIER COUNTY OCCUPANCY RA YES BY UNIT TYPE UNITlYPE SEASONAL OCCUPANCY RATE July .November SINGLE-F A:Mll.. YIDUPLEX MULTI-FAMll..Y MOBll..E HOME TRAVEL TRAll..ER HOTEUMOTEL 80% 57% 43% 18% 54% 85% 710/0 75% 41% 63% From these estimates, Collier County flood zones are estimated in 1995 to contain an aggregated average of 177,311 persons in July and 207,190 persons at the start of November. This is summarized by evacuation zone in Table 2. Numerically, the greatest seasonality occurs in Hurricane Category Zone 1, which has 81,980 persons in July and 100,586 in November, a seasonal increase of approximately 18.5%. MOTOR VEHICLES Nearly all of the population affected by an oncoming hurricane will evacuate by private vehicle. The question arises as to how many vehicles will be used in the evacuation. Issues relevant to this include the number of vehicles owned, whether owners would be willing to leave any vehicles behind (since next to the home, vehicles are the most expensive possession), whether all drivers feel confident to operate a vehicle in storm conditions, and whether evacuating families wish to be separated in different motor vehicles. Based on surveys, respondents indicated approximately 75% of available vehicles would be used in an evacuation (Hurricane Evacuation Plan, 1981-82, SWFRPC). This averaged out to 1.1 vehicles per occupied unit (A higher vehicle use would increase forecasted volumes of vehicles, which in turn would increase traffic loads). Using this ratio of cars and the occupancy ratio used previously, the County potential total of vehicles used in an evacuation in July would be 81,202, and in November would be 95,177. Category I Zones again have the greatest number of vehicles, 35,770 (37,508 with mobile homes outside the area) in July and 42,796 (45,952 with mobile homes) in November. Table 3 summarizes the vehicle generation by each evacuation zone. SHELTERS Evacuees must have a place to go. The SWFRPC undertook surveys in 1979 and. 1981 to determine evacuee preferences. This data is summarized as follows: public shelters (24%), leaving the County (34%), visit friends/relatives in county (13%), go to hoteVmotel (4%) or TI-A-IO <._~--"-'-'-'---'---~--~..__..,..- JL/~ TABLE 2 COLLIER COUNTY -1995 POPULATION ESTIMATES STORM EV ACUA TION CATEGORY ZONE JULY NOVEMBER 1 VANDERBILTINAPLES PARK WEST 9,734 11,307 1 PELICAN BAY WEST 3,871 4,719 1 PARK SHOREIMOORINGS WEST 7,341 8,994 i NAPLES BA Y 16,589 19,325 1 . GORDON RIVER/AIRPORT 8,105 9,382 1 SOUTH NAPLESIROOKERY BAY 2,309 3,089 1 HENDERSON CREEK 3,942 5,913 1 MARCO ISLAND/CAPRIlGOODLAND 24,632 28,622 1 ROY AL PALM HAMMOCKIPORT OF ISLANDS 445 623 1 EVERGLADES CITY/CHOKOLOSKEE/OCHOPEE 1,112 1,532 1 COPELAND~AKAHATCHEE 57 78 MH & RV 2-5 & BEYOND 3,843 7,002 TOTALS CA TEGORY 1 81,980 100,586 2 AUDUBON 949 1,143 2 PALM RIVERNICTORIA PARK 3,019 3,458 2 NAPLES PARK EAST 4,305 4,635 2 PELICAN BA YEAST 3,602 4,OSl 2 PARK SHOREIMOORINGS EAST 6,363 7,180 2 SOUTH BLOCKS 444 491 2 FAKAHA TCREE 0 0 2 DEEP LAKE 102 118 2 EAST NAPLES 30,103 35,854 MH&RV 2 1,768 4,028 NEW EV ACUEES 47,119 52,932 TOTALS CA TEGORY 1-2 129,099 153,518 3 LANDMARK/OLD 41 2,135 3,052 3 TURTLE LAKES/PINE RIDGE 8,497 9,S21 3 WINDEMERE 4,170 4,815 3 HIGH POINT 5,142 5,801 3 FOUR SEASONS 3,614 3,929 3 GOLDEN GA TE CITY 14,370 16,064 3 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES 3,829 4,092 3 FLORIDA SPORTS PARK 473 817 3 BIG CYPRESS 0 0 MH&RV 3 1,509 2,762 NEW EVACUEES 40,721 45,629 TOT A LS CATEGORY 1-3 169,821 199,146 4/5 CORKSCREW 10 10 4/5 QUAIL CREEK/ORANGE TREE 1,581 1,699 4/5 GOLDEN GA TE ESTATES 6,024 6,557 4/5 FAKAHATCHEE 0 0 MH&RV 4/5 124 223 NEW EVACUEES 7,490 8,044 TOTALS CA TEGORY 1..tl5 177,311 207,190 II-A-ll /4~. TABLE 3 COLLIER COUNTY - 1995 VEHICLE ESTIMATES STORM EV ACUA TION CATEGORY ZONE JULY NOVEMBER 1 VANDERBILTINAPLES PARK WEST 4,461 S,182 1 PELICAN BAY WEST 1,774 2,163 1 PARK SHOREIMOORINGS WEST 3,364 4,122 1 NAPLES BAY 7,601 8,8S3 1 GORDON RIVER/AIRPORT 3,711 4,290 1 SOUTH NAPLESIROOKERY BAY 1,050 1,397. 1 HENDERSON CREEK 1,793 2,679 1 MARCO ISLAND/CAPRIIGOODLAND 11,289 13,117 1 ROYAL PALM HAMMOCKlPORT OF ISLANDS 200 276 1 EVERGLADES CITY/CHOKOLOSKEE/OCHOPEE SOl 682 1 COPELAND/FAKAHA TCHEE 26 36 MH & RV 2-5 & BEYOND 1,738 3,156 TOTALS CATEGORY 1 37,508 45,952 2 AUDUBON 435 524 2 PALM RIVERNICTORIA PARK 1,384 1,585 2 NAPLES PARK EAST 1,973 2,124 2 PELICAN BAY EAST 1,651 1,871 2 PARK SHOREIMOORINGS EAST 2,917 3,291 2 SOUTH BLOCKS 204 225 2 FAKAHA TCHEE 0 0 2 DEEP LAKE 47 54 2 EAST NAPLES 13,786 16,407 MH&RV 2 799 1,455 NEW VEHICLES 21,596 20$,626 TOTALS CA TEGORY 1-2 59,105 70,577 3 LANDMARK/OLD 41 969 1,377 3 TURTLELAKESIPINE RIDGE 3,895 4,501 3 WINDEMERE 1,911 2,207 3 HIGH POINT 2,356 2,658 3 FOUR SEASONS 1,656 1,801 3 GOLDEN GATE CITY 6,586 7,363 3 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES 1,755 1,876 3 FLORIDA SPORTS PARK 217 374 3 BIG CYPRESS 0 0 MH&RV 3 681 1,243 NEW VEHICLES 18,664 20,913 TOTALS CA TEGORY 1-3 77,769 91,491 4/5 CORKSCREW 4 5 4/5 QUAIL CREEK/ORANGE TREE 724 779 4/5 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES 2,761 3,004 4/5 FAKAHATCHEE 0 0 MH&RV 4/5 56 101 NEW VEHICLES 3,433 3,687 TOT ALS CA TEGORY 1-4/5 81,202 95,177 II-A-12 /41, stay home (2%) or "other" (2%) for a total in county destination of (21 %), and "don't know" (21%). Those are preference declarations; other studies indicate there is a significant variation from preference to actual behavior. The severity of impending storms may also change decisions, as increased community-wide evacuation limits or eliminates the hotel/friends/public shelter/stay home prediction. At this time, the County has twenty-five primary public shelters and nine secondary public shelters, with a capacity (at 20 square feet per person) of 22,810 persons and 6,800 persons, respectively. These shelters are summarized in Table 4, by Vulnerability. zone. They are also depicted on Map 3. Secondary shelters are shelters without shelter managers and, as such, cannot be opened to the public. However, for contingency planning purposes, the appropriate tables also include secondary shelters, which adds 6,800 spaces to the initial inventory. Based upon the evacuees forecast in Table 2, the County has limited public shelter capacity. For example, the County can accommodate 12.4% of the evacuees during a Category 2 storm evacuation in July, but only 10.4% in November. Table 5 summarizes the County's public shelter capacities for storms. These capacities, specifically the "percent met" are ultimately used to determine how many evacuees will have to leave the county because adequate public or private shelter space cannot be found in the county. The addition of secondary shelters (6,800 spaces) does provide for additional space for tropical storms and category 1 storms. The improvement shown by this addition is also depicted in Table 5. Additional data is also shown in this Table to assist the local emergency management agency in determining the amount of shelter which should be opened to accommodate the assumed percent of evacuees seeking shelter. In Collier County a factor of 16 percent was assumed and is based on an Florida International University (FlU) Survey conducted in November of 1994 (see Table 1 in Part I of the study. This percent was also approved by the Collier County Emergency Management Office. Based on this survey and other conducted in previous years after Hurricane Andrew by FlU and other per and post hurricane behavioral surveys including the one conducted for the 1987 Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study Update their could be a range for this percent seeking shelter (possibly 12 to 24 percent). Finally, based on this assumption of percent seeking shelter, the shelter space surplus/deficit in the / county can be estimated. Public shelters within the County are not the only means of meeting evacuee shelter needs. Other options for evacuees include "friends," hotels/motels and one's own home (refusal to leave). In Collier County, there is an estimated 8,814 hotel/motel rooms. The greatest portion (76.6%) are along the shoreline within the category 1 flood zone. This leaves 2,066 units for category 1 storms, and 1,016 units for category 2 storms. The 2,066 units (at 100% vacancy) would satisfy 6.0% of demand in July and 4.9% of demand in November, for a category 1 storm. In category 2 storms, only 1.9% of demand would be met in July and 1.6% in November, while the greater storms eliminate virtually all capacity of commercial space being available. In summary, Table SA shows the percent shelter space increase or the amount of evacuees which can be sheltered due to hotel/motels units providing a fonn of commercial shelter space. II-A-13 /1../8. TABLE 4 COLLIER COUNTY SHELTERS CAPACITY AT SHELTER RED CROSS MANAGED 20 SO. IT. ~ORM NU!'.mER PRIMARY SHELTERS ADDRESS PER PERSON CATEGORY (1) 1 Barrm Calier High School <Augar Drive l,SOO .2 2 Big C)1Ire5S Eksnmtary School (2) 32SO Golden Gate Blvd.. 700 3 3 Bethme Education Cmter 61~ S SthSt. (lmm.) .tOO. Beyom .uS 4 Collier County Yo-Tech 3702 Estey Avenue SOO 1 5 Collier Pac \Vanhoose 601 E. Main St. 800 ~Uld 415 6 East Naples Middle Schod ~100 Estcoy AWe 1..300 1 7 Fannworkcr Village Comm. Center Route 29 SO 1k)'OOlf .us 8 Golden Gate Elementary Sdxd 20th Platt SW ~ 2 9 Golden Gate: l\I.fiddlc: Sdxd -Ul th T e:rna: SW 1,700 2 10 Golden T e:rna: Elemenbry School 2711 ~thTc:rnceSW 700 2 11 Hi&hJands ElmlCnbry School 1101 Lake: TralTord Rd... lmm. 700 Bc:)"ond .us 12 Immok2lc:e Higtl Schod (3) 701 lmmolWc:e Road 600 Bc:)'OOlf 4.15 13 Immok2lc:e Middle: School (3) N. 9th Street 1.200 Beyom 415 14 IFA$, lmmo&ulc:e State Road 29 100 Beyom .uS 15 Lake: Trafford Elementary Scbod 3500 Lake TralTord Rd., Imm. 1,200 Bcoy-on:i .uS 16 Laurc:l Oak Elemenury 7800 Immokalc:e Rd. 700 3 17 Ldy Elementary School 5lS6 CR 951 700 1 18 Ldy High Schad Ldy Blvd.. 2,500 1 19 NaplC3 Higtl Schad 2200 Avn-uc: N. 1,800 1 20 Oakrid~ l\I.-liddle: School 151 Sute Rd. 951 1200 3 21 Pi~re2St Elementary Schod 213 S. 9th Strttt 360 Ikyond .uS n Pine: Ridge Middle: School (3) Pine: Ridge Road 800 2 23 PWx:iana Elementary Schod 281S Airport Rd. 500 2 U Villagl: Oaks Elementary Scl10cI SUte: Route: 29 700 Beyond .us 25 v-mryards Elemenury School (:l) 6225 Arbor Blvd.. 700 Beyond .vs TOTAL: 25 PRIMARY SHELTER TOTAL CAPACITY n,810 PERSONS SECO:-iDARY SHELJERS(4) 1 Avalon Elementary School 1nan asson Drive: 700 1'$ 2 EvergJades Oty School Dr... Everglades Gty 600 1'$ 3 GuJ!Yiew Middle School 709 3rd Avenue:, S. 1,000 1 4 Lake Park Elementary ScOOoI 1~ 12th Street, N. 1,000 1 5 MaJl2tc:e Elemmta.ry 1880 MaJl2tc:e Rd. 1000 >1'$ 6 Naples Park ElemC'fltary Sch<d 658lllthAvmue, N. 500 1 7 Scagate Elemmbr)" Schoci 650 Seagate: Drive 700 1 8 Shadowlawn Elemental). SchOOl 2161 ShadCM-Jawn Drive: 800 1 9 Tommy Barfield Elc:mentary Marco Island 500 1'$ TOTAL: 9 SECONDARY SHELTERS 6,800 PERSONS II-A-14 I TAII..E 5 PRIM\RYPlHlCSHELTERO\PACIIY SImM EV.AO.nS pm(ENfK:r ~AO:NEDE>lOCHN Sl.lRIU.5/ InI<IT CAlECIRY ~AO: JtLY ~ .){Ly ~ .lU..Y ~ .lU..Y ~ 15" 22,810 8,207 15,lS 1000"/. 1000"/. l,3l3 2,426 2l..f17 ~ 1 22,810 8C8l 1~ 27.8"/. 22,7"/. 13,117 16,004 9,m3 6,716 2 16,010 129,W9 l53,518 124./. 10..../. 3l,6$ ~ (4,~ (8$3) 3 9,410 1(8,821 199,1~ sse/. 4.7"/. 27,171 3t.ail (17,761) (22.4SJ) 3" 16,010 1(8,821 199,1~ 9.40/. &0"/. 27,171 3l.863 (11.161) (15,8S3) 415" 9,410 In,311 2U7,190 5.3"/. 4.5% 28,n) 33,l!D (1~ (.23. 7-1J) IU3I.lC 5HELTFRC'APAaIY"IDISEllN)ARY9-IELTER SICRM C\l.Ea:RY ~.Aa. EVAa.JEES PfR(}NfMIT ~AO:NEEE>roCHN SURIU5/mKIT JL'LY ~ JULY !'U.IE1tHR .ll.LY ~HR .ll.LY ~ 15 28,610 8,207 15,l!f) 1000"/. 1000"/. 1 26,8l0 8C8l 1~ 32.7"/. 26.7% 0Itcg0ries 2-5 are ~ "Mble lure :n:I RVa::sidm Wlllilrly nxxn-e :d. wries to ~ to stdter "" AssI.m5 ~ in tlis 2aJ: raran qx:n 1,313 13, 117 2,.f26 16,004 27;87 13,693 26, 1~ 10,716 TABLE SA PERCENT SHELTER SPACE INCREASE DUE TO HOTElJMOTELS STORM CATEGORY PERCENT JULY NOVEMBER TS 257.7% 139.5% 1 6.0./0 4.9% 2 1.9% 1.6% 3 0.20/0 0.2% 4/5 0.2% 0.2% Without public or private commercial space available, evacuees have only the options of using friends within the County, or leaving the County for less affected areas such as areas outside of the stann's probable impact. The shelter capacity of "friends" is limited. This capacity diminishes as the ratio of evacuees to those not affected increases. This factor is depicted in Table 6. II-A-16 /OD. TABLE 6 POPULATION DISPLACEMENT RATIO STORM DISPLACED NOT DISPLACED RATIO CATEGORY JULY NOVEMBER JULY NOVEMBER JULY NOVEMBER TS 8,207 15,159 189,276 212,203 0.0 0.1 1 81,980 100,586 115,503 126,776 0.7 0.8 2 129,099 153,518 68,384 73,844 1.9 2.1 3 169,821 199,146 27,662 28,216 6.1 7.1 4/5 177,311 207,190 20,172 20,172 8.8 10.3 OUTSIDE 20,172 20,172 It is an assumption that ratios of 1: 1 or better (0.8: 1 for example) will enable those seeking shelter with friends will find them. This constitutes 13% of the population. Ratios of worse than 1: 1 (2: 1, for example), will diminish that likelihood in proportion to the ratio. Given that assumption, all of those evacuees from a category 1 storm wishing to stay with friends will be able to do so. However, during a category 2 evacuation only 6.9% in July and 6.3% in November of the evacuees will be able to stay with friends. "Therefore, out of County" evacuation loading will be reduced by only approximately these percentages or less by sheltering with a friend for category 2 evacuation. Table 6A summarizes the percent shelter space increase or the amount of evacuees which can be sheltered due to friends or relatives providing a form of shelter space. TABLE6A PERCENT SHELTER SPACE INCREASE DUE TO FRIENDSfRELA TIVES STORM PERCENT CATEGORY JULY NOVEMBER TS 13.0%. 13.0~. 1 13.0% 13.0% 2 6.9./e 6.3 0/. 3 2.1% 1.8% 4/5 1.5% 1.3% These percentages added to the shelter populations absorb the remainder of "in County" shelter demand satisfaction. This is summarized in Table 7. If shelter needs cannot be met within the County, they must be met outside of the County. For this reason, Table 7 A summarizes the number of vehicles leaving the county which is derived from subtracting the number of vehicles are staying in the county (e.g. going to shelter in the county) from the total number of vehicles used for evacuation. II-A-17 /$/. TABLE 7 TABLE7A TOTAL PUBLIC AND PRlV A TE SHELTER TOTAL VEHICLES LEAVING SATISFACfION IN COLLIER COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY STORM PERCENT MET STORM CATEGORY JULY NOVEMBER CATEGORY JULY NOVEMBER TS 100.0-/_ 100.0-/_ TS 1.266 2,S61 1 46.9-/_ 40.6-/_ 1 19.896 27.231 I" 51.8-/_ 44.6-/_ 1" 18.063 25.398 2 21.2-/_ 18.3-/_ 2 46.575 57.722 3 7.9-/_ 6.8./. 3 71.635 85.324 .' 3" 11.8-/_ 10.1-/_ 3" 68,610 82.299 4/5 7.0./. 6.0./. 4/5 75,507 89,483 "Assumes secondary shelten are open for a category 1 stonn and that shelten in category 3 nood zones remain open. SPECIAL AT RISK POPULATION There are several population areas that need special consideration. This includes Hospitals, Health Clinics and various nursing homes. The location of these facilities are included in Map 4. ROUTES Arterial roadways form the backbone of any hurricane evacuation effort. Unfortunately, Collier County's roadway system provides relatively few options for evacuees coming from the coast. Those that do exist are depicted on Map 5, "Evacuation Routes. n Identification of routes is the first step in assessing the roadway system. The next step is assessing roadway capacities. The capacities of these roadways have been developed based on their characteristics, tied to the assessment methodologies of the Highway Capacity Manual, 1985. These capacities are contained in Table 8 and were developed using Collier County and Florida DOT adopted route specific capacities. These capacities show that the roadways vary from a high hourly capacity at service level D of3,360 trips for 1-75, to a low of380 trips on several local roadways in the eastern areas of the county. An important aspect of any route is its condition. Many routes along the shore are low lying. Their propensity to flood due to surge or tidal action causes their reliability to operate as a route to cease several hours before storm landfalL In most cases, however, winds, not shoreline flooding, will initially make roads unsafe for traveL Rainfall flooding, however, may constitute a greater hazard to evacuation route operation than either early shoreline flooding or early winds. This is because roadways may flood and become II-A-18 /s-~_ ~ SHEL T~R~ECONDAAY SHEL TEllS !'~'7'_~' -. -'-'-'T-Z~;Ci~7~-'---'-'---'-'1 i :=.~:-l' SCtCD. I ..~J I' 1 GU.FVJ[V _c SCtDIl. I t. LM[ IWIK D.DKNTMI 1CttD.' .1 ' ~ ~~~'~SOUL i t!1.'1 ! i ~~~g~CHnI. i 11 ! _._._._._._.j .1' t~tU'. \ - j.t,i "'~i- : .~. I 31 ... I '{, ! '1\-:" I i i i i ! l t ! \ \J \ I'. , .,..."."r:~Ii, --- HURRICANE , PRIMARY SHELTERS }. ...... CDU.D HIGH 'SOUL !. JIG ~['$S D.EMOfTNn' SOlD. 3. .'TM..IE tU.'T![Jt . .... CII.LlO C(lJNTl' S. CI;I.l..lt.. He W 6. tAST IW'\.E 5 fitl J. FARM 'iJORKtliS connr 8. ~ GAl[ ELObITMt't UKD.. '- C\[LOC. GAl[ NtJa..t. satD.. 10. GlLDCH. TDtIUlCt Q...&JCWTMT SCHIlL It ..uHI.lUCIS El.D€NTM'I $CJIII.. 12'. MOClILti HIGH s:tKIL l3. HIJkAL([ HIDLt som.. 14. VAS. JMtCIK..u:t l~ LME TRNT[RI ElD€NTMY SCKD.. ti. LMlttl cw:: &:ltMDlUly SCIGI.. 17. L.ay LlEMOfTMn' 101II.. Ie. LtL , ~lijH SCIQL I'" NIPl.[S HIGH SCtDL ,.. QIQIIMt "'1I11..[ tQGL 2L PJN:CtUl EtLJII[NrMY $OGI.. 22. PINE lUGE KllfLt SOGI.. n "DlNCMHA o..CMENtMff lac:IL o!4. VlLlMll'.: twtS D.DCNTMY SDCD... a vHY.oS tLOlI:NTMIY SOCII. , , [U 1 ] ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,-... LEGEND If . ~J:rNJ\ (..... ::JY WI rcn ...., ~ 1M "0 . U ~ftO r-, ... ... - o I I :I ,. 11&I$ ~acTllD-IIJIC ';~~, V . I i- .f~ /.'-'1 .i .l::r ~'~::\, ....., .r::"" -C'< "~: ~~ff:~' -\ ~ ': 1:"1""'" ..' ?"lY//I::.rY Ll.-i'1' "., . ' .\~.,,{t.. '~~__ .- ~~.l... ,) ',\ r, I ,y "~r~\~. r}l.w:.. ...,. ",' ~. "~")!:"':'~(!'" ,r. ';:--;';~':~. "\'10' """''''x:~.~ ~ -." . "-~.i) ":~-rr""';. ~1~,i1J:, -e.~ .' .... , ,t7 ,...'f t. :m". '-, . I ~. '-.:<r~"' " !.ho't ~:~ ;.~ I~/' ". .r; '~{'i ":,,,~""'. ~~.,..:.~~~ 'r:--... MAP 3 HURRICANE SHELTER LOCATIONS COLLIER COUNTY --- /S3, ~ . _OlL OR ClNC _ ~-..nY 401 ~ co.uEII :J ~-=- CUIIC . ...-: IIQII[ = ~~_TH CIIRE -407 ___1HQ\III: 401 IAlDIlE ~AIIlJN 401 LELY_ <'0 _ CoM OF IW'US 411 ~.,... ..--- __ -". .'2 ~ :~: :=:.u~~ (ClII1Po\1DT) 420 _ lAIIlEIICI _ <%1 __ <n ~_ .u caDMlW .....x: ... ....... ~ CIO. WNrf/'1 ", j-- .-----. ---' - --. 7:';_:-;."7:: ----_. --------! . ~ I ! i ! i I I I I !+ ; I ;:;.'co. + I I I I I I ! I I i I ! I " " ... ~ ~ '" 'i:. ~ " ::.--::. III ~ ~ LEGEND . m'lt. ., ;u u,u.7lt ~ .. UIJi.......- : 3 U IJlI tUt . UW""' .".... ~-, ,. ~ " y - . I :I :I . '-D -....- MAP LIFE SAFETY COLLIER 4 FACILITIES COUNTY /"""- /si r- r- Li:GttlO . st\ol.c.t ~1S ~ 'tt&M~\-\C11.1~\I:S On!ll: 1 ~"t"""""~ )IlILUt><<' lit pl)..lCt ...l€> ~~~:;tttJ'. ~~._-_._._._._., ~._._._._._._._._.~~~ . . \ \ . . \ \ . , \ \ . . \ \ . . \ \ ..<nra5~~I.(l?;':' \ \ ~ ~"t" _.,,0\ . ...-._._-.-.J :;., ," ..""" \ \ ,$ \ . -~' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ t.......-.. ~ ~ ~ \.tGtt40 .'_...~ , ,,~,tl~~ -S~,l~ ~ {lIl5l.) . ~ 'Jl' ,u.' .-.. ~~...tt . ~ tAt.... f/ <?~\~ 't~'IO;""',,,,,,, ~,'"'",,' ~:/~ - ()\. ..."" " I ~..,. ~-- ~ r"'.'\ MAP 7 CR\1\CAL r AC\L\1\t:.S COLUt:R COUt-t1'( ,r- /56'. --------------/ ------------ . ~ c. >- ~ >- ~ - ...;l - u -< ~ ~ z ;:l 0 u ~ c.J - ..J ..J ~ 0 ~ "'u -< NZ Z ~- >- ..JrJ') Eo_ =c.J :i <:- - E--E-- u - -< ..J - .. U < ~ ..J - Eo_ - ...J U -< ~ >- ~~ Ot.:) ~~ tI)~ -< u ........................................... ;;;;;;;;;;;CCCCC S:E:E:~i:D:i:i:A:E:iS:~.!!.!!~~ ___________l:l..l:l..l:l..l:l..A. C=====C====----- uuuu 1I.l1l.l1l.l1l.l1l.l1l.l~1I.l1l.l1l.l1l.l55555~~~~~~~~ . =~~ '!!!!!'!!!!!!eeeEe~~~~==== ~~:: elIel1el1el1Cl1Il1Cl1Cl1Cl1Cl1Cl1_____QQQQ____ ClIC.IC.IC.I 1I.l1l.l~~~~~~~~~~~~::l:l..c.c.c.====II.lIl.lIl.l""~~~. --- ~~~~~~~""""~~""----II.lIl.lIl.lIl.lC.lC.lC.l~QOO ~~~~II.lIl.lIl.lIl.lIl.lIl.lIl.l~~~~~~~~~eEeEeEEEEEE~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~""hhhh~~~~ OOOC.lIl.lIl.lIl.l ClI ClI ea ClI ClI . . ClI . . ell II.l - - - - - - - - II.l II.l II.l II.l :: C.I C.I C.I ~~~~~~~~~~~.....~~~t~~~~~~~~::== ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t.:)t.:)t.:)t.:)~~~~~~~ c::r: ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ >-~~ . ~ 8 ~ z CI)~u-~~ CI) ~ tI) 0 ~ ~~ o ~ 0 - itl)~u ...J ...J ~ ...J ~ -<~ ~ o 0__ 0 -< -Q~z ~ o ~-z ~ ~ ~-<~ ~ - QO~- 0 tI) .....J~~ Z - ~ z-~~ - t.:) Ot.:)>~ ~ ~ ~c::r: c.;:lO~g 0 ~ >-~8~ ~ >- ~-< =o~~z ~ = t> ~ c::r: c::r:~~c. ~~oQO ~ 0 U u~~> < ~Q~~ ~c.~ZUOQc::r: ~ t wwQO >- >->-~~ zj 0 ~~c::r:j~~j~ c::r:~~ uujt.:l ~ Eo_~~Q ~t.:)~~~o~~~~o~<~~b~ Z ~Et.:l~~O uu~e ~:~~-=<~~...Ju~~c::r:~~Q ~tI)oo~i~tI) Cl)tI)z- ...J><~Q~oc::r:=...J~>Qoc::r:~-< ~~ ><tI)~Q~~...J ~~z~z~~c::r:~>~~z~c::r:>-~ g~~~~zo~z~~9~ z~..~jo~Oo~z...J..joOo~~ CI)...J:i:i"~5...Jj...J...J~tI) OOO-Q~~Q OQOQuQ~~-~t.:l...J...JOO~t.:lQt.:lt.:l~~ ~~~~gc::r:~Eo-~~g~8~~~~~~:~~~~o~o~~~~ ~uu8t.:l~~5~~~u~~5~~GG~~~uua~8~~~~ -M-~ ~Q-~QM~-N~~~~Q-M~~~~Q~ -~~~__NN~~~QQ---NNNM--~~~~~~Q-- MNMMN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~=~=~=~~~~~=~== ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .................-............................... II-A-46 /5 IlW ~ ~ > ~ - .J - U < '- ~ :z: ::J 0 U ~ til - .J .J IlW 0 :t \CU < M:z: Z til_ > .JrJj ~ c::ltil - <- .J - Eo-Eo- u - < .J - '- U < '- .J ~~ oc." E_oIlW crJE-o < U ......................... erJerJerJerJCCCCCCC--- r:rJ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ IlW .... ...................... ~~~~5555555ccc =ct~~~~~ c=~ ccccEEEEEEE~~~ SS~~~~~~ ~~SS= SSS.S~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ccc.....~ ..~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ccc~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~W'W'-__~~~VYU~~CC~ ----~~~~~~~~E_oE_o.~~...EEEEE~~~~~- eEEe~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~EEE ~uu~~e ~~~~.......~~~~cc---~~~ooo==88~ ~~~~~~~~~~~...=..~~~>>>~~~~~==~ ----~~~~~~~~~~c~~~~~~~~coc=~oo- '-'-'-'-crJr:rJcrJcrJcrJcrJcrJ~~~r:rJ~~____oo~~~~~~~,- ~ ~ UerJu ~ -~- U '-.J'- '-~'- C2 0<0 ~ E_oZE_o crJ ~ erJ .Z - U o~~ c C2 ~u:t IlW ~ E_o Q-> ~ ~ U Z>O U _ - < c::: , crJ C c::: .J~;: IlW .J ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~E_oE_oQ c::: OZIlW IlW 0 E_oZZ.J crJOcrJ crJ UIlWZ U c::: ZIlW~OIlW ~ZIlW ~ c:::~~ - ~ O:t~c:::> ~~~~crJ~r:rJ ~~~ ~ ~ UCC~c::: .JQ~.JIlW..::IC ~,u 0 U 1lW--ZIlW -Z- =:-z .-- =:<<0r:rJ~ ~<~~O~< ~ ~~~ ~ IlW ~~~u~~ ~~~Z=~~ .J -1lW1lW 0 ~ _CQIlW~~<C->,-crJC-ZQ.J ~QcrJQ~ Q C'- =:1lW1lW~crJllW.J~~<O~~~~~ <_ O>=~~ crJ~crJ~r:rJ ~~~'-~~~~~~~C~~O~ ~~ IlWtQ~< ~~~~~ U'-'-~C:::UZ-'-c:::<j-,-~- ~~ tZ<-~~~-~_~ ~~~~~llWzoollWocoo~o~~crJOjisO~~zOzo~ .J.J'9u.JllWu~~.Jc:::uE-oZu..::l~QullW c:::u.J9E-ouE-ouE-o 1lW~~-CC~C:::C:::O.JIlWC:::C:::C:::C:::~.JIlWC:::E-o:tOC:::~_crJC:::r:rJC:::crJ ..::I<<U_<<<OO<><O<<<..::IC:::<<O..::l<<U<<<<< ~ZZO=~.J~~C:::E_oIlW~~U~Z<'-~crJU'-~ZO~~~~~ ~N~O ~~~~~~O~~~-O~~~~~M~~ ~~~~M~~~~~~OO-eeONNN-NM~~~~~ee~ ~~~~ NNNMMMMMM~~~~~~~~~~~ ... ... - - ~=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ II-A-47 /51. '-'l ~ ~ >0 ~ - ..J - U < ~ ~ Z :J 0 U c=: ~ - ...J ...J '-'l 0 ~ -.oU < NZ Z ~- >0 ...JrJ'.l E-o CQ~ - -0(- ..J - f-of-o U - < ...J - ~ U -0( ~ ...J -0( U - f-o - c=: u c cz:: "" = ~ ;J Z >- E-o - ..J - U < ~ >- ~~ Oe,:, E-o"" enE-o < U ~~~~~~~ ~~~~ enen;;;;;;;~C en~tn~~~CCCC ~~-------.. ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ WW'-'lW'-'lW~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~5555555cc~~~~~~ c~~~~~~5555 ccEEEEE~EE~E~~iiii~ ~~ccccccEEEE co~~~~~~~. ~ ~~~cecccc~~~~ .- -- . . . . . . . ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ -- -- -- -- -_ __ . . . ~ uu~~~~~~~:.~ccccc~~~_~~~~~~~~~~ uu ~~-~~~~~uu~E~~~~u~ . Ef~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~EE~~eeeeeE~~~~ ~~:::::::~~-ww~~wOO~t~~~~~~:::: ~~~~~~~~~!!j}}}}}~~~i]~~~~~~~~~ ~~enen~enenenen~~""OOOOO~~~~~~~~~~enenenen cz:: rail E-o Z ~~ '-'l Z uu .....u'-'l __ ~e,:,~ 0 cz::cz:: ..JZ:: ~ ~E-o E-oE-o ~-cz:: ~ ~~t uu ~t= ~ QQ_ ;; 00 - '-'l'-'lCZ:: E-oE-o U-~ 9 ;J;J~E-o encn - - UUtnU -- ~ E-oen< en enen- QQ ~ Z""Q Z '-'l""Q; ..J..J ""~< < ~~..J~ Z gg ~~Oz~ ~~~~ 9 E-oE-o ~ ~ ZZ~O~ OO~Q E-o ZZ ~ < CZ::'-'l~~0 ~~Z~ ~ OO~ 0 ~E-o ~~~~E-o >-..JZzOO ~ UU~ - -~O O~<~Z CZ::-OOUCZ:: ~ _ ~~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~:~ ~~UU~~ E-o ~ ;:;:>- I cz:: cz::..Jo I >OU~""~ =>O~~~O ~ enE-o E-oO>- ~<uenO E-o-zencz:: =~E-o U ~ ""en QQzu~ -z ""U z~_zo~QQcz::~u..J..J<'-'lQO~""Q --CZ::~U..JUCZ:: CZ::_<cn<Z= cz::~~Z Z~zQO~ OO~>-=~==~~~~~..J~=::~~~~~~=~j~",,~o> ~~..JUE-o~E-oE-o=>-u..J..J~=~CZ::""..J..J..J~E-o~O",,~Q""~~ ~~5~~~~~~~~~5~~cz::9~~~S~~~a~~5~~~ ~~U..JZ~enenE-oU~ZUen=Q~UZZU""""ZOUZ~..J..J~ ~~~~~~M~~S~g~~~~~~~~e~~~~~~o~~~ ~~ -MM~~~MM~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-___ --MMMMMMMMMMMMMNMMMNMMMMMMM~~M~ II-A-48 /5"eg.. {oW ~ f_o >- f_o - ....J - U < I:l;, ~ z ~ 0 U Q:: ~ - ....:I ....:I {oW 0 :; -.oU < NZ ;Z; ~- >- ....:Icn f_o l:Q~ - ~- ....J - ~~ U - < ....:I - I:l;, U ~ '- ....:I ~ U - f- - Q:: U .. =: {oW = :; ::l ;Z; >- f-o - ..J - U < I:l;, >- ~~ oC-' f_o~ CJ':lf-o < U c~ccccc~~~~ ~~~~~C ~~~~~~~~;;; :;:;:;:;~~ ~~~~~~~~--- {oW{oW{oW{oW~~ --------~~~ -- 55555555ccc ~~~~~~~~ ggg~c~~~5E5E SSSSSS!Seee ~~~ii=== ~;;;Qggg__ ..."....--- QQQ----- .~~~;;;;.. ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c c C C 5 ~ ~ _ _ _ y ~ y y ~ ~ ~f-of-of-of-o~~~~~~;~~~eeeeE~.~EEE~Q~~~~ u ~ u u u u u u .. .. .. :> .y .Y.Y E E E E E c;;; - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u u ~~~~~~~~~~~~ccc OYuu~~~~~~~ ... . . . . . . u ~ ~ ~ - - _ u u ~ u u = Y Y Y . . ~~~~~~~~...=~~~>>>>>~~===~~f~~~ u~uuuuu~:>:>:>Q---~~~~~Q~QQQ----uu CJ':l~CJ':lCJ':lCJ':lCJ':l~CJ':l~~~CJ':l~~~OO~~O~~~~~I:l;,I:l;,~~CJ':l~ ~ ~ ..J ~ f-of-o ;z; UU ..J ;:;: ~~ t;t; ~~ CQ 2:< 2: 0C-' ....J ....J..J ..J 0 U2:....J 0 00 f_o ~ ~CJ':l ~ ~ ..J~ 0 ~~~~~=: =: <~ g::o ~ -<5;z; ~ 2: ;z;~;z;;z;<o < u~ ~ ~6g:: CJ':l ~oo>< 0 0~88~~ ~ g::~ =: ~~~ C-' zC-'~~~ ~ u~~~~=: -< ~O~~< ..Jg::~ 2: <~<~>. ~ ~g::=:g:::;> = g::=o~~~o>~ = >u~~~~ c ~~~~~~ - 0< ~_ U~~ U ~-u-~ ~~....J t;<~....J=:<<;z;~2:~ ~ 2:~~o==~~~~~c~~~~ ::l~=:~~....J=j05~ ~ 5og:::C-'~f-o=:~..J~~....J..J~~ Cj>g2:C~~=u< ~~ u~co=~<c<~<=:~~~....J ;z; ~_~o~c~ C-' ~C-' ~2: -_c C-'<C-'-<<~ -~-g::uoo-..J=:;z; =:Q g::-<;z;-<-;z;;z;;z;;Z;;z;~;Z;2:~....J CJ':lCJ':lCJ':l~~:>CJ':lCJ':lu~~CJ':l~=~~..J OQ<~~~_~CJ':l__~~ ~~~~-~ C --~--~-..J~--f-o-----~--~~ ..J..J..JQQQ~o~..JQ..J....J~<..J~~CJ':lg::_Q~C~Q..J~~UCJ':l ~~~2:<..J2:og::..J....J~....J2:..J..J~=:~o;z;....J~..J=:..J~=:=:C-'>- ~~~~~~~~~88~8~~8~~c~~888~8~~~;o QN~_~~~_e~~-~-N-~~~~e~N~~~~~~ NNN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ II-A-49 _I ~9, ~ z ;J o u c::: ~ - ....J ....J o \OU NZ ~- ....JtI) =~ -<- E-E- - ....J - U -< '- ....J -- ~ :3 tr ~ ~ ~ < Z ;;... ~ :3 U < '- .. cz: ~ = ~ ~ Z ;;... !- :3 - u < iii;, >- ~~ OC f-~ en .. < U - - c C- .. .. c ii:i:.! --~ CC- 0ll0ll lIoIlIoIC'--C-C !!E~=H=t'ggggg ....... c........ ..--.--- ~~"~cc...----- <-<-~_lIoI"'oClt:tt:tt r--c-"-.EE-.................. lIoI"'~uEE..JeEEEe D.OD.O....c u"'''' ,..,..,.. ........f.lu::........................ ~~.t~~oCleeeee ~~~~~t3lii:ii:ii:ii:ii: en en en en en ~~~~~ W ~HlIH~ (;IJ ~~~~~ !- f-o U U C2 C2 i:- ~ ~ :: ~ Q = w,..,J...:l Z cz:oo <en -cz:=: u~ '-f-!- en -...J QZZ ~ ...J~ zoocz: i= ~< <uu~ - ':Z ~ww:>- ..J ~;;: -cz:=:? i= :=f-o ~-;:e ;::l '--enw~enr- ~~~~'-cz:~cz:www ~w~f-oO~...Juf-..J!- cz:cz:cz:<wuc..~<c..<> ~!-~t.-'!-w<::i:e,,<t.-'f- ww~z_enzc::zzzu t.-'t.-'t.-'~:3::=ow=wen ZZZQw~f-ouQ!-Qw C2C2C2c;!-u~sa5~5= OOOt..::l~~z=e"zt.-'~ VlVl-r--O\r")-o-cr---cO\ MM~~V;;;;:;;~~~~~ VlVlVlll'lll'lll'lll'lll'llt'lll'lVlll'l ........-...-..............................................--..................-... ..,...,...,...,...,...,...,...,...,...,...,...,. Il-A-50 ;.:. c = Q U '" .c - C .~ e; ~ u :c Co .. '- D.O 2 ColI ... ~ lIoI ell .. Co '" = Q .;: ~ Co C Q r-- Co ~ ~ lIoI lIoI en .. c /~o. MAP PW-1 COLLIER COUNTY'S THREE (3) WATER AND/OR DISTRICTS - BOUNDARIES I SEWER ! UE co. --.~---..... COUJER co. Collier County, Florida - _______ '_'_' ___ ._._.1 1 I 1 1 I I !. - _I Ii U -------- ,-------- ----, 1 1 1 1 I .---- .. ... .!. I I 1 1 1 ..------_... N _ _ _ WA""~ OlSTRlCT I BOUNDARIES S<;f"..E 1"1. PlHE flIOOE AO .. .. Ii oj a TY OF NAPlES WA TER seRVICE AREA RAOlO AO INTtR5TATE - ~ GULF OF MEXICO OA~S 9OUlEVAAO Q '" ~ .. I: @ '" .. ri "' Q '" '" ~ u 15 ~ RA T'n..BNAKE HAWWOC( RO ...- I .._-.. I I 2M1. PREPARED BY: GRAPHICS AND TEQ;NICAL SUPPORT seCTlON COI.lMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION SOURCE: COWER COUNTY UTlUTlES 01\015100, 1995 DATE: 1/99 FlLE: PW-1.DWC /~/. COLLI ER MAP $$-2 COUNTY'S THREE (3) WATER AND/OR SEWER DISTRICTS - BOUNDARIES I Collier County, Florida _________.-. - --._._._.1 I I I I I I I .. - _I ! o! <l GULF OF "ElCICQ -------- ,-------- ----, I I I I I ----- .. ... .!. NAPU:S '''llOIW.EE Rll c.R._ I I I I I ..-------.... PINE RIOCE RO ~ oi <l OTY OF NAPlES WA TER SERVICE AREA AAOlO Rll INTERSTAT'E - 75 OA""S BOULEVARD li! ~ .. t: a u i:i oi .,; RA T1l.ESNAKE HAWWOCK RO li! Ii ~ u i!5 ~ -----------... -- I .._-. I I H - - _ WA""/SE'OEJ< DISTRICT / BOUNDARIES ~ D 5l;,AU ,..1. 2111. PREPARED BY: GRAPHICS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SECTION COMt.lUNITY DE'YUOPt.lENT AND EN'-1RONt.lENTAL SERVICES DIVISION SOORCE: COWER COONTY UTIUTIE$ DI'-1SlON. 1995 DA TE: '/99 FlLE: 5$- 2.DWC / to d-. MAP 12 PUBLIC FACILITIES IN COASTAL AND HIGH HAZARD ZONE EVERGLADES CITY Collier County, Florida COPELAND Ol <'I tr <Ii . ... EVERGLADES CITY " ,......... " " " " " " NOTE: EAOi Of" THE PUBUC F AOUllES IS IDENTIFIED IN PREVIOUS TEXT PREPARED BY: GRAPHICS AND TEOiNICAJ.. S1JPPOOT SECTION COMt.AUNITY OE'<tl.OPl.IENT AND ENVlRON"ENTAL SERVICES DIVlSlON SOURCE: COWER COUNTY COIolPREHENSl~ PLANNINC SECTION flU:: LU-BS.DWG DATE: 2/88 UPDATEO:7-ge PARK ~ e F= -< Z SCAlE o 2.5MI. U.S. 41 TAMIAMI TRAIL F18 F I LEGEND . SCHOOLS -if PARKS F FIRE ST A nONS E EMERGENCY MEDICAL STAnONS o GOVERNMENT 8UILDINGS * SHERIFF'S ST A nONS AND SU8STA nONS tr JAILS o U8RARIES <> WATER TREATMENT PLANTS H PU8UC HEALTH SYSTEMS AND HOSPITALS A WATER RETENnON STRUCTURES . SOUD WASTE FACIUTlES + WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS 1, AIRPORTS , - -. INDICATES HIGH ....; VELOCITY ZONE - - - INDICA TES COASTAL ZONE EVERGLADES CI TY CORPORA TE lIMI TS IG 1 WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS us SR 951 PREPARED BY: GRAPHICS ANO rEOiNICAl SUPPORT SECTION COWt.lUNITY DEVElOPWENr AND ENVIRONMENTAl SERVICES DlVlSl:ON SOURCE: ca..uER COON TY COMPREHENSI'wf; PlANNING SECTION DAlEo 7/98 F1LE: IWPlRI2.DWC SR 29 CR 858 CR 846 951 EVERGLADES BLVD I 75 @ CR 846 SR 29 /~1-. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT ON THE ADOPTION AND APPROVAL PROCESS FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. OBJECTIVE: Provide information regarding the approval and adoption process for amending the Comprehensive Plan and approval of the Stipulated Settlement Agreement and subsequent remedial amendments. CONSIDERATIONS: The density reduction amendments and the clustering criteria in the Agricultural/Rural Designation and Conservation Designation have been discussed with DCA staff for inclusion in the Stipulated Settlement Agreement. The process to amend Comprehensive Plan and the process for adoption of a settlement agreement and subsequent remedial amendments are outlined as follows: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process => Public hearing before the Collier County Planning Commission => Public hearing for transmittal by the Board of County Commissioners => DCA with comment from reviewing agencies has 60 days to issue an Objection, Recommendations & Comments (ORC) Report => Public hearing before the Collier County Planning Commission => Final Adoption hearing before the Board of County Commissioners => DCA has 45 days to issue a notice of intent to find the plan in compliance or not in compliance Stipulated Settlement Agreement & Remedial Amendment Process => Public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners to adopt & sign the proposed Stipulated Settlement Agreement => Forward signed agreement to DCA for their review and signature => Upon receipt of the Recommended Order from the Administrative Law Judge prepare a Joint Agreement on Recommended Remedial Action to the Governor and Cabinet => The Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing for final adoption of the remedial amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. => DCA has 45 days to find the remedial amendments in compliance based on the agreement The Board of County Commissioners has the following options: 1) Include all the density reduction amendments in the Urban, Agricultural/Rural and Conservation Designations and the clustering amendments in the Stipulated Settlement Agreement; or 2) Prepare a separate comprehensive plan amendment submittal for all the density reduction amendments and clustering criteria; or 3) Include all the density reduction amendments as a separate plan amendment submittal and include the clustering criteria in the Stipulated Settlement Agreement. lipS, The Development Services Advisory Committee met on February 3, 1999 and voted unanimously to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the density reduction amendments be excluded from the Stipulated Settlement Agreement. They did not take any action with regard to the clustering criteria. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None at this time. FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board review the process to amend the Comprehensive Plan and the Stipulated Settlement Agreement and form a policy decision on the Density Reduction Amendments and clustering criteria with regard to inclusion within the Stipulated Settlement Agreement or as a separate comprehensive plan amendment. Prepared By: / .,~ ---- Robe J. Mullhere, AICP, Director Planni ervices Depart ent Approved B . Date: 3 -\. ? - C? 1 Incent A. Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development & Environmental Services Division Date: :5 - S ~ 91 j(Pfo. 80-1 80-2 1980 ORDINANCES ADOPTED Amending 79-32, Re Petition CP-79-7C/Oversees Devel. by amending the land use element work study area map from Residential to Commercial. Amends: 79-32 01-08-80 Amending 76-30, Re Petition R-79-7C/Oversees Devel. by amending the zoning Atlas Map 50-25-1, from RM to GRC. Amends: 76-30 01-08-80 80-3 Amending 76-30, Re Petition R-78-18C/Donald Stone- 01-08-80 burner by amending the Zoning Atlas Map 50-26-3, from A to MHRP. Amends: 76-30 80-4 JO-5 80-6 80-7 80-8 80-9 80-10 Amending 76-30, Re Petition NZ-79-11C/Planning Dept. 01-08-80 amending various Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Amends 76-30 Establishing Guidelines for the Administration of the 01-08-80 Collier County Community Dev. Block Grant Program. Emergency amending 79-102, re discharge of firearms. 01-15-80 Amending 79-32, re Petition CP-79-9C/Planning Dept. 01-22-80 by changing residential to commercial on pine Ridge Road and Airport Road. Amends: 79-32 Amending 76-30, re Petition R-79-42CjPlanning Dept, 01-22-80 rezone of various areas for Annual Review. Amends: 76-30 Amending 76-30, changing zoning Atlas Map 49-25-5 01-22-80 from RM-1 Multi-Family to GRC General Retail Commer- cial on Lot 65, Naples Improvement Co's. Little Farms. (Wendy's International) Amends: 76-30 Amending 76-30, Re Petition R-79-37C (King's Lake N.) 01-22-80 changing Zoning Atlas Map 50-26-3 from "PUD" Planned unit Development to "PUD" (Bridle Path PUD) . Amends: 76-30 Page 1