COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB) Airport Authority AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 April 28, 2026 9:00 AM Commissioner Dan Kowal, District 4 – Chair; Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr., District 5 – Vice Chair; Commissioner Rick LoCastro, District 1; Commissioner Chris Hall, District 2; Commissioner Burt Saunders, District 3; NOTICE: Persons wishing to speak on an agenda item must register prior to its presentation. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes unless adjusted by the Chair. Time may be ceded by other in-person registered speakers who are present at the time the speaker is heard. Public comments are not heard for Proclamations, Presentations, or Public Petitions. Presentations are limited to ten (10) minutes unless extended by the Chair. To comment on Consent Agenda items, registration must occur before the Board’s action on the Consent Agenda, which is heard following the Pledge of Allegiance. Requests for Public Petitions must be submitted in writing to the County Manager at least 13 days prior to the meeting. They shall provide detailed information as to the nature of the Petition. Public Petitions must address matters not scheduled for a future agenda and concern a matter in which the Board can take action. If granted, a single presenter may speak for up to ten (10) minutes, subject to extension by the Chair, and the petition will be placed on a future agenda for a public hearing. For general public comments on non-agenda topics, registration is required before that portion is called. Comments are limited to three (3) minutes; time may not be ceded. The Chair may limit the number of speakers to five (5) for the meeting. Appeals require a record of proceedings, which may include the testimony and evidence on which the appeal is based and may be required to be verbatim. Lobbyists must register with the Clerk to the Board at the Board Minutes and Records Department per Collier County Ordinance 2003-53, as amended. All digital audio and visual materials submitted by the public via email link or attachment, or transported on external devices for broadcasting at the Board meeting, must be in a compatible format and received by the County Manager’s Office by noon on the day preceding the Board meeting to be scanned for network security threats. Digital materials submitted after the deadline will not be accepted. If you are a person with a disability who requires accommodation to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled to certain assistance at no cost. Contact Collier County Facilities Management located at 3335 East Tamiami Trail, Suite 1, Naples, Florida, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380. Assisted listening devices are available. Page 1 of 4116 A Lunch Recess is scheduled from Noon (12:00 P.M.) to 1:00 P.M. 1. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance Invocation: ||| Pledge of Allegiance: 2. Agenda and Minutes Approval of today's Regular, Consent, and Summary agenda as amended (ex-parte disclosure provided by Commission members for Consent agenda.) 3. Awards and Recognitions 3.A. Employee 3.A.1. 20 Year Attendees • Christian Quintana- Emergency Medical Services 3.A.2. 25 Year Attendees • Blanca Nieves- Code Enforcement • Maria L. Estrada- Zoning 3.A.3. 30 Year Attendees 3.A.4. 35 Year Attendees 4. Proclamations 4.A. Proclamation designating May 7, 2026, as National Day of Prayer. To be accepted by Pastor Jesse Barrett. (2026-468) 4.B. Proclamation designating May 2026 as Drowning Prevention Month. To be accepted by Daniel White, Advisory Board Chair, NCH Safe & Healthy Children's Coalition. (2026-866) 4.C. Proclamation designating May 3 - 9, 2026, as National Travel Tourism Week. To be accepted by representatives from the local tourism industry. (2026-1000) 5. Presentations 6. Public Petitions 7. Public Comments On general topics not on the current or future agenda. Unless adjusted by the Chair, registered public speakers will receive three (3) minutes and time may not be ceded to another speaker. The Chair may limit the number of public speakers under this item to five (5) for any meeting. (Resolution 98-167) 8. Board of Zoning Appeals 9. Advertised Public Hearings Page 2 of 41169.A. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and that Commission members provide ex- parte disclosures. A Resolution designating 1,446.59± acres within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District as a Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA), to be known as the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA, which will allow development of a maximum of 4,502 residential dwelling units, of which a minimum of 10% will be multifamily dwelling units, a minimum of 10% will be single-family detached, and a minimum of 10% will be single-family attached or villa; a minimum and maximum of 238,606 square feet of commercial development in the Village Center Context Zone; a maximum of 100,000 square feet of indoor self storage use in the Village Center Context Zone; a minimum of 45,020 square feet of civic, governmental and institutional uses in the Village Center Context Zone; senior housing including assisted living facilities and continuing care retirement communities limited to 300 units in the SRA; 362 of the maximum 4,502 residential dwelling units in the Affordable Housing Context Zone; no commercial uses in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; and 8.50± acres of amenity area in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; all subject to a maximum pm peak hour trip cap; and approving the Stewardship Receiving Area Credit Agreement for Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area and establishing that 11,703 stewardship credits are being utilized by the designation of the Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area. The subject property, consisting of 1,446.59± acres, is located on the north side of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road, east and west of Corkscrew Road, in Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Township 46 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20240010212] (This is a companion to Item 9B) (2026-733) 9.B. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution designating 1,295.4 acres in the Rural Land Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District as a Stewardship Sending Area with a designation as "SSA 22”; pursuant to the terms set forth in the Escrow Agreement, Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for SSA 22, and Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for SSA 22; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22; approving an Escrow Agreement for SSA 22; and establishing the number of Stewardship credits generated by the designation of said Stewardship Sending Area. The subject property is located in Sections 3, 4, 9, 10, and 15; Township 46 South; Range 28 East. [PL20240010213] (This is a companion to Item 9A) (2026-788) 9.C. Recommendation to approve Petition VAC-PL20260000213, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 60-foot roadway easement, as recorded in Official Record Book 238, page 913 and Official Record Book 1365, page 1357 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located approximately one half mile south of Veterans Memorial Boulevard, in Section 15, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (This item is a companion to Item 9D) (2026-720) 9.D. This item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending the zoning classification from a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Special Treatment Overlay (ST) to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) for a project to be known as Imperial Lakes RPUD to allow development of the previously approved 430 multifamily dwelling units or an alternative of 313 dwelling units including single family, two family, townhouse and multifamily subject to a trip cap for 78.28+ acres of property located on the future extension of Veterans Memorial Boulevard, north of Imperial Golf Club, west of Castlewood at Imperial Planned Unit Development, in Section 15, Township 48 South, Range 25 East; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 82-81; and providing an effective date. Page 3 of 4116 [PL20250006588 - Imperial Lakes PUDA] (This item is a companion to Item 9C) (2026-738) 10. Board of County Commissioners 11. County Manager's Report 11.A. Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid No. 25-8421, “Big Cypress Golf Estates & Country Club of Naples – Secondary Drainage and Water Main Replacement,” to Wright Construction Group, Inc., in the total amount of $5,785,747.47, with a total Owner’s Allowance of $578,574.75; and approve the County’s portion for payment in the amount of $3,282,544.68 with an Owner’s Allowance of $328,254.47, and the City of Naples’ portion for payment in the amount of $2,503,202.79 with an Owner’s Allowance of $250,320.28, in accordance with the terms of an existing Interlocal Agreement, and authorize the Chair to sign the attached Agreement. (Project No. 60102) (Peter Hayden, Supervisor - Project Management (Licensed)) (2026-870) 11.B. Recommendation to provide a final ranking for the 166.63-acre Smits property, located south of Sabal Palm Rd., approximately 1.5 miles east of Collier Blvd, and to direct staff to pursue the property with funds from the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund if ranked on the "A" list, as the property was ranked "C-List" by County staff and "A-list" by the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee. (Jaime Cook, Division Director - Development Review) (2026-864) 12. County Attorney's Report 13. Other Constitutional Officers 14. Airport Authority and/or Community Redevelopment Agency 15. Staff and Commission General Communications 15.A. Public Comments on General Topics Not on the Current or Future Agenda by Individuals Not Already Heard During Previous Public Comments in this Meeting 15.B. Staff Project Updates • Paradise Coast Sports Complex Schedule Update and Project Status (Phase 3 (Field 9)) 15.C. Staff and Commission General Communications 16. Consent Agenda All matters listed under this item are considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. 16.A. Growth Management Department (Consent) 16.A.1. Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) in the amount of $36,726.45 to the Project Engineer or Developer’s designated agent for Perry Hotel. [PL20240012794] (2026-601) Page 4 of 4116 16.A.2. Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a Performance Bond in the amount of $71,140 which was posted as a development guaranty for an Early Work Authorization (EWA) for work associated with Rivergrass North – Phase 1A. [PL20230001447] (2026-743) 16.A.3. Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the potable water facilities and appurtenant utility easement for Fiori Apartments – Phase 2. [PL20250010930] (2026-746) 16.A.4. Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the private roadway and drainage improvements, and acceptance of the plat dedications, for the final plat of Orange Blossom Ranch Outparcels, Application Number PL20220004173, and authorize the release of the maintenance securities in the amount of $1,238,425.20. (2026- 749) 16.A.5. Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water utility facilities and accept the conveyance of the potable water facilities and appurtenant utility easements for Anthony Court Utility Expansion. [PL20250010622] (2026-769) 16.A.6. Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the potable water utility facilities and appurtenant utility easement for Chase Randall Curve. [PL20250011907] (2026-770) 16.A.7. This item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Commercial Excavation Permit PL20260002040 to remove 77,000 cubic yards of material from the Collier County Resource Recovery Park Industrial Planned Unit Development. [PL20260002040] (2026-774) 16.A.8. Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program with Luis and Cinthia Alonso for a 2.73-acre parcel at a cost of $76,440 for a total cost not to exceed $78,230, inclusive of closing costs. (2026-734) 16.A.9. Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program with Thien Van Tran and Lua Thi-Kim Nguyen (“Tran”) for a 2.27-acre parcel at a cost of $150,000, for a total cost not to exceed $152,180, inclusive of closing costs. (2026-735) 16.A.10. Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or designee, to submit an application to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's Invasive Plant Management Section to be eligible to receive funding assistance services worth $150,000 in FY 2027 through the Upland Invasive Exotic Plant Management Program for the removal of invasive exotic vegetation within Conservation Collier's Shell Island Preserve, Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve, and Symphony property and to authorize staff to accept such funding assistance services if awarded. (2026-745) 16.A.11. Recommendation to authorize staff to issue an Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) to solicit a qualified development partner for the construction of housing that is affordable on County-owned property at Port of the Islands. (2026-827) 16.A.12. Recommendation to waive the nighttime hearing requirement and hear a Land Page 5 of 4116 Development Code amendment related to adding a comparable use provision to the Industrial (I) Zoning District, at two regularly scheduled daytime Board of County Commissioners meetings, and approve a request to advertise the Land Development Code Amendment. (2026-800) 16.A.13. Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to authorize the Chair to sign the CareerSource Southwest Florida compliance and approval documents related to the One-Stop Operator designation for the Southwest Florida Workforce Development Area. (2026-829) 16.A.14. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending the Administrative Code for Land Development, which was created by Ordinance No. 2013-57, by amending the administrative procedures and revising timeframes for processing applications for the approval of development permits or development orders in compliance with Section 125.022 and Section 177.071, Florida Statutes and to authorize the County Manager or designee to administratively deny an application for failure to pay required fees, inactivity, or when an application exceeds statutory review time limits without an applicant providing a waiver or agreeing to an extension of the applicable timeframe. [PL20250007882] (This item is conditioned upon Board adoption of the Land Development Code Amendment, companion to Item 17B) (2025-4960) 16.A.15. Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program with 1.) Klaus Peter Michael and Marsha Adler for a 1.14-acre parcel at a cost of $28,160, 2.) Heiner Gaviria for a 2.73- acre parcel at a cost of $70,980, 3.) Robert L. and Linda M. Harden for a 2.73-acre parcel at a cost of $67,430, and 4.) Daniel Rivera for a 2.27-acre parcel at a cost of $59,020 for a total cost not to exceed $232,300 inclusive of closing costs. (2026-551) 16.A.16. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending the Administrative Code for Land Development, which was created by Ordinance No. 2013-57, by amending Chapter Four, Administrative Procedures, more specifically to add Section S, Floating Solar Facilities- Additional SDP and SIP Requirements to comply with Section 163.32051 Florida Statutes. [PL20250000235] (2026-16) 16.A.17. Recommendation to approve an interlocal agreement authorizing the Big Cypress Stewardship District to provide alternative financial securities for the construction of infrastructure within the Town of Big Cypress. (2026-900) 16.B. Transportation Management Department (Consent) 16.B.1. Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid No. 25-8366R, “US 41 Tamiami Trail East Landscape & Irrigation Improvements" to Hannula Landscaping and Irrigation, Inc., in the amount of $703,424.98, and authorize the Chair to sign the attached Agreement. (2026- 721) 16.B.2. Recommendation to approve an Agreement for the acquisition of a Non-Exclusive Sidewalk, Slope and Transportation Facilities Easement (Parcel 549SWE) required for construction of a second right turn lane at Immokalee Road and Oil Well Road, Project No. 60273. (2026-740) Page 6 of 4116 16.B.3. Recommendation to approve an Agreement for the purchase of a pond site (Parcel 452POND) required for the Wilson Boulevard (Golden Gate Boulevard to Immokalee Road) Project (Project No. 60229). Estimated Fiscal Impact: $330,077. (2026-786) 16.B.4. Recommendation to approve a Fourth Amendment to the Lease, extending an existing lease with Drop Anchor Mobile Homeowners Association, Inc., for an additional ten years and authorizing Drop Anchor to continue to occupy space within County-owned right of way in Goodland. (2026-787) 16.B.5. Recommendation to approve Budget Amendments within various Transportation Management Services Department cost centers to recognize revenues received from traffic accident reimbursements from Insurance Companies in the amount of $54,828.01 (Road & Bridge Administration 163620); $48,590.27 (Landscape Operations Project 31112); $50,314.03 (Traffic Signals Project 60172); and $159,562.18 (Median Maintenance Project 60265). (2026-801) 16.B.6. Recommendation to approve the Collier Area Transit (CAT) Fare Study and associated recommendations and approve a Resolution superseding Resolution No. 2018-104 to modify the fare on both the Fixed-Route and the Paratransit Transportation Systems. (2026-804) 16.B.7. Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to sign a Landscape Maintenance Agreement with the Mediterra Community Association, Inc., for the installation and maintenance of improvements within Veterans Memorial Boulevard, a public right-of- way. (2026-806) 16.C. Public Utilities Department (Consent) 16.C.1. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a statutory warranty deed transferring 22 acres of County owned property at Camp Keais to the Collier County Water-Sewer District (“District”) and authorize acceptance of the deed by the District to support current and future public utility infrastructure and operations needed to serve the property and the community. (2026-579) 16.D. Community Services (Consent) 16.D.1. Recommendation to approve the after-the-fact grant application submittal of the Corporation for National and Community Services Retired and Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP 2027-2030) for $131,943 and allow the County Manager, or her designee, to serve as the authorized representative for the grantor’s electronic submission system, eGrants, throughout the grant period. (Housing Grant Fund 1835 and Housing Match Fund 1836) (2026-872) 16.D.2. Recommendation to approve Amendment #15 to the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Plan to include 1) a reallocation of funds to support (CC1.9) Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services in the amount of $250,000 and (CC4.3) Household Assistance: Food Programs in the amount of $40,000.00; 2) update performance outputs for (CC 1.9) Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services; and to approve and execute Amendment #1 to ARP23-002 with Collier Health Services, Inc., dba Healthcare Network. (2026-880) 16.D.3. Recommendation to authorize Community and Human Services to waive outstanding Page 7 of 4116 co-payments in the amount of $3,624.43 for seniors who have passed away or have an inability to pay in accordance with Resolution 2020-068 (Human Service Grant Fund 1837). (2026-980) 16.E. Corporate Business Operations (Consent) 16.E.1. Recommendation to approve the administrative report prepared by the Procurement Services Division for the disposal of property that is no longer viable and remove capital assets from the County’s capital assets records. (2026-830) 16.E.2. Recommendation to accept the report for the sale of one hundred and two items and the disbursement of funds in the amount of $276,150 associated with the County surplus auction held December 11 through December 13, 2025. (2026-904) 16.E.3. Recommendation to approve the administrative report prepared by the Procurement Services Division for the disposal of property that is no longer viable and remove capital assets from the County’s capital assets records. (2026-911) 16.E.4. Recommendation that the Board, pursuant to Section 274.06, Florida Statutes, approve the sale and disposal of surplus assets via public auction on May 7 through 9, 2026. (2026- 914) 16.E.5. Recommendation to approve modifications to the 2026 Fiscal Year Pay & Classification Plan which consists of one new classification, three reclassifications, one classification title revision, and the removal of three obsolete classifications from January 1, 2026 through March 31, 2026. (2026-988) 16.E.6. Recommendation to accept the report for the sale of three fleet items and over 1,200 IT and other equipment-related items for the disbursement of funds in the amount of $55,590 associated with the County surplus auction held on October 16 and October 17, 2025. (2026-991) 16.F. County Manager Operations (Consent) 16.F.1. Recommendation to approve increases to the existing exemptions from the competitive process for regulated utility services provided by the City of Naples, the Immokalee Water and Sewer District, Collier County Water and Sewer District, Florida Power and Light, and Lee County Electric Cooperative in a combined not-to-exceed amount of $27,400,000 per fiscal year through the currently approved term ending September 30, 2029; and approve the Fiscal Year 2026 Purchase Orders issued for Lee County Electric Cooperative, Immokalee Water and Sewer District, and Florida Power and Light that exceeded the previously authorized exemption limits. (2026-814) 16.F.2. Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to extend the termination date of Agreement No. 20-7765, “Roofing Preventative Maintenance and Remedial Repairs,” with Advanced Roofing, Inc., and Crowther Roofing and Sheet Metal of Florida, Inc., for one additional year, and authorize the Chair to sign the attached Amendments. (2026- 843) 16.F.3. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving amendments (appropriating grants, donations, contributions, insurance proceeds, and reserves) to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Adopted Budget. (2026-1003) Page 8 of 4116 16.F.4. Recommendation to confirm the appointment of Matthew D. McLean as Interim Public Utilities Department Head, effective May 18, 2026, and authorize any necessary Budget Amendments. (2026-1067) 16.F.5. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners execute a Grant Agreement between the County and the Florida Department of Emergency Management to accept funding in the amount of $650,000 for the Collier County Emergency Operations Center Audio and Visual System Upgrades, approve all necessary forms, and authorize the necessary Budget Amendments. (2026-1087) 16.G. Airport Authority (Consent) 16.H. Board of County Commissioners (Consent) 16.I. Miscellaneous Correspondence (Consent) 16.J. Other Constitutional Officers (Consent) 16.J.1. To record in the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners, the check number (or other payment method), amount, payee, and purpose for which the referenced disbursements in the amount of $38,557,906.01 were drawn for the periods between April 2, 2026, and April 15, 2026, pursuant to Florida Statute 136.06. (2025-3893) 16.J.2. Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of April 22, 2026. (2025-3894) 16.J.3. Recommendation to approve the use of $10,000 from the Confiscated Trust Funds to support the Law Enforcement Against Drugs & Violence (L.E.A.D.) Program. (2026-1084) 16.J.4. Recommendation to approve the use of $2,000 from the Confiscated Trust Funds to support the Florida FBI National Academy Associates, Inc. (FBINAA). (2026-1085) 16.K. County Attorney (Consent) 16.K.1. Recommendation to appoint Natalie Tyler and Christina Guerrero to the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Advisory Board. (2026-832) 16.K.2. Recommendation to reappoint Gregory Pollock to the Forest Lakes Roadway & Drainage Advisory Committee. (2026-992) 16.K.3. Recommendation to appoint Jeffrey Mitchell to the Emergency Medical Authority. (2026- 993) 16.K.4. Recommendation to appoint Jennifer Ginther to the Public Transit Advisory Committee. (2026-1015) 16.K.5. Recommendation to appoint Domenic Lucarelli to the Collier County Planning Commission. (2026-1016) 16.K.6. Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the total amount of $280,000, inclusive of attorney’s fees and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1327FEE required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project No. 60249. (2026-1059) Page 9 of 4116 16.K.7. Recommendation to approve an Engagement Agreement for Construction Expert Consultant Services with the Berkeley Research Group, LLC, on pending litigation known as Pika Construction, Inc. v. Sacyr Construction USA, LLC, Collier County, Florida, Et al., Circuit Case No. 25-CA-1157. (2026-1071) 16.L. Community Redevelopment Agency (Consent) 16.M. Tourist Development (Consent) 16.M.1. To approve the use of Tourist Development Tax (TDT) Promotion funds to support the upcoming USA Lacrosse WCLA National Championship event in May, 2026 for up to $10,000 and make a finding that these expenditures promote tourism. (2026-828) 17. Summary Agenda This section is for advertised public hearings and must meet the following criteria: 1) A recommendation for approval from staff; 2) Unanimous recommendation for approval by the Collier County Planning Commission or other authorizing agencies of all members present and voting; 3) No written or oral objections to the item received by staff, the Collier County Planning Commission, other authorizing agencies or the Board, prior to the commencement of the BCC meeting on which the items are scheduled to be heard; and 4) No individuals are registered to speak in opposition to the item. For those items which are quasi-judicial in nature, all participants must be sworn in. 17.A. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving amendments (appropriating carry forward, transfers, and supplemental revenue) to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Adopted Budget. (2026-1005) 17.B. *** This item has been continued from the February 10, 2026, BCC Meeting, continued again to the March 10, 2026, BCC Meeting, and further continued to the April 28, 2026, BCC Meeting *** Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending the Land Development Code, by adding a provision relating to application fees, processing of applications, and determination of completeness of applications, and to authorize the County Manager, or designee, to administratively deny an application when the applicant exceeds the time limits specified in F.S.125.022, without receiving a waiver of time limits or an agreement to an extension of time, on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners. [PL20250010243] (This item is a companion to Item 16A14) (2025-4959) 17.C. This item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 07-40, as amended, the Grey Oaks MPUD, by increasing the Floor-to-Area ratio to 0.6 for assisted living facilities on the 55.5 acre parcel designated as Residential (R) and Lake (L) known as Moorings Park Grande Lake located one-quarter mile west of Livingston Road, south of Golden Gate Parkway, limiting the maximum cumulative building area to 1,127,590 square feet, and by providing an effective date. The subject MPUD, consisting of 1,601 acres, is located at the northeast, northwest, and southeast quadrants of the intersection of Airport Road and Golden Gate Parkway in Sections 24, 25, and 26, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20250004748 - Moorings Park at Grande Lake within Grey Oaks MPUD] (2026-771) 17.D. Recommendation to adopt an amendment to Ordinance 1997-50, the Collier County Parking Ordinance, to increase parking violation fines and include procedural amendments in accordance with the events outlined in the proposed Ordinance. (2026-665) Page 10 of 411618. Adjourn Inquiries concerning changes to the Board’s Agenda should be made to the County Manager’s Office at 252-8383. Page 11 of 4116 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, “National Day of Prayer” is a day set aside by Congress for all Americans to pray and reaffirm the spiritual principles on which this nation is founded; and WHEREAS, A National Day of Prayer was called for by the first Continental Congress in 1775 and called for by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863; and WHEREAS, in 1952, Congress established the National Day of Prayer as an annual event by a joint resolution, signed into law by President Harry S. Truman; and WHEREAS, in 1988, Congress and President Ronald Reagan amended the law to designate the first Thursday in May as “National Day of Prayer”; and WHEREAS, prayer has comforted us in times of sorrow and tribulation and given us strength and hope for the future. We ask God to keep His hand upon us and bless Collier County, the great State of Florida, and the United States of America; and WHEREAS, this year is the 75th anniversary of the consecutive annual observance of the National Day of Prayer, and the theme, “GLORIFY GOD AMONG THE NATIONS - SEEKING HIM IN ALL GENERATIONS” is based on 1 Chronicles 16:24; and WHEREAS, the National Day of Prayer gives us an opportunity as a community to pray for our community, our nation, and our world; and WHEREAS, all people are encouraged to recognize the day, to participate in National Day of Prayer ceremonies, and reflect and pray during this National Day of Prayer on May 7, 2026, in Collier County; NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that May 7, 2026, be designated as NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER DONE AND ORDERED THIS 28TH Day of April 2026. Board of County Commissioners Collier County, Florida Dan Kowal, Chairman Page 12 of 4116Page 13 of 4116From: Louise Jarvis Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 4:32 PM To: Jesse Barrett Cc: Aimee Trochessett Subject: RE: National Day of Prayer Proclamation Certainly. Commissioner Hall said he would sponsor the National Day of Prayer for 2026. I have copied Aimee on this email to assist. Blessings, Louise Jarvis, Executive Coordinator Commissioner Chris Hall, District 2 Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 Phone: 239-252-8602 Subscribe to our Newsletter | District 2 Street Map | Facebook | Instagram Page 14 of 4116 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Florida continues to rank first in the nation for child drowning incidents, with enough children lost each year to fill three to four preschool classrooms, and in Collier County drowning remains the leading external cause of death for children 1-4 years old; and WHEREAS, the NCH Safe & Healthy Children Coalition of Collier County, comprising more than 70 local agencies dedicated to improving child health and prevent injury, remains steadfast in its mission to reverse these alarming trends; and WHEREAS, the Coalition has implemented a comprehensive, evidence-based drowning prevention strategy informed by the National Drowning Prevention Alliance, emphasizing that true safety requires multiple layers of protection including physical barriers, high quality swim instruction, effective rescue skills, and CPR training; and WHEREAS, as a cornerstone of this effort, the Coalition launched SWIM Central in March 2012, providing critical water safety education and, since its inception, has delivered more than 106,861 lessons to 12,921 children throughout Collier County; and WHEREAS, in February 2014, the Coalition expanded its prevention initiatives with the “Kids Don’t Float…Give Them Something That Does” Life Jacket Loaner Program, which now maintains 18 accessible loaner stations at lakes and beaches across the county, each stocked with 20 properly fitted life jackets in a variety of sizes; and WHEREAS, the Coalition welcomed Stewie the Duck, its water-safety mascot, in 2016, engaging families and young children in fun, memorable, and effective safety education; and WHEREAS, drowning prevention lays the foundation for a healthy livelong relationship with the water, supporting physical activity, family recreation, and community well-being; NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that May 2026 be designated as DROWNING PREVENTION MONTH DONE AND ORDEREDTHIS 28th Day of April 2026. Board of County Commissioners Collier County, Florida Dan Kowal, Chairman Page 15 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR PROCLAMATION Please complete the form below and email to Proclamations@collier.gov along with a draft of the proclamation (Insert language on the Draft Proclamation From linked on the same webpage as this Request Form). Forms must be submitted a minimum of 13 days prior to the requested meeting date. Please note: A Commissioner sponsor is required! COMMISSIONER(S) AGREEING TO SPONSOR: ______________________________________________________ Once the Board agenda is approved by the Chair, staff will contact you to confirm receipt and presentation at an upcoming Board of County Commissioners meeting. If you have any questions, please email Proclamations@collier.gov or by calling (239) 252-8075. NAME: ADDRESS: PHONE: EMAIL: DATE OF THE COMMISSION MEETING BEING REQUESTED FOR PRESENTATION: TOPIC/REASON FOR THE PROCLAMATION REQUEST: DOES THIS PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZE A SPECIFIC CALENDAR DATE? _ HAS THE PROCLAMATION BEEN PRESENTED BY THE BOARD IN PREVIOUS YEARS? NAME OF THE LEAD RECIPIENT AND TITLE (IF APPLICABLE) WHO WILL BE PRESENT AND INTRODUCED AT THE MEETING TO ACCEPT THE PROCLAMATION: (Other attendees may also participate in the receipt of the Proclamation but will be announced by the County Manager as “distinguished guests.” Commissioners may opt to identify others, by name, in any comments they make during or after the presentation of the Proclamation.) LEAD RECIPIENT NAME: ___________________________________________________________ Note: A photograph will be taken with the County Commissioners at the meeting when the proclamation is presented. Other persons present with the recipients may also come forward at the time of the photograph. Would you like a copy of this photograph sent (circle one): Via email / Via U.S. Mail Per your delivery selection, please provide a name and email address or physical mailing address if different than already provided on the form above: FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY: DATE FORM RECEIVED: RECEIVED BY: ACCEPTED: DENIED: REASON FOR DENIAL: APPLICANT NOTIFIED ON (DATE): VIA TELEPHONE / EMAIL / US MAIL BY: (SIGNATURE) REVISED 10/2025 Page 16 of 4116March 30, 2026 Hi Theresa, Thank you for your email. Commissioner Kowal has agreed to sponsor the proclamation. Since you submit a proclamation each year, I am sure you know the procedure, but I will include it here just in case! Collier County has an established vetting procedure for proclamations. You may visit the official Proclamation Request webpage at Request for Proclamation | Collier County, FL, where you will find the guidelines and necessary forms to be completed and returned to Proclamations@collier.gov at least 13 calendar days prior to a Board of Commissioners (BCC) meeting. Please note that receipt of the requested information does not guarantee the issuance of a proclamation. The County Manager's Office will review all submissions to ensure they comply with our Proclamation Policy. Thank you, Sarina Francis Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Kowal, District 4 Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, Florida 34112 Phone: 239 252 8604 Click here to sign up for the District 4 Newsletter! Click here to follow Commissioner Kowals Facebook Page! Page 17 of 4116 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, travel and tourism are cornerstones of the economy of Collier County and Florida’s Paradise Coast, encompassing Naples, Marco Island, and the Everglades, supporting hundreds of local businesses, generating substantial tax revenues for the County, and sustaining a high quality of life for residents; and WHEREAS, in the last fiscal year, the tourism industry was a primary employer and economic driver in the region, supporting more than 28,000 jobs, generating $49,827,537 in Tourist Development Tax (TDT) revenues, contributing $2,884,378,000 in visitor spending, and producing a total economic impact of $3,986,720,500 while reducing the tax burden on residents by almost $1,700 per household; and WHEREAS, in 2025, Collier County welcomed over 2,808,800 visitors, generating revenues that fund and enhance critical community assets, including beach renourishment and shoreline protection, arts and cultural institutions, and world-class recreational amenities; and WHEREAS, Collier County’s natural beauty, from its 30 miles of pristine beaches to the unmatched ecosystems of the Everglades National Park, combined with its luxury accommodations, vibrant culinary scene, and rich arts and cultural offerings, positions Florida’s Paradise Coast as a premier global destination; and WHEREAS, the Naples, Marco Island, Everglades Convention and Visitors Bureau, in partnership with local municipalities, industry stakeholders, and community organizations, plays a vital role in promoting the destination locally, nationally, and internationally, driving visitation and ensuring sustainable tourism development; and WHEREAS, the observance of National Travel and Tourism Week, May 3 – 9, 2026, provides an opportunity to recognize the contributions of Collier County’s tourism industry and honors the hospitality workforce whose dedication creates exceptional visitor experiences and sustains this critical economic driver for our region; NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that May 3 - 9, 2026, be designated as NATIONAL TRAVEL AND TOURISM WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY DONE AND ORDERED THIS 28th Day of April 2026. Board of County Commissioners Collier County, Florida Dan Kowal, Chairman Page 18 of 4116Page 19 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 9.A ID# 2026-733 Executive Summary This item requires that all participants be sworn in and that Commission members provide ex-parte disclosures. A Resolution designating 1,446.59± acres within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District as a Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA), to be known as the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA, which will allow development of a maximum of 4,502 residential dwelling units, of which a minimum of 10% will be multifamily dwelling units, a minimum of 10% will be single-family detached, and a minimum of 10% will be single-family attached or villa; a minimum and maximum of 238,606 square feet of commercial development in the Village Center Context Zone; a maximum of 100,000 square feet of indoor self storage use in the Village Center Context Zone; a minimum of 45,020 square feet of civic, governmental and institutional uses in the Village Center Context Zone; senior housing including assisted living facilities and continuing care retirement communities limited to 300 units in the SRA; 362 of the maximum 4,502 residential dwelling units in the Affordable Housing Context Zone; no commercial uses in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; and 8.50± acres of amenity area in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; all subject to a maximum pm peak hour trip cap; and approving the Stewardship Receiving Area Credit Agreement for Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area and establishing that 11,703 stewardship credits are being utilized by the designation of the Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area. The subject property, consisting of 1,446.59± acres, is located on the north side of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road, east and west of Corkscrew Road, in Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Township 46 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20240010212] (This is a companion to Item 9B) OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) review staff's findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced petition and render a decision regarding the petition; and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay District (RLSA) was developed to protect natural resource areas and agricultural lands. The RLSA encourages property owners to voluntarily protect environmentally valuable land as a public benefit. The mechanism to achieve the protection of environmentally valuable land is the designation of a Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) in exchange for Stewardship Credits, which are used to entitle the Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA). The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA requires 11,703.40 credits to entitle 1,382.96± acres of development. Note: no credits are required for the 63.63± acres of public benefit use within the SRA.) The Natural Resource Index Assessment documents the existing conditions and Natural Resource Index (NRI) scores within the proposed SRA for the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. It should be noted that the NRI scores demonstrate that the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA meets the Suitability Criteria contained in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). Please see the Environmental Review Section of the Staff Report for further information. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is one of ten SRAs that have either been submitted for or have received an SRA designation. The other nine SRAs are Hyde Park Village, Rivergrass Village, Bellmar Village, Brightshore Village, Collier Rod and Gun Club Village, Town of Big Cypress, Town of Ave Maria, and Horse Trails Village, which have received SRA designation. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is 1,446.59± acres and consists of three context zones required by the SRA Overlay regulations: 1,237.41± acre Neighborhood General, 169.55± acre mixed-use Village Center, and 39.63± acre Affordable Housing. Public benefit uses include the affordable housing site, a 24± acre public school site, and a 3.41± acre essential services site. The Village has access to Corkscrew Road and SR 82. The Village Center context zone is located at the southwest intersection of Corkscrew Road and SR 82. The Neighborhood General context zone is located to the north, east, and west of the Village Center context zone. A panther corridor contained within SSA 22 (approval pending) runs adjacent to a portion of the eastern boundary of the Village. The lake system, located along a portion of the SRA's eastern boundary, is part of the Village stormwater system and serves as a deterrent to wildlife. This SRA application for Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will include approximately: Page 20 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 9.A ID# 2026-733 • 4,502 residential dwelling units with a density of 3.11± dwelling units per acre; • 362 of the maximum 4,502 residential dwelling units in the Affordable Housing Context Zone; • senior housing, including assisted living facilities and continuing care retirement communities, limited to 300 units in the SRA; • 8.50± acres of amenity area in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; • no commercial uses in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; • a minimum and a maximum of 238,606 square feet of commercial development in the Village Center Context Zone; • a maximum of 100,000 square feet of indoor self-storage use in the Village Center Context Zone; and • a minimum of 45,020 square feet of civic, governmental, and institutional uses in the Village Center Context Zone. The Village will also have other uses such as an Amenity Center, Park Preserves, and Parks. The required minimum of 35% open space is 506.30± acres; 36% open space, or 516.60± acres, has been provided. For further information, please see Attachment A-Proposed SRA Resolution. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard Petition Number PL20240010212, Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA on March 19, 2026. The CCPC voted 4-0 to approve the petition, subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. Stewardship Sending Area 22 must be approved prior to or concurrently with approval of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. 2. Affordable housing will include 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom, and 3-bedroom units. This condition has been added to the SRA Resolution. Post CCPC, the applicant was approached about a Sheriff's substation in the SRA. To address the request, the condition of approval below has been added to the Resolution. After the substation site is identified, the Essential Service tract of the Affordable Housing Context zone will increase by 3 acres, bringing the tract to 6.41 acres. The Affordable Housing tract within the Affordable Housing Context Zone will remain at 36.22 acres after the reconfiguration. And the Neighborhood General Context zone will be reduced by 3 acres, resulting in a total of 1,234.41± acres. Condition of Approval: 3. This approval is subject to the condition that Alico, Inc, its successors and assigns ("Alico"), will work with the Collier County Sheriff's Office to accommodate the Sheriff's request for a 3-acre Sheriff's substation within the SRA. The addition of the Sheriff's substation will require a future reconfiguration of the Master Plan in the SRA Document in Exhibit B of this Resolution as follows: Three (3) acres will be added to the Essential Services tract within the Affordable Housing Context Zone to accommodate a Sheriff substation bringing the Essential Services Tract total to 6.41 acres and the Affordable Housing Context Zone total to 42.63 acres; the Neighborhood General Context Zone will be reduced by 3 acres resulting in a total of 1,234.41± acres for the Neighborhood General Context zone. Once the location is finalized, Alico will submit a petition to Collier County for a minor SRA amendment with a revised Master Plan and Text change to the Neighborhood General Context Zone total acreage and the Affordable Housing Context Zone total acreage. Staff is authorized to administratively approve the acreage modifications and reconfiguration on the Master Plan and the Neighborhood General Context Zone total acreage and the Neighborhood General Context Zone total acreage modifications in the SRA Document as a minor SRA amendment in accordance with LDC Section 4.08.07.F.4.d. As required by Policy 4.18 of the Future Land Use Element within the Collier Growth Management Plan, the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA has demonstrated it will be fiscally neutral to the County at build-out, specifically for the provision of transportation, potable water, waste water, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, law Page 21 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 9.A ID# 2026-733 enforcement, and schools. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. FISCAL IMPACT: As required by Policy 4.18 of the Future Land Use Element within the Collier Growth Management Plan, the Horse Trials Village SRA has demonstrated it will be fiscally neutral to the County at build-out, specifically for the provision of transportation, potable water, waste water, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, law enforcement, and schools. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed SRA and has found it consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. See Attachment B-FLUE Consistency Review. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This petition requests the creation of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. A Village is described in LDC Section 4.08.07.C.2 as: Villages are communities with a diversity of housing types and a mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be greater than 300 acres but not more than 1,500 acres, except that if any portion is designated ASCS, the maximum size shall be no more than 1,000 acres. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed-use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood-scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.07.I.1. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. The Village form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC, subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.07 A.2. The burden falls upon the applicant to prove that the proposal is consistent with all of the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the County, should it consider denial, that such denial is not arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the amendment does not meet one or more of the listed criteria: Criteria for the creation of SRA 1. Consider: Compatibility with adjacent land uses. 2. Consider: An SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the planned development. 3. Consider: Residential, commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, transient housing, institutional, civic, and community service uses within an SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. 4. Consider: Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, with the exception of those Page 22 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 9.A ID# 2026-733 necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety, shall not be sited on land that receives a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2, regardless of the size of the land or parcel. 5. Consider: Lands or parcels that are greater than one acre and have an Index Value greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space and maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated state. 6. Consider: Open space shall also comprise a minimum of thirty-five percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town, or Village. Gross acreage includes only that area of development within the SRA that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits. 7. Consider: An SRA may be contiguous to an FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in LDC Section 4.08.07 I.5. An SRA may be contiguous to, or encompass a WRA. However, if all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the pro rata acreage of the WRA that is used to meet the water quality treatment water volume shall be required to consume SRA credits and shall be included with the SRA acreage. 8. Consider: The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation planning standards. 9. Consider: Conformity of the proposed SRA with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP. 10. Consider: Suitability criteria described in Items 2 through 8 above [LDC Section 4.08.07 A.1.] and other standards of LDC Section 4.08.07. 11. Consider: SRA master plan compliance with all applicable policies of the RLSA District Regulations, and demonstration that incompatible land uses are directed away from FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and Conservation Lands. 12. Consider: Assurance that the applicant has acquired or will acquire sufficient Stewardship Credits to implement SRA uses. 13. Consider: Impacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts. The Board must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons, and the oral testimony presented at the BCC hearing, as these items relate to these criteria. This item has been approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval. Should there be a dispute regarding any of the deviations from the Code requested by the applicant, a vote of 4 is required.-HFAC RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve Petition SRA-PL20240010212, Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA, subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. Stewardship Sending Area 22 must be approved prior to or concurrently with approval of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. 2. Affordable housing will include 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom, and 3-bedroom units. PREPARED BY: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, CSM, Planner III, Zoning Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report - Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA 2-25-26 2. Attachment A-Proposed Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Resolution-4-8-26 3. Attachment B-GMP Consistency Review Memorandum 4. Attachment C-Corkscrew Grove East Economic Assessment 2025.08.29 5. Attachment D-Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report (7-28-2025) 6. Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 7. Attachment F- Application Corkscrew Village East SRA 2-19-2026 8. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (Signed by Alico Inc) 9. Letters of Objection 3-19-26 10. Legal Ad - BCC 4_28_26 Corkscrew Grove East Village PL20240010212 Page 23 of 4116 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT-PLANNING & REGULATION HEARING DATE: MARCH 19, 2026 SUBJECT: SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA (SRA), COMPANION ITEM TO SSA- PL202400010213, STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA (SSA) 22 _______________________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNERS/AGENTS: Applicant/ Property Owner: Alico, Inc. (f/k/a/ Alico Land Development Company) 10070 Daniels Interstate Court #200 Fort Myers, FL 33913 Agents: Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, President, CEO Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire and Jeremie Chastain, Planner III Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. Hole Montes, a Bowman Company 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34103 Naples, FL 34110 SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 1 of 28 Page 24 of 4116 Page 2 of 28 SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 25 of 4116 MASTER PLAN Page 3 of 28 SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 26 of 4116 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a Resolution of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners designating 1,446.59+/- acres within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area zoning overlay district as a Stewardship Receiving Area, to be known as the Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA), which will allow development of a maximum of 4,502 dwelling units, of which a minimum of 10% will be multi-family dwelling units, 10% will be single-family detached and 10% will be single-family attached or villa; a minimum and a maximum of 238,606 square feet of commercial development in the Village Center Context Zone; and a 100,000 square feet of indoor self storage use in the Village Center Context Zone; a minimum of 45,020 square feet of civic, governmental and institutional uses in the Village Center Context Zone; senior housing including assisted living facilities and continuing care retirement communities limited to 300 units in the SRA; 362 of the maximum 4,502 residential dwelling units in the Affordable Housing Context Zone; no commercial uses in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; and 8.50+/- acres of amenity area in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; all subject to a maximum pm peak hour trip cap; and approving the Stewardship Receiving Area Credit Agreement for Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area and establishing that 11,703 stewardship credits are being utilized by the designation of the Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, consisting of 1,446.59± acres, is located on the north side of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road, east and west of Corkscrew Road, in Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Township 46 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the Location Map on page 2 of this Staff Report.) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay District (RLSA) was developed to protect natural resource areas and agricultural lands. The RLSA encourages property owners to voluntarily protect environmentally valuable land as a public benefit. The mechanism to achieve the protection of environmentally valuable land is the designation of a Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) in exchange for Stewardship Credits, which are used to entitle the Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA). The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA requires 11,703.40 credits to entitle 1,382.96± acres of development. (Note: no credits are required for the 63.63± acres of public benefit use within the SRA.) The Natural Resource Index Assessment documents the existing conditions and Natural Resource Index (NRI) scores within the proposed SRA for the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. It should be noted that the NRI scores demonstrate that the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA meets the Suitability Criteria contained in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). Please see the Environmental Review Section of this Staff Report for further information. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is one of ten SRAs that have either been submitted for or have received an SRA designation. The other nine SRAs are Hyde Park Village, Rivergrass Village, Bellmar Village, Brightshore Village, Collier Rod and Gun Club Village, Town of Big Cypress, Town of Ave Maria, and Horse Trails Village, which have received SRA designation. SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 4 of 28 Page 27 of 4116 The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is 1,446.59± acres and consists of three context zones that are required per the SRA Overlay regulations: 1,237.41± acre Neighborhood General, 169.55± acre mixed-use Village Center, and 39.63± acre Affordable Housing. Public benefit uses include the affordable housing site, a 24± acre public school site, and a 3.41± acre essential services site. The Village has access to Corkscrew Road and SR 82. The Village Center context zone is located at the southwest intersection of Corkscrew Road and SR 82. The Neighborhood General context zone is located to the north, east, and west of the Village Center context zone. A panther corridor contained within SSA 22 (approval pending) runs adjacent to a portion of the eastern boundary of the Village. The lake system located along a portion of the eastern boundary of the SRA serves as part of the Village stormwater system and acts as a deterrent to wildlife. This SRA application for Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will include approximately: • 4,502 residential dwelling units with a density of 3.11± dwelling units per acre; • 362 of the maximum 4,502 residential dwelling units in the Affordable Housing Context Zone; • senior housing, including assisted living facilities and continuing care retirement communities, limited to 300 units in the SRA; • 8.50+/- acres of amenity area in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; • no commercial uses in the Neighborhood General Context Zone; • a minimum and a maximum of 238,606 square feet of commercial development in the Village Center Context Zone; • a maximum of 100,000 square feet of indoor self-storage use in the Village Center Context Zone; and • a minimum of 45,020 square feet of civic, governmental, and institutional uses in the Village Center Context Zone. The Village will also have other uses such as an Amenity Center, Park Preserves, and Parks. The required minimum of 35% open space is 506.30± acres, and 36% open space, or 516.60± acres, has been provided. For further information, please see Attachment A-Proposed SRA Resolution. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Undeveloped land and agricultural fields with a zoning designation of Agriculture- Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO), and lake excavations (mining lands) within Hendry County. East: Undeveloped land and agricultural fields/public lands, Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW), with a zoning designation of Agriculture-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) and Agriculture-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) South: Undeveloped land and agricultural fields/public lands, Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW), with a zoning designation of Agriculture-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) and Agriculture-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 5 of 28 Page 28 of 4116 West: Undeveloped land and agricultural fields with a zoning designation of Agriculture- Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) AERIAL PHOTO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed SRA petition and has found it consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Please see Attachment B-GMP Consistency Review Memorandum. Transportation Element: In evaluating the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA staff reviewed the applicant’s Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) dated December 23, 2025, for consistency using the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR). The Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition and recommends the following: Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 6 of 28 Page 29 of 4116 countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has a significant impact if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links, the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” Staff finding: Staff evaluated the SRA Development Document and TIS Section 1 dated December 23, 2025, and found that the scenario presents an accurate trip generation calculation, reasonable trip distribution on the surrounding network, and reflects a reasonable development potential for the proposed SRA Village. The SRA document establishes a total trip cap commitment for a net external maximum of 4,065 PM, peak hour, two-way trips, according to the SRA Development Document, Section 9.3 Transportation A. Additionally, TIS Section 1-Road Segment Analysis indicates the project impacts the following County roadways: Roadway/ Link Location P.M. Peak Projected 2024 2024 AUIR DRAFT Link # Hour Peak PM Peak AUIR Remaining 2025 AUIR Direction Hr./Peak LOS Capacity Remaining Service Direction Capacity Volume/Pea Project k Direction Traffic (1) State Road CR 29A 900/South 649/South D 126 96 (2) 29/86.0 North to SR 82 State Road SR 82 to 800/South 133/South B 486 486 (2) 29/87.0 Hendry Co. Line State Road State Rd 29 to 1,800/South 1,244/South B (157) 763 (2) 82/88.0 Lee Co. Line 1. Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic isthe December 24, 2025, Traffic Impact Statement provided by the petitioner. 2. Roadways are the Jurisdiction of FDOT. Consistent with the 5-year Capital Improvement Plan and Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element, these roadways are included in the current work programs to address increased network capacity. The Immokalee “Bypass” is also anticipated to improve the road network capacity in this area, specifically on these roadways. According to the mitigation report provided with this petition, the impact fees generated by the development will address the fair-share costs of the development's impacts on the network. Finally, the project-related operational improvements for all impacted intersections will be determined at the time of Plat and/or Site Development Plan and will be required to be constructed by the development. SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 7 of 28 Page 30 of 4116 Florida Statute 163.3180: Key points of applicability: • Must allow an applicant to enter into a binding agreement to pay or construct their proportionate fair share. Consistency and operational fair share mitigation attachments are consistent with this requirement. • Facilities determined to be deficient with existing, committed, and vested trips plus projected background traffic from any source other than the development shall be removed from the proportionate share calculation. • The improvement necessary to correct this type of deficiency is the funding responsibility of the maintaining entity. • Applicant must receive credit for the anticipated road impact fees. The consistency fair share attachment is consistent with this requirement. • The applicant calculated their proportionate share, and it does not exceed the impact fees anticipated to be collected. The consistency fair share attachment is consistent with this requirement. Based on this information, staff finds the application consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element. Policy 7.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: “Collier County shall apply the standards and criteria of the Access Management Policy as adopted by Resolution and as may be amended to ensure the protection of the arterial and collector system’s capacity and integrity.” Staff finding: Corkscrew Groves East Village SRA is proposing access points on State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road. Staff recommends approval of the proposed access points shown on the master plan for this petition; nothing in this development order will vest the developer with anything more than a right-in/right-out at these locations. Directional and full median openings may be contemplated at the time of the Site Development Plan or Plat and Plan, or when/if future expansion of the roadways occurs, and in the case of SR-82, require permitting by FDOT. Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: “The County shall require, wherever feasible, the interconnection of local streets between developments to facilitate convenient movement throughout the road network. The LDC shall identify the circumstances and conditions that would require the interconnection of neighboring developments and shall also develop standards and criteria for the safe interconnection of such local streets.” Staff finding: The Land Development Code requires the applicant to create an interconnected street system designed to disperse and reduce the length of automobile trips (4.08.07.J.3.a.iii). The proposed Corkscrew Groves East Village SRA’s Master Plan shows an interconnection link road that will be open to the public. There are also connections provided within the development shown on the mobility plan. Staff Recommendation: The Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP and recommends approval of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) and FLUE related to Environmental Planning: Environmental Planning staff have found this project to be consistent with the CCME & FLUE. Pursuant to the Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element, preservation of listed SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 8 of 28 Page 31 of 4116 species habitat and other native areas in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area is addressed by the creation of the required Stewardship Sending Areas. SSA 11 and SSA 22 have been approved for the petitioner to obtain credits for the development of the SRA. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this SRA petition and the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based. The listed criteria are noted explicitly in the LDC and require staff evaluation and comment. The criteria shall be used as the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) to the Board of Collier County Commissioners (BCC). Notwithstanding the above, staff reviewed the determinants for adequate findings to support the proposed SRA application as follows: Environmental Review: LDC Section 4.08.07.A.1.d requires that Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRA) with lands greater than one acre and a Natural Resource Index (NRI) value greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space and maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated state; there are no areas within the boundaries of the proposed SRA that yield an NRI score above 1.2. The majority of the land within the SRA boundary was cleared of native vegetation and converted to row crops and improved pastureland. Pursuant to the Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element, the preservation of listed species habitat and other native areas in the Rural Lands Stewardship Receiving Area is addressed by the creation of the required Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA). SSA 11 has been approved, and SSA 22 is proposed for the petitioner to obtain credits for the development of the SRA. SSA 11 is approximately 3,699 acres and is located east of Okaloacoochee Slough State Forest. Proposed restoration in SSA 11 will primarily enhance the Cara Cara habitat as well as improve habitats for the Florida Sandhill Crane and the Florida panther. SSA 22 is approximately 1,295.4 acres and is located along the subject properties’ east boundary. SSA 22 is a panther corridor and will be restored by improving existing citrus land with the reestablishment of native habitats. Additionally, the subject property is adjacent to Corkscrew Marsh (7,330 acres), which is located southeast of the property. Corkscrew Marsh is part of the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW), and in combination with the panther corridor proposed in SSA 22, provides a critical wildlife corridor for Florida panthers and other wildlife. Evaluation of Suitability Criteria in LDC section 4.08.07.A: • Residential, commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, transient housing, institutional, civic, and community service uses within an SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2 (LDC Section 4.08.07.A.1.b). There are no portions of the subject property having an NRI value greater than 1.2; therefore, residential, commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, transient housing, institutional, civic, and community service uses will not be restricted on lands within the SRA. • Conditional use essential services and government essential services, with the exception of those necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety, shall not be sited on land that receives a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2, regardless of the size of the land or parcel (LDC Section 4.08.07.A.1.c). There are no portions of subject property having an NRI value greater than 1.2; therefore, conditional use and essential governmental services are not restricted on lands within the SRA. SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 9 of 28 Page 32 of 4116 • Lands or parcels that are greater than one acre and have an Index Value greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space and maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated state (LDC Section 4.08.07.A.1.d). There are no portions of the subject property having an NRI value greater than 1.2. • An SRA may be contiguous to an FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in LDC Section 4.08.07.J.6. An SRA may be contiguous to, or encompass, a WRA (LDC Section 4.08.07.A.1.g). The project does not encroach into an FSA or HSA; it is adjacent to WRA lands (SSA #23) and provides the required buffers as indicated on the SRA Master Plan. SSA credits required for SRA Designation: Environmental Planning staff reviewed this petition in conjunction with GIS staff, who provided the following information regarding the generation of stewardship credits: The Stewardship credits for Corkscrew Grove Village SRA are generated from SSAs 11 and 22. SSA 11 is located on properties within and adjoining the Okaloacoochee Slough, a major flowway system connecting which connects to Big Cypress National Forest. SSA 22 is a property located to the east of the subject property, which is an established wildlife corridor. The credit calculation is based on the total acreage of the Corkscrew Grove East Village, which is 1,446.59 acres. Of the total acreage, 63.63 acres have been designated as a public benefit use area, which does not require the use of credits. The total acreage that requires credits is 1,382.96 acres. As SSA 11 was approved prior to the RLSAO GMP Amendments approved on July 13, 2021, SSA 11 will provide eight (8) credits per acre of land for a total of 8,504.80 Stewardship Credits. Additionally, the proposed SRA utilizes 3,198.60 Stewardship Credits from SSA 22, which are redeemed at ten (10) Stewardship Credits per acre of development. Of the six Natural Resources Index Factors on the Stewardship Credit Worksheet, only Land Use Land Cover (FLUCFCS) and Listed Species Habitat are prone to change over time. Minor changes have occurred from the baseline assessment, which stem from adjustments to FLUCFCS mapping and species information and refinement of the WRA. Site Description: The subject property consists of 1,446.59 acres of disturbed lands. The property is currently being used for agricultural activities, including row crops and improved pasture. The property includes widely scattered lands comprised of exotic vegetation, non-forested uplands, forested uplands, and forested wetlands. A FLUCFCS map detailing land use is contained in Exhibit 4 of the Natural Resource Index Assessment. Wetland mitigation for impacts to this area will be addressed through the South Florida Water Management District Environmental Resource Permitting process. Listed Species: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is bordered along the east property boundary by SSA 22, which is an established panther corridor and contains HSA and FSA areas. The listed species surveys were conducted for the subject property in 2023 and 2024. The surveys were conducted for wildlife species listed by the FWCC and the USFWS as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern, and plants listed by FDACS and USFWS as endangered, threatened, or commercially exploited. Eagles and their nests were also included as part of the wildlife surveys. SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 10 of 28 Page 33 of 4116 Surveys conducted indicate the following species have been present within the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA boundary: American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis), cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis), glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus), great egret (Casmerodius albus), little blue heron (Egretta caerulea), Roseate spoonbill (Platalea ajaja) tri-colored heron (Egretta tricolor), Snowy egret (Egretta thula) wood stork (Mycteria americana), crested caracara (Caracara cheriway), Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus) and Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi). see Appendix E of the Listed Species Survey). The wildlife survey revealed that a wading bird rookery was documented in a reservoir located in the western central section of the project. The rookery contained nests for cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis), glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus), snowy egret (Egretta thula), and great egret (Casmerodius albus). The nests will be protected during construction activities. There is one protected plant listed in the LDC as “Less Rare Plants” that was identified within the project boundary: stiff-leafed wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata). Additionally, there were also five plant species listed on the “Rare Plants” list that may be found within the project site; they include cowhorn orchid (Cyrtopodium punctatum), Curtiss’ milkweed (Asclepaias lindenii), and West Coast prickly apple (Harrisain gracilis). To deter large mammals from accessing the development areas, the proposed project has been designed to include the construction of buffer lakes and fences between the development areas and the native habitat areas (SSA 22 and Corkscrew Marsh). The location of buffer lakes and 10-foot chain-link fencing is illustrated in the Listed Species Management and Human-Wildlife Coexistence Plan (Appendix B). Additionally, two road crossings will be installed to protect wildlife. The road crossings are located within the proposed SSA 23. Environmental Review recommends approval of this petition, subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. Prior to issuance of the first SDP and/or PPL, all development must be in compliance with the Human-Wildlife Coexistence Plan. Also, listed species management plans for the Florida panther and all other listed species must be provided for review, with approval from FWCC and/or USFWS. 2. Stewardship Sending Area 22 must be approved prior to or concurrently with approval of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. Collier County Public Schools (CCPS) District Review: CCPS review has been requested, staff has no comments. Stormwater Review: The existing site is served by a stormwater network of ditches and canals suited to the agricultural activities currently in operation. The proposed drainage system, or any change in land use or development, will require a modification of the existing South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Environmental Resource Permit (ERP). That process will ensure consistency with all applicable state stormwater standards. In addition, site development approval (SDP and/or Plat) will be required from Collier County to ensure that local development standards are maintained and that proposed stormwater system(s) are designed consistent with relevant LDC and County Ordinances for water quality and water quantity, during both the interim construction phase and final implementation. All associated costs with the design, permit, construction, and operation of the proposed stormwater improvements will be borne by the Owner. SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 11 of 28 Page 34 of 4116 Fire Review: Fire staff has reviewed this petition and recommends approval. Affordable Housing Review: Housing Policy & Economic Development Division staff have provided the following comments: the Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) meets the requirements of Policy 4.7.5 of the GMP as follows: • At least 362 (8%) of the maximum 4,502 residential units will be affordable housing and made available for rent or for sale to households with incomes up to 100% of the area median income. • Per Policy, a minimum of 36.22 (2.5%) of the 1,446.99 acres will be set aside for the development of the affordable housing unit as shown on the master plan. • The affordable housing parcels shall be located adjacent to educational or commercial uses on land that has similar access to common open spaces, public facilities, and public transportation as market-rate parcels. • The affordable housing will be built by the developer, in whole or in part, or for acquisition, in whole or in part, by either Collier County, a Community Land Trust, a private developer, or any other affordable housing provider based upon the appraised value of $22,500/ acre, with a right of first refusal to Collier County. • All affordable units will remain affordable for a period of 30 years and are subject to compliance monitoring by the County. For reference, the 2025 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Income and Rent Limits are: The need for affordable housing units is great in Collier County, as the University of Florida Shimberg Center for Housing reports that there are currently 54,275 cost-burdened households in Collier County, with 26,756 of those spending more than 50% of their monthly income on housing expenses. Approval of this development will assist Collier County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing. Economic Assessment Review: Section 4.08.07 (L) of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) provides the requirements for the preparation and submittal of the Economic Assessment for a Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA). The Economic Assessment, at a minimum, is required to demonstrate fiscal neutrality for the development, as a whole, for the following units of government: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 12 of 28 Page 35 of 4116 law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire, and school. In the event the Assessment identifies a negative fiscal impact of the project, several options are identified to address the funding shortfalls, including impositions of special assessments, use of community development districts (CDD), Municipal Service Benefit Units (MSBU), Municipal Service Taxing Units (MSTU), etc. DPFG conducted meetings with representatives from the various public facilities to capture information on both capital needs as well as operating impacts related to the proposed project. As part of this process, the need for new facility sites and other capital items, specifically related to the proposed project were also analyzed. An outside peer review (see Attachment E-Peer Review of Economic Assessment) was conducted by Jacobs to provide an independent evaluation of the report. The Jacobs report concluded that the DPFG’s analysis is reasonable and confirms the project’s fiscal neutrality, as defined. Jacobs further stated that “the analysis is professionally prepared and thorough in its treatment of revenues and expenses, is accurate in its determination that the Corkscrew Grove East Village development would meet the County’s requirements for Fiscal Neutrality.” Both the DPFG and Jacobs reports rely on impact fees and other fiscal information that is adopted by Collier County as the basis for many of the underlying assumptions. The model used by DPFG was provided to Jacobs for peer review and to Collier County for staff analysis. While the model is locked, all cell information is visible, including formulas, and the data sources are also presented for validation. DPFG has been available for discussions, questions, and/or concerns related to the model and its outputs. The following is a brief overview of the analysis by facility. The project impact fee revenue assumed for this assessment is based on the adopted rates at the time of application, and as previously stated, does not include any projections for impact fee increases or decreases. Any staff comments that affect the anticipated impact fee revenue are provided below; otherwise, the assumptions are considered acceptable for the proposed types of residential and commercial land uses and square footage, for the purpose of this analysis. The analysis concludes that adequate revenue will be generated by the proposed project, through millage, fees, and other applicable funding sources, to fund the attributable increase in operating costs, to the various facilities, generated by the development. The same approach used for the capital revenue, to note any comments or observations that may affect the anticipated revenue, is used for the information related to millage rates and other governmental revenue sources used for this analysis. Transportation – Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of fiscal neutrality for transportation (road) impacts to be reasonable. See the Transportation Review Section of this Staff Report and Attachment D-Public Facilities Impact Assessment, to be read in combination with the following: The County imposes road impact fees on new developments to fund the construction of growth-related improvements. Consistent with impact fee statutory requirements, these fees place a fair share of the cost burden on new development for transportation-related expansions and improvements, which are necessitated by such development. DPFG treats road impacts from the perspective that the owner will pay road impact fees according to the number of units (residential) or square footage (non-residential) in the development plan and the corresponding fee schedule established by the County. Using DPFG’s approach, Corkscrew Grove East SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 13 of 28 Page 36 of 4116 Village SRAA will generate approximately $35.8 million in Road Impact Fee revenues to the County, based on the development parameters and the current road impact fee rate table. This exceeds the $24.9 million proportionate fair-share estimate for the project. Law Enforcement – Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of law enforcement as fiscally neutral to be reasonable. The capital needs for law enforcement were established using the case study approach. The law enforcement impact fee is intended to recover the cost of capital construction and expansion of law enforcement-related facilities and assets. DPFG estimated impact fee revenue to be $2,904,000 and other capital revenues at $520,000, which amounts to total capital revenues of $3,424,000. With the indirect capital costs of $3,424,000, the estimated revenues equal the forecasted indirect capital costs. Therefore, the impact is neutral. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) – Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of emergency medical services as fiscally neutral to be reasonable. According to EMS management, Corkscrew Grove East Village SRAA will initially be served by the EMS facility located at the Immokalee Fire Control District’s Headquarters Station 32. If the call volume necessitates it, an additional ambulance may be leased, and space rented for its operation at a proposed new fire station. DPFG projects total capital revenues of $710,000. EMS direct capital costs were estimated at $585,000, which is less than the combined projected impact fee of $693,000 and other capital revenues of $17,000, leaving about $125,000 for indirect/related capital costs. Therefore, the impact is neutral. Parks –Jacobs finds that parks are fiscally neutral. The County imposes separate impact fees for community and regional parks. The impact fee revenues of community parks were calculated to be $3,242,000 (plus other capital revenues of $52,000 for a total of $3,294,000), and regional parks were $9,246,000 (plus other capital revenues of $481,000 for a total of $9,727,000). The cost of the estimated acreage ($283,638 per acre) required to achieve the County LOS for community parks forms the basis for capital impacts, which DPFG estimated at $3,117,000, resulting in an estimated surplus of $177,000 for community parks. The cost of estimated acreage ($590,288 per acre) required to achieve the County LOS for regional parks forms the basis for capital impacts. While the adopted level of service for regional parks is 2.70 acres per 1,000 peak population, the adjusted achieved LOS of 1.82 acres was recommended by the County. The recommended LOS and cost per acre result in an estimated capital cost for regional parks of $590,288. The cost of the regional parks of $9,840,000 is more than the estimated impact fee and other capital revenues of $9,727,000 of the regional parks by $113,000. While there is a projected deficit of $113,000 for regional parks, the forecast surplus of $177,000 for community parks offsets this, resulting in a slightly positive $64,000 capital impact for regional and community parks. SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 14 of 28 Page 37 of 4116 DPFG’s assumption that regional park acreage costs will reflect average costs is conservative compared to the relative cost of inland acreage. If inland acreage costs less, on average, than the blended County average, then capital fiscal surplus for parks would be higher than DPFG’s calculations. Public Utilities (Water, Wastewater, Irrigation Water, and Solid Waste) – Fiscally Neutral. See Public Utilities Review Section of this Staff Report and Attachment D-Public Facilities Impact Assessment, to be read in combination with the following: Potable Water and Wastewater The Corkscrew Groves East Village project is located within the Immokalee Water and Sewer District (“IWSD”) utility service area. Hence, IWSD will be responsible for the provision of water and wastewater utility services to Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. To meet potential demands arising from this project, necessary capital infrastructure improvements to the water and wastewater systems are envisaged, in line with all regulatory requirements and standards. The project developer will be required to pay the applicable connection fees to IWSD. Irrigation Water “The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA project site has a long history of permitted agricultural withdrawals from the Lower Tamiami and Sandstone Aquifers that have not resulted in adverse impacts to natural environments.” The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA project will result in converting approximately 1,447 acres of agricultural land into a residential development at build-out. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will apply to SFWMD for a water use permit to use onsite surface water and groundwater sources for irrigation. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will be responsible for all relevant costs for the permitting, construction, and maintenance of the irrigation system. Solid Waste The approved Collier County hauler contractor will be responsible for the collection of solid waste generated within Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. County-approved bear-resistant dumpsters and trash cans will be used for the project. The developer will cover the costs associated with the maintenance and operations of the dumpsters. Solid waste collected within Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will be disposed of at Okeechobee Landfill through Immokalee Transfer Station. The county maintains a disposal capacity agreement with Okeechobee Landfill with 930,000 tons of reserved capacity. Solid waste capital and operational costs are accounted for in the County’s Solid Waste Fund, a self- supporting enterprise fund. Enterprise funds are inherently fiscally neutral because they are created for a specific purpose and intended to be self-supporting through user rates and fees. Again, enterprise funds were excluded from DPFG’s analysis. Stormwater Management – Fiscally Neutral. See Attachment D-Public Facilities Impact Assessment, to be read in combination with the following: Stormwater Management “The proposed SRA encompasses three distinct areas: the property west of Corkscrew Road, the property north of SR 82, and the property east of Corkscrew Road and south of SR 82. The existing site has historically been used for agricultural row crops, primarily oranges and tomatoes. The site is SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 15 of 28 Page 38 of 4116 composed of an intricate network of agricultural infrastructure, including dikes, impoundment areas known as WRAs, perimeter ditches, and berms. These perimeter berms effectively prevent external surface water from flowing onto the site, ensuring that no stormwater flows from surrounding properties are accepted.”1 All associated costs with the design, permit, construction, and operation of the proposed stormwater improvements will be borne by the Owner. Immokalee Fire Control District – Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of the fire control district as fiscally positive to be reasonable. See Fire Review Section of this Staff Report and Attachment D- Public Facilities Impact Assessment, to be read in combination with the following: The current millage rate and the projected tax base of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA result in annual ad valorem revenues of $8,017,000. The annual operating expenses to serve Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA population, based on an average of the fire district’s existing stations and population served, are $1,926,000. Thus, there is a projected operating fiscal surplus. The capital needs for the fire control district will be funded by impact fees. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will generate adequate capital revenues for the Immokalee Fire Control District, with matching levels of capital costs. In exchange for impact fee credits, and prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, a 3.0-acre parcel shall be donated by the owner to the Immokalee Fire Control and Rescue District. The parcel shall be located within proximity to the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA development. A new station will be constructed and placed into operation if sufficient development occurs within the potential service area to ensure the funding of capital and operating costs of the new station is financially feasible. DPFG projects total capital revenues of $10,162,000 with an additional operating surplus of $2,159,000 to match the $12,321,000 capital cost for construction, vehicles, and equipment. Therefore, the impact is neutral. Collier County Public Schools – Fiscally Neutral. See Collier County Public Schools District Review Section of this Staff Report and Attachment D-Public Facilities Impact Assessment, to be read in combination with the following: Based on projections of school enrollment by type, as well as the operating revenue and costs impacts, the calculations estimating the fiscal impacts on the County School District indicate that Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is fiscally neutral. DPFG estimates ad valorem local millage revenues at buildout of $6,987,000, with matching levels of operating expenditures. Revenues to pay for growth-related capital expenditures are derived from ad valorem taxes and impact fees on residential-only units, and a capital outlay millage of 1.1332 mills (subject to a cap of 1.50 mills). Hence, the residential development will have an impact on the determination of fiscal neutrality. In this case, the revenue from the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA development results in a net fiscal neutrality. SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 16 of 28 Page 39 of 4116 Other Facilities – Fiscally Neutral. The DPFG report also provided analysis related to Correctional Facilities. While this was not a required element of the Economic Assessment or the Public Facilities Impact Assessment, the same framework was used as that for the required facilities; the analysis is consistent with the impact fee methodology, and thus the determination of fiscal neutrality is reasonable. The correctional facilities impact fee is intended to recover the cost of capital construction for jail facilities (both land and building) and related equipment. Impact fees are charged based on residential units. The County’s current LOS was used to calculate the capital costs of the correctional facilities. DPFG applied the impact fee study coefficients for population and employment to calculate functional population. Combined revenues from impact fees of $1,898,000 and other capital revenues of $104,000 amount to $2,002,000, with comparable capital outlays, resulting in a finding of fiscal neutrality. As stated above, the Economic Assessment provides a fiscal snapshot projected to build out. Based on these assumptions and making no predictions on changes, positive or negative, that may affect project revenue, the conclusion of fiscal neutrality is supported by the analysis. The analysis concludes that adequate funding will be generated by the project to fund the capital and operating needs of the specified public facilities. The future use of any type of debt as a funding mechanism is evaluated on a facility-by-facility basis, including the business case for such borrowing, and will also be reviewed for the appropriateness of such costs, as applicable, for inclusion into applicable impact fee studies. Finally, the specified public facilities do not have projected deficiencies as a result of the demand created by the proposed development. Therefore, overall, the intent of the fiscal neutrality requirement has been satisfied. Zoning Services Review: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Development Document sets forth the design standards for the Village. According to LDC Section 4.08.07C.2, “Villages are communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village… Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed-use village center to serve as the focal point for the community’s support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods…” As previously stated, the Village consists of three context zones: Neighborhood General, Affordable Housing, and Village Center. The Neighborhood General Context Zone is approximately 1,237.41± acres and allows for a maximum of 4,502 residential dwelling units. The residential dwelling units consist of single-family, multi-family residential dwelling units, and horizontal multi-family units. Horizontal multi-family units are single- SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 17 of 28 Page 40 of 4116 family units built within a single development tract. Senior/group housing, including but not limited to Adult Living Facilities (ALF), Independent Living Facilities (ILF), and Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRC), not to exceed 300 units, is permissible. The Neighborhood General Context Zone also includes parks, amenity centers, and open space. The maximum zoned and actual building heights are 50 and 62 feet. The Village Center context zone, located at the northwest intersection of Corkscrew Road and SR 82, is approximately 169.55± acres and is mixed-use, allowing for a minimum of 40 multi-family dwellings, commercial, office, civic, governmental, and institutional uses. As previously stated, a minimum of 45,020 gross square feet of civic, governmental, and institutional uses, a minimum and a maximum of 238,606 gross square feet of neighborhood commercial and office uses, and an additional maximum of 100,000 square feet of indoor self-storage uses will be provided. The maximum zoned and actual building heights are 50 and 60 feet. The Affordable Housing Context Zone, located on the north side of SR 82, is approximately 39.63± acres and will provide for up to 362 residential dwelling units. The context zone is located across the street from the Village Center, which contains commercial uses. The maximum zoned and actual building heights are 50 and 62 feet. The Village will also have other uses such as an Amenity Center, Park Preserves, and Parks. The required minimum of 35% open space is 506.30± acres, and 36% open space, or 516.60± acres, has been provided. A panther corridor contained within SSA 22 runs adjacent to the north-eastern boundary of the Village. The lake system located along portions of the north and east boundaries of the SRA is part of the Village stormwater system and serves as a deterrent to wildlife. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is a compact, suburban-style development similar to many of the Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) located in the Urban Area of Collier County. DEVIATION DISCUSSION: The petitioner is seeking 16 deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are directly extracted from SRA Document Section VII. Deviations. The petitioner’s rationale and staff analysis/recommendation are outlined below. SRA Document Section 8.1. Neighborhood General Standards: Note: LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.iii requires that Neighborhood General design standards in a Village be the same as those required in a Town for a Neighborhood General Context Zone. Therefore, the following deviations are requested from Section 4.08.07.I.2.d.iii. a) through i) based on how such standards apply to the Neighborhood Center in a Village. Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.2.d.iii.f)iv), “Non-residential uses,” which states “the maximum square footage per [non-residential] use shall be 3,000 square feet and per location shall be 15,000 square feet,” to instead allow [non-residential uses] the Amenity Center sites to be a maximum of 30,000 square feet each per location. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 18 of 28 Page 41 of 4116 Community Centers will provide multiple amenities and uses for Village residents (and guests). This effectively reduces external trips. This also requires flexibility in size to be sufficient to meet market demand. Note: This LDC Provision (and thus this deviation request) is unique to the RLSA Overlay. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.d.iii.e)ii), which states that in the case of “Multi-Family residential,” “side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet and rear yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 20 feet for the primary structure…” to instead allow for a side yard setback of 0 or 5 feet and a rear yard setback of 10 feet for zero lot line and townhome development, as set forth in Table 1: Neighborhood General - Required Minimum Yards and Maximum Building Height and Table 3: Affordable Housing-Required Minimum Yards and Maximum Building Height. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The RLSA encourages a diversity of housing types. Allowing for Townhome and Villa-type development in the Neighborhood General Context Zone promotes such diversity. To build such units effectively and efficiently, they must be consistent with the design used in other similar developments where the market has responded favorably. There are many approved projects that allow for such setbacks for villas and townhomes. We have maintained the required minimum 10- foot side and 20-foot rear yard setbacks for traditional multi-family products, and this deviation is limited to the Villa Townhome product. Note: This is a deviation that has routinely been granted for projects in the Urban area and other approved RLSA Villages when requested. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.2.d.iii.e)i), which establishes multi-family residential lots to be a maximum of 4 acres, to instead allow multi-family lots to be a maximum of 25 acres. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: This deviation will allow for additional flexibility in the design of the different multi-family housing options proposed within this village. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 19 of 28 Page 42 of 4116 petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02 C., which limits fences or walls to a maximum height of six (6) feet in residential districts, to instead allow a twelve (12) foot wall/berm combination. The maximum height of the wall will be eight (8) feet. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The deviation will allow for additional visual screening and noise attenuation from adjacent properties and roadways. Approval of the deviation will promote the public health, safety, and welfare, and enhance the visual appeal of the proposed development and community park internally and to existing external uses. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” SRA Document Section 8.2. Village Center Standards: Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.p)ii) “General Parking Criteria,” which states “The majority of parking spaces shall be provided off-street in the rear of buildings or along the side secondary streets. Parking is prohibited in front of buildings…” to instead allow parking in front of buildings in the Village Center, when such parking is in support of a shopping center, or when located on a lot with two or more street frontages, or when located on a lot fronting on Corkscrew Road or State Road 82. A Type ‘D’ buffer per LDC at time of permitting will be required when parking is adjacent to or abutting a road. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The Village Center fronts on Corkscrew Road and State Road 82 and is separated by a 25-foot- wide Type D Buffer. To remain viable in the marketplace, the Village Center commercial uses need to be accessible to and convenient to motorists from Corkscrew Road or State Road 82. This may warrant parking in the front yard. However, with a 25-foot-wide Type D Buffer along Corkscrew Road and State Road 82, such parking will be adequately screened from view. Without direct access and exposure to and from these roadways, the commercial enterprises will not be viable in the marketplace. The request is to eliminate the restriction on the number of parking spaces that may be located within any yard. Notes: This LDC provision (and thus this deviation request) is unique to the RLSA Overlay. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 20 of 28 Page 43 of 4116 Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.q), which requires that the majority of parking be located in the rear of buildings and prohibits parking in the front of a building except on- street parking within the right-of-way to instead allow parking in the front, side, and rear yards, when such parking is in support of a shopping center, or when located on a lot with two or more street frontages, or when located on a lot fronting on Immokalee Road. A Type ‘D’ buffer per LDC at the time of permitting will be required when parking is adjacent to or abutting a road. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: This deviation is requested to allow parking in front, side, or rear yards in the Village Center to provide maximum design flexibility for a relatively small number of commercial uses providing neighborhood goods and services. Also see Justification for Village Center Standards #1, above. Convenience and easy access are critical for achieving market viability for the nonresidential uses in the Village Center, particularly for the pass-by traffic, which is necessary for the viability of the commercial elements. Design flexibility is also necessary. Note: This LDC Provision (and thus this deviation request) is unique to the RLSA Overlay. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.q), which requires that the amount of required parking in the Village Center “be demonstrated through a shared parking analysis submitted with an SRA designation application…” and be “determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies…” to instead allow the parking demand analysis to be submitted at the time of initial Site Development Plan (SDP) or, at the discretion of the County Manager or designee, at the time of a subsequent SDP or SDP Amendment, in order to allow for a more comprehensive parking demand analysis based upon the mix of uses at the time of the initial SDP or subsequent SDP or SDP Amendment. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: Requiring this parking demand analysis at the time of SRA application makes no sense, as the type and mix of uses in the Village Center are undetermined at the time of SRA application. This analysis should be conducted at the time of initial (or possibly subsequent) SDP for non-residential uses in the Village Center. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 21 of 28 Page 44 of 4116 techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.g), which establishes a maximum block perimeter of 2,500 feet in the Village Center to instead allow for the Neighborhood General block perimeter provisions per LDC Section 4.08.07.J.2.d.iii.c): the maximum block perimeter shall be 3,500 feet, except that a larger block perimeter shall be allowed where an alley or pathway provides through access, or the block includes water bodies or public facilities. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The road network within the Village Center has been designed to accommodate the required separation of the limited access points to Corkscrew Road and State Road 82. The Village Center development tracts will contain connecting and entry driveways, sidewalks, and lakes to effectively break up the block length and provide through access. This design effectively meets the LDC intent to have smaller blocks. It recognizes that there are limited opportunities to accomplish this through additional roadway connections to these roadways and allows for alternatives that accomplish the LDC intent. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02 H.1.b. and c., which requires non-residential development to provide a wall within the right-of-way landscape buffer when located on property opposite a residentially zoned district, but fronting on a local street or roadway, to instead not require a wall. This deviation shall not apply to the rear of shopping centers and building areas where overhead doors are located and facing toward a residential district. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The Village SRA is required to include a mixed-use village center to serve as the focal point for the community’s support services and facilities. The Village Center will include the majority of the non-residential development, and requiring a wall between this area and the adjoining residential tracts will create a physical barrier where there should be seamless connectivity between the uses. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 22 of 28 Page 45 of 4116 SRA Document Section 8.3. Transportation Standards: Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.1.b, “Figures 5, 6, and 7, Local Street Neighborhood General,” which requires a 6-foot-wide planting area between the travel lane and the sidewalk, to instead allow for a 4-foot-wide planting area in the same location for local roads within the project in Neighborhood General. In such cases, either a root barrier or structural soil shall be utilized. If the option of structural soil is utilized, a minimum of 2 c.f. of structural soil per square foot of mature tree crown projection shall be provided. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: This is a minimal reduction and is required to ensure the necessary (LDC required) 23 feet, measured from the back of the sidewalk to the garage, to allow room to park a vehicle on the driveway without parking over the sidewalk. Please see the Local Street Sections in the Master Concept Plan for additional details. The substantive deviations from the LDC cross-section for a local road in a village are that the planting area between the sidewalk and travel lane is 4 feet versus 6 feet. Note: This local street cross-section is unique to the RLSA - SRA Village. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” SRA Document Section 8.4. Sign Standards: Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a, “On-premises directional signs within residential districts,” which requires on-premise directional signs to be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of the roadway, paved surface, or back of the curb, to instead allow a minimum setback of 5 feet from the edge of the roadway, paved surface or back of the curb, limited to signs internal to the SRA only. This excludes signage along county-owned roadways. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: This deviation will allow more flexibility for directional signage internal to the project. A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the community. All roads and drives will be privately owned and maintained. This deviation is typical of master-planned residential developments in Collier County. Note: This deviation is from a requirement that applies throughout the County (per Section 5.06.00 (Signs Regulations). Note that the deviation does not apply to such signs located along County Roads. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 23 of 28 Page 46 of 4116 SRA Document Section 8.5. Landscape Standards: Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C., Buffer Requirements, “Types of buffers,” Table 2.4 Information, Footnote (3) which requires “Buffer areas between commercial out parcels located within a shopping center, Business Park, or similar commercial development may have a shared buffer 15 feet wide with each abutting property contributing 7.5 feet”, to instead allow a shared buffer 10 feet wide with each abutting property contributing 5 feet. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The combined 10-foot shared buffer will provide for sufficient separation and “breaking up” of parking areas within the Village Center. Note: This deviation is from a requirement that applies throughout the County, and similar deviations have been granted. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02 A., which requires landscape buffer strips to be shown and designated on the final plat within an easement, to instead allow the same required landscaping materials to be demonstrated on a planting plan, for staff review as part of the respective plans and plat application (PPL), with no requirement to provide a landscape buffer for any residential development adjacent to a lake regardless of location within the Village. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: This deviation is intended to remove the required buffer easement for single-family residential development when adjacent to other single-family and multi-family subdivisions located within the same neighborhood context zone and when they are separated by a lake. The LDC already allows for clustering of the buffer requirements in this circumstance. In addition, sufficient transition and buffering between single-family and multi-family uses will be maintained as the multi-family residential developments will still be required to provide a 15’ Type B buffer to adjacent single- family uses. The deviation is only to eliminate the requirement to establish a buffer easement in this limited circumstance. All required planting will be provided and depicted on a planting plan for staff review as part of the subdivision plats and plans application, and again, only in the limited circumstances where single-family uses are adjacent to other single-family or multi-family residential subdivisions or developments within the Neighborhood General Context Zone and when separated by a lake. Since the landscape plan will be part of the approved PPL, it will have an enforcement mechanism. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 24 of 28 Page 47 of 4116 techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” SRA Document Section 8.6 Other Deviations: Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, “Parking Space Requirements,” which requires 1 parking space per 100 square feet for recreation facilities (indoor) sports, exercise, fitness, aerobics, or health clubs to instead allow for parking for the Amenity Center sites to be calculated at 1 space per 200 square feet of indoor square footage, excluding kitchen or storage space. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The project will include a complete system of interconnected sidewalks and multi-use pathways that accommodate golf carts and bicycles, allowing residents to travel to the amenity center without a car. Additionally, the Amenity Center is restricted to use by only Village residents and guests and is not open to the general public. The 1 space per 100 square feet for these “community” amenity centers is excessive. Note: This deviation is from a requirement that applies throughout the County, and similar deviations have been granted. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.10.A.2. – “Location Criteria,” which requires that “LSPA [littoral shelf planting areas] shall be concentrated in one location of the lake(s), preferably adjacent to a preserve area,” to instead allow for required littoral shelf planting areas to be aggregated in certain specific development lakes, including the development lake that runs along the western and northern perimeter of the SRA. It shall also be permitted to utilize Gator Slough and Cabbage Slough as part of all of the required LSPA. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: These areas will be designed to create, enhance, or restore wading bird/waterfowl habitats and foraging areas. They will be designed to recreate wetland function, maximize its habitat value, and minimize maintenance efforts. They will enhance the survivability of the littoral area plant species, as there is a lower survivability rate in littoral planting areas along larger lakes subject to more variable water levels and wind and wave action, which negatively affects these littoral planting areas. Note: This deviation is from a requirement that applies throughout the County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Environmental staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that the concentration of littoral plantings in lakes and waters of the proposed project will meet the intent of the littoral planting requirement, which is to improve water quality and provide habitat for a variety of aquatic species and birds. Therefore, it is reasonable to allow for some flexibility in the design and locations of the required littoral planting areas. SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 25 of 28 Page 48 of 4116 In compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” Deviation # 3 seeks relief from LDC section 5.04.04.B.5 – “Model Homes and Model Sales Centers”, which permits a maximum of five (5) model homes, or a number corresponding to ten (10) percent of the total number of platted lots, whichever is less, per platted approved development prior to final plat approval. The requested deviation is to allow for a maximum of 30 model homes at any one time within the overall Village. With each building permit for a model home, the applicant shall provide documentation as to the current number of model homes in existence. Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The Village allows for a maximum of 4,502 residential dwelling units, which will take a significant amount of time to get to completion and include multiple developers. The allowance of the maximum of 30 model homes will allow for the different styles associated with different developers and current trends or architectural styles that may change throughout this build-out stage. A similar deviation was approved in the Town of Big Cypress SRA, Willow Run RPUD, and the San Marino RPUD. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(a), the petitioner has demonstrated that “the deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay” and LDC Section 4.08.07.I.7(b), the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation(s) “further enhances the tools, techniques, and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3248, F.S.” NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The agent/applicant duly noticed and held the required NIM on September 24, 2024, at 5:30 p.m. at IFAS Extension, 14700 Immokalee Road, Naples, Florida. There were no attendees. A second NIM was held on September 24, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. at IFAS Extension, 14700 Immokalee Road, Naples, Florida. There were no attendees. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney’s office reviewed the staff report for Petition Number PL20240010212, Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA, on February 23, 2026. This petition requests the creation of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. A Village is described in LDC Section 4.08.07.C.2, in part as: Villages are communities with a diversity of housing types and a mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be greater than 300 acres but not more than 1,500 acres, except that if any portion is designated ASCS, the maximum size shall be no more than 1,000 acres. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed-use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 26 of 28 Page 49 of 4116 circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood-scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.07.I.1. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. The Village form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC, subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.07 A.2. The burden falls upon the applicant to prove that the proposal is consistent with all of the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the County, should it consider denial, that such denial is not arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the amendment does not meet one or more of the listed criteria: Criteria for the creation of SRA 1. Consider: Compatibility with adjacent land uses. 2. Consider: An SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the planned development. 3. Consider: Residential, commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, transient housing, institutional, civic, and community service uses within an SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. 4. Consider: Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, with the exception of those necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety, shall not be sited on land that receives a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2, regardless of the size of the land or parcel. 5. Consider: Lands or parcels that are greater than one acre and have an Index Value greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space and maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated state. 6. Consider: Open space shall also comprise a minimum of thirty-five percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town, or Village. Gross acreage includes only that area of development within the SRA that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits. 7. Consider: An SRA may be contiguous to an FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in LDC Section 4.08.07 J.6. An SRA may be contiguous to, or encompass a WRA. However, if all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the pro rata acreage of the WRA that is used to meet the water quality treatment water volume shall be required to consume SRA credits and shall be included with the SRA acreage. 8. Consider: The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation planning standards. 9. Consider: Conformity of the proposed SRA with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP. 10. Consider: Suitability criteria described in Items 2 through 8 above [LDC Section 4.08.07 A.1.] and other standards of LDC Section 4.08.07. 11. Consider: SRA master plan compliance with all applicable policies of the RLSA District Regulations, and demonstration that incompatible land uses are directed away from FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and Conservation Lands. SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 27 of 28 Page 50 of 4116 12. Consider: Assurance that the applicant has acquired or will acquire sufficient Stewardship Credits to implement SRA uses. 13. Consider: Impacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts. The CCPC, in making its recommendation, must rely upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, maps, studies, letters from interested persons, and the oral testimony presented at the CCPC hearing, as these items relate to these criteria. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend that the Collier County Planning Commission, acting as the local planning agency and the Environmental Advisory Council, forward Petition Number PL20240010212, Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA, to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval, subject to the following Condition of Approval: 1. Prior to issuance of the first SDP and/or PPL, all development must be in compliance with the Human-Wildlife Coexistence Plan. Also, listed species management plans for the Florida panther and all other listed species must be provided for review, with approval from FWCC and/or USFWS. 2. Stewardship Sending Area 22 must be approved prior to or concurrently with approval of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. Attachments: Attachment A: Proposed SRA Resolution Attachment B: GMP Consistency Review Memorandum Attachment C: Economic Assessment Attachment D: Public Facilities Impact Assessment Attachment E: Peer Review of Economic Assessment Attachment F: Application SRA-PL20240010212, CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA February 25, 2026 Page 28 of 28 Page 51 of 4116 RESOLUTION NO. 2026- ______ A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DESIGNATING 1,446.59 ACRES WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT AS A STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA, TO BE KNOWN AS THE CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA, WHICH WILL ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A MAXIMUM OF 4,502 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, OF WHICH A MINIMUM OF 10% WILL BE MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, A MINIMUM OF 10% WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, AND A MINIMUM OF 10% WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED OR VILLA; A MINIMUM AND A MAXIMUM OF 238,606 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE; A MAXIMUM OF 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF INDOOR SELF STORAGE IN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE; A MINIMUM OF 45,020 SQUARE FEET OF CIVIC, GOVERNMENTAL AND INSTITUTIONAL USES IN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE; SENIOR HOUSING INCLUDING ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES AND CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES LIMITED TO 300 UNITS IN THE SRA; 362 OF THE MAXIMUM 4,502 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS IN THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTEXT ZONE; NO COMMERCIAL USES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL CONTEXT ZONE; AND 8.50 ACRES OF AMENITY AREA IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL CONTEXT ZONE; ALL SUBJECT TO A MAXIMUM PM PEAK HOUR TRIP CAP; AND APPROVING THE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA AND ESTABLISHING THAT 11,703 STEWARDSHIP CREDITS ARE BEING UTILIZED BY THE DESIGNATION OF THE CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION OF SR 82 AND CORKSCREW ROAD, AND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION OF SR 82 AND CORKSCREW ROAD, BOTH EAST AND WEST OF CORKSCREW ROAD IN SECTIONS 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 AND 10, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20240010212] [25-CPS-02617/2012947/1]137 Corkscrew Grove East Village / PL20240010212 4/8/2026 Page 1 of 3 Page 52 of 4116 WHEREAS, Alico, Inc. fka Alico Land Development Company (“Applicant”) has applied for Stewardship Receiving Area designation pursuant to Section 4.08.07 of the Collier County Land Development Code (“LDC”) for the Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area (herein referred to as “Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA”), which is one thousand four hundred forty-six and fifty-one-one hundredths (1,446.59) acres in size; and WHEREAS, Collier County staff and the Collier County Planning Commission have reviewed the SRA Designation Application (“Application”), along with all support documentation and information required by LDC Section 4.08.07, and determined that the application is consistent with the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District, and requirements of Section 4.08.07 of the LDC, specifically the suitability criteria of Section 4.08.07 of the LDC; and WHEREAS, Alico, Inc. has demonstrated its ownership of the necessary Stewardship Sending Area (“SSA”) Stewardship Credits to be utilized by the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA by its approved SSA Credit and Easement Agreements; and WHEREAS, Applicant seeks to utilize 8,504.80 Stewardship Credits generated from the Board’s designation of SSA 11 and 3,198.6 Stewardship Credits generated from the Board’s designation of SSA 22, leaving some SSA 22 Stewardship Credits unused, to entitle designation of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: 1. The Board hereby approves and designates as the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA one thousand four hundred forty-six and fifty-nine-one hundredths (1,446.59) acres described in the legal description attached as Exhibit “A”, subject to the requirements of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Development Document and the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Master Plan both attached hereto as Exhibit “B”. 2. The Board hereby approves the Stewardship Receiving Area Credit Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “C”, requiring Applicant and Owners to transfer and assign eleven thousand seven hundred three and four-tenths (11,703.4) Stewardship Credits to Collier County. 3. The Board hereby approves the number of dwelling units, gross leaseable square footage of retail and office uses, and the other land uses described in the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Development Document and depicted on the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Master Plan. [25-CPS-02617/2012947/1]137 Corkscrew Grove East Village / PL20240010212 4/8/2026 Page 2 of 3 Page 53 of 4116 4. This approval is subject to the condition that Alico, Inc, its successors and assigns (“Alico”), will work with the Collier County Sheriff’s office to accommodate the Sheriff’s request for a 3 acre Sheriff’s substation within the SRA. The addition of the Sheriff’s substation will require a future reconfiguration of the Master Plan in the SRA Document in Exhibit B of this Resolution as follows: Three (3) acres will be added to the Essential Services tract within the Affordable Housing Context Zone to accommodate a Sheriff substation bringing the Essential Services Tract total to 6.41 acres and the Affordable Housing Context Zone total to 42.63 acres; the Neighborhood General Context Zone will be reduced by 3 acres resulting in a total of 1234.41 acres for the Neighborhood General Context zone. Once the location is finalized, Alico will submit a petition to Collier County for a minor SRA amendment with a revised Master Plan and Text change to the Neighborhood General Context Zone total acreage and the Affordable Housing Context Zone total acreage. Staff is authorized to administratively approve the acreage modifications and reconfiguration on the Master Plan and the Neighborhood General Context Zone total acreage and the Neighborhood General Context Zone total acreage modifications in SRA Document as a minor SRA amendment in accordance with LDC Section 4.08.07.F.4.d. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED this _____ day of ______________, 2026, after motion, second, and favorable vote. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: By: , Deputy Clerk Dan Kowal, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A – Legal Description Exhibit B – Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Development/Exhibits Exhibit C – Stewardship Credit Agreement [25-CPS-02617/2012947/1]137 Corkscrew Grove East Village / PL20240010212 4/8/2026 Page 3 of 3 Page 54 of 4116Page 55 of 4116Page 56 of 4116Page 57 of 4116Page 58 of 4116Page 59 of 4116Page 60 of 4116Page 61 of 4116Page 62 of 4116Page 63 of 4116Page 64 of 4116Page 65 of 4116Page 66 of 4116Page 67 of 4116Page 68 of 4116Page 69 of 4116Page 70 of 4116Page 71 of 4116Page 72 of 4116Page 73 of 4116Page 74 of 4116Page 75 of 4116Page 76 of 4116Page 77 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT Alico Incorporated 10070 Daniels Interstate Court Suite 200 Fort Myers, FL 33913 The Corkscrew Grove East Professional Consulting Team includes: JR Evans – Engineering Coleman Yovanovich & Koester – Legal Counsel Development Planning & Financing Group (DPFG) – Fiscal Analysis Bowman Consulting – Planning and Permitting Passarella & Assoc., Inc. (PAI) – Environmental Permitting Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, Inc. – Transportation EX B to Res. Page 1 of 112 Page 78 of 4116 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. OVERVIEW/VILLAGE DESIGN 3 II. SRA STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE/SUITABLITY CRITERIA 3 III. REQUIRED PERIMETER LANDSCAPE BUFFERS 5 IV. MINIMUM REQUIRED AND MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE 5 DENSITY AND INTENSITY V. CONTEXT ZONES 5 5.1 Neighborhood General 5 5.2 Village Center 8 5.3 Affordable Housing 12 VI. EXCAVATIONS 14 VII. GOLF CARTS/LOW-SPEED VEHICLES 14 VIII. DEVIATIONS 14 8.1 Neighborhood General Standards 14 8.2 Village Center Standards 15 8.3 Transportation Standards 15 8.4 Signs Standards 16 8.5 Landscape Standards 16 8.6 Other Deviations 16 IX. OWNER COMMITMENTS 17 9.1 Planning 17 9.2 Environmental 18 9.3 Transportation 19 9.4 Parks and Recreation 19 9.5 Landscaping 19 9.6 Affordable Housing 19 9.7 School 20 9.8 Fire and Emergency Medical Services 21 Page 2 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 2 of 112 Page 79 of 4116 EXHIBITS Exhibit A – Sheet 1: SRA Master Plan (Color) Exhibit A – Sheet 2: SRA Master Plan (Black & White) Exhibit A – Sheet 3: SRA Master Plan Internal Mobility Plan Exhibit A – Sheet 4: SRA Master Plan with Deviations Exhibit A – Sheet 5: SRA Master Plan Deviation Descriptions Exhibit A – Sheet 6: SRA Street Cross Sections (1) Exhibit A – Sheet 7: SRA Street Cross Sections (2) Exhibit A – Sheet 8: SRA Street Cross Sections (3) Exhibit A – Sheet 9: SRA Street Cross Sections (4) Exhibit A – Sheet 10: SRA Street Cross Sections (5) Exhibit B – Sheets 1-11: Legal Description Exhibit B – Sheets 12-23: Sketch to Accompany Legal Description Exhibit C – Sheet 1 Location Map Exhibit D – Sheets 1-10 Covenant of Unified Control Exhibit E – Sheet 1-42 Natural Resource Index Assessment Page 3 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 3 of 112 Page 80 of 4116I. OVERVIEW/VILLAGE DESIGN AND PROJECT DEVELOPMENT The Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA or Village) is located in northern Collier County in portions of Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Township 46 South, and Range 28 East. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA (“Village”) contains a total of 1,446.59± acres. A portion of the Village is located on the north side of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road. The remainder of the Village is located south of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road, east and west of Corkscrew Road. Lands north of the Village within Collier County are zoned A-Agricultural and within the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA). Lands to the north within Hendry County are zoned PUD (mining). Lands to the south are zoned A – Agricultural and designated Public Lands. Lands to the east are zoned A- Agricultural and within the RLSA, with a portion designated Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA). Lands to the east are also identified as a Panther Corridor. Lands to the west are within the RLSA, with a portion designated Water Retention Area (WRA). In accordance with the RLSA Overlay definition, the Village is primarily a residential community which includes a diversity of housing types and a maximum of 4,502 dwelling units, which includes 362 affordable housing units. The Village includes 145.58± acres of a mixed-use Village Center providing for the required neighborhood-scaled retail, office, civic, and community uses. II. SRA STATEMENT OF SUITABILITY CRITERIA PER LDC SECTION 4.08.07, PARAGRAPHS A, B, and C AND RLSA OVERLAY ATTACHMENT C 1. The SRA contains 1,446.59± acres. 2. The SRA does not include any lands designated Flowway Stewardship Area (FSA) or Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA) 3. There is a Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) surrounded by the SRA that includes 81.56 acres of Water Retention Area (WRA). This WRA will not provide stormwater quality treatment for the SRA. 4. The SRA does not include any lands with a Natural Resource Index (NRI) greater than 1.2. 5. The SRA does not include any lands within the Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC) Overlay. 6. The required minimum Open Space (35%) is 506.30 acres. The SRA master plan provides for 516.60± acres of Open Space (36%). 7. The SRA is designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and a multi-use pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods with connecting multi-use pathways. 8. The SRA provides a total of 63.63± acres of public benefit use in the form of a dedicated affordable housing site, a public-school site, and a fire station site. 9. The SRA contains three Context Zones: Neighborhood General, Affordable Housing, and Village Center. 10. Within the Village Center Context Zone, the SRA shall provide the following: a minimum and maximum of 238,606 gross square feet of neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, a maximum of 100,000 gross square feet of indoor self-storage, and a minimum of 45,020 gross square feet of civic, government, and institutional uses, all subject to a trip cap. The required neighborhood goods and services, civic, governmental, and institutional square footage is based on all units including the affordable units. Page 4 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 4 of 112 Page 81 of 411611. The SRA allows for up to 4,502 dwelling units (3.11 dwelling units per acre), which include 362 affordable housing units. 12. In compliance with the requirement to provide a diversity of housing types within a Village, a minimum of 10% of units shall be multi-family, based upon the Land Development Code (LDC) definition of Multifamily Dwelling (a group of 3 or more dwelling units within a single building) or Horizontal Multifamily as hereinafter defined, a minimum of 10% of the units shall be single family detached, and a minimum of 10% of the units shall be single family attached or villas. 13. The SRA provides approximately 24.33± acres of parks, park preserves, wetland park preserves, and a Neighborhood General Amenity Center. This exceeds the SRA requirement of providing 1% of the SRA gross acreage (14.47 acres) for recreation and parks for neighborhoods. 14. The SRA has direct access to Corkscrew Road, which is classified as major collector road and State Road 82 which is classified as a principal arterial road. 15. The SRA is consistent with the standards set forth in the GMP RLSA Overlay Attachment C, applicable to Villages. 16. The Village will be served by the Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District created by Chapter 2025- 237, Laws of Florida. 17. The total acreage requiring stewardship credits is 1,382.96 acres (total SRA acreage excluding 63.63 acres of public benefit use). This is calculated as follows: Total SRA Acreage 1,446.59 Acres Public Benefit Use Acreage1 - 63.63 Acres Total 1,382.96 Acres 1Public benefit uses include 36.22 acres for affordable housing, 24 acres for a public-school site, and 3.41 acres for a fire station site (essential services tract as depicted on the SRA Master Plan). 18. Eight (8) Credits shall be required for each acre of land included in a SRA, where such Credits were created from an SSA submitted for review or approved prior to July 13, 2021. The SRA utilizes 8,504.80 Stewardship Credits from SSA 11 created prior to July 13, 2021, which entitles 1,063.10 acres of the SRA. 19. Ten (10) Credits per acre shall be required for each acre of land included in an SRA, where such Credits were created from an SSA submitted for review or approved after July 13, 2021. The SRA utilizes 3,198.60 Stewardship Credits from SSA 22 created after July 13, 2021, which entitles 319.86 acres of the SRA. 20. The proposed schedule of development within the Village SRA, is as follows: a. Anticipated timeframe for receipt of required jurisdictional agency permits (or permit modifications) and date of commencement of residential development: two years from approval of this SRA. b. Anticipated sequence of residential development: An average of 250 units per year commencing after receipt of federal, state, and local permits. c. Anticipated timeframe for commencement of minimum required neighborhood retail and office uses: 10 years from date of approval of this SRA. d. Anticipated project completion date: fourteen (14) years from date of approval of this SRA or upon approval of any required jurisdictional permits, whichever occurs last. Page 5 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 5 of 112 Page 82 of 4116III. REQUIRED PERIMETER LANDSCAPE BUFFERS Table 1: Village Perimeter Landscape Buffer Requirements Adjacent to Corkscrew Road Minimum 25’ wide Type “D” Buffer per LDC Section 4.06.02.C.4.1 and State Road 82 All other Perimeter Landscape Buffers No Buffer Required (except as required by the South Florida Water Management Adjacent to Preserve or SSA2 District) Adjacent to A – Agriculture Minimum 10’ wide Type “A” buffer per LDC Section 4.06.02.C.1. 1 The required 25’ wide Type D perimeter buffer along Corkscrew Road and State Road 82 may include a 10’ wide underground utility easement adjacent to the respective roadway. The 10’ wide underground utility easement shall be sodded, and all required buffer plantings shall then be located outside of the underground utility easement within remaining 15’ of the 25’ wide perimeter buffer. 2 Minimum 300-foot Open Space buffer is required between the SRA and any adjoining HSA or FSA IV. MINIMUM REQUIRED AND MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DENSITY AND INTENSITY The maximum total number of dwelling units in the Village shall not exceed 4,502 dwelling units. The minimum and maximum allowed amount of neighborhood goods and services to be developed within the Village is 238,606 gross square feet. A minimum of 45,020 gross square feet of civic, governmental, and institutional uses are required. The required neighborhood goods and services, civic, governmental, and institutional square footage is based on all units including the affordable units. A maximum of 100,000 gross square feet of indoor self-storage is also permitted and shall not count towards the required minimum of 238,606 gross square feet of neighborhood goods and services. The overall intensity and density for the Village is limited by a Trip Cap maximum of 4,092 two-way, adjusted (net external), average weekday pm peak hour total trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. V. CONTEXT ZONES The Village contains three distinct Context Zones: Neighborhood General, Village Center, and Affordable Housing. 5.1 Neighborhood General Context Zone The Neighborhood General Context Zone includes approximately 1,237.41± acres of land. The Neighborhood General zone is predominately residential with a mix of single and multi-family housing. The Neighborhood General Context Zone also includes parks, amenity centers and open space. The interconnected street pattern is maintained throughout the Neighborhood General designation to facilitate traffic movement. Sidewalks, a multi-use pathway, and a walkable streetscape support the pedestrian- oriented environment. Page 6 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 6 of 112 Page 83 of 4116 5.1.1 Allowable Uses and Structures 5.1.1. A. Permitted Uses and Structures: I. Single-Family dwelling units. II. Multi-family dwelling units. Multi-family dwelling units shall include 3 or more dwelling units within a single building as well as Horizontal Multifamily. Horizontal Multifamily is defined as single-family housing units built within a single development tract. Similar to typical multifamily, a Horizontal Multifamily project includes common infrastructure, parking, amenities, stormwater management system, and open space. Unlike traditional multifamily buildings, the units are standalone buildings, without other units above or below. Horizontal multifamily projects may include attached villas (two units with a common wall). Horizontal multifamily developments are not required to be platted and shall be reviewed through the Site Development Process (LDC Section 10.02.03). As is the case with typical multifamily, setbacks are applied from the development tract boundaries. III. Senior/Group Housing, including but not limited to Assisted Living Facilities (ALF), Independent Living Facilities (ILF), and Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRC), not to exceed 300 units in this SRA, subject to Florida statutes and the applicable provisions of LDC Section 5.05.04 - Group Housing, located within ½ mile of the Village Center, as depicted on the SRA Master Plan. IV. Neighborhood General- Amenity center, as identified on the SRA Master Plan, for residents and guests, which may include clubhouses, fitness facilities, and typical recreational uses, including swimming pools, tennis courts, pickle ball courts, dog parks, and similar facilities. IV. Utility facilities for water/wastewater, subject to the applicable standards set forth in Section 5.05.12 of the LDC. V. Permitted, accessory, and conditional uses permissible within the Rural Agricultural District (A) subject to the applicable development standards established in LDC Section 4.02.00 for the Rural Agricultural District (A) until such time as an SDP or Subdivision Plat is approved for a particular parcel. 5.1.1. B. Accessory Uses and Structures: I. Typical accessory uses and structures incidental to residential development including, walls, fences, gazebos, swimming pools, screen enclosures, utility buildings (subject to the applicable standards set forth in Section 5.05.12 of the LDC), chickee huts, air conditioning units, satellite antennas, docks and similar uses and structures, and appurtenances required by Collier County, which may include structures, to serve the development, excluding water and wastewater treatment plants. II. Model homes, sales centers and other temporary uses are permitted throughout Neighborhood General as provided for in LDC Section 5.04.00, and in this SRA Document. Page 7 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 7 of 112 Page 84 of 4116 III. Neighborhood recreation areas may include clubhouses, swimming pools, tennis courts, pickle ball courts, and similar neighborhood recreation facilities. IV. Passive parks, limited to landscaped or natural areas and may include hardscape pathways or seating areas, benches, fire pits, shade structures such as gazebos or pavilions, docks, or piers. Page 8 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 8 of 112 Page 85 of 4116 5.1.2. Neighborhood General Development and Design Standards 5.1.2.A. Required Minimum Yards & Maximum Building Heights1, 10: SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY CLUBHOUSES/REC- REATION AND FITNESS FACILTIES DEVELOPMENT SINGLE ZERO LOT ALF, ILF, CCRC PER 5.1.1. A. (IV); HORIZONTAL STANDARDS SINGLE FAMILY LINE & & OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD FAMILY ATTACHED MULTI- TOWNHOME5 MULTI- RECREATION DETACHED & TWO- FAMILY8 FAMILY6 AREAS PER FAMILY 5.1.1.B.(III) and (IV) PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES 4,600 S.F. / 2,800 S.F. / 10,000 S.F. / 2,500 MIN. LOT AREA 20,000 S.F./LOT N/A UNIT UNIT LOT S.F./UNIT MIN. LOT 37.5’ 30’ 100’ 20’/UNIT 100’ N/A WIDTH MIN. FLOOR 1,200 S.F./ 1,200 1,200 SF 700 S.F./ UNIT 7 N/A AREA UNIT S.F./UNIT 550 S.F./UNIT 0.45 (only applies FLOOR AREA N/A N/A N/A N/A to ALF, ILF, N/A RATIO CCRC) MIN. FRONT 15’ 20’ 20’9 20’ 20’ 20’ YARD2 MIN. SIDE 5’ 0 OR 5’ 5’ 0 or 5’ 10’ 10’ YARD3 MIN. REAR 10’ 10’ 9 10’ 20’ 10’ YARD 20’ MIN. LAKE 20’ 20’ 20’ 20’ 20’ 20’ SETBACK4 MIN. DISTANCE 15’ OR ½ SUM of BETWEEN 10’ 10’ 10’ 10’ BH for Structures 10’ STRUCTURES Exceeding 35’ BH MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT - 35’ 35’ 35’ 35’ 3.5 Stories NTE 50’ 3.5 Stories NTE 50’ ZONED MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT - 42’ 42’ 42’ 42’ 62’ 62’ ACTUAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MIN. FRONT SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS YARD MIN. SIDE YARD SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS 10’ MIN. REAR 5’ 5’ 5’9 5’ 5’ 5’ YARD MIN. LAKE 10’ 10’ 5’ 5’ 5’ 5’ SETBACK4 MAX. HEIGHT ZONED & SPS SPS 42’ SPS 42’ SPS ACTUAL Table 1: Neighborhood General - Required Minimum Yards Maximum Building Height S.P.S. = same as for principal structure; NTE = not to exceed; S.F. = square feet; BH = building height; N/A = not applicable Footnotes: 1. Setbacks from preserves, as shown on master plan, shall be as set forth in LDC Section 3.05.07.H.3. 2. Front yards shall be measured as follows: − If the parcel has frontage on two streets (corner lot), the frontage providing vehicular access to the unit shall be considered the front yard. The setback along the other frontage shall be a minimum of 10’. − In no case shall the setback be less than 23 feet from the edge of an adjacent sidewalk, except in the case of side-loaded garages where the garage is designed in such a way that a vehicle can be parked in the driveway without conflicting with, or encroaching upon, the adjacent sidewalk. 3. 5’ minimum side setbacks for single-family attached, two-family, must be accompanied by another 5’ minimum side setback on adjoining lot to achieve minimum 10’ separation. 4. Lake setback is measured from lake maintenance easement. The required 20’ lake maintenance easement shall be provided in a separate platted tract for single-family, two-family and townhome developments submitted as a PPL. Properties that abut a lake maintenance easement or open space tract may reduce the setback for accessory structures to 0’. 5. Zero Lot Line and Townhome Development means 3 or more attached units, typically one or 2 stories in height. Page 9 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 9 of 112 Page 86 of 41166. Other Multi-family means 2 or more units in one building other than Zero Lot Line or Townhome Development, typically more than 2 stories in height. 7. Minimum floor area is not applicable to ALF, ILF, or CCRC units. 8. Horizontal Multifamily is defined as single-family housing units built within a single development tract. Similar to typical multifamily, a Horizontal Multifamily project includes common infrastructure, parking, amenities, stormwater management system, and open space. Unlike traditional multifamily buildings, the units are standalone buildings, without other units above or below. Horizontal multifamily projects may include attached villas (two units with a common wall). Horizontal multifamily developments are not required to be platted and shall be reviewed through the Site Development Process (LDC Section 10.02.03). As is the case with typical multifamily, setbacks are applied from the development tract boundaries. 9. Measured from the development tract boundary. 10. Standards included within this Table do not constitute an approved deviation if in conflict with required utility separations. 5.2 Village Center Context Zone The Village Center Context Zone includes 169.55± acres of land. The Village Center shall be the focal point for the community’s support services and facilities. The Village Center is mixed use in nature, requiring a minimum of 40 multi-family dwelling units, a minimum and maximum of 238,606 gross square feet of neighborhood goods and services, and a minimum of 45,020 gross square feet of civic, governmental and institutional uses. An additional maximum of 100,000 gross square feet of indoor self-storage is also permitted within the Village Center and shall not count towards the required minimum of 238,606 gross square feet of neighborhood goods and services. 5.2.1. Allowable Uses and Structures 5.2.1.A. Permitted Uses I. Multi-Family Dwelling Units. Multi-family dwelling units shall include 3 or more dwelling units within a single building as well as Horizontal Multifamily communities. II. Permitted, accessory, and conditional uses permissible within the Rural Agricultural District (A) subject to the applicable development standards established in LDC Section 4.02.00 for the Rural Agricultural District (A) until such time as an SDP or Subdivision Plat is approved for development within that area of the SRA. III. The following neighborhood-scale goods and service uses, and civic, governmental, and institutional uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section, are permitted by right, or as accessory uses within the Village Center. 1) Accounting and Bookkeeping services (8721). 2) Amusements and recreation services (7999 indoor only). 3) Apparel and accessory stores (5611 – 5699). 4) Auto and home supply stores (5531). 5) Banks, credit unions and trusts (6011 – 6091). 6) Barber shops (7241, except for barber schools). 7) Beauty shops (7231, except for beauty schools). 8) Carwashes (7542) provided that carwashes abutting residential zoning districts shall be subject to LDC section 5.05.11. 9) Child day care services (8351). 10) Churches. 11) Civic, social and fraternal associations (8641). 12) Commercial art and graphic design (7336). Page 10 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 10 of 112 Page 87 of 4116 13) Commercial photography (7335). 14) Computer and computer software stores (5734). 15) Dry cleaning plants (7216, nonindustrial dry cleaning only). 16) Drug stores (5912). 17) Eating places (5812 only). All establishments engaged in the retail sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption are subject to locational requirements of LDC section 5.05.01. 18) Engineering, Architectural and Surveying Services (8711-8713) 19) Essential services, subject to LDC Section 2.01.03. 20) Federal and federally sponsored credit agencies (6111). 21) Food stores (groups 5411 – 5461, and 5499, except egg dealers and poultry dealers). 22) Garment pressing, and agents for laundries and drycleaners (7212). 23) Gasoline service stations (5541, subject to LDC Section 5.05.05). 24) General merchandise stores (5331 – 5399, except catalog showrooms). 25) Group care facilities (category I and II, except for homeless shelters); care units, except for homeless shelters; nursing homes; assisted living facilities pursuant to applicable Florida Statutes; and continuing care retirement communities pursuant to applicable Florida Statutes; all subject to Section 5.05.04 of the LDC. 26) Hardware stores (5251). 27) Health services, offices and clinics (8011 - 8049). 28) Home furniture and furnishings stores (5712-5719). 29) Home health care and services (8082). 30) Household appliance stores (5722). 31) Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (6311 - 6399, 6411). 32) Landscape architects, consulting and planning (0781). 33) Laundries and drycleaning, coin operated – self service (7215) 34) Legal services (8111). 35) Libraries (8231). 36) Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents (6162). 37) Museums and art galleries (8412). 38) Musical instrument stores (5736). 39) Paint stores (5231). 40) Passenger Car Rental (7514) 41) Personal services, miscellaneous (7299 - babysitting bureaus, clothing rental, costume rental, dating service, debt counseling, depilatory salons, diet workshops, dress suit rental, electrolysis (hair removal), and genealogical investigation service only). 42) Photographic studios, portrait (7221). 43) Physical fitness facilities (7991; 7911, except discotheques). 44) Public administration (groups 9111-9199, 9229, 9311, 9411-9451, 9511-9532, 9611-9661). 45) Public Safety Facilities and other governmental services including, but not limited to, fire, emergency management and law enforcement facilities, and public libraries (8231, 9221, 9222, 9224, ). 46) Real Estate (6531 - 6552). 47) Repair services - miscellaneous (7629—7631, 7699 - bicycle repair, binocular repair, camera repair, key duplicating, lawnmower repair, leather goods repair, locksmith shop, picture framing, and pocketbook repair only). 48) Retail Nurseries, Lawn and Garden Supply Stores (5261). 49) Retail services - miscellaneous (5921 - 5963 except pawnshops and building materials, 5992- 5995, and 5999 – architectural supplies, art dealers, artificial flowers, artists’ supply and Page 11 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 11 of 112 Page 88 of 4116 material stores, cosmetic stores, gem stones, hearing aids, pet food stores, pet shops, ready- made picture frames, religious goods stores (other than books), and trophy shops only). 50) Elementary and Secondary Schools, Colleges, Universities, Professional Schools and Technical Institutes, public or private (8211, 8221-8222) 51) Security/commodity brokers (6211 and 6282). 52) Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors (7251). 53) Tax return preparation services (7291). 54) Travel agencies (4724, no other transportation services). 55) United State Postal Service (4311, except major distribution center). 56) Warehousing (4225, air conditioned and mini- and self-storage warehousing only). 57) Veterinary services (0742, excluding outdoor kenneling). 58) Any other use which is comparable and compatible in nature with foregoing list of permitted uses, is considered to be a neighborhood scale commercial, office, or civic, governmental, or institutional uses, as determined by the Hearing Examiner or BZA, pursuant to the applicable procedures set forth in LDC Section 10.02.06 K. 5.2.1.B. Accessory Uses I. Typical accessory uses and structures incidental to residential development including, walls, fences, gazebos, swimming pools, screen enclosures, utility buildings (subject to the applicable standards set forth in Section 5.05.12 of the LDC), chickee huts, air conditioning units, satellite antennas, docks and similar uses and structures, and appurtenances required by Collier County, which may include structures, to serve the development, excluding water and wastewater treatment plants.. II. Neighborhood recreation areas for residential or mixed-use development may include clubhouses, swimming pools, tennis courts, pickle ball courts, and similar neighborhood recreation facilities. III. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the permitted neighborhood-scale commercial and office uses, and civic, governmental, and institutional uses above. IV. Parking structures detached or attached, not to exceed 35 feet in Actual height. V. Passive parks, limited to landscaped or natural areas and may include hardscape pathways or seating areas, benches, fire pits, shade structures such as gazebos or pavilions, docks, or piers. Page 12 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 12 of 112 Page 89 of 41165.2.2. Village Center Development and Design Standards 5.2.2.A. Required Minimum Yards (Setbacks) and Maximum Building Heights8: ALF, ILF, CCRC & NON- SINGLE HORIZONTAL DEVELOPMENT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FAMILY MULTI- STANDARDS ONLY AND MIXED-USE DETACHED FAMILY9 BUILDINGS BUILDINGS1 PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES 4,600 10,000 S.F. / UNIT MIN. LOT AREA 20,000 S.F. 10,000 S.F. S.F./UNIT MIN. LOT WIDTH 37.5’ 100’ 100’ 100’ 1,200 S.F. 700 S.F. / UNIT 800 S.F. for Commercial Units MIN. FLOOR AREA 550 S.F. Per Unit5 550 S.F. for Residential Units MIN. SETBACK FROM 20’ 20’ CORKSCREW ROAD, STATE 20’ 20’ ROAD 29, AND ENTRANCE ROADS2 FRONT YARDS3,6, 15’10 0’ or 20’ 0’ or 20’ 0’ or 20’ MINIMUM SETBACK FROM A 0’ 0’ 0’7 20’ RESIDENTIAL ONLY TRACT MINIMUM SETBACK FROM A 15’ 15’ 15’ 5’ NONRESIDENTIAL TRACT MIN. LAKE SETBACK4 20’ 20’ 20’ 20’ MIN. PRESERVE SETBACK 25’ 25’ 25’ 25’ 10’ 10’ 15 Feet or ½ Sum of 15 Feet or ½ Sum of MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN BH, whichever is BH, whichever is STRUCTURES greater greater MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT - 35’ 35’ 4 Stories NTE 50’ 4 Stories NTE 50’ ZONED MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT - 42’ 42’ 60’ 60’ ACTUAL N/A N/A 0.45 (only applies to MAX FAR See footnote 1. ALF, ILF, and CCRC) ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MIN. FRONT YARD (ALL) SPS SPS SPS SPS MIN. SETBACK FROM A SPS SPS SPS SPS RESIDENTIAL TRACT MIN. SETBACK FROM A NON- 5’ SPS SPS SPS RESIDENTIAL TRACT MIN. LAKE SETBACK4 10’ 20’ 20’ 20’ MIN. PRESERVE SETBACK 10’ 10’ 10’ 10’ MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN SPS 10’ 10’ 10’ STRUCTURES MAX. HEIGHT – ZONED & SPS SPS 35’ 35’ ACTUAL Table 2: Village Center - Required Minimum Yards and Maximum Building Height S.P.S. = same as for principal structure; NTE = not to exceed; S.F. = square feet; BH = building height; N/A = not applicable; ALF = assisted living facility; ILF = independent living facility; CCRC = continuing care retirement community Footnotes: 1. Retail and office uses are subject to a maximum FAR of 0.5. Civic, governmental and institutional uses are subject to a maximum FAR of 0.6. 2. Tracts abutting the minimum required 25’wide landscape buffer (located in a separate platted tract adjacent to Corkscrew Road and State Road 82) shall provide a front yard setback, measured from the abutting landscape buffer tract. Tracts abutting the project entrance road shall provide a front yard setback measured from the 10-foot landscape buffer tract adjacent to the entry road. 3. Except as described in footnote 2 above, front yards for parcels abutting a street or internal driveway shall be measured from the right-of-way line. Page 13 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 13 of 112 Page 90 of 41164. The required 20’ lake maintenance easement shall be provided in a separate platted tract. Properties that abut a lake maintenance easement or open space tract may reduce the setback for accessory structures to 0’. 5. The minimum floor area is not applicable to ALF, ILF, or CCRC units. 6. Canopies or awnings may encroach into the adjacent non-county owned ROW as necessary to cover pathways, sidewalks, and outdoor dining areas. 7. A minimum 15 foot setback is required for ALF, ILF, and CCRC uses. 8. Standards included within this Table do not constitute an approved deviation if in conflict with required utility separations. 9. Horizontal Multifamily is defined as single-family housing units built within a single development tract. Similar to typical multifamily, a Horizontal Multifamily project includes common infrastructure, parking, amenities, stormwater management system, and open space. Unlike traditional multifamily buildings, the units are standalone buildings, without other units above or below. Horizontal multifamily projects may include attached villas (two units with a common wall). Horizontal multifamily developments are not required to be platted and shall be reviewed through the Site Development Process (LDC Section 10.02.03). As is the case with typical multifamily, setbacks are applied from the development tract boundaries. 10. For single-family detached, front yards shall be measured as follows: − If the parcel has frontage on two streets (corner lot), the frontage providing vehicular access to the unit shall be considered the front yard. The setback along the other frontage shall be a minimum of 10’. − In no case shall the setback be less than 23 feet from the edge of an adjacent sidewalk, except in the case of side-loaded garages where the garage is designed in such a way that a vehicle can be parked in the driveway without conflicting with, or encroaching upon, the adjacent sidewalk. S.P.S. = same as for principal structure; NTE = not to exceed; S.F. = square feet; BH = building height; N/A = not applicable Page 14 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 14 of 112 Page 91 of 41165.3 Affordable Housing Context Zone The Affordable Housing Context Zone includes 39.63± acres of land as identified on the SRA Master Plan and consists of a 36.22± acre affordable housing tract and a 3.41± acre essential services tract. The Affordable Housing context zone shall be located adjacent to educational or commercial uses on land that has similar access to common open spaces, public facilities and public transportation, as well as market rate parcels. The Affordable Housing context zone shall provide the SRA with up to 362 residential dwelling units subject to the restrictions in section 9.6. 5.3.1. Affordable Housing Context Zone Uses and Structures 5.3.1.A. Permitted Uses I. Multi-Family Dwelling Units. Multi-family dwelling units shall include 3 or more dwelling units within a single building as well as horizontal multifamily communities. II. Single-Family Dwelling Units. III. Permitted, accessory, and conditional uses permissible within the Rural Agricultural District (A) subject to the applicable development standards established in LDC Section 4.02.00 for the Rural Agricultural District (A) until such time as an SDP or Subdivision Plat is approved for a particular parcel. 5.3.1.B. Accessory Uses I. Typical accessory uses and structures incidental to single-family or multi-family residential development including, walls, fences, gazebos, swimming pools, screen enclosures, chickee huts, air conditioning units, satellite antennas, similar uses and structures, and appurtenances required by Collier County, which may include structures, to serve the development, excluding water and wastewater treatment plants. II. Neighborhood recreation areas for residential development may include clubhouses, swimming pools, tennis courts, pickle ball courts, and similar neighborhood recreation facilities. III. Passive parks, limited to landscaped or natural areas and may include hardscape pathways or seating areas, benches, fire pits, shade structures such as gazebos or pavilions, docks, or piers. IV. Parking structures detached or attached, not to exceed 35 feet in Actual height. Page 15 of 26 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/7b77a751-6765-470c-b1e7- d12e1afd71f0/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_205.bowman.egnyte.com/Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (2-19- 2026).docx EX B to Res. Page 15 of 112 Page 92 of 4116 5.3.2. Affordable Housing Development and Design Standards 5.3.2.A. Required Minimum Yards (Setbacks) and Maximum Building Heights1,10: SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD RECREATION DEVELOPMENT SINGLE ZERO LOT AREAS PER HORIZONTAL ALF, ILF, CCRC STANDARDS SINGLE FAMILY LINE & 5.3.1.B.(II) and (III) & MULTI- & OTHER FAMILY ATTACHED 5 ESSENTIAL 8 TOWNHOME 6 DETACHED & TWO- FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY SERVICES FAMILY PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES 4,600 S.F. / 2,800 S.F. / 10,000 S.F. / 2,500 MIN. LOT AREA 20,000 S.F./LOT N/A UNIT UNIT UNIT S.F./UNIT MIN. LOT 40’ 30’ 100’ 20’/UNIT 100’ N/A WIDTH MIN. FLOOR 750 750 S.F. 700 S.F./ UNIT 850 S.F./ UNIT 7 N/A AREA S.F./UNIT 550 S.F./UNIT 0.45 (only applies FLOOR AREA N/A N/A N/A N/A to ALF, ILF, N/A RATIO CCRC) MIN. FRONT 15’ 20’ 20’9 20’ 20’ 20’ YARD2 MIN. SIDE 5’ 0 OR 5’ 5’ 0 or 5’ 10’ 10’ YARD3 MIN. REAR 10’ 10’ 9 10’ 20’ 10’ YARD 20’ MIN. LAKE 20’ 20’ 20’ 20’ 20’ 20’ SETBACK4 MIN. DISTANCE 15’ OR ½ SUM of BETWEEN 10’ 10’ 10’ 10’ BH for Structures 10’ STRUCTURES Exceeding 35’ BH MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT - 35’ 35’ 35’ 35’ 3.5 Stories NTE 50’ 3.5 Stories NTE 50’11 ZONED MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT - 42’ 42’ 42’ 42’ 62’ 62’11 ACTUAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MIN. FRONT SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS YARD MIN. SIDE YARD SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS 10’ MIN. REAR 5’ 5’ 5’9 5’ 5’ 5’ YARD MIN. LAKE 10’ 10’ 5’ 5’ 5’ 5’ SETBACK4 MAX. HEIGHT ZONED & SPS SPS 42’ SPS 42’ SPS ACTUAL Table 3: Affordable Housing - Required Minimum Yards Maximum Building Height S.P.S. = same as for principal structure; NTE = not to exceed; S.F. = square feet; BH = building height; N/A = not applicable Footnotes: 1. Setbacks from preserves, as shown on master plan, shall be as set forth in LDC Section 3.05.07.H.3. 2. Front yards shall be measured as follows: − If the parcel has frontage on two streets (corner lot), the frontage providing vehicular access to the unit shall be considered the front yard. The setback along the other frontage shall be a minimum of 10’. − In no case shall the setback be less than 23 feet from the edge of an adjacent sidewalk, except in the case of side-loaded garages where the garage is designed in such a way that a vehicle can be parked in the driveway without conflicting with, or encroaching upon, the adjacent sidewalk. 3. 5’ minimum side setbacks for single-family attached, two-family, must be accompanied by another 5’ minimum side setback on adjoining lot to achieve minimum 10’ separation. 4. Lake setback is measured from lake maintenance easement. The required 20’ lake maintenance easement shall be provided in a separate platted tract for single-family, two-family and townhome developments submitted as a PPL. Properties that abut a lake maintenance easement or open space tract may reduce the setback for accessory structures to 0’. 5. Zero Lot Line and Townhome Development means 3 or more attached units, typically one or 2 stories in height. Page 16 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 93 of 41166. Other Multi-family means 2 or more units in one building other than Zero Lot Line or Townhome Development, typically more than 2 stories in height. 7. Minimum floor area is not applicable to ALF, ILF, or CCRC units. 8. Horizontal Multifamily is defined as single-family housing units built within a single development tract. Similar to typical multifamily, a Horizontal Multifamily project includes common infrastructure, parking, amenities, stormwater management system, and open space. Unlike traditional multifamily buildings, the units are standalone buildings, without other units above or below. Horizontal multifamily projects may include attached villas (two units with a common wall). Horizontal multifamily developments are not required to be platted and shall be reviewed through the Site Development Process (LDC Section 10.02.03). As is the case with typical multifamily, setbacks are applied from the development tract boundaries. 9. Measured from the development tract boundary. 10. Standards included within this Table do not constitute an approved deviation if in conflict with required utility separations. 11. The maximum height for essential services uses shall be 35’ zoned, 42’ actual. VI. DEVLOPMENT STANDARDS FOR STRUCTURES WHEN LOCATED WITHIN OPEN SPACE, DRAINAGE CANALS, BUFFER LAKES, AND UTILITY EASEMENTS Appurtenances required by Collier County which may include structures to serve the development, such as utility pump stations, lift stations, and similar structures, are permitted in these areas. Additionally, educational and informational signage, kiosks, and shade structures such as chickee huts, are permitted within open space area and drainage canals, and along buffer lake areas, which are located within the SRA. All such structures shall be setback a minimum of five (5) feet from any Tract or SRA boundary and a minimum of 15 feet from any residential lot and shall not exceed 12 feet in height. VI. EXCAVATIONS All excavations within the Corkscrew Grove East Village shall be permitted as development excavations. Within the boundary of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA and related SSAs, fill material may be hauled from one construction site to another. Fill may be placed up to the edge of, but not within, all conservation easements, preserves, and Water Retention Areas (WRAs). VII. GOLF CARTS/LOW-SPEED VEHICLES Subject to Section 316.212, FS., the use of golf carts/low-speed vehicles shall be permitted within the SRA. Up to thirty percent (30%) of required off-street parking for amenity centers and for parking provided for access to trails may be comprised of golf cart/low-speed vehicle parking spaces. The Owner may submit an alternative to the design requirements for off-street parking spaces set forth in LDC Section 4.05.00, for golf cart/low-speed vehicle parking subject to review and approval of County staff. VIII. DEVIATIONS 8.1 Neighborhood General Standards (which apply per LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.iii) 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.2.d.iii.f)iv), “Non-residential uses,” which states “the maximum square footage per [non-residential] use shall be 3,000 square feet and per location shall be 15,000 square feet,” to instead allow [non-residential uses] the Amenity Center sites to be a maximum of 30,000 square feet per location. 2) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.2.d.iii.e)ii), which states that in the case of “Multi- Family residential,” “side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet and rear yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 20 feet for the primary structure…” to instead allow for a side yard setback of 0 or 5 feet and a rear yard setback of 10 feet for zero lot line and townhome development, as set forth in Table 1: Neighborhood General - Required Page 17 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 94 of 4116 Minimum Yards and Maximum Building Height and Table 3: Affordable Housing - Required Minimum Yards and Maximum Building Height 3) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.2.d.iii.e)i), which establishes multi-family residential lots to be a maximum of 4 acres, to instead allow multi-family lots to be a maximum of 25-acres. 4) A deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02 C., which limits fences or walls to a maximum height of six (6) feet in residential districts to instead allow a twelve (12) foot wall/berm combination. The maximum height of the wall will be eight (8) feet. 8.2 Village Center Standards 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.p)ii) “General Parking Criteria,” which states “The majority of parking spaces shall be provided off-street in the rear of buildings or along the side secondary streets. Parking is prohibited in front of buildings…” to instead allow parking in front of buildings in the Village Center, when such parking is in support of a shopping center, or when located on a lot with two or more street frontages, or when located on a lot fronting on Corkscrew Road or State Road 82. A Type ‘D’ buffer per LDC at time of permitting will be required when parking is adjacent to or abutting a road. 2) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.q), which requires that the majority of parking be located in the rear of buildings and prohibits parking in the front of building except on-street parking within the right-of-way to instead allow parking in the front, side, and rear yards, when such parking is in support of a shopping center, or when located on a lot with two or more street frontages, or when located on a lot fronting on Corkscrew Road or State Road 82. A Type ‘D’ buffer per LDC at time of permitting will be required when parking is adjacent to or abutting a road. 3) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.q), which requires that the amount of required parking in the Village Center “be demonstrated through a shared parking analysis submitted with an SRA designation application…” and be “determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies…” to instead allow the parking demand analysis to be submitted at the time of initial Site Development Plan (SDP) or, at the discretion of the County Manager or designee, at the time of a subsequent SDP or SDP Amendment, in order to allow for a more comprehensive parking demand analysis based upon the mix of uses at the time of the initial SDP or subsequent SDP or SDP Amendment. 4) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.g), which establishes a maximum block perimeter of 2,500 feet in the Village Center to instead allow for the Neighborhood General block perimeter provisions per LDC Section 4.08.07.J.2.d.iii.c): the maximum block perimeter shall be 3,500 feet, except that a larger block perimeter shall be allowed where an alley or pathway provides through access, or the block includes water bodies or public facilities. 5) A deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02 H.1.b. and c., which requires non-residential development to provide a wall within the right-of-way landscape buffer when located on property opposite a residentially zoned district but fronting on a local street or Page 18 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 95 of 4116 roadway to instead not require a wall. This deviation shall not apply to the rear of shopping centers and building areas where overhead doors are located and facing towards a residential district. 8.3 Transportation Standards 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.I.1.b, “Figures 5, 6, and 7, Local Street Neighborhood General,” which requires a 6-foot-wide planting area between the travel lane and the sidewalk, to instead allow for a 4-foot-wide planting area in the same location for local roads within the project in Neighborhood General. In such cases, either a root barrier or structural soil shall be utilized. If the option of structural soil is utilized, a minimum of 2 cubic feet of structural soil per square feet of mature tree crown projection shall be provided. 8.4 Sign Standards 1) A deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a, “On-premises directional signs within residential districts,” which requires on-premise directional signs to be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of the roadway, paved surface or back of the curb, to instead allow a minimum setback of 5 feet from the edge of the roadway, paved surface or back of the curb, limited to signs internal to the SRA only. This excludes signage along County owned roadways. 8.5 Landscape Standards 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02.C., Buffer Requirements, “Types of buffers,” Table 2.4 , Footnote (3) which requires “Buffer areas between commercial outparcels located within a shopping center, Business Park, or similar commercial development may have a shared buffer 15 feet wide with each abutting property contributing 7.5 feet”, to instead allow a shared buffer 10 feet wide with each abutting property contributing 5 feet. 2) A deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02 A., which requires landscape buffer strips to be shown and designated on the final plat within an easement, to instead allow the same required landscaping materials to be demonstrated on a planting plan, for staff review as part of the respective plans and plat application (PPL), with no requirement to provide a landscape buffer for any residential development adjacent to a lake regardless of location within the Village. 8.6 Other Deviations 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, “Parking Space Requirements,” which requires 1 parking space per 100 square feet for recreation facilities (indoor) sports, exercise, fitness, aerobics, or health clubs to instead allow for parking for the Amenity Center sites to be calculated at 1 space per 200 square feet of indoor square footage, excluding kitchen or storage space. 2) A deviation from LDC Section 3.05.10.A.2. – “Location Criteria,” which requires that “LSPA [littoral shelf planting areas] shall be concentrated in one location of the lake(s), preferably adjacent to a preserve area,” to instead allow for required littoral shelf planting areas to be aggregated in certain specific development lakes, including the development Page 19 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 96 of 4116 lake that runs along the eastern perimeter of the SRA. It shall also be permitted to utilize Gator Slough and Cabbage Slough as part of all the required LSPA. 3) A deviation from LDC section 5.04.04.B.5. – “Model Homes and Model Sales Centers”, which permits a maximum of five (5) model homes, or a number corresponding to ten (10) percent of the total number of platted lots, whichever is less, per platted approved development prior to final plat approval. The requested deviation is to allow for a maximum of 30 model homes at any one time within the overall Village irrespective to the number of platted lots. With each building permit for a model home, the applicant shall provide documentation as to the current number of model homes in existence. IX. OWNER COMMITMENTS 9.1 Planning A. One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for monitoring of the SRA, as may be required by Collier County, and until no longer required by Collier County. The monitoring and report shall follow the same procedures and requirements set forth in LDC Section 10.02.02.F, PUD Monitoring Report requirements. This entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all commitments set forth in the SRA Document and in a separate Owner Agreement. At the time of this SRA approval, the Managing Entity is Alico Incorporated. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document, to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As the Owner sells off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to the County that includes, if applicable, an acknowledgement of the commitments required by the SRA Document by the new owner and the new owner’s agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity will not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the County determines that the SRA Document commitments have been fulfilled, the Managing Entity shall no longer be responsible for the monitoring of this SRA. B. Issuance of a development permit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. C. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. D. Owner shall provide an annual SRA monitoring report, in a form similar to a PUD monitoring report, identifying the number of residential units constructed by type within the SRA, and amount of retail, office, civic, government, and institution square footage constructed within the SRA. The Report shall also address whether or not or to what degree the Owner Commitments contained herein have been satisfied. Page 20 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 97 of 4116 E. The Owner of any group housing, including a retirement community, its successors or assigns, shall provide the following services and be subject to the following operational standards for the units in the group housing, including, but not limited to, independent living units, assisted living units, or skilled nursing units: Operational Characteristics for Senior Housing: Senior housing may be composed of one or more types of care/housing facilities. These care/housing types are limited to independent living, assisted living, and skilled nursing units, each of which can have varying operational characteristics. The following characteristics of senior housing care units distinguish them from residential land uses, and all of the characteristics must be provided for and maintained to be considered a senior housing care unit: 1.) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; 2.) There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on- site, or catered; 3.) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents’ needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 4.) There shall be an onsite manager/activities coordinator to assist residents who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 5.) An on-site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents; 6.) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; 7.) Independent living units shall be designed so that a resident is able to age in place. For example, kitchens may be easily retrofitted by lowering the sink to accommodate a wheelchair bound resident or bathrooms may be retrofitted by adding grab bars. 8.) Group housing for seniors shall be constructed to have a core area to shelter residents and staff on site in the event of a hurricane. The core area will be constructed to meet the Public Shelter Design Criteria that are required for new public schools and public community colleges and universities (“State Requirements for Educational Facilities, 2014”) and shall be capable of ventilation or air conditioning provided by back-up generator for a period of no less than 96 hours. 9.2 Environmental A. The Owner shall adhere to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Black Bear Management Plan, as applicable. The informational brochure created by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) and titled “A Guide to Living in Bear County” will be distributed to future homeowners and construction/maintenance personnel. Residents will be provided with information on how to secure their garbage containers to discourage bears from foraging in trash receptacles and the project will utilize County- approved bear-proof dumpsters/trash cans for all residential and non-residential uses, with the ocations to be determined at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP) approval. All costs, including maintenance, of bear-proof containers will be borne by the Owner. Page 21 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 98 of 4116 B. Prior to issuance of the first SDP and/or PPL, a listed species management plan must be provided for review, with approval from FWCC and/or USFWS, as applicable, for management of the Florida Panther (Puma concolor coryi) and other listed species. C. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA shall utilize County-approved bearproof trash cans for both residential and commercial (including non-residential) development. All costs, including maintenance, of bear-proof containers will be borne by the Owner. D. Light fixtures shall be dark sky compliant (flat panel, full cut-off fixtures-backlight, up light and glare (BUG) rating where U=o). E. All residents will be provided and required to acknowledge by signature a notice of prescriptive burns that will occur within the adjacent Stewardship Sending Area(s) or any public or private conservation lands. The Owner/Developer is responsible for compliance for the initial sale of residential properties. 9.3 Transportation A. Intensity of uses under any development scenario for the SRA is limited to a maximum of 4,092 two-way, adjusted (net external), average weekday pm peak hour total trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. The limitation does not apply to the 362 affordable housing units or to the neighborhood goods and services, civic, governmental, or institutional square footage required to serve the affordable housing units. B. No more than 2,500 dwelling units will be issued certificates of occupancy until a minimum of 30,000 sq. ft. of the neighborhood retail and office uses and a minimum of 20 multi- family dwelling units have been developed in the Village Center and issued certificate(s) of occupancy. C. The Owner shall convey the additional right-of-way labeled “50’Corkscrew Rd ROW Reservation” along Corkscrew Road on Exhibit A, Master Plan. The conveyance will be to Collier County in fee simple, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, by warranty deed within sixty (60) days of the County’s written request. At the time of conveyance, the Owner shall receive Road Impact Fee Credits or cash equal to the market value of the land as determined on the day before approval of this SRA. The market value shall be determined by a mutually agreed upon accredited appraiser or, failing such an agreement, shall be the average of two appraisals prepared by mutually agreed upon accredited appraisers. Appraisal costs shall be shared equally by the Owner and the County. Should the development be designed to accommodate the stormwater from the future Corkscrew Road widening within the SRA lake system, the owner will convey the SRA lake system to Collier County by a Drainage Easement with no responsibility for maintenance. In exchange, Owner shall receive Road Impact Fee Credits or cash equal to the market value of the easement area necessary to accommodate such improvements as determined the day before approval of this SRA as determined the day before approval of this SRA. The market value shall be determined by a mutually agreed upon accredited appraiser or, failing such an agreement, shall be the average of two appraisals prepared by mutually agreed upon accredited appraisers. Appraisal costs shall be shared equally by the Owner and the County. Page 22 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 99 of 4116 9.4 Parks and Recreation A. The Owner shall provide and maintain one (1) children’s playground, for use of residents only, that conforms to appropriate ASTM standards, which shall be a minimum of 2,500 square feet in size. The location of this playground shall be identified at the time of subdivision plat or SDP, as the case may be, for the development phase or area within which the playground is to be included. 9.5 Landscaping A. Street trees will be provided throughout the Village. Within the Village Center Context Zone, street trees shall be spaced forty feet (40’) on center and within the Neighborhood General Context Zone, street trees shall be spaces sixty feet (60’) on center. Street trees shall have a minimum average mature canopy spread of twenty feet (20’) or alternatively, for species with an average mature spread less than twenty feet (20’), street trees shall be spaced a distance equal to twice the average mature spread. Along residential local streets, the required street trees may be located within platted lots. 9.6 Affordable Housing A. The Owner has agreed to provide the following which satisfies the affordable housing requirements for the Corkscrew Grove East Village: 1.) Two adjacent affordable housing parcels totaling a minimum of 36.22 acres and entitling a minimum of 362 dwelling units will be set aside for development by the Owner, in the Affordable Housing Context Zone of the SRA, or for acquisition, in whole or in part, by either Collier County, a Community Land Trust, a private developer or any other affordable housing provider based upon the appraised value of $22,500/ acre, with a right of first refusal to Collier County. The Affordable Housing parcels will be considered as a Public Benefit Use and do not require Stewardship Credits but shall be included in the calculation of total SRA acreage. The Affordable Housing units shall be excluded from the trip cap for the SRA in which they are located. The affordable housing sites will be offered for sale to Collier County in writing before they are offered to other entities. 2.) If developed by the Owner or an entity other than Collier County acquires an affordable housing site, the entity is subject to the following: a) Rental units. All units will be rented to households whose incomes are up to and including 100% of the AMI for Collier County and the corresponding rent limits. These units will be committed for a period of 30 years from the date of issuance of certificate of occupancy of the first unit. Income and rent limits may be adjusted annually based on combined income and rent limit table published by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation or as otherwise provided by Collier County. b) For sale units. All units will be sold to households whose initial certified incomes are up to and including 100% of the AMI for Collier County. These units will be committed for a period of 30 years from the date of the issuance Page 23 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 100 of 4116 of the certificate of occupancy and sold to households that qualify for the designated income thresholds. Households shall occupy the property as their primary residence as evidenced by maintenance of homestead exemption. Prior to sale of any of the units, the Owner or an entity other than Collier County will record a restrictive covenant in the public records of Collier County identifying the affordable units and the income threshold pertaining to each unit. The covenant will state that each unit will be initially sold and subsequently sold to qualifying households for a period of 30 years of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for each unit. It will also state that at least 30 days prior to the sale of any unit, the County's Community and Human Services Division will be notified in writing and provided documents for income verification and certification on forms acceptable to Collier County. The closing on the sale may occur after the County confirms that the household qualifies for the designated income thresholds. c) The Owner or an entity other than Collier County will provide an annual monitoring report to County which includes, the progress and monitoring of occupancy of the income restricted units, including rent data for rented units, and homestead data for owner-occupied units, in a format approved by Collier County Community and Human Services Division. Owner agrees to annual on-site monitoring by the County. B. Affordable housing will include 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom, and 3 bedroom units. 9.7 School A. The Owner shall reserve a school site, shown on the SRA Master Plan, for the District School Board of Collier County, Florida (District). Upon Approval of the SRA, and all required permits from the South Florida Water Management District or any federal or state regulatory authorities, and the expiration of appeal periods, the Owner will provide written notice to the District and the District shall have up to two years to provide written Notice of its intent to purchase the parcel. After providing Notice, the District shall close on the parcel or parcels within 6 months of providing Notice to the Owner. In accordance with Florida Statutes Section 1013.14(1)(b), the District will obtain two (2) appraisals for the school site from independent state certified appraisers, to establish the value of the school site. The appraisal date shall be the day prior to the Approval of the SRA. The average appraised value of the two appraisals, not to exceed $22,500/acre, shall constitute the amount of credit available to the Owner as a prepayment of Educational Impact Fees upon conveyance of the school site to the District. With respect to the conveyance of real property, by the Owner to the District, the conveyance of the school site to the District fully mitigates for the development’s impact to the elementary, middle and high schools needed to serve the Corkscrew Grove East SRA. Corkscrew Grove East’s surface water management system will be designed and permitted to treat the stormwater generated by the school site. ERP permits for Corkscrew Grove East Village from the South Florida Water Management District and the Army Corp of Engineers will include the school site using an assumed impervious coverage of 70%. If SFWMD or other agency requires pretreatment for any parking lot area, the pretreatment Page 24 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 101 of 4116 will be included in the school’s design and shall not be a reimbursable cost from the Owner. If the Owner is successful in including the school site within its permits for Corkscrew Grove East Village, the District shall reimburse the Owner for any wetlands or Panther (or other species) mitigation required by such permits, upon actual payment and completion of the mitigation and Owner’s written request to District, which reimbursement shall be calculated by Owner on a proportionate share basis of the acreage of school site to the total acreage of the Corkscrew Grove East Village project. The water management reimbursement shall be calculated on a prorated basis using the following formula: Total Water Management Area x (School Site Area / Total Development Area). The reimbursement amount shall be added to the value of the real property conveyed to the District and shall become part of the Educational Impact Fee credit issued to the Owner. The school site shall be used only for a public elementary school and not for any other purpose, which restrictions shall be deed restrictions attached to and incorporated in the conveyance deed. The District shall be responsible for the construction of all access improvements into the school site. The school site will connect to two access points on Corkscrew Road. 9.8 Fire and Emergency Medical Services A. The Owner shall convey to the Fire District real property in the Affordable Housing Context Zone for a 3.41-acre site for a fire station in exchange for fire impact fee credits and/or cash. With respect to the conveyance of real property, by the Owner to the Fire District, the conveyance of the Fire Site to the Fire District fully mitigates for the development’s impact to the fire facilities needed to serve Corkscrew Grove East SRA. B. Corkscrew Grove East’s surface water management system will be designed and permitted to treat the stormwater generated by the fire station site. ERP permits for Corkscrew Grove East Village from the South Florida Water Management District and the Army Corp of Engineers will include the fire station site using an assumed impervious coverage of 70%. If SFWMD or other agency requires pretreatment for any parking lot area, the pretreatment will be included in the site’s design and shall not be a reimbursable cost to the Owner. If the Owner is successful in including the fire station site within its permits for Corkscrew Grove East Village, the Fire District shall reimburse the Owner for any Panther (or other species) mitigation required by such permits, upon actual payment and completion of the mitigation and Owners’ written request to Fire District, which reimbursement shall be calculated by Owners’ on a proportionate share basis of the acreage of fire station site to the total acreage of the Corkscrew Grove East Village project, using the formula Total Water Management Area X (Fire District Site/Total Development Area). The reimbursement amount shall be added to the value of the real property conveyed to the Fire District and shall become part of the Fire Impact Fee credit issued to the Owner. C. The fire station site shall be used only for a fire station/EMS station and not for any other purpose, which restrictions shall be deed restrictions attached to and incorporated in the conveyance deed. The fire station site shall have direct and permanent access (in accordance with County Standards) to State Road 82. The Fire District shall be responsible for the construction of all access improvements into the fire station site. Page 25 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 102 of 4116 9.9 Utilities A. The developer can use well and septic for the installation of site related work. All development requiring a certificate of occupancy must be connected to central water and sewer facilities to be provided by Immokalee Water and Sewer District (IWSD) or the developer, if IWSD is unable to provide service. Page 26 of 26 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Post CCPC SRA Doc (3-20-2026)\Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Document (PL-20240010212) (3-20- 2026).docx EX B of Res Page of 112 Page 103 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE - SRA LAND USE SUMMARY % OPEN OPEN SYMBOL DESCRIPTION ACRES SPACE SPACE (AC) NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL CONTEXT ZONE N NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL 998.99 30% 299.70 AMENITY 8.50 40% 3.40 20' TYPE "D" ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY 65.40 15% 9.81 FDOT WATER HENDRY COUNTY R.O.W RESERVATION (CORKSCREW RD) 17.65 15% 2.65 MANAGEMENT AREA BUFFER BUFFER LAKES 53.20 100% 53.20 AG S.R.A. BOUNDARY (ZONING: 25' TYPE "D" DRAINAGE CANALS 32.13 100% 32.13 0 600' 1200' NO BUFFER REQUIRED A-MHO-RLSAO) BUFFER SSA #22 OPEN SPACE 15.83 100% 15.83 22 x 34 SCALE: 1" = 600' (PANTHER CORRIDOR) ADJACENT TO SSA #22 11 x 17 SCALE: 1" = 1200' 1/2 ESSENTIAL EX. UTILITY EASEMENT (WITHIN SRA) 45.72 90% 41.15 STATE ROAD 82 (200' R.O.W.) N.G. N.G. SERVICES 1,237.41 FUTURE UTILITY SITE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL CONTEXT ZONE TOTAL CHURCH ROAD (NOT WITHIN THE S.R.A.) AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTEXT ZONE CARSON GULLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING 36.22 20% 7.24 CANAL FDOT WATER * BUFFER ESSENTIAL SERVICES 3.41 20% 0.68 MANAGEMENT AREA 25' TYPE "D" FDOT WATER AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTEXT ZONE TOTAL 39.63 A.H. A.H. MANAGEMENT 10' TYPE "D" * 5/6 20' TYPE "D" AREA VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE BUFFER VILLAGE CENTER 145.55 30% 43.66 AG BUFFER FUTURE (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) 7 50' CORKSCREW RD AG UTILITY SITE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (PUBLIC) 24.00 30% 7.20 ROW RESERVATION POTENTIAL GUARDHOUSE / 5/6 (ZONING: (NOT WITHIN 2/19/2026 11:27 AM VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE TOTAL 169.55 ENTRY FEATURE V.C. A-MHO-RLSAO) THE S.R.A.) SRA BOUNDARY TOTAL 1,446.59 36% 516.65 BUFFER 25' TYPE "D" 25' TYPEV.C. "D" 25' TYPE "D" STATE ROAD 82 (200' R.O.W.) SSA 22 (CORRIDOR) 1,295.41 100% 1,295.41 BUFFER SSA 23 (WRA) BUFFER 388.87 100% 388.87 1/2 1/2 3/4 5/6 FDOT WATER SSA BOUNDARY TOTAL 1,684.28 100% 1,684.28 MANAGEMENT AREA 20' TYPE "D" 7 5/6 50' CORKSCREW RD OPEN SPACE TABLE 7 V.C. BUFFER SSA #23 ROW RESERVATION BUFFER AREA (AC) % RELOCATED CABBAGE ELEMENTARY 25' TYPE "D" N.G. REQUIRED 506.3 35% FUTURE SLOUGH CANAL SCHOOL CARSON GULLY CONNECTION N.G. CANAL PROVIDED 516.6 36% ROAD CROSSING EX BLDGS TO BE 1/2 3/4 7 7 UTILIZED AS INTERIM POTENTIAL GUARDHOUSE / FIRE STATION LEGEND NO BUFFER REQUIRED ENTRY FEATURE CROSSING FPL EASEMENT N.G. N.G. POTENTIAL 1/2 GUARDHOUSE / ENTRY FEATURE INTERNAL CONNECTION POTENTIAL FUTURE 1/2 LOCATION CONNECTION 7 N.G. 8 EXTERNAL CONNECTION 1/2 LOCATION AMENITY (N.G.) 1/2 SSA #22 1/2 (PANTHER AMENITY (N.G.) N.G. CORRIDOR) OPTIONAL CONNECTION N.G. 20' TYPE "D" SSA #23 7 1/2 LOCATION BUFFER NO BUFFER PROJECT ACCESS POINTS AG REQUIRED (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) * ALONG SR 82 ALIGN WITH S.R.A. ADJACENT TO N.G. SSA #22 PROPOSED MEDIAN BREAKS BOUNDARY IN FDOT IMPROVEMENT POTENTIAL GUARDHOUSE / HSA PLANS S.R.A. ENTRY FEATURE 300' BUFFER BOUNDARY NO BUFFER TO HSA OR FSA N.G. POTENTIAL REGIONAL TREATMENT MARSH REQUIRED ADJACENT # S.R.A. CROSS SECTION LOCATIONS (OUTSIDE MASTER SWMS) FSA LOCATION IDENTIFIER CORKSCREW(100' R.O.W.) ROAD TO SSA #22 GENERAL NOTES: CONCEPTUAL NATURE 50' CORKSCREW RD TRAILHEADS, BOARDWALKS, ROW RESERVATION 25' TYPE "D" 1. MASTER PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL. INTERNAL ROAD ALIGNMENTS, LAKE SITING AND CONFIGURATION OF Page 27 of 112 OR OBSERVATION PIERS DEVELOPMENT AREAS ARE SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION WITHIN THE RLSA GUIDELINES AT TIME OF EX B to Res. BUFFER C.R.E.W. LOCATIONS SDP AND/OR PPL PERMITTING. (ZONING: A-MHO) NO BUFFER REQUIRED 2. SEE MOBILITY PLAN FOR PATHWAYS. ADJACENT TO SSA #22 3. WRA LAND USE IS WITHIN SSA #23 AND IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE SRA BOUNDARY AREA. THE WRA AREA IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS. # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) 2 9-01-25 REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENTS ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SRA MASTER PLAN COLOR SCALE: 1" = 1200' SHEET : 1 of 10 Page 104 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE - SRA LAND USE SUMMARY % OPEN OPEN SYMBOL DESCRIPTION ACRES SPACE SPACE (AC) NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL CONTEXT ZONE N NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL 998.99 30% 299.70 AMENITY 8.50 40% 3.40 20' TYPE "D" ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY 65.40 15% 9.81 FDOT WATER HENDRY COUNTY R.O.W RESERVATION (CORKSCREW RD) 17.65 15% 2.65 MANAGEMENT AREA BUFFER BUFFER LAKES 53.20 100% 53.20 AG S.R.A. BOUNDARY (ZONING: 25' TYPE "D" DRAINAGE CANALS 32.13 100% 32.13 0 600' 1200' NO BUFFER REQUIRED A-MHO-RLSAO) BUFFER SSA #22 OPEN SPACE 15.83 100% 15.83 22 x 34 SCALE: 1" = 600' (PANTHER CORRIDOR) ADJACENT TO SSA #22 11 x 17 SCALE: 1" = 1200' 1/2 ESSENTIAL EX. UTILITY EASEMENT (WITHIN SRA) 45.72 90% 41.15 STATE ROAD 82 (200' R.O.W.) N.G. N.G. SERVICES 1,237.41 FUTURE UTILITY SITE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL CONTEXT ZONE TOTAL CHURCH ROAD (NOT WITHIN THE S.R.A.) AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTEXT ZONE CARSON GULLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING 36.22 20% 7.24 CANAL FDOT WATER * BUFFER ESSENTIAL SERVICES 3.41 20% 0.68 MANAGEMENT AREA 25' TYPE "D" FDOT WATER AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTEXT ZONE TOTAL 39.63 A.H. A.H. MANAGEMENT 10' TYPE "D" * 5/6 20' TYPE "D" AREA VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE BUFFER VILLAGE CENTER 145.55 30% 43.66 AG BUFFER FUTURE (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) 7 50' CORKSCREW RD AG UTILITY SITE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (PUBLIC) 24.00 30% 7.20 ROW RESERVATION POTENTIAL GUARDHOUSE / 5/6 (ZONING: (NOT WITHIN 2/19/2026 11:27 AM VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE TOTAL 169.55 ENTRY FEATURE V.C. A-MHO-RLSAO) THE S.R.A.) SRA BOUNDARY TOTAL 1,446.59 36% 516.65 1/2 3/4 BUFFER 25' TYPE "D" 25' TYPEV.C. "D" 25' TYPE "D" STATE ROAD 82 (200' R.O.W.) SSA 22 (CORRIDOR) 1,295.41 100% 1,295.41 BUFFER SSA 23 (WRA) BUFFER 388.87 100% 388.87 1/2 5/6 FDOT WATER SSA BOUNDARY TOTAL 1,684.28 100% 1,684.28 MANAGEMENT AREA 20' TYPE "D" 7 5/6 50' CORKSCREW RD OPEN SPACE TABLE 7 V.C. BUFFER SSA #23 ROW RESERVATION BUFFER AREA (AC) % RELOCATED CABBAGE ELEMENTARY 25' TYPE "D" N.G. REQUIRED 506.3 35% FUTURE SLOUGH CANAL SCHOOL CARSON GULLY CONNECTION N.G. CANAL PROVIDED 516.6 36% ROAD CROSSING EX BLDGS TO BE 1/2 3/4 7 UTILIZED AS INTERIM 7 POTENTIAL GUARDHOUSE / FIRE STATION LEGEND NO BUFFER REQUIRED ENTRY FEATURE CROSSING FPL EASEMENT N.G. N.G. POTENTIAL 1/2 GUARDHOUSE / ENTRY FEATURE INTERNAL CONNECTION POTENTIAL FUTURE 1/2 LOCATION CONNECTION 7 N.G. 8 EXTERNAL CONNECTION 1/2 LOCATION AMENITY (N.G.) 1/2 SSA #22 1/2 (PANTHER OPTIONAL CONNECTION AMENITY (N.G.) N.G. CORRIDOR) N.G. 1/2 20' TYPE "D" SSA #23 7 LOCATION BUFFER NO BUFFER PROJECT ACCESS POINTS AG REQUIRED (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) * ALONG SR 82 ALIGN WITH S.R.A. ADJACENT TO N.G. SSA #22 PROPOSED MEDIAN BREAKS BOUNDARY IN FDOT IMPROVEMENT POTENTIAL GUARDHOUSE / HSA PLANS S.R.A. ENTRY FEATURE 300' BUFFER BOUNDARY NO BUFFER TO HSA OR FSA N.G. POTENTIAL REGIONAL TREATMENT MARSH REQUIRED ADJACENT # S.R.A. CROSS SECTION LOCATIONS (OUTSIDE MASTER SWMS) FSA LOCATION IDENTIFIER CORKSCREW(100' R.O.W.) ROAD TO SSA #22 GENERAL NOTES: CONCEPTUAL NATURE 50' CORKSCREW RD TRAILHEADS, BOARDWALKS, ROW RESERVATION 25' TYPE "D" 1. MASTER PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL. INTERNAL ROAD ALIGNMENTS, LAKE SITING AND CONFIGURATION OF Page 28 of 112 OR OBSERVATION PIERS DEVELOPMENT AREAS ARE SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION WITHIN THE RLSA GUIDELINES AT TIME OF EX B to Res. BUFFER C.R.E.W. LOCATIONS SDP AND/OR PPL PERMITTING. (ZONING: A-MHO) NO BUFFER REQUIRED 2. SEE MOBILITY PLAN FOR PATHWAYS. ADJACENT TO SSA #22 3. WRA LAND USE IS WITHIN SSA #23 AND IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE SRA BOUNDARY AREA. THE WRA AREA IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS. # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) 2 9-01-25 REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENTS ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SRA MASTER PLAN BLACK & WHITE SCALE: 1" = 1200' SHEET : 2 of 10 Page 105 of 4116 INTERNAL MOBILITY PLAN NOTES THE SRA SHALL ADHERE TO THE INTERNAL MASTER MOBILITY PLAN AND SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: 1. A 5-FOOT SIDEWALK ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROADWAY. WHERE THE LDC REQUIRES BIKE LANES, AT THE DEVELOPER'S DISCRETION, A MINIMUM 10 FOOT PATHWAY MAY BE PROVIDED ON ONE SIDE, IN LIEU OF BIKE LANES. FDOT WATER HENDRY COUNTY 2. LOCAL STREETS (LOCATED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL AREAS) WILL INCLUDE A MINIMUM 5 FOOT SIDEWALK MANAGEMENT AREA ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROADWAY EXCEPT FOR CUL-DE-SACS AND SINGLE-LOADED RESIDENTIAL STREETS. 3. AT TIME OF SDP, OR PPL (AS APPLICABLE), CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE VARIOUS MODES OF TRANSPORTATION WILL AG BE IDENTIFIED TO ENSURE INTERCONNECTIVITY WITH THE SRA AND TO EXTERNAL TRANSPORTATION LINKS. (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) S.R.A. BOUNDARY 4. GOLF CARTS WILL BE ALLOWED ON 10 FOOT MULTI-USE PATHS AND INTERNAL RESIDENTIAL/LOCAL STREETS. SSA #22 5. ALL ROADS, INCLUDING STEWARDSHIP DISTRICT PUBLIC ROADS, ARE TO BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED. ESSENTIAL (PANTHER CORRIDOR) STATE ROAD 82 (200' R.O.W.) N.G. 6. THE FACT THAT FUTURE EXPANSION / IMPROVEMENTS TO CORKSCREW ROAD WILL INCLUDE SIDEWALKS WITHIN THE SERVICES RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND THAT ROAD IMPACT FEES COLLECTED FOR THIS PROJECT CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF CHURCH ROAD SIDEWALKS, PAYMENT IN LIEU SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT'S FRONTAGE ALONG CORKSCREW ROAD. ROW RESERVATIONS FOR FUTURE CORKSCREW ROAD EXPANSION / IMPROVEMENTS ARE BEING PROVIDED WITHIN THE N.G. SRA AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. FDOT WATER MANAGEMENT AREA TRANSFER STATION / PARK & RIDE NOTES A.H. A.H. 1. A TRANSFER STATION OR PARK-AND-RIDE FACILITY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITHIN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE AG TO COMPLY WITH RLSAO POLICY 4.7.2. THE SPECIFIC LOCATION OF THIS FACILITY WILL BE DETERMINED AND SHOWN AG (ZONING: PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE FIRST NON-RESIDENTIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (SDP) WITHIN ANY OF THE VILLAGE (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) A-MHO-RLSAO) CENTER PODS. V.C. V.C. 2/19/2026 11:27 AM S.R.A. BOUNDARY STATE ROAD 82 (200' R.O.W.) FDOT WATER MANAGEMENT AREA V.C. SSA #23 ELEMENTARY N.G. SCHOOL GATOR SLOUGH RELOCATED CABBAGE (N.G. SLOUGH CANAL CANAL N.G. (N.G. POTENTIAL PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER CABBAGE SSA #22 SLOUGH CANAL (PANTHER CORRIDOR) N.G. (N.G. AMENITY (N.G.) (N.G. SSA #23 AG (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) AMENITY (N.G.) (N.G. HSA S.R.A. BOUNDARY LEGEND N.G. SRA BOUNDARY FSA CORKSCREW(100' R.O.W.) ROAD 5' SIDEWALK N C.R.E.W. 6' SIDEWALK (ZONING: A-MHO) 10' MULTI-USE PATHWAY 5' SIDEWALK * 10' MULTI-USE PATHWAY * Page 29 of 112 CONCEPTUAL NATURE TRAILHEADS, BOARDWALKS, OR OBSERVATION EX B to0 Res. 600' 1200' PIERS LOCATIONS 22 x 34 SCALE: 1" = 600' 11 x 17 SCALE: 1" = 1200' *SIDEWALK AND MULTI-USE PATHS TO BE INSTALLED AS PART OF FDOT'S STATE ROAD 82 EXPANSION IMPROVEMENTS. # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) 2 9-01-25 REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENTS ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SRA MOBILITY PLAN SCALE: 1" = 1200' SHEET : 3 of 10 Page 106 of 4116 AG (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) 8.1.1 8.5.2 8.1.4 8.6.1 N.G. N.G. 8.4.1 8.6.2 ESSENTIAL 8.4.2 8.6.3 8.1.1 8.4.3 SERVICES CHURCH ROAD8.4.3 8.1.2 8.5.2 8.1.3 8.6.1 SSA #22 8.1.4 8.6.2 8.4.1 8.6.3 8.4.2 8.4.1 8.5.2 A.H. 8.4.2 8.6.1 A.H. 8.6.2 8.4.1 N 8.4.2 8.5.2 AG 8.6.1 AG 8.6.2 (ZONING: (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) V.C. A-MHO-RLSAO) 8.2.1 8.5.1 STATE ROAD 82 (200' R.O.W.) 8.2.2 8.5.2 8.2.1 V.C. 8.5.1 8.2.3 8.6.1 8.2.2 8.5.2 8.2.4 8.6.2 2/19/2026 11:27 AM0 600' 1200' 8.2.3 8.6.1 8.2.5 8.6.4 22 x 34 SCALE: 1" = 600' 8.2.4 8.6.2 11 x 17 SCALE: 1" = 1200' 8.2.5 8.6.4 8.2.1 8.5.1 V.C. 8.2.2 8.5.2 8.2.3 8.6.1 SSA #23 8.2.4 8.6.2 8.2.5 8.6.4 ELEMENTARY LEGEND 8.1.1 8.5.2 8.1.1 8.5.2 SCHOOL (N.G. 8.1.4 8.6.1 N.G. 8.1.4 8.6.1 A.H. - AFFORDABLE HOUSING 8.4.1 8.6.2 8.4.1 8.6.2 8.4.2 8.6.3 N.G. - NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL 8.4.2 8.6.3 8.4.3 8.4.3 V.C. - VILLAGE CENTER 8.1.1 8.5.2 N.G. DENOTES DEVIATION 8.1.4 8.6.1 #.#.# N.G. LOCATION 8.4.1 8.6.2 8.1.1 8.5.2 8.1.4 8.6.1 8.1.1 8.5.2 8.4.2 8.6.3 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 8.4.1 8.6.2 8.1.4 8.6.1 8.4.3 8.4.2 8.6.3 8.4.1 8.6.2 8.4.3 SSA #22 BUFFER LAKES 8.4.2 8.6.3 N.G. 8.4.3 DRAINAGE CANALS 8.1.1 8.5.2 8.1.1 8.5.2 N.G. 8.1.4 8.6.1 ESSENTIAL SERVICES N.G. 8.1.4 8.6.1 8.4.1 8.6.2 NEIGHBORHOOD SSA #23 8.4.1 8.6.2 8.4.2 8.6.3 GENERAL (AMENITY) 8.4.2 8.6.3 8.4.3 8.4.3 NEIGHBORHOOD AG GENERAL (ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO) 8.1.1 8.5.2 8.1.4 8.6.1 N.G. HSA OPEN SPACE 8.4.1 8.6.2 8.4.2 8.6.3 N.G. 8.4.3 ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY (100' R.O.W.) 8.1.1 8.5.2 SCHOOL SITE 8.1.4 8.6.1 8.4.1 8.6.2 EX. UTILITY EASEMENT 8.4.2 8.6.3 CORKSCREW ROAD FSA (ELECTRIC) 8.4.3 C.R.E.W. VILLAGE CENTER (ZONING: A-MHO) SSA 22 (PANTHER CORRIDOR) SSA 23 (WRA) Page 30 of 112 EX B to Res. SRA BOUNDARY # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SRA MASTER PLAN WITH DEVIATIONS SCALE: 1" = 1200' SHEET : 4 of 10 Page 107 of 4116 DEVIATIONS: 8.1 NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL STANDARDS 8.5 LANDSCAPE STANDARDS 1. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.08.07.I.2.d.iii.f)iv), “NON-RESIDENTIAL USES,” WHICH STATES “THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE PER 1. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.06.02.C., BUFFER REQUIREMENTS, “TYPES OF BUFFERS,” TABLE 2.4 INFORMATION, FOOTNOTE (3) [NON-RESIDENTIAL] USE SHALL BE 3,000 SQUARE FEET AND PER LOCATION SHALL BE 15,000 SQUARE FEET,” TO INSTEAD ALLOW WHICH REQUIRES “BUFFER AREAS BETWEEN COMMERCIAL OUTPARCELS LOCATED WITHIN A SHOPPING CENTER, BUSINESS PARK, OR [NON-RESIDENTIAL USES] THE AMENITY CENTER SITES TO BE A MAXIMUM OF 30,000 SQUARE FEET PER LOCATION. SIMILAR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT MAY HAVE A SHARED BUFFER 15 FEET WIDE WITH EACH ABUTTING PROPERTY CONTRIBUTING 7.5 FEET”, TO INSTEAD ALLOW A SHARED BUFFER 10 FEET WIDE WITH EACH ABUTTING PROPERTY CONTRIBUTING 5 FEET. 2. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 44.08.07.I.2.d.iii.e)ii), WHICH STATES THAT IN THE CASE OF “MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL,” “SIDE YARD SETBACKS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET AND REAR YARD SETBACKS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 20 FEET FOR THE PRIMARY 2. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.06.02 A., WHICH REQUIRES LANDSCAPE BUFFER STRIPS TO BE SHOWN AND DESIGNATED ON THE STRUCTURE…” TO INSTEAD ALLOW FOR A SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 0 OR 5 FEET AND A REAR YARD SETBACK OF 10 FEET FOR ZERO FINAL PLAT WITHIN AN EASEMENT, TO INSTEAD ALLOW THE SAME REQUIRED LANDSCAPING MATERIALS TO BE DEMONSTRATED ON A LOT LINE AND TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, AS SET FORTH IN TABLE 1: NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL - REQUIRED MINIMUM YARDS AND PLANTING PLAN, FOR STAFF REVIEW AS PART OF THE RESPECTIVE PLANS AND PLAT APPLICATION (PPL), WITH NO REQUIREMENT TO MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT AND TABLE 3: AFFORDABLE HOUSING - REQUIRED MINIMUM YARDS AND MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT PROVIDE A LANDSCAPE BUFFER FOR ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO A LAKE REGARDLESS OF LOCATION WITHIN THE VILLAGE. 3. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.08.07.I.2.d.iii.e)i), WHICH ESTABLISHES MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS TO BE A MAXIMUM OF 4 ACRES, TO INSTEAD ALLOW MULTI-FAMILY LOTS TO BE A MAXIMUM OF 25-ACRES. 8.6 OTHER DEVIATIONS 4. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 5.03.02 C., WHICH LIMITS FENCES OR WALLS TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX (6) FEET IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS TO INSTEAD ALLOW A TWELVE (12) FOOT WALL/BERM COMBINATION. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE WALL WILL BE EIGHT (8) 1. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.05.04.G, “PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS,” WHICH REQUIRES 1 PARKING SPACE PER 100 SQUARE FEET. FEET FOR RECREATION FACILITIES (INDOOR) SPORTS, EXERCISE, FITNESS, AEROBICS, OR HEALTH CLUBS TO INSTEAD ALLOW FOR PARKING FOR THE AMENITY CENTER SITES TO BE CALCULATED AT 1 SPACE PER 200 SQUARE FEET OF INDOOR SQUARE FOOTAGE, EXCLUDING KITCHEN OR STORAGE SPACE. 8.2 VILLAGE CENTER STANDARDS 1. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.p)ii) “GENERAL PARKING CRITERIA,” WHICH STATES “THE MAJORITY OF PARKING SPACES 2. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 3.05.10.A.2. - “LOCATION CRITERIA,” WHICH REQUIRES THAT “LSPA [LITTORAL SHELF PLANTING SHALL BE PROVIDED OFF-STREET IN THE REAR OF BUILDINGS OR ALONG THE SIDE SECONDARY STREETS. PARKING IS PROHIBITED IN AREAS] SHALL BE CONCENTRATED IN ONE LOCATION OF THE LAKE(S), PREFERABLY ADJACENT TO A PRESERVE AREA,” TO INSTEAD FRONT OF BUILDINGS…” TO INSTEAD ALLOW PARKING IN FRONT OF BUILDINGS IN THE VILLAGE CENTER, WHEN SUCH PARKING IS IN ALLOW FOR REQUIRED LITTORAL SHELF PLANTING AREAS TO BE AGGREGATED IN CERTAIN SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT LAKES, 2/19/2026 11:27 AM SUPPORT OF A SHOPPING CENTER, OR WHEN LOCATED ON A LOT WITH TWO OR MORE STREET FRONTAGES, OR WHEN LOCATED ON A INCLUDING THE DEVELOPMENT LAKE THAT RUNS ALONG THE EASTERN PERIMETER OF THE SRA. IT SHALL ALSO BE PERMITTED TO LOT FRONTING ON CORKSCREW ROAD OR STATE ROAD 82. A TYPE 'D' BUFFER PER LDC AT TIME OF PERMITTING WILL BE REQUIRED UTILIZE GATOR SLOUGH AND CABBAGE SLOUGH AS PART OF ALL THE REQUIRED LSPA. WHEN PARKING IS ADJACENT TO OR ABUTTING A ROAD. 2. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.q), WHICH REQUIRES THAT THE MAJORITY OF PARKING BE LOCATED IN THE REAR OF 3. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 5.04.04.B.5. - “MODEL HOMES AND MODEL SALES CENTERS”, WHICH PERMITS A MAXIMUM OF FIVE (5) BUILDINGS AND PROHIBITS PARKING IN THE FRONT OF BUILDING EXCEPT ON-STREET PARKING WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO INSTEAD MODEL HOMES, OR A NUMBER CORRESPONDING TO TEN (10) PERCENT OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PLATTED LOTS, WHICHEVER IS ALLOW PARKING IN THE FRONT, SIDE, AND REAR YARDS, WHEN SUCH PARKING IS IN SUPPORT OF A SHOPPING CENTER, OR WHEN LESS, PER PLATTED APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PRIOR TO FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. THE REQUESTED DEVIATION IS TO ALLOW FOR A LOCATED ON A LOT WITH TWO OR MORE STREET FRONTAGES, OR WHEN LOCATED ON A LOT FRONTING ON CORKSCREW ROAD OR MAXIMUM OF 30 MODEL HOMES AT ANY ONE TIME WITHIN THE OVERALL VILLAGE IRRESPECTIVE TO THE NUMBER OF PLATTED LOTS. STATE ROAD 82. A TYPE 'D' BUFFER PER LDC AT TIME OF PERMITTING WILL BE REQUIRED WHEN PARKING IS ADJACENT TO OR WITH EACH BUILDING PERMIT FOR A MODEL HOME, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION AS TO THE CURRENT NUMBER ABUTTING A ROAD. OF MODEL HOMES IN EXISTENCE. 3. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.q), WHICH REQUIRES THAT THE AMOUNT OF REQUIRED PARKING IN THE VILLAGE CENTER “BE DEMONSTRATED THROUGH A SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS SUBMITTED WITH AN SRA DESIGNATION APPLICATION…” AND BE “DETERMINED UTILIZING THE MODAL SPLITS AND PARKING DEMANDS FOR VARIOUS USES RECOGNIZED BY ITE, ULI OR OTHER SOURCES OR STUDIES…” TO INSTEAD ALLOW THE PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS TO BE SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF INITIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (SDP) OR, AT THE DISCRETION OF THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE, AT THE TIME OF A SUBSEQUENT SDP OR SDP AMENDMENT, IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR A MORE COMPREHENSIVE PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS BASED UPON THE MIX OF USES AT THE TIME OF THE INITIAL SDP OR SUBSEQUENT SDP OR SDP AMENDMENT. 4. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.08.07.I.3.d.ii.g), WHICH ESTABLISHES A MAXIMUM BLOCK PERIMETER OF 2,500 FEET IN THE VILLAGE CENTER TO INSTEAD ALLOW FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL BLOCK PERIMETER PROVISIONS PER LDC SECTION 4.08.07.J.2.D.III.C): THE MAXIMUM BLOCK PERIMETER SHALL BE 3,500 FEET, EXCEPT THAT A LARGER BLOCK PERIMETER SHALL BE ALLOWED WHERE AN ALLEY OR PATHWAY PROVIDES THROUGH ACCESS, OR THE BLOCK INCLUDES WATER BODIES OR PUBLIC FACILITIES. 5. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 5.03.02 H.1.b AND c., WHICH REQUIRES NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE A WALL WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LANDSCAPE BUFFER WHEN LOCATED ON PROPERTY OPPOSITE A RESIDENTIALLY ZONED DISTRICT BUT FRONTING ON A LOCAL STREET OR ROADWAY TO INSTEAD NOT REQUIRE A WALL. THIS DEVIATION SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE REAR OF SHOPPING CENTERS AND BUILDING AREAS WHERE OVERHEAD DOORS ARE LOCATED AND FACING TOWARDS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. 8.3 TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS 1. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.08.07.I.1.b, “FIGURES 5, 6, AND 7, LOCAL STREET NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL,” WHICH REQUIRES A 6-FOOT-WIDE PLANTING AREA BETWEEN THE TRAVEL LANE AND THE SIDEWALK, TO INSTEAD ALLOW FOR A 4-FOOT-WIDE PLANTING AREA IN THE SAME LOCATION FOR LOCAL ROADS WITHIN THE PROJECT IN NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL. IN SUCH CASES, EITHER A ROOT BARRIER OR STRUCTURAL SOIL SHALL BE UTILIZED. IF THE OPTION OF STRUCTURAL SOIL IS UTILIZED, A MINIMUM OF 2 CUBIC FEET OF STRUCTURAL SOIL PER SQUARE FEET OF MATURE TREE CROWN PROJECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED. 8.4 SIGN STANDARDS 1. A DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 5.06.02.B.5.a, “ON-PREMISES DIRECTIONAL SIGNS WITHIN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS,” WHICH REQUIRES ON-PREMISE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS TO BE SET BACK A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET FROM THE EDGE OF THE ROADWAY, PAVED SURFACE OR Page 31 of 112 BACK OF THE CURB, TO INSTEAD ALLOW A MINIMUM SETBACK OF 5 FEET FROM THE EDGE OF THE ROADWAY, PAVED SURFACE OR EX B to Res. BACK OF THE CURB, LIMITED TO SIGNS INTERNAL TO THE SRA ONLY. THIS EXCLUDES SIGNAGE ALONG COUNTY OWNED ROADWAYS. # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SRA MASTER PLAN DEVIATION DESCRIPTIONS SCALE: N.A. SHEET : 5 of 10 Page 108 of 4116 12' 50' R.O.W. (MIN) 12' P.U.E. P.U.E. 13' 2' 10' 10' 2' 13' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE 5'* 4' 2' 4' 5'* S/W MIN MIN MIN S/W 2% (MAX) 2% 2% 2% (MAX) POTABLE WATER OR POTABLE WATER OR IRRIGATION MAIN IRRIGATION MAIN 5' 5' 5' MIN 5' 5' MIN MIN GRAVITY MIN MIN SEWER FORCE MAIN CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) 2/19/2026 11:27 AM 50' LOCAL STREET SECTION 1A NTS 12' 50' R.O.W. (MIN) 12' P.U.E. P.U.E. 13' 2' 10' 10' 2' 13' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE CROSS SECTION NOTES 5'* 4' 2' 4' 5'* MIN S/W MIN MIN S/W * A 5-FOOT SIDEWALK IS REQUIRED ON ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE STREET FOR 2% (MAX) 2% (MAX) 2% 2% CUL-DE-SACS OR SINGLE-LOADED ROADWAYS. ** PROVIDES SPACE FOR 12' LEFT TURN POTABLE WATER OR POTABLE WATER OR LANE AND 4' TRAFFIC SEPARATOR IRRIGATION MAIN IRRIGATION MAIN *** THESE DIMENSIONS MAY VARY TO 3' 5' 5' MIN 5' 3' ENABLE MEANDERING OF PATHS & MIN MIN MIN MIN WALKWAYS AND/OR INCREASE / DECREASE MEDIAN WIDTH FORCE MAIN GRAVITY CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) SEWER (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) **** MAY SUBSTITUTE (2)-11' TRAVEL LANES TO CREATE 4 LANE DIVIDED SECTION. 50' LOCAL STREET SECTION 1B NTS UTILITY NOTE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES Page 32 of 112 ONLY. EXACT LOCATIONS TO BE EX B to Res. DETERMINED BY IMMOKALEE WATER & SEWER DISTRICT (IWSD) AT THE TIME OF SDP OR PPL PERMITTING. # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM SRA STREET CROSS SECTIONS (1) C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SCALE: NTS SHEET : 6 of 10 Page 109 of 4116 12' 58' R.O.W. (MIN) 12' P.U.E. P.U.E. 17' 2' 10' 10' 2' 17' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE 5'* 4' 4' 5'* S/W MIN MIN S/W 2% (MAX) 2% 2% 2% (MAX) FORCE MAIN POTABLE WATER IRRIGATION MAIN 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' GRAVITY MIN MIN MIN SEWER MIN MIN CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) 2/19/2026 11:27 AM 58' LOCAL STREET SECTION 2A NTS 12' 58' R.O.W. (MIN) 12' P.U.E. P.U.E. 17' 2' 10' 10' 2' 17' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE CROSS SECTION NOTES 5'* 4' 4' 5'* S/W MIN MIN S/W * A 5-FOOT SIDEWALK IS REQUIRED ON ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE STREET FOR 2% (MAX) 2% 2% 2% (MAX) CUL-DE-SACS OR SINGLE-LOADED ROADWAYS. FORCE MAIN POTABLE WATER ** PROVIDES SPACE FOR 12' LEFT TURN LANE AND 4' TRAFFIC SEPARATOR IRRIGATION MAIN *** THESE DIMENSIONS MAY VARY TO ENABLE MEANDERING OF PATHS & 3' 5' 5' 5' 5' GRAVITY WALKWAYS AND/OR INCREASE / MIN MIN MIN SEWER MIN MIN DECREASE MEDIAN WIDTH CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) **** MAY SUBSTITUTE (2)-11' TRAVEL LANES TO CREATE 4 LANE DIVIDED SECTION. 58' LOCAL STREET SECTION 2B NTS UTILITY NOTE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES Page 33 of 112 ONLY. EXACT LOCATIONS TO BE EX B to Res. DETERMINED BY IMMOKALEE WATER & SEWER DISTRICT (IWSD) AT THE TIME OF SDP OR PPL PERMITTING. # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM SRA STREET CROSS SECTIONS (2) C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SCALE: NTS SHEET : 7 of 10 Page 110 of 4116 12' 60' (MIN.) R.O.W. 12' P.U.E. P.U.E. CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) 5'* 4' 9' 3' 10' 10' 2' 4' 5'* S/W MIN PARALLEL TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE MIN S/W PARKING 2% (MAX) 2% (MAX) POTABLE WATER OR 3' VALLEY GUTTER IRRIGATION MAIN POTABLE WATER OR FORCE MAIN GRAVITY 5' IRRIGATION MAIN 5' 10' SEWER MIN MIN MIN CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) 2/19/2026 11:27 AM (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) 60' LOCAL STREET SECTION (VILLAGE CENTER) 3 NTS 12' 24' (MIN.) R.O.W. 12' P.U.E. P.U.E. CROSS SECTION NOTES 12' (MIN) - 14' (MAX) TRAVEL LANE * A 5-FOOT SIDEWALK IS REQUIRED ON ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE STREET FOR CUL-DE-SACS OR SINGLE-LOADED ROADWAYS. ** PROVIDES SPACE FOR 12' LEFT TURN 17' 3' 3' 5' LANE AND 4' TRAFFIC SEPARATOR MIN MIN MIN MIN *** THESE DIMENSIONS MAY VARY TO ENABLE MEANDERING OF PATHS & POTABLE WATER OR POTABLE WATER OR WALKWAYS AND/OR INCREASE / IRRIGATION MAIN IRRIGATION MAIN DECREASE MEDIAN WIDTH STORM DRAINAGE **** MAY SUBSTITUTE (2)-11' TRAVEL LANES 24' ALLEY SECTION (VILLAGE CENTER) TO CREATE 4 LANE DIVIDED SECTION. 4 NTS UTILITY NOTE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES Page 34 of 112 ONLY. EXACT LOCATIONS TO BE EX B to Res. DETERMINED BY IMMOKALEE WATER & SEWER DISTRICT (IWSD) AT THE TIME OF SDP OR PPL PERMITTING. # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM SRA STREET CROSS SECTIONS (3) C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SCALE: NTS SHEET : 8 of 10 Page 111 of 4116 12' 70' (MIN.) R.O.W. 12' P.U.E. P.U.E. 2' 10' 5' 2' 5' 11' 11' 5' 2' 5' 6' 6' MULTI-USE PATH TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE S/W 2% (MAX) 2% 2% 2% (MAX) POTABLE WATER OR FORCE MAIN IRRIGATION MAIN POTABLE WATER OR 5' 5' 5' IRRIGATION MAIN 5' MIN MIN MIN OPTIONAL GRAVITY TYPE "F" CURB (TYP.) MIN SEWER LOCATION (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) 2/19/2026 11:27 AM 70' COLLECTOR ROAD SECTION 5 N.T.S. 12' 80' (MIN.) R.O.W. 12' P.U.E. P.U.E. 16' *** 10' 6' 2' 4' 11' 2' 6' 6' 2' 11' 4' 2' 6' 5' MULTI-USE PATH MIN. TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE MIN. S/W CROSS SECTION NOTES * A 5-FOOT SIDEWALK IS REQUIRED ON ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE STREET FOR CUL-DE-SACS OR SINGLE-LOADED 2% (MAX) 2% (MAX) ROADWAYS. 2% 2% ** PROVIDES SPACE FOR 12' LEFT TURN LANE AND 4' TRAFFIC SEPARATOR *** THESE DIMENSIONS MAY VARY TO ENABLE MEANDERING OF PATHS & FORCE MAIN IRRIGATION MAIN OPTIONAL GRAVITY OPTIONAL GRAVITY WATER MAIN WALKWAYS AND/OR INCREASE / SEWER LOCATION SEWER LOCATION DECREASE MEDIAN WIDTH 3' 3' OPTIONAL IRRIGATION TYPE "F" CURB (TYP.) 5' 5' MIN MAIN LOCATION (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) MIN **** MAY SUBSTITUTE (2)-11' TRAVEL LANES TO CREATE 4 LANE DIVIDED SECTION. 6 80' COLLECTOR ROAD SECTION UTILITY NOTE N.T.S. UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES Page 35 of 112 ONLY. EXACT LOCATIONS TO BE EX B to Res. DETERMINED BY IMMOKALEE WATER & SEWER DISTRICT (IWSD) AT THE TIME OF SDP OR PPL PERMITTING. # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM SRA STREET CROSS SECTIONS (4) C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SCALE: NTS SHEET : 9 of 10 Page 112 of 4116 12' 125' 12' P.U.E. R.O.W. P.U.E. 2' 2' 2' 11.5'* 10' 12' *** 5' 11' 18'**** 11' 5' 2' 14.5'*** 6' 13' (1' MIN.) MULTI-USE (6' MIN.) (MIN.) (6' MIN.) S/W (1' MIN.) PATH 9' 9' 2% (MAX) (MIN.) (MIN.) 2% (MAX) 2% 2% CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) FORCE MAIN OPTIONAL GRAVITY WATER MAIN IRRIGATION MAIN 5' OPTIONAL GRAVITY SEWER LOCATION SEWER LOCATION 3' 3' CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) MIN (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) (TYPE & MATERIAL MAY VARY) OPTIONAL IRRIGATION MAIN LOCATION 2/19/2026 11:27 AM 125' BOULEVARD SECTION 7 N.T.S. 12' 125' 12' P.U.E. R.O.W. P.U.E. 2' 2' 2' 11.5'* 10' 12' *** 5' 11' 18'**** 11' 5' 2' 14.5'*** 6' 13' (1' MIN.) MULTI-USE (6' MIN.) (MIN.) (6' MIN.) S/W (1' MIN.) PATH DROP DROP DROP DROP CURB 9' 9' CURB CURB CURB (MIN.) (MIN.) 2% (MAX) 2% (MAX) 2% 2% NO LANDSCAPING MATERIAL AT FPL STABILIZED ACCESS (TYP) CROSSINGS. ONLY STABILIZED ACCESS (TYP) (6" LIMEROCK BASE OR STABILIZED ACCESS (TYP) GROUNDCOVER AND (6" LIMEROCK BASE OR APPROVED EQUAL) (6" LIMEROCK BASE OR SMALL SHRUBS (TYP) NO LANDSCAPING MATERIAL APPROVED EQUAL) APPROVED EQUAL) AT FPL CROSSINGS. ONLY NO LANDSCAPING MATERIAL AT FPL GROUNDCOVER AND SMALL CROSSINGS. ONLY GROUNDCOVER SHRUBS (TYP) AND SMALL SHRUBS (TYP) CROSS SECTION NOTES * A 5-FOOT SIDEWALK IS REQUIRED ON ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE STREET FOR TYPICAL FPL EASEMENT CROSSING SECTION CUL-DE-SACS OR SINGLE-LOADED 8 ROADWAYS. N.T.S. ** PROVIDES SPACE FOR 12' LEFT TURN UTILITY NOTE LANE AND 4' TRAFFIC SEPARATOR *** THESE DIMENSIONS MAY VARY TO UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE LOCATIONS ENABLE MEANDERING OF PATHS & SHOWN ARE FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES WALKWAYS AND/OR INCREASE / Page 36 of 112 ONLY. EXACT LOCATIONS TO BE DECREASE MEDIAN WIDTH EX B to Res. DETERMINED BY IMMOKALEE WATER & SEWER DISTRICT (IWSD) AT THE TIME OF **** MAY SUBSTITUTE (2)-11' TRAVEL LANES SDP OR PPL PERMITTING. TO CREATE 4 LANE DIVIDED SECTION. # DATE REVISIONS J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, P.A. CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA DESIGNED BY: JRE PROJECT #: 01093 1 6-23-25 REVISED PER COUNTY & OWNER COMMENTS 9961 INTERSTATE COMMERCE DR, STE. 230 JR EVANS FT MYERS, FLORIDA 33913 DRAWN BY: EKA FILE DATE: Jun-25 PHONE: (239) 405-9148 EXHIBIT (A) ENGINEERING FAX: (239) 288-2537 WWW.JREVANSENGINEERING.COM SRA STREET CROSS SECTIONS (5) C:\USERS\EADAMS\DC\ACCDOCS\JRE\01093 - CORKSCREW GROVES\PROJECT FILES\00-ACAD\EXHIBITS\0109300E07 - MCP EAST VILLAGE\CURRENT\01093 - EAST VILLAGE MCP.DWG SCALE: NTS SHEET : 10 of 10 Page 113 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 37 of 112 Page 114 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 38 of 112 Page 115 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 39 of 112 Page 116 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 40 of 112 Page 117 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 41 of 112 Page 118 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 42 of 112 Page 119 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 43 of 112 Page 120 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 44 of 112 Page 121 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 45 of 112 Page 122 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 46 of 112 Page 123 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 47 of 112 Page 124 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 48 of 112 Page 125 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 49 of 112 Page 126 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 50 of 112 Page 127 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 51 of 112 Page 128 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 52 of 112 Page 129 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 53 of 112 Page 130 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 54 of 112 Page 131 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 55 of 112 Page 132 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 56 of 112 Page 133 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 57 of 112 Page 134 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 58 of 112 Page 135 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 59 of 112 Page 136 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 60 of 112 Page 137 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 61 of 112 Page 138 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 62 of 112 Page 139 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 63 of 112 Page 140 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 64 of 112 Page 141 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 65 of 112 Page 142 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 66 of 112 Page 143 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 67 of 112 Page 144 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 68 of 112 Page 145 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 69 of 112 Page 146 of 4116 EX B to Res. Page 70 of 112 Page 147 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX ASSESSMENT Revised June 2025 Prepared For: Alico Land Development Company 10070 Daniel Interstate Court, No. 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33913 (239) 226-2000 Prepared By: Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 274-0067 Project No. 23AII4051 EX B to Res. Page 71 of 112 Page 148 of 4116 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................1 2.0 NRI Assessment Methodology and Datasets .....................................................................1 2.1 Stewardship Overlay Designation..........................................................................3 2.2 Proximity................................................................................................................3 2.3 Listed Species Habitat............................................................................................3 2.4 Soils/Surface Water ...............................................................................................3 2.5 Restoration Potential ..............................................................................................4 2.6 Land Use/Land Cover ............................................................................................4 3.0 NRI Assessment .................................................................................................................4 3.1 Stewardship Overlay Designation..........................................................................4 3.2 Proximity................................................................................................................4 3.3 Listed Species Habitat............................................................................................5 3.4 Soils/Surface Water ...............................................................................................5 3.5 Restoration Potential ..............................................................................................5 3.6 Land Use/Land Cover ............................................................................................5 3.7 Final Assessment Result ........................................................................................5 4.0 NRI Results Summary .......................................................................................................6 i EX B to Res. Page 72 of 112 Page 149 of 4116 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Spatial Datasets Used in the Corkscrew Grove East Village NRI Assessment Model .........................................................................................2 ii EX B to Res. Page 73 of 112 Page 150 of 4116 LIST OF EXHIBITS Page Exhibit 1. Project Location Map ......................................................................................... E1-1 Exhibit 2. Aerial with Boundary ......................................................................................... E2-1 Exhibit 3. Aerial with Stewardship Overlay ....................................................................... E3-1 Exhibit 4. Aerial with FLUCFCS Map ............................................................................... E4-1 Exhibit 5. Aerial with Listed Species Locations ................................................................ E5-1 Exhibit 6. Soils Map ........................................................................................................... E6-1 Exhibit 7. Stewardship Overlay Designation...................................................................... E7-1 Exhibit 8. Proximity Index ................................................................................................. E8-1 Exhibit 9. Listed Species Habitat Index ............................................................................. E9-1 Exhibit 10. Soils/Surface Water Index ............................................................................... E10-1 Exhibit 11. Land Use/Land Cover Index ............................................................................ E11-1 Exhibit 12. Final NRI Assessment...................................................................................... E12-1 Exhibit 13. Natural Resource Index Values ....................................................................... E13-1 iii EX B to Res. Page 74 of 112 Page 151 of 41161.0 INTRODUCTION This Natural Resource Index (NRI) Assessment documents the environmental conditions and NRI scores within Corkscrew Grove East Village (Project) Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) and demonstrates that the Project meets the Suitability Criteria contained in Section 4.08.07.A.1 of the adopted Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) amendments. This Assessment is submitted in support of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay District SRA Designation Application on behalf of Alico Land Development Company. This Assessment is consistent with the requirements of the RLSA Zoning Overlay District, Collier County LDC, Section 4.08.00. This NRI Assessment includes the following: • Identification of the acreage of agricultural and non-agricultural lands, by type, included within the SRA; • A summary of the refined and updated data incorporated into the Project NRI model; • A summary analysis and verification of the NRI scores; • Identification of the acreage of lands, by type, within the SRA that have an NRI value greater than 1.2; • An analysis of how the Project NRI scores compare to those in the original Baseline model; and • A demonstration of compliance with the Suitability Criteria contained in Section 4.08.07.A.1. This SRA Designation Application involves the designation of 1,446.6± acres as the Project SRA, located in Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10; Township 46 South; Range 28 East; Collier County (Exhibit 1). The location and extent of the Project is indicated in Exhibit 2. The Project is located within lands designated as “Open” on the adopted RLSA Stewardship Map and does not encroach into any Flow-Way Stewardship Area (FSA), Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA), or Water Retention Area (WRA) lands, as illustrated in Exhibit 3. The Project is not within the Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC). The Project property is currently dedicated to citrus grove operations and includes scattered natural areas composed of forested uplands, forested wetlands, and herbaceous wetlands, all of which exhibit a high degree of disturbance and contain various levels of exotic vegetation infestation (e.g., Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia)). The agricultural and non- agricultural land uses on the Project site are depicted in Exhibit 4. Listed species data from state and federal wildlife agencies indicate occurrences of Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) telemetry points within the SRA boundary. 2.0 NRI ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND DATASETS The NRI Assessment is a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis where resource values are calculated for every acre in the study area using a raster model. The raster model uses one- 1 EX B to Res. Page 75 of 112 Page 152 of 4116 acre grid cells that receive a score value based on each of the six NRI Factors, as defined in Section 4.08.01 of the LDC. Baseline NRI values were assigned during the original Collier County RLSA Assessment Study to establish the Baseline conditions. This NRI Assessment includes documentation that refines the NRI Factors from the original study using updated data. Of the six NRI Factors on the Stewardship Credit Worksheet, two factors (i.e., Land Use/Land Cover and Listed Species Habitat) are the most prone to change over time or require mapping refinements. However, in preparing the Assessment, Passarella & Associates, Inc. (PAI) obtained updated datasets, where available, to be included in the model. Table 1 depicts the datasets used for each NRI Factor and indicates where data have been updated from the Baseline model. Table 1. Spatial Datasets Used in the Corkscrew Grove East Village NRI Assessment Model Natural Resource Model Input GIS Dataset Source Date1 Index Factors Stewardship Collier County Collier County Overlay Collier County2 2024 Stewardship Areas Stewardship Areas Designation Collier County Collier County Collier County2 2024 Stewardship Areas Stewardship Areas Proximity Conservation Collier Collier County 2019 Preserve Land Florida Managed Areas FNAI 2019 Florida Panther FWCC 2022 Telemetry Documented Wading Bird Rookeries FWCC 1999 Listed Species Listed Species Listed Species and Habitat Species-Specific Survey PAI 2024 Results Habitat Type FLUCFCS PAI 2025 Soils/Surface Soils for Lee, Collier, Soils USDA-NRCS 1990 Water and Hendry Counties Restoration -- -- -- -- Potential Land Use/Land Land Cover FLUCFCS PAI 2025 Cover FLUCFCS – Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System FNAI – Florida Natural Areas Inventory FWCC – Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission NRCS – Natural Resources Conservation Service PAI – Passarella & Associates, Inc. USDA – United States Department of Agriculture 1Years in bold indicate updated dataset. 2WRA boundaries around the perimeter of the Project were revised per permitted wetland boundaries and agricultural reservoirs (see Section 2.1). 2 EX B to Res. Page 76 of 112 Page 153 of 4116 2.1 Stewardship Overlay Designation As part of establishing the RLSA, the Stewardship Overlay was established to designate land within the RLSA as FSA, HSA, WRA, or Open. To refine this layer, WRA boundaries taken from the Collier County Stewardship Overlay Map were updated through a detailed analysis of these areas on the ground, using actual surveyed wetland and South Florida Water Management District permit boundaries. Using this actual groundtruthed data, the Stewardship Overlay WRA boundaries were refined. The Project SRA boundary was created so that no FSA, HSA, or WRA areas were included. Exhibit 3 illustrates the refined Stewardship Overlay within the SRA boundary. 2.2 Proximity The Proximity Index Factor also utilizes the Collier County Stewardship Areas. The same refined dataset used for the Stewardship Overlay Designation Index Factor was used for the Proximity Index. In addition, the Conservation Collier and Florida Managed Areas datasets were used to determine the proximity of private or public preserve lands. 2.3 Listed Species Habitat The Listed Species Habitat Index values are based on the intersection of documented listed species observations and land cover that is identified as preferred or tolerated by that species. The Baseline model used Land Use/Land Cover mapping from the Stage 1 Report. While this mapping was generally accurate at the regional/planning scale, groundtruthing by PAI revealed some positional and classification errors that are rectified in this application. The updated Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) mapping for the Project SRA is presented in Exhibit 4. The Documented Listed Species datasets were updated to include the results of listed species and species-specific surveys conducted by PAI in 2023 and 2024. In addition, updated listed species occurrence data and Florida panther telemetry was obtained from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC). Pursuant to communication with the FWCC in August 2023, the FWCC no longer releases panther telemetry data to the public per Florida Statute 379.1026. Panther telemetry data was last obtained from the FWCC by PAI in September 2022 and is current through May 2022. A map of the updated listed species occurrences, listed species records, and Florida panther telemetry points is provided as Exhibit 5. 2.4 Soils/Surface Water The U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service soils map for the Project is provided in Exhibit 6. This dataset has not changed since the Baseline model. 3 EX B to Res. Page 77 of 112 Page 154 of 4116 2.5 Restoration Potential Restoration Potential is one of the six NRI Factors in an NRI Assessment. However, this Factor is assigned only during a Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) designation process, if appropriate, and was not assessed in the Baseline model. As this application and NRI Assessment are for an SRA, this NRI Factor was not incorporated into the Project NRI Assessment. 2.6 Land Use/Land Cover As mentioned in Section 2.3, the updated FLUCFCS mapping conducted by PAI was utilized for the land cover dataset in the Project NRI Assessment. 3.0 NRI ASSESSMENT The following section summarizes the results of the Project NRI Assessment and analyzes how the results of this Assessment compare to the Baseline Assessment results from the Collier County RLSA Assessment Study. Most of the variation in the NRI Factor results between the Project and the Baseline are due to updated datasets. However, it is worth noting that while the Project NRI Assessment was conducted for the proposed SRA boundary, the Baseline Assessment was conducted for the entire RLSA area. This difference results in some minor variations due to the difference in scope between the two Assessments and the alignment of the model’s one-acre grid cells. 3.1 Stewardship Overlay Designation In the Assessment for the Project, there are no lands designated as FSA, HSA, WRA, or ACSC. Therefore, the majority of the SRA boundary received a score of 0 for this NRI Factor (Exhibit 7A). The cells that received a score of 0.6 are on the perimeter of the SRA, with the centerpoint outside of the SRA boundary where WRAs are located. The Assessment scoring matches the majority of the scoring for this area in the Baseline Assessment (Exhibit 7B). Variations between the two Assessments are attributed to the refinement of the WRA boundaries and the nature of the raster model and the scope of the Baseline Assessment, resulting in minor differences in the alignments of the model’s one-acre grid cells. 3.2 Proximity For the Proximity Index, the Project SRA boundary is within 300 feet of an HSA along a small portion of the southeastern boundary. Cells that were within the 300-foot distance from the HSA scored 0.3, and the remainder of the SRA scored 0 (Exhibit 8A). These scores are also supported by the Baseline Assessment (Exhibit 8B). Variations between the two Assessments are attributed to the nature of the raster model and the scope of the Baseline Assessment, resulting in minor differences in the alignments of the model’s one- acre grid cells. 4 EX B to Res. Page 78 of 112 Page 155 of 4116 3.3 Listed Species Habitat The Listed Species Habitat Index for the Project received scores ranging from 0 to 0.4 (Exhibit 9A). The areas that scored 0.4 had observations of listed species within habitats that are considered preferred or tolerated for that species. Areas receiving a score of 0 did not have a listed species observation within a preferred or tolerated habitat. In the Baseline Assessment (Exhibit 9B), all areas received a score of 0. Variations between the Baseline and Project Assessments are attributed to the use of updated and groundtruthed FLUCFCS mapping and species datasets. 3.4 Soils/Surface Water For the Soils/Surface Water Index Factor, the Project Assessment received scores ranging from 0 for non-hydric soils to 0.3 for sand depression soils (Exhibit 10A). The majority of the Baseline Assessment (Exhibit 10B) matches the Assessment for the Project. Variations between the two Assessments are attributed to the nature of the raster model and the scope of the Baseline Assessment, resulting in minor differences in the alignments of the model’s one-acre grid cells. 3.5 Restoration Potential This Factor is assigned only during an SSA designation process, if appropriate, and was not assessed in the Baseline model. As this application and NRI Assessment are for an SRA, this NRI Factor was not incorporated into the Project NRI Assessment. 3.6 Land Use/Land Cover In the Land Use/Land Cover Index Factor, the Project Assessment received scores of 0 to 0.4, as it contains FLUCFCS Code Groups 4 through 1 (Exhibit 11A). The majority of the Baseline Assessment matches the Assessment for the Project (Exhibit 11B). Differences between the two Assessments are due to the use of updated and groundtruthed FLUCFCS mapping conducted by PAI. 3.7 Final Assessment Results The final model result is calculated by summing the raster cells for each NRI Factor. The Project Assessment demonstrates that none of the land within the SRA boundary carries an NRI value greater than 1.2, with scores ranging from 0 to 1.0 (Exhibit 12A). The majority of the Baseline model cells are in agreement with the Project Assessment (Exhibit 12B). Areas where scoring in the Project Assessment diverge from the Baseline Assessment are primarily due to the refinement of the model to include updated FLUCFCS mapping and species information and the refinement of WRAs to permitted and groundtruthed boundaries. The Project NRI Assessment scores are presented graphically in Exhibit 12A and in table format in Exhibit 13. 5 EX B to Res. Page 79 of 112 Page 156 of 41164.0 NRI RESULTS SUMMARY The NRI Assessment for the proposed Project SRA has been prepared with updated and refined datasets to reflect current site conditions. This NRI Assessment for the Project SRA indicates there are no habitats within the boundary that score above a 1.2. Comparisons between the updated Assessment for the Project and the Baseline Assessment indicate that the incorporation of updated and refined datasets has not had a significant change to the overall Assessment scoring. Many of the index factors are still in agreement with the Baseline condition. Differences between the Baseline and Project Assessments are due to the refinement of the model to include updated FLUCFCS mapping and species information and the refinement of WRAs to permitted and groundtruthed boundaries. 6 EX B to Res. Page 80 of 112 Page 157 of 4116 EXHIBIT 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP EX B to Res. Page 81 of 112 Page 158 of 4116 À¿82 KERI RD À¿835 ^ ^ ALICO RD PENSACOLA TALLAH ASSEE ^ ^ JACKSONVILLE À¿833 PANAMA CITY ^ LEELEE GAINESVILLE ^ DAYTON A BEACH D HENDRY R HENDRY N OIL WELL RD À¿858 SN O 846 A T À¿ K ^ S E ORLANDO G À¿29 R IN D IV ^ L TAMPA 75 ^ §¨¦ VERO BEACH ^ ^ EVERGLADES BLVD SARASOTA LAKE PLACID À¿951 COLLIER ^ FORT MYERS À¿837 ^ ^ À¿839 NAPLES FORT LAUDERDALE À¿892 ^ MIAMI Gulf /(41 of À¿94 Mexico MONROE ¶ ^ KEY WEST HENDRY À¿830 À¿830A À¿82 LEE PROJECT LOCATION À¿850 SEC 3-10, TWP 46 S, RNG 28 E À¿29 890 À¿ À¿29A COLLIER À¿846 DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 1. PROJECT LOCATION MAP REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 82 of 112 Page 159 of 4116 EXHIBIT 2 AERIAL WITH BOUNDARY EX B to Res. Page 83 of 112 Page 160 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD   LEGEND     ¶¶   0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 2. AERIAL WITH BOUNDARY REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 84 of 112 Page 161 of 4116 EXHIBIT 3 AERIAL WITH STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY EX B to Res. Page 85 of 112 Page 162 of 4116 ¶ NAPLES AVE S 0 1,450 2,900 Feet CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed LOSTLOST LNLN WHIDDEN LOOP RD LEGEND       Pepper Ranch  Preserve DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 3. AERIAL WITH STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 86 of 112 Page 163 of 4116 EXHIBIT 4 AERIAL WITH FLUCFCS MAP EX B to Res. Page 87 of 112 Page 164 of 4116 PROJECT LOCATION CHURCH RD HH E E N N D D R R Y Y 814 6319E4 CC O O L L L L I I E E R R 814 740 514 514 514 514 514 514 747 514 7401 514 221 4349E4 514 514 6319E4 514 514 514 514 514 7401 514 514 SR 82 514 514 514 514 514 422 4159E3 4221 514 514 221 514 6259E3 832 514 422 221 514 6319E2 514 514 740 514 4299E4 514 514 514 514 514 422 514 6189E3 514 514 747 514 6419E4 6319E4 514 514 514 740 747 6189E4 514 530 747 514 514 514 6189E4 514 514 514 514 422 514 747 514 514 514 6189E4 514 514 514 4221 514 514 4221 514 6189E3 6189E3 6189E4 747 514 6319E2 6189E4 3209E2 4221 530 514 514 3209E4 221 514 514 514 514 530 6249E4 221 514 6249E4 262 4119E4 6319E3 422 514 514 514 514 514 514 7401 514 514H 514 514 514 7401 514H 6319E4 422 530 7401 514 530 514 6189E3 422 221 514 514 6259E4 514 6319E4 514 514 7401 7401 740 514 4289E2 514 514 514 514 8321 832 6309E3 6189E3 514 514 514 514 832 514 4221 514 514 514 514 530 514 6319E3 514 6319E2 4221 514 514 514 514 7401 514 221 514 514 514 514 514 514 514 514 514 514 221 7401 747 514 FLUCFCS 514 514 747 CODE DESCRIPTION 514 514 110 RESIDENTIAL, LOW DENSITY 514 221 CITRUS GROVE 514 514 262 LOW PASTURE 3209E2 SHRUB AND BRUSHLAND, DISTURBED (25-49% EXOTICS) 514 3209E4 SHRUB AND BRUSHLAND, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 4119E1 PINE FLATWOODS, DISTURBED (0-24% EXOTICS) 514 4119E4 PINE FLATWOODS, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 514 514 4159E2 PINE, DISTURBED (25-49% EXOTICS) 4159E3 PINE, DISTURBED (50-75% EXOTICS) 422 BRAZILIAN PEPPER 4221 BRAZILIAN PEPPER, HYDRIC 4289E2 CABBAGE PALM, DISTURBED (25-49% EXOTICS) 4289E4 CABBAGE PALM, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 4299E4 WAX MYRTLE, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 4349E1 HARDWOOD/CONIFER MIXED, DISTURBED (0-24% EXOTICS) CORKSCREW RD 4349E2 HARDWOOD/CONIFER MIXED, DISTURBED (25-49% EXOTICS) 4349E4 HARDWOOD/CONIFER MIXED, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 514 DITCH 514H DITCH, HYDRIC 530 RESERVOIR 6189E1 WILLOW, DISTURBED (0-24% EXOTICS) 6189E3 WILLOW, DISTURBED (50-75% EXOTICS) 6189E4 WILLOW, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 6249E4 CYPRESS/PINE/CABBAGE PALM, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 6259E2 HYDRIC PINE, DISTURBED (25-49% EXOTICS) 6259E3 HYDRIC PINE, DISTURBED (50-75% EXOTICS) 6259E4 HYDRIC PINE, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 6309E3 WETLAND FORESTED MIXED, DISTURBED (50-75% EXOTICS) 6319E2 WETLAND SHURB, DISTURBED (25-49% EXOTICS) 6319E3 WETLAND SHURB, DISTURBED (50-75% EXOTICS) 6319E4 WETLAND SHURB, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 6419E1 FRESHWATER MARSH, DISTURBED (0-24% EXOTICS) 6419E2 FRESHWATER MARSH, DISTURBED (25-49% EXOTICS) 6419E4 FRESHWATER MARSH, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 740 DISTURBED LAND 7401 DISTURBED LAND, HYDRIC 742 BORROW AREA 743 SPOIL AREA 747 BERM 814 ROAD 832 ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES 8321 ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES, HYDRIC   LEGEND     ¶¶   0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 4. AERIAL WITH FLUCFCS MAP REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  W.C. 5/29/25 Page 88 of 112 Page 165 of 4116 EXHIBIT 5 AERIAL WITH LISTED SPECIES LOCATIONS EX B to Res. Page 89 of 112 Page 166 of 4116 PROJECT LOCATION CHURCH RD H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 *# *# *# *# *# *# CORKSCREW RD LEGEND   *#             ¶¶        0 1,000 2,000 Feet   DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 5. AERIAL WITH LISTED SPECIES LOCATIONS REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 90 of 112 Page 167 of 4116 EXHIBIT 6 SOILS MAP EX B to Res. Page 91 of 112 Page 168 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R 2222 2121 16 2929 16 2929 33 37 2222 1616 37 2222 2727 2121 3737 43 3737 SRSR 8282 2222 2929 43 2222 2222 2222 2929 2222 29 22 29 22 2222 2222 22 2222 22 2222 1616 2222 2222 3737 2222 2222 3737 2222 2222 2222 2222 2929 2727 2222 2222 2222 2222 2727 2727 22 22 1818 2222 2222 2222 1616 2222 1616 2727 CORKSCREW RD CORKSCREW RD Soil Unit Description NSLP Classification 3 MALABAR FINE SAND FLATS (TRANSITIONAL) SOILS 16 OLDSMAR FINE SAND FLATWOOD SOILS 18 RIVIERA FINE SAND, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM FLATS (TRANSITIONAL) SOILS 21 BOCA FINE SAND FLATWOOD SOILS 22 CHOBEE, WINDER AND GATOR SOILS, DEPRESSIONAL SAND DEPRESSION 27 HOLOPAW FINE SAND FLATS (TRANSITIONAL) SOILS 29 WABASSO FINE SAND FLATWOOD SOILS 37 TUSCAWILLA FINE SAND FLATWOOD SOILS 43 WINDER, RIVIERA, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM, AND CHOBEE SOILS DEPRESSIONAL SAND DEPRESSION   LEGEND     ¶   0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 6. SOILS MAP REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 92 of 112 Page 169 of 4116 EXHIBIT 7 STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY DESIGNATION EX B to Res. Page 93 of 112 Page 170 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD  LEGEND        ¶   0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE EXHIBIT 7A. STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY W.C. 12/5/24 REVIEWED BY DATE DESIGNATION H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 94 of 112 Page 171 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD  LEGEND        ¶   0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE EXHIBIT 7B. BASELINE - STEWARDSHIP W.C. 12/5/24 REVIEWED BY DATE OVERLAY DESIGNATION H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 95 of 112 Page 172 of 4116 EXHIBIT 8 PROXIMITY INDEX EX B to Res. Page 96 of 112 Page 173 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD  LEGEND        ¶   0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 8A. PROXIMITY INDEX REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 97 of 112 Page 174 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD  LEGEND        ¶   0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 8B. BASELINE - PROXIMITY INDEX REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 98 of 112 Page 175 of 4116 EXHIBIT 9 LISTED SPECIES HABITAT INDEX EX B to Res. Page 99 of 112 Page 176 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION HH E E N N D D R R Y Y CC O O L L L L I I E E R R SR 82 CORKSCREW RD LEGEND         ¶   0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 9A. LISTED SPECIES HABITAT INDEX REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  W.C. 5/29/25 Page 100 of 112 Page 177 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD  LEGEND       ¶   0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE EXHIBIT 9B. BASELINE - LISTED SPECIES W.C. 12/5/24 REVIEWED BY DATE HABITAT INDEX H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 101 of 112 Page 178 of 4116 EXHIBIT 10 SOILS/SURFACE WATER INDEX EX B to Res. Page 102 of 112 Page 179 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD LEGEND           ¶  0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 10A. SOILS/SURFACE WATER INDEX REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 EAST VILLAGE SRA REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 103 of 112 Page 180 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD LEGEND           ¶  0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 10B. BASELINE - SOILS/SURFACE REVIEWED BY DATE WATER INDEX H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 104 of 112 Page 181 of 4116 EXHIBIT 11 LAND USE/LAND COVER INDEX EX B to Res. Page 105 of 112 Page 182 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION HH E E N N D D R R Y Y CC O O L L L L I I E E R R SR 82 CORKSCREW RD LEGEND          ¶    0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 11A. LAND USE/LAND COVER INDEX REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  W.C. 5/29/25 Page 106 of 112 Page 183 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD LEGEND          ¶    0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE EXHIBIT 11B. BASELINE - LAND USE/ W.C. 12/5/24 REVIEWED BY DATE LAND COVER INDEX H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 107 of 112 Page 184 of 4116 EXHIBIT 12 FINAL NRI ASSESMENT EX B to Res. Page 108 of 112 Page 185 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION HH E E N N D D R R Y Y CC O O L L L L I I E E R R SR 82 CORKSCREW RD LEGEND              ¶    0 1,000 2,000 Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 12A. FINAL NRI ASSESSMENT REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  W.C. 5/29/25 Page 109 of 112 Page 186 of 4116 CHURCH RD PROJECT LOCATION H E N D R Y C O L L I E R SRSR 8282 CORKSCREW RD LEGEND              ¶     0 1,000 2,000  Feet DRAWN BY DATE W.C. 12/5/24 EXHIBIT 12B. BASELINE - FINAL NRI ASSESSMENT REVIEWED BY DATE H.S. 12/5/24 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE REVISED DATE EX B to Res.  Page 110 of 112 Page 187 of 4116 EXHIBIT 13 NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX VALUES EX B to Res. Page 111 of 112 Page 188 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX VALUES Revised June 2025 Percent of Total Open Total Total SRA Acres NRI Value SRA Acreage (±) Acres (±) (±) 0.0 9.6 138.9 138.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 71.1 1,028.0 1,028.0 0.3 3.4 49.9 49.9 0.4 4.3 61.9 61.9 0.5 10.0 144.9 144.9 0.6 0.6 9.0 9.0 0.7 0.3 4.0 4.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.7 10.0 10.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Totals 100.0 1,446.6 1,446.6 NRI ˃1.2 Totals 0.0 0.0 0.0 NRI – Natural Resource Index SRA – Stewardship Receiving Area E13-1 EX B to Res. Page 112 of 112 Page 189 of 4116 STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA THIS STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as the (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this ____ day of ___________, 2026, by and between COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as “County” whose mailing address is the Harmon Turner Building, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida 34112, and Alico, Inc. hereinafter referred to as “Owner” whose mailing address is 10070 Daniels Interstate Ct. #200, Fort Myers, FL 33913, for the purpose of designating the number of “Stewardship Sending Area” (SSA) Credits consumed in the designation of Corkscrew Grove East Village as a Stewardship Receiving Area and the source of those SSA credits pursuant to Section 4.08.07.C.11 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). RECITALS 1. Owner has applied for SRA designation for Corkscrew Grove East Village and said SRA is approximately 1,446.59 acres in size. 2. The County has reviewed the SRA Designation Application, along with all support documentation and information required by Section 4.08.07 of the LDC and determined that SRA designation for the Corkscrew Grove East Village is appropriate. 3. The County and Owner have reached agreement on the number of Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) Credits required to be utilized for such designation. 4. The County and Owner agree that this SRA Credit Agreement is in compliance with and fully meets the requirements of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and LDC. NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the above premises and the expenditure of credits and authorizations granted hereby and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 1 of 15 Page 190 of 41161. Owner is hereby utilizing and transferring 11,703.4 Stewardship Credits (Credits) which shall be applied to the SRA land described in Exhibit “A” in order to carry out the plan of development on the 1,446.59 acres proposed in the Corkscrew Grove East Village Development Document and summarized hereinafter. 2. Exhibit “A” is the legal description of the 1,446.59 acres that constitute the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. 3. Attached hereto is Exhibit “B” the Corkscrew Grove East Village Master Plan which depicts the land uses within the SRA. Also attached as Exhibit “C” is the Corkscrew Grove East Village Land Use Summary which identifies the number of residential dwelling units, gross leasable square footage of retail and office uses, and the other land uses depicted on the Corkscrew Grove East Village Master Plan. 4. Pursuant to the Future Land Use Element – Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Growth Management Plan, the designation of a SRA requires eight (8) Stewardship Credits where such Credits were created from an SSA submitted for review or approved prior to July 13, 2021 and ten (10) Stewardship Credits for each acre of land included in an SRA, where such Credits were created from an SSA submitted for review or approved after July 13, 2021 to be transferred to an SRA in exchange for the development of one acre of land within Corkscrew Grove East Village. Owner is transferring enough credits to allow development on 1,382.96 acres, since 63.63 acres of public benefit use area does not consume Credits. Once credits are transferred, they may not be recaptured by Owner. 5. Owner will be utilizing credits generated from Stewardship Sending Area 11 in the amount of 8,504.80 Credits. 6. Owner will be utilizing credits generated from Stewardship Sending Area 22 in the amount of 3,198.60 Credits. 7. Pursuant to Resolution No._______, the County has approved Corkscrew Grove East Village as an SRA consisting of 1,446.59 acres and has approved the Corkscrew Grove East Village Master Plan and Development Document. 8. Applicant and Owner acknowledge that development of SRA land may not commence until an SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum is recorded with the Collier County Clerk of Courts. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 2 of 15 Page 191 of 41169. This Agreement may only be amended by written agreement of all the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers or representatives and their official seals hereto affixed the day and year first written above. Attest: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: ________________ , Deputy Clerk Dan Kowal, Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: By: Assistant County Attorney WITNESS: ALICO, INC. (Signature) ________________________________ By:_______________________________ (Print full name) Printed Name:________________________ Title: _____________________________ (Signature) (Print full name) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing Stewardship Receiving Area Credit Agreement was executed before me this ____day of ___________, 2026, by means of _____ physical presence or _____ online notarization, by _______________, as _____________ of Alico, Inc., who is personally known to me ________ or who has produced _________ as identification. ___________________________________ Notary Public Print Name__________________________ (SEAL) Certificate No._______________________ My Commissioner Expires__________ Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 3 of 15 Page 192 of 4116 SRA CREDIT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. 9001 HIGHLAND WOOD BLVD., SUITE. 6, BONITA SPRINGS, FLORIDA, 34135 TELEPHONE: (239) 597-1315 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE BOUNDARY A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTIONS 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09 AND 10, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: AREA 1 COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 04; THENCE RUN S.88°49'18"W., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,508.39 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HERIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN S.01°10'09"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 560.56 FEET; THENCE RUN S.70°39'05"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 408.22 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 69°12'45", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 56.79 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.36°02'42"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 60.40 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S.01°26'19"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 188.82 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN SOUTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°00'00", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 70.71 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.43°33'41"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 78.54 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S.88°33'41"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,025.38 FEET; THENCE RUN S.50°56'03"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 169.38 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 37°37'38", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 32.25 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.69°44'52"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 32.84 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S.88°33'41"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 703.74 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 74°33'23", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 60.57 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.54°09'38"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.06 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.16°52'57"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 136.11 FEET; TO THE BEGINNING Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 4 of 15 Page 193 of 4116OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 74°33'23", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 60.57 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.54°09'38"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.06 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S.88°33'41"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 138.80 FEET; THENCE RUN S.10°54'54"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,723.47 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 82 (A 200 FOOT WIDE RIGHT OF WAY); THENCE RUN N.73°57'58"W., ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 3,951.29 FEET TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERED TO AS POINT “A” THENCE CONTINUE N.73°57'58"W., ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,511.79 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 04, THE SAME BEING A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERED TO AS POINT “B”; THENCE RUN N.01°10'09"W., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,123.48 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE RUN S.89°34'35"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,601.08 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 04; THENCE RUN N.88°49'18"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,195.39 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS OR 192.492 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. LESS AND EXCEPT COMMENCE AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT “A”, THENCE RUN N.16°02'02"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 73.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE N.16°02'02"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 60.91 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°02'21"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 132.64 FEET; THENCE RUN N.88°57'41"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 234.50 FEET; THENCE RUN S.01°02'17"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 268.38 FEET; THENCE RUN N.73°57'54"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 264.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 1.264 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. AND AREA 2 COMMENCE AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT “B”, THENCE RUN S.18°37'53"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 200.21 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 82 (A 200 FOOT WIIDE RIGHT OF WAY, THE SAME BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN S.73°57'58"E., ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 818.89 FEET; THENCE RUN S.36°17'02"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 85.80 FEET; THENCE RUN N.73°57'58"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 327.44 FEET; THENCE RUN N.78°05'08"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 96.93 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°02'23"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 322.02 FEET; THENCE RUN S.73°57'58"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 218.62 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 5 of 15 Page 194 of 4116FEET; THENCE RUN S.36°17'02"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 265.76 FEET; THENCE RUN S.53°42'58"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET; THENCE RUN N.36°17'02"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 711.07 FEET TO SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE; THENCE RUN S.73°57'58"E., ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 3,151.52 FEET; THENCE RUN S.16°02'02"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET; THENCE RUN S.73°57'58"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 464.76 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF CORKSCREW ROAD (A 100 FOOT WIDE RIGHT OF WAY), THE SAME BEING A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERED TO AS POINT “C”; THENCE RUN S.20°51'56"W., ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,727.40 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,859.86 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 37°08'16", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 1,184.52 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.39°26'04"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,205.52 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S.58°00'12"W., ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 6,667.70 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,914.79 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°45'18", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 546.33 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.52°37'33"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 547.14 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S.47°14'54"W., ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 592.73 FEET; THENCE RUN N.42°45'06"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 182.77 FEET; THENCE RUN N.08°34'04"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 29.19 FEET; THENCE RUN N.07°19'41"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 73.16 FEET; THENCE RUN N.04°55'22"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.31 FEET; THENCE RUN N.05°01'49"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 55.88 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°02'16"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 44.00 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°10'03"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 63.95 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°29'48"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 47.71 FEET; THENCE RUN N.02°18'30"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 59.29 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°01'00"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.59 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°26'27"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.34 FEET; THENCE RUN N.26°36'32"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 21.65 FEET; THENCE RUN N.71°11'20"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 62.41 FEET; THENCE RUN N.78°16'23"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 59.85 FEET; THENCE RUN N.44°56'42"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 61.76 FEET; THENCE RUN N.07°58'50"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 71.72 FEET; THENCE RUN N.06°48'04"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 79.45 FEET; THENCE RUN N.06°20'44"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 62.71 FEET; THENCE RUN N.02°58'06"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 61.35 FEET; THENCE RUN N.10°07'23"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 57.54 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°52'44"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 256.40 FEET; THENCE RUN N.02°54'16"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 84.49 FEET; THENCE RUN N.02°25'45"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 69.25 FEET; THENCE RUN N.30°11'45"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 54.29 FEET; THENCE RUN N.86°55'39"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 54.72 FEET; THENCE RUN S.85°44'03"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 23.63 FEET; THENCE RUN N.62°37'24"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 48.08 FEET; THENCE RUN N.29°11'17"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 23.53 FEET; THENCE RUN N.34°43'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.62 FEET; THENCE RUN N.02°00'28"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 63.59 FEET; THENCE RUN N.04°15'45"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.83 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 6 of 15 Page 195 of 4116FEET; THENCE RUN N.02°00'20"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 64.72 FEET; THENCE RUN N.03°51'27"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 47.63 FEET; THENCE RUN N.05°47'57"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 48.46 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°30'23"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 80.45 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°08'26"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 95.81 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°39'33"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 58.77 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°35'28"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 73.39 FEET; THENCE RUN N.03°07'02"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 46.18 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°03'06"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 63.29 FEET; THENCE RUN N.03°24'00"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 55.90 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°04'14"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,048.74 FEET; THENCE RUN N.57°16'37"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.27 FEET; THENCE RUN S.88°51'17"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 944.04 FEET; THENCE RUN S.43°19'43"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.74 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°10'26"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 620.35 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°37'20"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 59.32 FEET; THENCE RUN S.01°07'47"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 176.53 FEET; THENCE RUN S.42°53'32"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.07 FEET; THENCE RUN N.89°03'28"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 191.01 FEET; THENCE RUN S.88°36'21"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 71.23 FEET; THENCE RUN S.89°19'21"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 133.04 FEET; THENCE RUN N.85°50'05"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 99.43 FEET; THENCE RUN S.79°25'26"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.39 FEET; THENCE RUN S.56°44'28"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 57.38 FEET; THENCE RUN S.31°01'07"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 37.43 FEET; THENCE RUN S.03°43'08"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 96.90 FEET; THENCE RUN S.06°32'57"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 68.49 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°36'31"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 81.05 FEET; THENCE RUN S.04°23'21"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 79.50 FEET; THENCE RUN S.01°11'30"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.74 FEET; THENCE RUN S.02°48'10"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 118.12 FEET; THENCE RUN S.03°03'32"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 102.35 FEET; THENCE RUN S.01°30'01"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 119.09 FEET; THENCE RUN S.02°20'04"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 75.13 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°29'22"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 94.37 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°42'05"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 92.14 FEET; THENCE RUN S.03°36'37"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 117.42 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°50'03"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 106.32 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°40'00"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 97.31 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°35'17"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 110.31 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°16'58"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 140.41 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°41'19"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 150.96 FEET; THENCE RUN S.01°04'59"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 85.24 FEET; THENCE RUN S.02°22'19"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 85.05 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°21'33"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 123.18 FEET; THENCE RUN S.08°21'19"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 67.75 FEET; THENCE RUN S.45°16'07"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 68.75 FEET; THENCE RUN S.84°15'47"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 73.96 FEET; THENCE RUN S.89°57'40"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 81.30 FEET; THENCE RUN S.86°42'24"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 89.38 FEET; THENCE RUN N.89°43'02"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 83.72 FEET; THENCE RUN N.88°47'49"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 103.44 FEET; THENCE RUN S.89°04'18"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 103.63 FEET; THENCE RUN S.89°39'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 71.75 FEET; THENCE RUN S.86°02'46"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 64.96 FEET; THENCE RUN S.89°35'11"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 68.29 FEET; THENCE RUN S.88°55'43"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 84.29 FEET; THENCE RUN N.88°23'45"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 70.30 FEET; THENCE RUN S.87°27'37"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 66.12 FEET; THENCE RUN N.74°04'04"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 74.55 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°09'55"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 119.52 FEET TO THE Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 7 of 15 Page 196 of 4116BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 78°43'31", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 31.71 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.39°11'51"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 34.35 FEET TO THE POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 235.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 78°09'08", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 296.27 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.39°29'02"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 320.54 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.00°24'28"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,096.45 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,700.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 22°50'27", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 673.22 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.11°00'45"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 677.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 300.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°34'42", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 122.59 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.10°38'38"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 123.46 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.01°08'43"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 224.54 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 700.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33°55'13", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 408.39 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.15°48'54"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 414.42 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.32°46'30"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 181.86 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 700.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12°56'43", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 157.82 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.39°14'52"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 158.16 FEET TO THE POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 382.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12°56'43", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 86.13 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.39°14'52"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 86.31 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.32°46'30"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 53.08 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 400.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 34°32'04", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 237.46 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.50°02'33"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 241.10 FEET TO THE POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 62°04'46", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 25.78 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.36°16'12"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 27.09 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.05°13'48"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 426.62 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 8 of 15 Page 197 of 4116THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°32'42", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 9.52 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.19°00'09"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 9.62 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.32°46'30"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 444.29 FEET; THENCE RUN N.37°41'31"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 223.51 FEET; THENCE RUN S.51°54'14"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 40.72 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 225.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°39'16", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 152.97 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.71°43'53"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 156.07 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.88°26'29"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 358.52 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 925.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°31'36", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 377.36 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.76°40'41"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 380.03 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.64°54'54"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,604.44 FEET TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERED TO AS POINT “D”, THE SAME BEING THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,074.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24°30'39", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 456.17 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.77°10'13"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 459.67 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.89°25'33"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,254.90 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 874.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25°35'52", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 387.46 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.77°46'31"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 390.70 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE AND A POINT OF CURVE OF A NON-TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 137.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°26'36", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 46.27 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.71°32'27"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 46.49 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE AND A POINT OF CURVE OF A NON-TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 675.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°37'20", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 241.82 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.09°08'24"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 243.13 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.01°10'16"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 214.59 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 574.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30°33'45", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 302.83 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.14°06'37"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 306.45 FEET TO THE POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 425.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 56°52'12", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 405.21 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.00°57'24"E., FOR A Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 9 of 15 Page 198 of 4116DISTANCE OF 422.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 574.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43°30'44", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 425.89 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.05°43'20"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 436.29 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.16°02'02"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 69.84 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 944.869 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. LESS AND EXCEPT COMMENCE AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT “D”, THENCE RUN S.27°26'01"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 402.44 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN N.67°11'52"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 55.46 FEET; THENCE RUN N.85°21'28"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.15 FEET; THENCE RUN N.89°02'13"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 58.07 FEET; THENCE RUN S.56°15'41"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.77 FEET; THENCE RUN S.07°36'38"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 52.92 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°07'50"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 85.50 FEET; THENCE RUN S.01°41'56"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 73.36 FEET; THENCE RUN S.12°47'36"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 42.53 FEET; THENCE RUN S.63°14'17"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.54 FEET; THENCE RUN S.65°58'21"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 78.96 FEET; THENCE RUN S.22°40'47"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 41.36 FEET; THENCE RUN S.04°33'09"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 81.77 FEET; THENCE RUN S.01°42'39"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 70.11 FEET; THENCE RUN S.02°43'11"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 51.59 FEET; THENCE RUN S.07°40'03"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 31.35 FEET; THENCE RUN S.46°59'16"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 27.98 FEET; THENCE RUN S.75°58'12"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.61 FEET; THENCE RUN N.90°00'00"E , FOR A DISTANCE OF 69.56 FEET; THENCE RUN N.54°40'20"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 30.65 FEET; THENCE RUN N.40°57'26"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 29.09 FEET; THENCE RUN N.08°36'07"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 69.19 FEET; THENCE RUN N.07°43'29"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 46.16 FEET; THENCE RUN N.16°05'02"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.36 FEET; THENCE RUN S.88°50'11"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 57.96 FEET; THENCE RUN N.89°04'13"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 57.32 FEET; THENCE RUN N.86°53'19"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 90.52 FEET; THENCE RUN N.88°42'22"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.98 FEET; THENCE RUN S.88°44'52"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.21 FEET; THENCE RUN N.88°59'24"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 87.77 FEET; THENCE RUN S.78°53'49"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.56 FEET; THENCE RUN S.14°20'06"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 66.40 FEET; THENCE RUN S.09°01'51"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 88.55 FEET; THENCE RUN S.09°13'56"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 87.61 FEET; THENCE RUN S.10°53'56"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 57.56 FEET; THENCE RUN S.09°47'32"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.54 FEET; THENCE RUN S.10°54'31"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 84.26 FEET; THENCE RUN S.10°45'45"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 97.85 FEET; THENCE RUN S.08°50'14"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 71.26 FEET; THENCE RUN S.08°24'23"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 58.35 FEET; THENCE RUN S.07°28'27"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 94.54 FEET; THENCE RUN S.10°11'32"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 58.77 FEET; THENCE RUN S.35°09'18"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 54.16 FEET; THENCE RUN S.49°38'14"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 76.97 FEET; THENCE RUN S.51°40'50"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.73 FEET; THENCE RUN N.87°43'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 43.73 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 10 of 15 Page 199 of 4116FEET; THENCE RUN S.71°31'58"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 51.56 FEET; THENCE RUN S.74°48'32"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.29 FEET; THENCE RUN N.47°44'22"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 27.22 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°44'13"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 458.91 FEET; THENCE RUN N.50°03'22"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 55.18 FEET; THENCE RUN N.52°35'34"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 42.36 FEET; THENCE RUN N.52°39'27"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 44.34 FEET; THENCE RUN N.66°17'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 33.93 FEET; THENCE RUN N.58°16'54"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 44.24 FEET; THENCE RUN N.53°46'50"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 103.66 FEET; THENCE RUN N.50°19'54"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.52 FEET; THENCE RUN N.59°46'44"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 108.92 FEET; THENCE RUN S.88°21'52"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 31.84 FEET; THENCE RUN S.27°44'21"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 40.05 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°57'37"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 386.62 FEET; THENCE RUN S.04°58'47"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 38.88 FEET; THENCE RUN S.05°56'08"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 31.43 FEET; THENCE RUN S.03°27'27"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 74.52 FEET; THENCE RUN S.02°15'32"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 71.04 FEET; THENCE RUN S.06°11'40"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.66 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°43'29"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 350.98 FEET; THENCE RUN S.04°21'32"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.53 FEET; THENCE RUN S.02°17'57"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.85 FEET; THENCE CONTINUE S.02°17'57"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 28.25 FEET; THENCE RUN S.37°27'37"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 43.13 FEET; THENCE RUN S.46°11'45"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 38.49 FEET; THENCE RUN S.52°30'51"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 41.39 FEET; THENCE RUN N.89°50'21"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 37.75 FEET; THENCE RUN N.69°29'22"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 144.19 FEET; THENCE RUN N.73°51'39"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 84.95 FEET; THENCE RUN N.17°36'03"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 19.58 FEET; THENCE RUN N.15°55'16"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 469.33 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°54'54"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 638.37 FEET; THENCE RUN N.10°40'40"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 25.37 FEET; THENCE RUN N.65°16'14"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 51.24 FEET; THENCE RUN N.80°53'11"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 377.64 FEET; THENCE RUN N.41°38'01"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 16.60 FEET; THENCE RUN N.13°21'12"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 35.89 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°16'22"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 80.83 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°57'36"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 70.74 FEET; THENCE RUN N.02°54'14"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 63.42 FEET; THENCE RUN N.04°25'23"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.72 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°13'35"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 60.99 FEET; THENCE RUN N.14°04'29"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 81.90 FEET; THENCE RUN N.80°17'27"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.29 FEET; THENCE RUN N.79°24'32"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.53 FEET; THENCE RUN N.33°59'45"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 70.02 FEET; THENCE RUN N.46°53'13"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.26 FEET; TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 22.115 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. AND AREA 3 COMMENCE AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT “C”, THENCE RUN S.87°40'38"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 105.48 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD (A 200 FOOT WIDE RIGHT OF WAY) AND THE Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 11 of 15 Page 200 of 4116SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF CORKSCREW ROAD (A 100 FOOT WIDE WIGHT OF WAY), THE SAME BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN S.73°57'58"E., ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID STATE ROAD 82, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,786.39 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°35'44"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 364.23 FEET; THENCE RUN S.73°57'58"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 134.39 FEET; THENCE RUN N.31°00'02"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 52.82 FEET; THENCE RUN S.58°59'58"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 15.00 FEET; THENCE RUN N.31°00'02"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET; THENCE RUN N.58°59'58"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 15.00 FEET; THENCE RUN N.31°00'02"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 278.43 FEET TO SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE; THENCE RUN S.73°57'58"E., ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 106.67 FEET; THENCE RUN S.16°02'01"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 10.84 FEET; THENCE RUN S.31°00'01"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 361.08 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 497.96 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°24'27", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 20.92 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.29°47'47"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 20.92 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN, S.73°57'58"E., A DISTANCE OF 1,267.66 FEET; THENCE RUN S.00°00'47"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,149.10 FEET; THENCE RUN S.18°00'34"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 269.47 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,725.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 57°00'46", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 1,646.54 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.46°30'57"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,716.48 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S.75°01'20"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 885.99 FEET; THENCE RUN S.06°02'21"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 300.50 FEET; THENCE RUN S.14°52'39"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.55 FEET; THENCE RUN N.75°07'20"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 3,889.60 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID CORKSCREW ROAD; THENCE RUN N.58°00'12"E., ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,619.31 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,959.86 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 37°08'16", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 1,248.21 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.39°26'04"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,270.34 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.20°51'56"E., ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,760.94 FEET; TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PAREL CONTAINS 332.608 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 12 of 15 Page 201 of 4116 THE TOTAL AREA OF PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN IS 1,446.590 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON REFER TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 03, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, HAVING A BEARING OF S.89°29'58"E. 89° 23' 32 THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 13 of 15 Page 202 of 4116 SRA CREDIT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT “B” CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE MASTER PLAN Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 14 of 15 Page 203 of 4116 SRA CREDIT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT “C” Land Use Summary Use Density or Intensity Residential Up to 4,502 Dwelling Units Commercial Min. and Max. of 238,606 gross square feet of retail and office uses, a max. of 100,000 gross square feet of indoor self-storage Civic, Governmental, Institutional Min. 42,020 square feet • Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA contains 1,446.59± acres. • Corkscrew Grove East Village contains approximately 24.33± acres of parks, park preserves, wetland park preserves, and a Neighborhood General Amenity Center. This exceeds the SRA requirement of providing 1% of the SRA gross acreage (14.47 acres) for recreation and parks for neighborhoods. • Corkscrew Grove East Village provides 516.60± acres of (36± percent) of Open Space. • Total acreage requiring stewardship credits is 1,382.96 acres (total Village acreage excluding public use acreage). • Eight (8) credits shall be required for each acre of land included in a SRA, where such Credits were created from an SSA submitted for review or approved prior to July 13, 2021. The SRA utilizes 8,504.80 Stewardship Credits from SSA 11 created prior to July 13, 2021, which entitles 968.81 acres of the SRA. • Ten (10) credits per acre shall be required for each acre of land included in an SRA, where such Credits were created from a SSA 22 submitted for review or approved after July 13, 2021. The SRA utilizes 3,198.60 Stewardship Credits from SSA(s) created after July 13, 2021, which entitles 319.86 acres of the SRA. • Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA does not include lands within ACSC Overlay. • Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA does not include land designated Flowway Stewardship Area (FSA)or Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA). • There is a Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) surrounded by the SRA that includes 81.56 acres of Water Retention Area (WRA). This WRA will not provide stormwater quality treatment for the SRA. • The SRA does not include any lands with a Natural Resource Index (NRI) greater than 1.2. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Credit Agreement (2-19-2026).docx Page 15 of 15 Page 204 of 4116 CONSISTENCY MEMORANDUM TO: Nancy Gundlach, Planner III, Zoning Services FROM: Jessica Constantinescu, Planner II, Comprehensive Planning Growth Management Community Development Department DATE: January 8, 2026 SUBJECT: Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) (PL20240010212) _________________________________________________________________________________ PETITION NUMBER: SRA PL20240010212 PETITION NAME: Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA REQUEST: This petition seeks to establish a Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) in the form of a Village on an approximately 1,446.59-acre site in accordance with the provisions of Florida Statutes and the Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) of Collier County, as contained in the Collier County Growth Management Plan’s Future Land Use Element and the Collier County Land Development Code. Development of the Village consists of a residential community (with a maximum of 4,502 dwelling units and 362 affordable housing units) and a mixed-use Village Center containing retail, office, civic, and community uses to support the residential development. LOCATION: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is located on the north and south sides of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road, within Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Township 46 South, Range 28 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay provisions of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP), in conjunction with the Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay District of the County’s Land Development Code (LDC), are used to determine the consistency of this SRA request. The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural (Agricultural/Rural Mixed-Use District) as identified in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the GMP. This future land use designation limits development to such uses as agriculture and related uses, essential services, residential (maximum density of 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres), parks and open space, earth mining, etc. The site is within the Mobile Home Overlay, which allows mobile homes in the Rural Agricultural zoning district, and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO). The RLSAO provides for the designation of Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRAs) using Stewardship Credits generated by designation of Stewardship Sending Areas (SSAs). SRAs may vary in size and must contain a mixture of uses, as provided for in the RLSAO policies contained in the FLUE. Relevant to this Overlay, the planning strategies and techniques include urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area-based allocations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed-use development that allow the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and providing for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Specifically, the Overlay allows development in the form of towns, villages, and compact rural developments (CRD), subject to certain criteria and development parameters, as an SRA and allows “public benefit uses” such as public schools and public or private pos t- Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 205 of 4116 secondary institutions, including ancillary uses; community parks exceeding the minimum acreages required, municipal golf courses; regional parks; and governmental facilities. This application proposes the new Village SRA using the Rural Land Stewardship Credit System, as provided for under Policy 1.4 of the RLSAO. The SRA application further proposes that Stewardship Credits, enabling this SRA to be developed as a Village, will be obtained from permanent restrictions on the use of environmentally sensitive land from Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA). The SRA procedures and standards are outlined in Section 4.08.07 of the LDC. Specifically, the SSA to be used to enable the Village to proceed as an SRA is SSA numbers 11 and 22. SSA 11 was approved by the Board of County Commissioners on June 10th, 2008. The petition for SSA 22 is proposed and is in the staff review phase. This SRA application states that a total of 11,703.40 Stewardship Credits will be used to entitle the Village at 1,382.96 acres. Public Benefit Uses including affordable housing, a public school site, and a fire station comprise 63.63 acres of the Village, amounting to a total SRA acreage of 1,446.59 acres. The Village must meet the RLSA Overlay Stewardship Receiving Area Characteristics as identified in the table below. The table lists characteristic land uses and threshold requirements from the RLSA Overlay, [FLUE] Attachment C, followed by staff comments/analysis [in italics]. Underlined uses are not required uses. After the table, the relevant RLSA Overlay Policies (Group 4 Policies) are listed, followed by staff comments/analysis [in italics]. Size (Gross Acres) 300 – 1,500 acres The SRA is ±1,446.59 acres. Residential Units (DUs) per gross acre 1 ‒ 4 DUs per gross acre base density Proposed density = 4,502 DU/±1,446.59 gross acres = 3.11 DU/A. Residential Housing Styles Diversity of single family and multi-family housing types, styles, and lot sizes A maximum of 4,502 dwelling units comprised of both single family detached, single family attached/villas, and multi-family housing are proposed. Maximum Floor Area Ratio or Retail and Office ‒ 0.5; Neighborhood goods and services are Intensity provided at a minimum of 238,606 sq. ft.; the uses and FARs are provided for in the Village Center. Civic/Governmental/Institution ‒ 0.6; Civic, governmental, and institutional uses are provided at a minimum of 45,020 sq. ft. Group Housing ‒ 0.45; not required – not proposed. Transient Lodging ‒ 26 units/ac. net; not required – not proposed. Goods and Services Convenience Goods and Services; Minimum 53 sq. ft. gross building area per DU; The minimum 238,606 sq. ft. of neighborhood goods and services is provided in the Village Center Context Zone. Water and Wastewater Centralized or decentralized community treatment system; The SRA is within the Immokalee Water and Sewer District (IWSD) Service Area. Service is intended to be provided by IWSD. Interim Well and Septic; This information is not proposed within the SRA document and is not a required use. Recreation and Open Spaces Parks & Public Green Spaces within Neighborhoods (minimum 1% of gross acres); Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 206 of 4116 14.47 acres are required (±1,446.59 ac. x 1%) and ±24.33 acres are provided. Active Recreation/Golf Course; not required – not proposed Lakes; 53.20 acres of lake areas are proposed Open Space Minimum 35% of SRA; Open space areas comprise 516.60 acres of the Village SRA, totaling 36% Civic, Governmental and Moderate Range of Services – Minimum 10 SF/DU; 4,502 Institutional Services dwelling units x 10 sf = 45,020 sq. ft. minimum, 45,020 sq. ft. of civic, government, and institutional uses are proposed Full Range of Schools; Included in Village Center Context Zone as allowed use under 5.2.1.A.III.50) Elementary and Secondary Schools, Colleges, Universities, Professional Schools and Technical Institutes, public or private (SIC 8211, 8221-8222). Transportation Auto-interconnected system of collector and local roads; The SRA connects directly to State Road 82 (SR 82), a principal arterial road, and Corkscrew RD (CR 850), a major collector road as classified in the Transportation Element (TR-3.3), and will be interconnected to the property to the south, which provides access to State Road 29 and Oil Well Road. Pedestrian pathways; Interconnected sidewalks and 10-foot multi-use pathways are provided within the SRA as depicted on the SRA Mobility Plan in Exhibit A. Equestrian Trails; not required – not proposed. County Transit Access; At the time of development order, connections between modes of transportation will be identified to ensure interconnectivity between the SRA and external transportation links. RLSA Overlay Group 4 Policies ‒ Policies to enable conversion of rural lands to other uses in appropriate locations, while discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques by the establishment of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Policy 4.1: Collier County will encourage and facilitate uses that enable economic prosperity and diversification of the economic base of the RLSA. Collier County will also encourage development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques and facilitates a compact form of development to accommodate population growth by the establishment of Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRAs). Incentives to encourage and support the diversification and vitality of the rural economy such as flexible development regulations, expedited permitting review, and targeted capital improvements shall be incorporated into the LDC Stewardship District. [The subject petition is for an SRA and must comply with the RLSA Overlay in the LDC.] Policy 4.2: All privately owned lands within the RLSA which meet the criteria set forth herein are eligible for designation as a SRA, except land delineated as a FSA, HSA, WRA or land that has been designated as a Stewardship Sending Area. The exception, consistent with Policy 3.13, is when a WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, then the acreage of the WRA used for stormwater quality treatment for the SRA shall be included in the Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 207 of 4116 SRA. Land proposed for SRA designation shall meet the suitability criteria and other standards described in Group 4 Policies. Due to the long-term vision of the RLSA Overlay, and in accordance with the guidelines established in Section 163.3248, Florida Statutes, the specific location, size, and composition of each SRA cannot and need not be predetermined in the GMP. In the RLSA Overlay, lands that are eligible to be designated as SRAs generally have similar physical attributes as they consist predominately of agriculture lands which have been cleared or otherwise altered for this purpose. Lands shown on the Overlay Map as eligible for SRA designation include approximately 72,000 acres outside of the ACSC and approximately 15,000 acres within the ACSC. Total SRA designation shall be a maximum of 45,000 acres. Because the Overlay requires SRAs to be compact, mixed-use and self-sufficient in the provision of services, facilities and infrastructure, traditional locational standards normally applied to determine development suitability are not relevant or applicable to SRAs. Therefore, the process for designating an SRA follows the procedures set forth herein and the adopted RLSA Zoning Overlay District. [Land proposed for the SRA designation meets suitability criteria and certain other standards described in RLSA Overlay Group 4 Policies. The subject site is designated on the RLSA Overlay Map as eligible for SRA designation.] Policy 4.3: Land becomes designated as a SRA upon petition by a property owner to Collier County seeking such designation and the adoption of a resolution by the BCC granting the designation. The petition shall include a SRA master plan as described in Policy 4.5. The basis for approval shall be a finding of consistency with the policies of the Overlay, including required suitability criteria set forth herein, compliance with the LDC Stewardship District, and assurance that the applicant has acquired or will acquire sufficient Stewardship Credits to implement the SRA uses. The County has adopted LDC amendments to establish the procedures and submittal requirements for designation as a SRA, providing for consideration of impacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts, and for public notice of and the opportunity for public participation in any consideration by the BCC of such a designation. [The property owner has submitted the required SRA application along with an SRA Master Plan and has demonstrated acquisition of the required number of Stewardship Credits in the amount of 11,703.40 generated from both SSA Numbers 11 and 22 to entitle development of 1,382.96 acres in the SRA (plus 63.63 acres of uses providing a public benefit). The basis for approval shall be a finding of consistency with the policies of the Overlay, including required suitability criteria set forth herein. Compliance with the “LDC Stewardship District” (RLSA zoning overlay) is addressed later herein.] Policy 4.4: Collier County will update the Overlay Map to delineate the boundaries of each approved SRA. Such updates shall be incorporated into the adopted Overlay Map by amendment periodically initiated by the County, or sooner at the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners. [This Policy is not directed toward individual applications.] Policy 4.5: To address the specifics of each SRA, a master plan of each SRA will be prepared and submitted to Collier County as a part of the petition for designation as a SRA. The master plan will demonstrate that the SRA complies with all applicable policies of the Overlay and the LDC Stewardship District and is designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from wetlands and critical habitat identified as FSAs and HSAs on the Overlay Map. The SRA Master Plan shall comply with the County’s then-adopted MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), and Access Management procedures. Each SRA master plan shall include a Management Plan with provisions for minimizing human and wildlife interactions. Low intensity land uses (e.g. passive recreation areas, golf courses) and vegetation preservation requirements, including agriculture, shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 208 of 4116 dominated by human activities. Consideration shall be given to the most current Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human wildlife conflict. The management plans shall also require the dissemination of information to local residents, businesses and governmental services about the presence of wildlife and practices that enable responsible coexistence with wildlife, while minimizing opportunities for negative interaction, such as appropriate waste disposal practices. [The applicant’s submittal appears to demonstrate compliance with all applicable policies of the RLSA Overlay and the LDC Stewardship District (RLSA zoning overlay), based upon staff discipline reviews. Note: the analysis of some policies has been deferred to other County staff. The SRA is designed with a 300’ buffer from HSA lands to ensure that potential incompatible land uses are directed away from HSA designated land. In addition, a management plan with provisions for minimizing human and wildlife interactions is also included with the petition.] Policy 4.6: SRA characteristics shall be based upon innovative planning and development strategies referenced in Section 163.3248, Florida Statutes. These planning strategies and techniques include urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area-based allocations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed-use development that allow the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and providing for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. The SRA shall also include a mobility plan that includes vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas of outside development and land uses. The mobility plan shall provide mobility strategies such as bus subsidies, route sponsorship or other incentives which encourage the use of mass transit services. The development of SRAs shall also consider the needs identified in the MPO Long Range Transportation Needs Plan, and plan land uses to accommodate services that would increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long- distance travel. Such development strategies are recognized as methods of discouraging urban sprawl, encouraging alternative modes of transportation, increasing internal capture and reducing vehicle miles traveled. [The applicant’s SRA document and master plan appear to demonstrate compliance with this Policy, based upon staff discipline reviews. Additionally, the Mobility Plan depicts a connected trailway and pathway system to encourage pedestrian circulation throughout the SRA.] Policy 4.7: There are three specific forms of SRA permitted within the Overlay. These are Towns, Villages, and Compact Rural Development (CRD). The Characteristics of Towns, Villages, and CRD are set forth in Attachment C and are generally described in Policies 4.7.1, 4.7.2, and 4.7.3. Specific regulations, guidelines and standards within the LDC Stewardship District to guide the design and development of SRAs to include innovative planning and development strategies as set forth in Section 163.3248, Florida Statutes. The size and base density of each form shall be consistent with the standards set forth on Attachment C. The maximum base residential density as set forth in Attachment C may only be exceeded through the density blending process as set forth in density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan or through the affordable housing density bonus as referenced in the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element. The base residential density is calculated by dividing the total number of residential units in a SRA by the overall area therein. The base residential density does not restrict net residential density of parcels within a SRA. The location, size and density of each SRA will be determined on an individual basis during the SRA designation review and approval process. [The SRA size and density are consistent with requirements in FLUE Attachment C. The SRA location is designated on the RLSA Overlay Map as eligible for an SRA designation.] Policy 4.7.1: [This Policy regarding Towns is not applicable to this application.] Policy 4.7.2: Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 209 of 4116 Villages are communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be not less than 300 acres and up to 1,000 acres inside the Area of Critical State Concern and up to 1,500 acres outside the Area of Critical State Concern. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed-use village center to serve as the focal point for the community’s support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Policy 4.15. Appropriately scaled uses described in Policy 4.7.3 shall also be permitted in Villages. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. Design criteria for Villages are included in the LDC Stewardship District. Villages greater than 500 acres shall include an internal mobility plan which shall include a transfer station or park and ride area that is appropriately located within the village to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. [The proposed Village encompasses approximately 1,446.59 acres and is organized around a centrally located Village Center. The Village Center includes retail and office uses at a scale appropriate to support the surrounding residential development. The Village incorporates an interconnected network of multi-use pathways, pedestrian sidewalks, and nature observation points, as illustrated on the Mobility Plan. While the education site does not directly abut public green space, it is located in close proximity and connected through the integrated pathway system, providing accessible routes from the school to adjacent park areas. A park-and-ride facility is proposed, with its final location to be determined prior to approval of the Site Development Plan.] Policy 4.7.3: [This Policy regarding CRDs is not applicable to this application.] Policy 4.7.4: Existing urban areas, Towns and Villages shall be the preferred location for business and industry within the RLSA, to further promote economic sustainability and development, diversification and job creation. The business and industry use allowed includes, but is not limited to, those as defined as Florida Qualified Target Industries. The appropriate scale and compatibility of these uses within a Town or Village will be addressed during SRA application process. [The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with this policy by concentrating business and industry uses within a designated mixed-use Village Center. The Village Center permits a broad range of appropriately scaled commercial and employment-generating uses, including those consistent with Florida Qualified Target Industries, thereby supporting economic sustainability and job creation.] Policy 4.7.5: To address the accommodation of Affordable Housing in a Town or Village, the SRA applicant shall utilize one of the following options: 1) Affordable Housing Land Reservation: a) Reservation of one or more site(s) within the SRA or within a proximal SRA in the RLSAO with densities and development standards that accommodate Affordable Housing residential uses at a minimum density of 10 units per acre, for acquisition by either Collier County, a Community Land Trust, a private developer or any other affordable housing provider. b) The aggregate acreage of such site(s) shall be equal to or greater than 2.5% of the gross area of the SRA. c) The acreage of land reserved for Affordable Housing will be considered as a Public Benefit Use and not require the consumption of Stewardship Credits but shall be included in the calculation of total SRA acreage. d) The County shall verify the site(s) is/are appropriate and approve the site(s) at time of SRA approval, subject to standards to be established in the LDC. Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 210 of 4116 e) Affordable Housing units shall be excluded from the Traffic Impact Statement or trip cap for the SRA in which they are located. 2) Alternatives proposed by the SRA Applicant: a) While compliance with the Land Reservation described above shall be deemed to satisfy affordable housing requirements, other options may be proposed by the SRA applicant and approved by the Board of County Commissioners to address housing affordability issues in the subject SRA. 3) The process and procedures to implement this policy, including a definition to be used to determine “proximal SRA” and specific guidelines and standards in those instances in which alternative options may be proposed, shall be set forth in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District. Affordable housing opportunities are provided within the Affordable Housing Context Zone of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. The Affordable Housing Context Zone is comprised of ±36.22 acres, entitling a minimum of 362 dwelling units set aside for affordable housing development at a minimum density of 10 dwelling units per acre. and is adjacent to a commercial tract. This satisfies the first option of Policy 4.7.5. Policy 4.8: An SRA may be contiguous to a FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in Policy 4.13. A SRA may be contiguous to and served by a WRA in accordance with Policy 3.12 and 3.13. [The SRA is contiguous to lands designated HSA but does not encroach into these areas; and, the proposed SRA development is buffered from those HSA areas, as required in Policy 4.13.] Policy 4.9: A SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the planned development in an environmentally acceptable manner. The primary means of directing development away from wetlands and critical habitat is the prohibition of locating SRAs in FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs unless the WRA is being used to provide water quality treatment volume as referenced in Policy 3.13, in which case the WRA shall retain its WRA Overlay classification and be included in the SRA acreage total. To further direct development away from wetlands and critical habitat, residential; commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, and transient housing, institutional, civic and community service uses within a SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. In addition, conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, with the exception of those necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety, shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. Infrastructure necessary to serve permitted uses may be exempt from this restriction, provided that designs seek to minimize the extent of impacts to any such areas. The Index value of greater than 1.2 represents those areas that have a high natural resource value as measured pursuant to Policy 1.8. Less than 2% of potential SRA land achieves an Index score of greater than 1.2. [The Environmental Planning Section evaluated all land within the proposed SRA to determine the Natural Resource Index values. This SRA is adjacent to an HSA but does not encroach into these areas.] Policy 4.10: Within the RLSA Overlay, open space, which by definition shall include public and private conservation lands, underdeveloped areas of designated SSAs, agriculture, water retention and management areas and recreation uses, will continue to be the dominant land use. Therefore, open space adequate to serve the forecasted population and uses within the SRA is provided. To ensure that SRA residents have such areas proximate to their homes, open space shall also comprise a minimum of thirty-five percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town, or Village. Lands within an SRA greater than one acre with Index values of greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space except for the allowance of uses described in Policy 4.9. [The proposed open space meets the minimum of thirty-five percent of the Village’s gross acreage: 1,446.59 gross acres x 35% = 506.3 acres; 36% or 516.6 acres are provided. The Environmental Planning Section evaluated lands for the NRI value and identified any such lands greater than one acre for retention as open space.] Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 211 of 4116 Policy 4.11: The perimeter of each SRA shall be designed to provide a transition from higher density and intensity uses within the SRA to lower density and intensity uses on adjoining property. The edges of SRAs shall be well defined and designed to be compatible with the character of adjoining property. Techniques such as, but not limited to setbacks, landscape buffers, and recreation/open space placement may be used for this purpose. Where existing agricultural activity adjoins a SRA, the design of the SRA must take this activity into account to allow for the continuation of the agricultural activity and to minimize any conflict between agriculture and SRA uses. [A 300’ buffer, consisting of open spaces and lakes will be provided adjacent to HSA designated lands, located directly east and south of the SRA. Along the remaining SRA perimeters, landscape buffers and adequate setbacks will be provided, and existing native vegetation will be retained to the extent possible to provide sufficient screening/buffering from neighboring properties. A transition from landscaping buffers, open space and retained native vegetation to residential development is planned from the SRA edges.] Policy 4.12: Where an SRA adjoins a FSA, HSA, WRA or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the Overlay Map, best management and planning practices shall be applied to minimize adverse impacts to such lands. SRA design shall demonstrate that ground water table draw down or diversion will not adversely impact the adjacent FSA, HSA, WRA or conservation land. Detention and control elevations shall be established to protect such natural areas and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. [As depicted on the Stewardship Areas Exhibit, SSA 22 borders the east boundary of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. HSA and FSA areas exist within the boundaries of SSA 22. WRA areas of SSA 23 are within portions of the Village. Environmental Review staff and Stormwater staff have reviewed the SRA for compliance with this Policy.] Policy 4.13: Open space within or contiguous to a SRA shall be used to provide a buffer between the SRA and any adjoining FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the Overlay Map. Open space contiguous to or within 300 feet of the boundary of a FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land may include: natural preserves, lakes, golf courses provided no fairways or other turf areas are allowed within the first 200 feet, passive recreational areas and parks, required yard and set-back areas, and other natural or man-made open space. Along the west boundary of the FSAs and HSAs that comprise Camp Keais Strand, i.e., the area south of Immokalee Road, this open space buffer shall be 500 feet wide and shall preclude golf course fairways and other turf areas within the first 300 feet. [Open space (open space, lakes and buffer) located within the SRA is used to provide the required buffer between the SRA and the adjoining HSA (refer to the Master Plan).] Policy 4.14: The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation planning standards. At the time of SRA approval, an SRA proposed to adjoin land designated as an SRA or lands designated as Open Lands shall provide for the opportunity to provide direct vehicular and pedestrian connections from said areas to the County’s arterial/collector roadway network as shown on the MPO’s LRTP Needs Plan so as to reduce travel time and travel expenses, improve interconnectivity, increase internal capture, and keep the use of county arterial roads to a minimum when traveling between developments in the RLSA. Public and private roads within an SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. Signalized intersections within or adjacent to an SRA that serves the SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. No SRA shall be approved unless the capacity of County collector or arterial road(s) serving the SRA is demonstrated to be adequate in accordance with the Collier County Concurrency Management System in effect at the time of SRA designation. A transportation impact assessment meeting the requirements of Section 2.7.3 of the LDC, or its successor regulation shall be prepared for each proposed SRA to provide the necessary data and analysis. To the extent Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 212 of 4116 required to mitigate an SRA’s traffic impacts, actions may be taken to include, but shall not be limited to, provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossings, environmental mitigation credits, right of way dedication(s), water management and/or fill material which may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network. Any such actions to offset traffic impacts shall be memorialized in a developer contribution agreement. These actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or proposed roadways. [The SRA proposes ingress/egress points to State Road 82 (SR 82) and Corkscrew Road (CR 850). Concurrency is determined at the time of subsequent development orders. Transportation Planning staff reviewed this project for its transportation impact, and Comprehensive Planning staff defers comments relative to these aspects of the review to the Transportation Planning Section.] Policy 4.15.1: SRAs are intended to be mixed use and shall be allowed the full range of uses permitted by the Urban Designation of the FLUE, as modified by Policies 4.7, 4.7.1, 4.7.2, and 4.7.3, and Attachment C. An appropriate mix of retail, office, recreational, civic, governmental, and institutional uses will be available to serve the daily needs and community wide needs of residents of the RLSA. Depending on the size, scale, and character of a SRA, such uses may be provided either within the specific SRA, within other SRAs in the RLSA or within the Immokalee Urban Area provided the capacity of those adjoining area’s facilities as described in Attachment C to be utilized by the newly created SRA can demonstrate sufficient capacity exists for their desired uses per the standards of Attachment C. By example, each Village or Town shall provide for neighborhood retail/office uses to serve its population as well as appropriate civic and institutional uses, however, the combined population of several Villages may be required to support community scaled retail or office uses in a nearby Town. Standards for the minimum amount of non-residential uses in each category are set forth in Attachment C, and shall be also included in the Stewardship LDC District. [The Village provides a mix of neighborhood-scaled retail, office, civic, and institutional uses to meet the minimum requirements for non-residential uses in each category identified in Attachment C.] Policy 4.15.2: The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) may, as a condition of approval and adoption of an SRA development, require that suitable areas for parks, schools, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use. When the BCC requires such a set aside for one or more public facilities, the set aside shall be subject to the same provisions of the LDC as are applicable to public facility dedications required as a condition for PUD rezoning. [Policy provided for informational purposes.] Policy 4.15.3: Applicants for SRA designation shall coordinate with Collier County School Board staff to allow planning to occur to accommodate any impacts to the public schools as a result of the SRA. As a part of the SRA application, the following information shall be provided: 1. Number of residential units by type; 2. An estimate of the number of school-aged children for each type of school impacted (elementary, middle, high school); and 3. The potential for locating a public educational facility or facilities within the SRA, and the size of any sites that may be dedicated, or otherwise made available for a public educational facility. [A School Impact Analysis is included as part of the application.] Policy 4.16: Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 213 of 4116 A SRA shall have adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed development, or such infrastructure must be provided concurrently with the demand. The level of infrastructure provided will depend on the form of SRA development, accepted civil engineering practices, and LDC requirements. The capacity of essential services and infrastructure necessary to serve the SRA at build-out must be demonstrated during the SRA designation process. Infrastructure to be analyzed includes but not limited to, transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, and solid waste. Transportation infrastructure is discussed in Policy 4.14. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities are required in Towns and Villages, and may be required in CRDs depending upon the permitted uses approved within the CRD. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities shall be constructed, owned, operated and maintained by a private utility service, the developer, a Community Development District, the Immokalee Water Sewer Service District, Collier County, or other governmental entity. Innovative alternative water and wastewater treatment systems such as decentralized community treatment systems shall not be prohibited by this Policy provided that they meet all applicable regulatory criteria. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems, limited to a maximum of 100 acres of any Town, Village or CRD of 100 acres are permitted on an interim basis until services from a centralized/decentralized community system are available. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems may be permitted in CRDs of 100 acres or less in size. [Infrastructure must be available to serve the proposed Village ‒ or provided concurrently with the demand. The infrastructure analysis for the development has been provided in the Public Facilities Impact Analysis, Traffic Impact Statement, and Letter of Willingness to Serve provided by IWSD within the SRA application submittal documents. It is anticipated that any developer commitments related to utilities, transportation, or other public facilities, once finalized, will be specifically detailed in a Developer’s Contribution Agreement. Review staff has determined that adequate public facilities will be available to serve the SRA, consistent with this Policy.] Policy 4.17: The BCC will review and approve SRA designation applications in accordance with the provisions of Policy 1.2 of the Capital Improvement Element of the GMP and public facilities pursuant to Policy 1.1 of the Capital Improvement Element in addition to the following: jails, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire service, government buildings and libraries. Final local development orders will be approved within an SRA designated by the BCC in accordance with the Concurrency Management System of the GMP and LDC in effect at the time of final local development order approval. [The project does not create a significant impact on countywide population as defined by Policy 1.2 of the CIE. Public facilities impacts will be evaluated at the time of final local development order approval, consistent with the GMP and LDC.] Policy 4.18: The SRA will be planned and designed to be fiscally neutral or positive to Collier County at the SRA horizon year based on a public facilities impact assessment, as identified in LDC 4.08.07.K. The BCC may grant exceptions to this Policy to accommodate affordable housing, as it deems appropriate. Techniques that may promote fiscal neutrality such as Community Development Districts, and other special districts, shall be encouraged. At a minimum, the assessment shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement, and schools. Development phasing, developer contributions and mitigation, and other public/private partnerships shall address any potential adverse impacts to adopted levels of service standards. In the event that an SRA development, generates surplus revenues to Collier County, Collier County may choose to allocate a portion of such surplus revenues to ensure that sufficient resources are available to allow Collier County to respond expeditiously to economic opportunities and to compete effectively for high-value research, development and commercialization, innovation, and alternative and renewable energy business projects. [The Economic Assessment Report has been deemed fiscally neutral and/or positive to Collier County, Collier County Schools, and Immokalee Fire Control District.] Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 214 of 4116 Policy 4.19: Eight (8) credits shall be required for each acre of land included in a SRA, where such Credits were created from a Stewardship Sending Area submitted for review or approved prior to July 13, 2021. Ten Credits per acre shall be required for each acre of land included in an SRA, where such Credits were created from any other Stewardship Sending Area. Land that is designated for a public benefit use described in Policy 4.20 do not require the use of Credits. In order to promote compact, mixed use development and provide the necessary support facilities and services to residents of rural areas, the SRA designation entitles a full range of uses, accessory uses and associated uses that provide a mix of services to and are supportive to the residential population of a SRA, as provided for in Policies 4.7, 4.15.1 and Attachment C. Such uses shall be identified, located and quantified in the SRA master plan. [Both a 1:8 and a 1:10 ratio is proposed by the applicant to entitle the requested residential density and mix of uses to support the residents of the SRA. The applicant will use Credits generated from SSA Numbers 11 and 22, as demonstrated in the SRA Master Plan.] Policy 4.20: The acreage of a public benefit use shall count toward the maximum acreage limits of an SRA, unless such public benefit uses were approved as part of an SRA approved prior to July 13, 2021, in which case such public benefit uses shall continue to be excluded from the maximum acreage limitation pursuant to the policy in effect at the time of approval. Public benefit uses shall not count toward the consumption of Stewardship Credits. For the purpose of this Policy, public benefit uses include: affordable housing as defined in the LDC, public schools (Pre- K-12) and public or private post secondary institutions, including ancillary uses; community parks exceeding the minimum acreage requirements of Attachment C, municipal golf courses; regional parks; and governmental facilities as defined in the LDC. The location of public schools shall be coordinated with the Collier County School Board, based on the interlocal agreement, Section 163.3248 F.S. and in a manner consistent with 235.193 F.S. Schools and related ancillary uses shall be encouraged to locate in or proximate to Towns and Villages subject to applicable zoning and permitting requirements. [Public benefit use acreage does not require the consumption of Stewardship Credits but is included in the overall SRA acreage calculation.] Policy 4.21: Lands within the ACSC that meet all SRA criteria shall also be restricted such that credits used to entitle a SRA in the ACSC must be generated exclusively from SSAs within the ACSC. Further, the only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC east of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be CRDs of 100 acres or less and the only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC west of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be CRDs and Villages of not more than 300 acres. Provided, not more than 1,000 aces of SRA development in the form of Villages or CRDs , exclusive of any lakes created prior to June 30, 2002 as a result of mining operations, shall be allowed in areas that have a frontage on State Road 29 and that, had been predominantly cleared as a result of Ag Group I or Earth Mining or Processing Uses. This Policy is intended to assure that the RLSA Overlay is not used to increase the development potential within the ACSC but instead is used to promote a more compact form of development as an alternative to the Baseline Standards already allowed within the ACSC. No policy of the RLSA Overlay shall take precedence over the Big Cypress ACSC regulations and all regulations therein shall apply. [This Policy does not apply, as this site is not within the ACSC.] Policy 4.22: When historic or cultural resources are identified within the RLSA through the SRA designation process, the applicant in conjunction with the Florida Division of Historic Resources will assess the historic or cultural significance and explore the educational and public awareness opportunities regarding significant resources. [Historic and/or cultural resources have not been identified within the SRA.] Policy 4.23: Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 215 of 4116 Any development on lands participating in the RLS Program shall be compatible with surrounding land uses. Within one year of the effective date of this Policy LDC regulations shall be implemented for outdoor lighting to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. [The SRA document includes a regulation requiring outdoor lighting to be consistent with this policy.] CONSISTENCY REVIEW FINDINGS: Based upon the above analysis, staff finds: 1) The requisite credits are approved and will be sufficient in number to enable development of the Village; and, 2) The proposed Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) for the Village may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.collier.gov/ Page 216 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment Collier County Collier County Schools Immokalee Fire Control District Initial Submission: March 6, 2025 Revised: June 20, 2025 Solid Waste and Roads Revised: July 29, 2025 Solid Waste Revised: August 29, 2025 Roads Prepared By: Page 217 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 5 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 7 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................ 7 MAJOR ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................................................................. 9 Development Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 9 Revenue Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 10 Sales, Just, and Taxable Values .............................................................................................. 10 Property Taxes ....................................................................................................................... 11 Expenditure Assumptions ........................................................................................................ 11 COLLIER COUNTY FISCAL IMPACTS .............................................................................................. 12 Collier County Operating Impacts ............................................................................................ 12 Collier County Operating Revenue Projections ........................................................................ 12 Collier County Operating Expenditure Projections .................................................................. 13 Collier County Capital Impacts ................................................................................................. 15 Collier County Capital Impacts by Department ..................................................................... 15 COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOLS FISCAL IMPACT ................................................................................ 27 Collier County Schools Capital Impacts .................................................................................... 27 Collier County Schools Operating Impacts ............................................................................... 31 Immokalee Fire Control District .................................................................................................. 33 Immokalee Fire Control District Capital Impact .................................................................... 33 Immokalee Fire Control District Annual Operating Impacts ................................................. 34 APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................... 36 GENERAL LIMITING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................ 54 2 Page 218 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 1: Corkscrew Grove East Village Development Program .................................................... 9 Table 2: Corkscrew Grove East Village Residential Sales, Just, and Taxable Values.................... 10 Table 3: Corkscrew Grove East Village Nonresidential Sales, Just, and Taxable Values .............. 10 Table 4: Corkscrew Grove East Village County Tax Base at Buildout .......................................... 11 Table 5: Collier County Millage Rates ......................................................................................... 11 Table 6: Corkscrew Grove East Village Operating Annual Net Impact at Buildout ..................... 12 Table 7: Corkscrew Grove East Village Annual Operating Revenue Projections ......................... 13 Table 8: Corkscrew Grove East Village Annual Operating Expenditure Projections ................... 14 Table 9: Corkscrew Grove East Village Impact Fee Revenue for Collier County ......................... 16 Table 10: Corkscrew Grove East Village Regional Parks Capital Impacts .................................... 18 Table 11: Corkscrew Grove East Village Regional Parks Level of Service .................................... 19 Table 12: Corkscrew Grove East Village Indexed Capital Cost per Acre ...................................... 19 Table 13: Corkscrew Grove East Village Community Parks Capital Impacts ............................... 19 Table 14: Corkscrew Grove East Village Community Parks Level of Service ............................... 20 Table 15: Corkscrew Grove East Village Community Parks Level of Service ............................... 20 Table 16: Corkscrew Grove East Village Law Enforcement Capital Impacts ............................... 21 Table 17: Corkscrew Grove East Village Correctional Facilities .................................................. 21 Table 18: Corkscrew Grove East Village Correctional Facilities Capital Cost............................... 22 Table 19: Corkscrew Grove East Village Correctional Facilities Indexed Cost per Resident ........ 22 Table 20: Corkscrew Grove East Village EMS Capital Cost .......................................................... 23 Table 21: Corkscrew Grove East Village EMS Capital Impact ...................................................... 23 Table 22: CCPC Historical Enrollment and Capital Revenues ....................................................... 28 Table 23: Collier County Charter School Student Stations........................................................... 29 Table 24: Corkscrew Grove East Village Projected Public School Enrollment ............................. 29 Table 25: Corkscrew Grove East Village Projected Enrollment by School Type .......................... 30 Table 26: Corkscrew Grove East Village School Impact Fee Revenue ......................................... 30 Table 27: Corkscrew Grove East Village School Net Capital Impacts – Total Cash Flow Approach .................................................................................................................................................... 31 Table 28: Corkscrew Grove East Village Local Ad Valorem School Operating Taxes at Buildout 32 Table 29: Corkscrew Grove East Village Immokalee Fire Control District Capital Impact ........... 33 Table 30: Corkscrew Grove East Village Immokalee Fire Control Impact Fee Revenues ............ 34 Table 31: Corkscrew Grove East Village Square Footage ............................................................ 34 Table 32: Corkscrew Grove East Village Immokalee Fire Control District Annual Operating Impacts at Buildout .................................................................................................................................. 35 Appendix Table 1: Collier County Base Assumptions ................................................................. 36 Appendix Table 2: Corkscrew Grove East Village Resident Population and Seasonal Population Coefficients ................................................................................................................................. 37 Appendix Table 3: Corkscrew Grove East Village Population and Employment Estimates ......... 37 Appendix Table 4: Corkscrew Grove East Village Population and Employment Summary ......... 37 Appendix Table 5: Corkscrew Grove East Village Public School Enrollment ............................... 38 Appendix Table 6: Corkscrew Grove East Village County Tax Base ............................................ 38 3 Page 219 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 7: Corkscrew Grove East Village School District Tax Base ................................. 39 Appendix Table 8: FY 2025 Collier County General Funds and MSTU Revenue Budget Summaries .................................................................................................................................................... 40 Appendix Table 9: FY 2025 Collier County General Funds Revenue Demand Units .................... 41 Appendix Table 10: FY 2025 Collier County MSTU Revenue Demand Units ............................... 41 Appendix Table 11: Corkscrew Grove East Village General Funds Revenue at Buildout ............. 42 Appendix Table 12: Corkscrew Grove East Village MSTU Revenue at Buildout ........................... 42 Appendix Table 13: FY 2025 Collier County General Funds and MSTU Expenditure Budget Summaries .................................................................................................................................. 43 Appendix Table 14: FY 2025 Collier County Expenditure Budget Summaries ............................. 44 Appendix Table 15: FY 2025 Collier County Appropriations by Program Budget Summaries ..... 45 Appendix Table 16: FY 2025 Collier County General Funds Expenditure Demand Units ............ 46 Appendix Table 17: EMS Adjusted Operating Expenditures for New Ambulance ...................... 47 Appendix Table 18: FY 2025 Collier County MSTU Expenditure Demand Units ......................... 48 Appendix Table 19: Corkscrew Grove East Village General Funds Expenditures at Buildout ..... 49 Appendix Table 20: Corkscrew Grove East Village MSTU Expenditures at Buildout ................... 50 Appendix Table 21: Collier County Impact Fee Schedule for Applicable Services....................... 51 Appendix Table 22: Corkscrew Grove East Village Impact Fee Revenues for Applicable Services .................................................................................................................................................... 52 Appendix Table 23: Collier County School District Base Assumptions ........................................ 53 4 Page 220 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Alico, Inc. is proposing the establishment of the Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area (“SRA”) on 1,446.59± acres in Collier County with a portion located on the north side of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road and the remainder located south of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road, east and west of Corkscrew Road. In accordance with the definition of a Village in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (“RLSA”) Overlay, Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA (“Corkscrew Grove East Village” or “Village”) is primarily a residential community with a diversity of housing types and a maximum of 4,502 dwelling units. The Village includes 149.07± acres of a mixed-use Village Center providing the required neighborhood-scale retail, office, civic, and community uses. The concept plan also includes 283,500 square feet of retail space and 70,000 square feet of civic/institutional space. As shown in the table below, the Corkscrew Grove East Village will generate substantial tax and impact fee revenues for Collier County, the Immokalee Fire Control District, and Collier County Public Schools. The results are presented at the Project’s buildout (horizon year), as required. Summary Table 1: Corkscrew Grove East Village Fiscal Highlights Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Fiscal Highlights At Buildout At Buildout Collier County: Countywide MSTU Ad Valorem Tax Base $ 2,137,928,000 $ 2,137,928,000 Net Annual Fiscal Benefit Countywide MSTU Annual Operating Revenues$ 8,880,000 $ 1,590,000 Annual Operating Expenditures 5,877,000 683,000 Total Annual Net Operating Surplus$ 3,003,000 $ 907,000 Collier County Schools: School District Ad Valorem Tax Base $ 2,197,080,000 Net Fiscal Benefit: Annual Operating* Total Capital Annual Ad Valorem Operating/Total Capital Revenues$ 6,987,000 $ 67,335,000 Annual Ad Valorem Operating/Total Capital Expenditures 6,987,000 67,335,000 Annual Ad Valorem Operating/Total Capital Surplus $ - $ - Annual Ad Valorem Tax Revenues: At Buildout Collier County $ 6,437,000 Collier County MSTU 1,463,000 Conservation Collier 448,000 Water Pollution Control 53,000 Immokalee Fire Control District 8,017,000 Collier County Schools - Ad Valorem Operating 6,987,000 Collier County Schools - Capital Improvement 2,490,000 Total Annual Ad Valorem Tax Revenues$ 25,895,000 5 Page 221 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Impact Fees Impact Fee Revenue Adopted Rates Required Facility Analysis: Roads - Impact Fees$ 35,834,000 Regional Parks$ 9,246,000 Community Parks$ 3,242,000 Law Enforcement $ 2,258,000 Jail$ 1,898,000 EMS$ 543,000 Schools$ 28,671,000 Water N/A Wastewater N/A Immokalee Fire Control District $ 9,146,000 * The Florida Legislature sets the majority of school district operating revenues through statewide equalization formulas. Source: DPFG, 2025 Developer Contribution Agreements (“DCAs”) will be negotiated with the County prior to approval of the Corkscrew Grove East Village. As demonstrated in this report, DPFG concludes that the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is fiscally neutral, as defined, for the following facilities as required by the Collier County Land Development Code (“LDC”) Section 4.08.07 L. Summary Table 2: Corkscrew Grove East Village Net Fiscal Impact Conclusions per Taxing Authority Net Fiscal Net Fiscal Required Facility Analysis Impact Required Facility Analysis Impact Collier County Collier County Schools Annual Operations: Annual Operations* Neutral General Funds Positive Capital Neutral MSTU Positive Capital: Collier County Roads Neutral Annual Operations and Capital: Regional and Community Parks Positive Water N/A Law Enforcement Neutral Wastewater N/A Jail Neutral Irrigation Water Neutral EMS Neutral Solid Waste Neutral Stormwater Neutral Immokalee Fire Control District Positive * The Florida Legislature sets the majority of school district operating revenues through statewide equalization formul * The Florida Legislature sets the majority of school district operating revenues through statewide equalization formulas. Source: DPFG, 2025 6 Page 222 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION An Economic Assessment is required as part of the Stewardship Receiving Area (“SRA”) Designation Application Package, and each SRA must demonstrate that its development, as a whole, will be fiscally neutral or positive to the County tax base at buildout. At a minimum, the Economic Assessment shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire, and schools. Development Planning & Financing Group, Inc. (“DPFG”) was retained to prepare an Economic Assessment for the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. This report provides complete and transparent support for the methodology, assumptions, and calculations applied to demonstrate fiscal neutrality, as required, for the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA for Collier County (“County”), the Immokalee Fire Control District, and the Collier County Public Schools District (“School District”). METHODOLOGY The Government Finance Officers Association (“GFOA”)1 outlines the most common methods for estimating service costs in fiscal impact analysis as: average cost, marginal cost, comparisons to other governments and econometric modeling. In many cases, fiscal impact analysis uses a combination of these methods to generate a projection.  Average Cost is the easiest and most common method and assumes the current cost of serving residents and businesses will equal the cost of serving the new development. The average cost method provides a rough estimate of both direct and indirect costs associated with development. However, this method does not account for demographic change, existing excess capacity, or potential economies of scale in service delivery. Methods of calculating average cost include per capita costs, service standard costs and proportional valuation costs.  Marginal Cost uses site-specific information to determine services costs for a new development. A case study approach is typically necessary to gather detailed information about the existing capacity within public services and infrastructure to accommodate growth from a development project. This method assumes that information about local service levels and capacity is more accurate than standards based on average data  Comparable Governments incorporate the experience by similar governments with comparable development projects. Studying other governments before and after specific 1 Michael J. Mucha, “An Introduction to Fiscal Impact Analysis for Development Projects,” (white paper, Government Finance Officers Association, 2007), www.gfoa.org 7 Page 223 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT projects can provide useful information in determining additional costs and the increase in costs over a long period of time.  Econometric Modeling uses complex econometric models and is best used for estimating impacts from large projects that create many indirect effects on the existing community such as a utility plant or an entertainment center. The fiscal impact analysis of the Corkscrew Grove East Village uses a marginal/average cost hybrid methodology to determine the Project’s impact on capital and operating costs. Personnel and operating costs were projected on a variable, or incremental basis, as were expenditures for certain capital improvements. Revenues, such as property taxes, were projected on a marginal basis whereas revenues attributable to growth were reflected on an average basis. Allocation bases include Permanent Population, Peak Seasonal Population, Peak Seasonal Population and Employment, Peak Seasonal and Tourist Population and Employment. Persons per residential product type and employees per nonresidential land uses were obtained from the County’s 2016 Emergency Medical Services Impact Fee Update, which County staff has deemed the most appropriate source of County-adopted residential and nonresidential demographic metrics for purposes of this analysis (see Appendix). Based on discussions with County staff, these demographic metrics are conservative when compared to similar metrics compiled for the impact fee updates which are in process. The Economic Assessment model and future reports will be revised and reissued if the Board of County Commissioners adopts the impact fee updates and establishes new rates prior to hearing.2 The analysis includes the following general funds:3 (0001) General Fund, (0002) Affordable Housing Impact Fee Deferral Program, (0003) Emergency Relief Fund, (0004) Economic Development, (0011) Clerk of Circuit Court, (0040) Sheriff, (0060) Property Appraiser, (0070) Tax Collector, and (0080) Supervisor of Elections. A reconciliation of these funds to the County’s budget documents is provided in the Appendix. The analysis also includes (1011) Unincorporated Area General Fund MSTU, the Immokalee Fire Control & Rescue District, and the Collier County School District. The FY 2025 budget of the County and the FY 2025 budgets of the Immokalee Fire Control District, and the School District form the basis for the service levels and revenue and cost assumptions. This “snapshot” approach does not attempt to speculate about how services, costs, revenues, and other factors will change over time. Instead, it evaluates the fiscal impact to the County as it currently conducts business under the present budget. The impacts of self-supporting funds (e.g., enterprise funds) were not included in this analysis as is typical in fiscal impact analysis. Utility rates and capacity fees are established through 2 Impact fee updates for Roads, Parks, EMS, Law Enforcement, Correctional Facilities, and Schools are currently underway. 3 Collier County considers this listing of general funds as the “General Fund Grouping.” 8 Page 224 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT independent studies. Public utilities generally benefit from economies of scale (i.e., more customers) since rate structures are dependent upon recovering fixed infrastructure costs. Based on Pre-Application discussions with County staff, the County accepts the methodology described in this report and as applied in previous SRA Economic Assessments. In particular, the County accepts the preparation of the analysis at the year of buildout (or horizon year) under a snapshot approach which reflects the intended land uses of the project as a whole. In addition, there are no monitoring requirements with respect to the fiscal impact of an SRA Village. MAJOR ASSUMPTIONS Major assumptions supporting the Corkscrew Grove East Village Economic Assessment are summarized in this section. The financial model and assumptions are provided in the Appendix. Balance Carryforwards were excluded from allocation to avoid overstatement of revenues. Interfund transfers were analyzed in depth, and their classifications in the model were carefully reviewed. Revenue and costs are projected in constant 2025 dollars, with no adjustment for future inflation. The use of a constant dollar approach in fiscal impact analysis produces annual and buildout results that are readily comparable and understandable. Results have been rounded to the nearest one thousand dollars ($1,000). Development Assumptions Table 1 presents the Corkscrew Grove East Village development program proposed by the Applicant. The program was the basis for determining the operating and capital impacts of the Project. Table 1: Corkscrew Grove East Village Development Program Residential Units Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 Total Market Rate Residential 4,127 Affordable Housing Units 362 Tota Housing Units 4,489 Non-Residential Sq Ft Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft 283,500 Total Non-Residential 283,500 Civic/Institutional 70,000 Grand Total Non-Residential (sf) 353,500 Source: Alico, Inc., DPFG, 2025 9 Page 225 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Revenue Assumptions Sales, Just, and Taxable Values Estimates of sales, just, and taxable values for the residential units are shown in Table 2. The sales values of the residential product types were provided by the Applicant’s market consultant, Mr. Michael Timmerman, CRE. The eligible homestead percentage per residential product type used in computing the taxable value per unit was based on unincorporated County averages published by the Shimberg Center for Housing Studies at the University of Florida. Table 2: Corkscrew Grove East Village Residential Sales, Just, and Taxable Values Average Average Just Average Residential Units Sales Value Value per Taxable Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 $ 418,990 $ 393,850 $ 376,269 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 $ 601,204 $ 565,132 $ 552,035 Total Market Rate Residential 4,127 $ 544,734 $ 512,050 $ 497,563 Source: Mr. Michael Timmerman, CRE, Shimberg Center for Housing Studies (Univ. of FL), DPFG, 2025 Table 3 reflects the estimates of sales, just4, and taxable values for the nonresidential land uses. Sales values were based on data provided by the Applicant’s market consultant, Mr. Michael Timmerman, CRE. Estimates used to arrive at just values also considered construction cost per square foot estimates from the Cumming Group for reasonableness. Table 3: Corkscrew Grove East Village Nonresidential Sales, Just, and Taxable Values Taxable Sales Value Just Value Value per Non-Residential Sq Ft per Sq Ft per Sq Ft Sq Ft Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft 283,500 $ 350 $ 298 $ 298 Total Non-Residential 283,500 Civic/Institutional 70,000 Grand Total Non-Residential (sf) 353,500 Source: Mr. Michael Timmerman, CRE Cumming Group, DPFG, 2025 At buildout, the real property tax base of the Corkscrew Grove East Village is estimated to be $2.1 billion as reflected in Table 4. 4 In determining just value, reasonable fees and costs of purchase (for example, commissions) are excluded. 10 Page 226 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 4: Corkscrew Grove East Village County Tax Base at Buildout Units or Taxable Value Land Use Sq Ft per Unit/SF Buildout Multi-Family Type 1 784 $ 416,699 $ 326,692,000 Type 2 210 $ 271,939 57,107,000 Type 3 157 $ 320,819 50,369,000 Type 4 128 $ 367,819 47,081,000 Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 $ 481,249,000 Single-Family Detached Type 1 1,073 $ 483,357 $ 518,642,000 Type 2 908 $ 567,957 515,705,000 Type 3 784 $ 614,957 482,126,000 Type 4 83 $ 671,357 55,723,000 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 $ 1,572,196,000 Total Market Rate Residential 4,127 $ 2,053,445,000 Non-Residential Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft 283,500 $ 298 $ 84,483,000 Total Non-Residential 283,500 $ 84,483,000 Total Tax Base $ 2,137,928,000 Source: Mr. Mike Timmerman, CRE, DPFG, 2025 Property Taxes Table 5 reflects the millage rate assumptions (FY 2025) for Collier County used in the analysis. Table 5: Collier County Millage Rates 3.0107 County General Fund 0.0246 Water Pollution Control 0.2096 Conservation Collier Program 3.2449 County Wide Millage Source: Collier County, 2025 Expenditure Assumptions A detailed evaluation of expenditures by the General Funds Group and the MSTU General Fund was performed to determine which were variable (i.e., assumed to fluctuate with growth) or fixed (i.e., not impacted by growth) in nature. For equitable matching of revenues and expenses, certain adjustments were made to account for funding sources from other funds. The primary demand bases in the average cost/revenue calculations were new population and employment for the County and new students for the School District. 11 Page 227 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT COLLIER COUNTY FISCAL IMPACTS Collier County Operating Impacts Table 6 presents the annual net operating fiscal impact of the Corkscrew Grove East Village at buildout. Table 6: Corkscrew Grove East Village Operating Annual Net Impact at Buildout At Buildout Net Operating Impact Countywide MSTU Total Annual Operating Revenues$ 8,880,000 $ 1,590,000 Total Annual Operating Expenditures 5,877,000 683,000 Total Annual Operating Surplus$ 3,003,000 $ 907,000 Source: DPFG, 2025 Collier County Operating Revenue Projections Projected County annual operating revenues at buildout are summarized in Table 7. Corkscrew Grove East Village is projected to generate annual operating revenues of $8.9 million for the County’s General Funds and $1.6 million for the MSTU General Fund. 12 Page 228 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 7: Corkscrew Grove East Village Annual Operating Revenue Projections GENERAL FUND GROUPING REVENUES At Buildout Ad Valorem Taxes$ 6,437,000 Licenses & Permits 3,000 Inter-Governmental Revenues 6,000 State Revenue Sharing - Growth Portion 283,000 State Sales Tax 1,160,000 Charges for Services 712,000 Fines & Forfeitures 10,000 Miscellaneous Revenues 4,000 Interest/ Miscellaneous 34,000 Indirect Service Charge 113,000 Transfers from Constitutional Officers 99,000 Reimburse from Other Departments 19,000 Total General Funds Annual Operating Revenues$ 8,880,000 MSTU GENERAL FUND REVENUES At Buildout Ad Valorem Taxes$ 1,463,000 Licenses & Permits 6,000 Charges for Services 42,000 Fines & Forfeitures 3,000 Miscellaneous Revenues 4,000 Interest/ Miscellaneous 6,000 Communication Services Tax 55,000 Reimburse from Other Departments 11,000 Total MSTU Annual Operating Revenues$ 1,590,000 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 Collier County Operating Expenditure Projections Projected County annual operating expenditures at buildout are presented in Table 8. Corkscrew Grove East Village is expected to generate annual General Funds service demand of $5.9 million and $683,000 of MSTU General Fund service demand. The Appendix contains a detailed breakdown of operating costs by line-item category. 13 Page 229 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 8: Corkscrew Grove East Village Annual Operating Expenditure Projections GENERAL FUND GROUPING EXPENDITURES At Buildout County Attorney$ 23,000 Other General Administration 67,000 Property Appraiser 79,000 Supervisor of Elections 51,000 Clerk of Courts 121,000 Sheriff Law Enforcement 2,523,000 Law Enforcement Paid by BCC 69,000 Detention & Corrections 126,000 Bailiffs 4,000 Tax Collector 154,000 Human Resources 37,000 Procurement Services 20,000 Emergency Management Division 65,000 Growth Mgt - Planning 20,000 Growth Mgt - Regulation 27,000 Circuit & County Court Judges 1,000 Public Defender 11,000 State Attorney 13,000 County Manager Operations 15,000 Office of Management & Budget 18,000 Facilities Management Division 147,000 Public Services Administration 4,000 Domestic Animal Services 85,000 Community and Human Services 84,000 Library 165,000 Parks & Recreation 329,000 Public Health 5,000 Transportation Mgt - Public Transit & NE 11,000 Transfer to 1001 Road & Bridge 362,000 Transfer to 1051 Court Administration 45,000 Transfer to 1060 MHz Radio System 9,000 Transfer to 3081 Growth Mgt Transportation Cap 126,000 Transfer to 4030 CATT Transit Enhance 51,000 Transfer to 4033 Transp Disadv 44,000 Transfer to 4050 EMS Fund 735,000 Distributions in Excess of Fees to Govt Agencies 231,000 Total General Funds Annual Operating Expenditures$ 5,877,000 14 Page 230 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT MSTU GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES At Buildout Other General Administration$ 31,000 Human Resources 8,000 Growth Mgt - Administration 5,000 Growth Mgt - Planning 31,000 Growth Mgt - Regulation 100,000 Communications Government & Public Affairs 37,000 Parks & Recreation 361,000 Transportation Mgt - Operations 40,000 Transportation Mgt - Landscaping 43,000 Transportation Mgt - Coastal Zone Management 4,000 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 23,000 Total MSTU Annual Operating Expenditures$ 683,000 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 Corkscrew Grove East Village is deemed fiscally positive with respect to the County’s Operating Impacts. Collier County Capital Impacts Collier County Capital Impacts by Department Methodologies upon which the County’s impact fees are based generally use the consumption or existing inventory replacement approach rather than an improvements-driven approach. For example, the County’s Parks impact fee is calculated by dividing the existing inventory of park facilities, including land at current replacement value, by the existing population or relevant demand base. This methodology does not consider the timetable over which the existing facilities were acquired, available capacity within existing facilities, or long-range capital improvement plans with timetables for delivery of new facilities. Impact fee methodologies are typically designed to generate the maximum amount of impact fees a jurisdiction can legally assess. Impact fee calculations include a credit component to recognize future revenue streams which will be used to fund capital expansion and certain debt service payments. The credit component prevents new development from being charged twice for the same facility. The analyses of the General Funds and the MSTU General Fund account for these credits by recognizing capital outlays and applicable transfers (e.g., subsidized capital acquisition and capital fund debt service) as expenditures. This approach is very conservative because the associated expenditures include growth and non-growth-related capital outlays and capital fund subsidies. In comparison, the credit component of the impact fee calculation is limited to certain growth-related capital outlay and capital fund subsidies. The impact fee updates for Correctional Facilities and Parks were adopted in 2015, and the corresponding adopted rates have been indexed. EMS and Law Enforcement impact fee studies were updated in 2016, and the associated rates were adopted in 2017. The Road impact fee update was adopted in 2019 with new rates phased-in over a three-year period. Impact fee 15 Page 231 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT updates for Roads, Parks, Law Enforcement, EMS, Correctional Facilities and Schools are currently underway. Over buildout, new development will be charged impact fees at rates enacted by the County at that time. The Economic Assessment model and future reports will be revised and reissued if the Board of County Commissioners adopts the impact fee updates and establishes new rates prior to hearing. The capital needs of the Corkscrew Grove East Village were discussed with the Collier County Sheriff, EMS, the Immokalee Fire Control District, and the School District. The capital analysis for these services was prepared in accordance with their input. When the achieved level of service (“LOS”) for a particular public facility currently exceeds the adopted LOS, then the adopted LOS was applied in calculating demand to (1) recognize existing capacity and (2) avoid overstating demand. When the achieved LOS for a particular facility was less than the adopted LOS, then the achieved LOS was used when calculating demand to avoid charging new development for a higher LOS than provided to existing development. Data from the 2024 Audit Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities (“AUIR”), the most recent source available, was generally used to calculate the achieved LOS. Other inputs were obtained from the relevant impact fee studies. Projected impact fee collections for the facilities specified in LDC Section 4.08.07 L are reflected in Table 9. The County’s impact fee schedule is included in the Appendix. Table 9: Corkscrew Grove East Village Impact Fee Revenue for Collier County Impact Fees Impact Fee Revenue Adopted Rates Required Facility Analysis: Roads - Impact Fees$ 35,834,000 Regional Parks$ 9,246,000 Community Parks$ 3,242,000 Law Enforcement $ 2,258,000 Jail$ 1,898,000 EMS$ 543,000 Schools$ 28,671,000 Water N/A Wastewater N/A Immokalee Fire Control District $ 9,146,000 Note: Immokalee Water and Sewer District will provide water and wastewater services. Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 16 Page 232 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Collier County Road Capital Impacts Based on the results provided in the Traffic Impact Statement – Section 1, Road Segment Analysis (June 4, 2025) prepared by Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA, the Corkscrew Grove East Village is a significant traffic generator for the roadway network at this location and adversely impacts the following roadway segments:  SR 29 from 9th St. to CR 29A North  SR 29 from Hendry County Line to SR 82  SR 82 from Hendry County Line to SR 29 The Owner proposes to provide a transportation mitigation plan to stay consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Collier County’s GMP. The Owner may be required to assist the County with potential capacity/operational improvements for the roadway segments that are significantly impacted by the project. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting to determine turn lane requirements, as more accurate parameters will be made available. The Owner proposes to pay the applicable Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. The Owner proposes to provide transportation commitments that will be incorporated into the Development Document for the project. The mitigation plan will include specific improvements to be undertaken, fair share contribution commitments where appropriate, and site related improvements. Site related improvements are addressed as development occurs. Concurrency Fair-Share Estimate Appendix L to the Traffic Impact Statement – Section 1 Road Segment Analysis contains the roadway proportionate share calculation for Corkscrew Grove which will be developed as a pair of SRA Villages. The project traffic’s consumption of the projected added capacity is total traffic volume with project minus the unimproved service volume. The estimated roadway service volume in the improved condition uses the Collier County AUIR unimproved condition service volume multiplied by the ratio of LOS D service volumes shown in FDOT Generalized Service Volume Table 7 (Urban Condition, Class I Arterial, Appendix I) between the improved and unimproved cross sections (product rounded to the nearest hundred). Ex ratios:  2 lanes to 4 = 2,000/880 = 2.27  2 lanes to 6 = 3,020/880 = 3.43  4 lanes to 6 = 3,020/2,000 = 1.51 17 Page 233 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT That ratio isolates the effect of the additional lanes while keeping all other factors affecting service volume constant. The effect of all those other factors is reflected in the County’s published service volume in the unimproved condition and explains its relation to the average for all roads of like cross section. The Proportionate Fair share estimate allocable to Corkscrew Grove East Village is $24.9 million ($49.8 million cost for both Villages x 50 percent = $24.9 million allocable to East Village), which is less than the project’s projected road impact fees of $35.8 million. The Owner proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as applicable. Operational Fair-Share Estimate Based on the results provided in the Traffic Impact Statement – Section 2, Intersection Analysis (August 29, 2025) prepared by Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA, an operational fair-share contribution is not required. Corkscrew Grove East Village Regional Parks Capital Impacts The County imposes separate impact fees for community and regional parks. Revenues and costs associated with maintaining and operating the County’s Parks facilities are provided in the General Funds and MSTU Operating Impacts section. Regional Park capital impacts are presented in Table 10. Table 10: Corkscrew Grove East Village Regional Parks Capital Impacts Regional Park Facilities Regional Park Capital Revenues Impact Fee Revenue$ 9,246,000 Other Capital Revenues* 481,000 Total Capital Revenues$ 9,727,000 Regional Park Indirect Capital Costs Indexed Land & Facility Cost per Acre$ 590,288 Regional Park Acres at Achieved LOS 16.67 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Regional Park Acres$ 9,840,000 Regional Park Capital Revenues in Excess of Capital Costs$ (113,000) Community Park Capital Revenues in Excess of Capital Costs 177,000 Total Park Capital Revenues in Excess of Capital Costs$ 64,000 *Included in the Collier County General Funds and MSTU expenditures analysis Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 The County’s adopted LOS for Regional Parks is 2.70 acres per 1,000 peak population. County Staff recommended the application of an adjusted achieved LOS of 1.82 acres per 1,000 peak population for purposes of this analysis. 18 Page 234 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 11: Corkscrew Grove East Village Regional Parks Level of Service LOS Share of Regional Park Facilities Regional Park Achieved LOS per County Staff 1.82 Corkscrew Grove East SRA Peak Seasonal Population 9,159 Corkscrew Grove East SRA Community Park Acreage 16.67 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 The indexed capital cost per Regional Park acre is calculated in Table 12. Table 12: Corkscrew Grove East Village Indexed Capital Cost per Acre Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 Corkscrew Grove East Village Community Parks Capital Impacts Community Parks capital impacts are presented in Table 13. Table 13: Corkscrew Grove East Village Community Parks Capital Impacts Community Park Facilities Community Park Capital Revenues Impact Fee Revenue$ 3,242,000 Other Capital Revenues* 52,000 Total Capital Revenues$ 3,294,000 Community Park Indirect Capital Costs Indexed Land & Facility Cost per Acre$ 283,638 Community Park Acres at Adopted LOS 10.99 Corkscrew Grove East SRA Community Park Cost$ 3,117,000 Community Park Capital Revenues in Excess of Capital Costs$ 177,000 Regional Park Capital Revenues in Excess of Capital Costs (113,000) Total Park Capital Revenues in Excess of Capital Costs$ 64,000 *Included in the Collier County General Funds and MSTU expenditures analysis. Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 The County’s adopted LOS for Community Parks is 1.20 acres per 1,000 peak population, and the achieved LOS is 1.22 acres. As such, the adopted LOS was used to estimate the number of Community Park acres needed to serve Corkscrew Grove East Village. 19 Page 235 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 14: Corkscrew Grove East Village Community Parks Level of Service LOS Share of Community Park Facilities Community Park Adopted LOS 1.20 Corkscrew Grove East SRA Peak Seasonal Population 9,159 Corkscrew Grove East SRA Community Park Acreage 10.99 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 The indexed capital cost per Community Park acre is calculated in Table 15. Table 15: Corkscrew Grove East Village Community Parks Level of Service Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 Collier County Law Enforcement Capital Impacts The Law Enforcement impact fee includes the capital construction and expansion of police service related to land facilities, and capital equipment required to support police service demand created by new growth. Fees are assessed at the recommended level. Revenues and costs associated with maintaining and operating the Law Enforcement facilities and equipment are provided in the General Funds Operating Impacts section. Direct capital impacts on Law Enforcement are presented in Table 16. Based on discussions with the Sheriff’s office, a substation is needed to serve Corkscrew Grove East Village. Under the adopted impact fee methodology, Corkscrew Grove East Village will generate sufficient impact fee revenues to cover the direct impact of law enforcement facilities and equipment. 20 Page 236 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 16: Corkscrew Grove East Village Law Enforcement Capital Impacts Law Enforcement Facilities Law Enforcement Capital Revenues: Impact Fee Revenue$ 2,258,000 Other Capital Revenues* 409,000 Total Capital Revenues$ 2,667,000 Law Enforcement Direct Capital Costs: New Substation - Square Feet 4,500 Cost per Sq Ft$ 470 Cost of New Substation 2,115,000 Law Enforcement Indirect Capital Costs 552,000 Law Enforcement Capital Revenues in Excess of Capital Costs$ - *Included in the Collier County General Funds expenditures analysis. Source Collier County, DPFG, 2025 The County's 2016 Law Enforcement Impact Fee Study is based on a Certified Police Officer per Capita LOS, consistent with the County adopted standards at the time. Since then, the County has adopted a Facility Square Footage per Capita LOS. A new impact fee study incorporating this methodology is underway. The Economic Assessment model will be revised upon the adoption of a new Law Enforcement impact fee study. Collier County Correctional Facilities Capital Impacts The Correctional Facilities impact fee includes jail facilities (land and building) and equipment. Fees are assessed at the recommended level. Revenues and costs associated with maintaining and operating correctional facilities and equipment are provided in the General Funds Operating Impacts section. Correctional Facilities capital impacts are presented in Table 17. Table 17: Corkscrew Grove East Village Correctional Facilities Jail Facilities Correctional Facilities Capital Revenues: Impact Fee Revenue$ 1,898,000 Other Capital Revenues* 104,000 Total Capital Revenues$ 2,002,000 Capital Cost (Land, Building, Vehicles, and Equipment) - indexed 2,002,000 Correctional Facilities Net Capital Impact$ - *Included in the Collier County General Funds expenditures analysis. Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 The capital cost for correctional facilities is calculated below. 21 Page 237 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 18: Corkscrew Grove East Village Correctional Facilities Capital Cost Functional Population Units/ Functional Land Use Coefficient Square Feet Population Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 0.83 1,279 1,062 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 1.81 2,848 5,152 Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft 2.34 283,500 663 Total Functional Population 6,877 Indexed Capital Cost per Functional Population$ 290.98 Total Capital Cost$ 2,002,000 Functional Population Coefficients obtained from the Collier County Correctional Impact Fee Study Update (2015). Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 The indexed capital cost per bed is calculated in Table 19. Table 19: Corkscrew Grove East Village Correctional Facilities Indexed Cost per Resident Description Figure Net Asset Value - Indexed$ 111,592,344 Number of Beds 1,304 Net Asset Value per Bed$ 85,577 Impact Fee LOS (Beds per 1,000 Functional Residents) 3.40 Asset Value per Functional Resident$ 290.98 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 Collier County Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Capital Impacts Emergency Medical Service (“EMS”) for the project will be initially provided by Collier County Medic Station 32 which is co-located at the Fire District’s Headquarters Station 32. If call volume and response time for the Corkscrew Grove East Village and the immediate area generate the need for an additional ambulance, Collier County EMS may choose to co-locate a medic facility at the new Immokalee Fire Control District station. For purposes of the Economic Assessment, it is assumed the space needed for a new ambulance will be leased at the highest annual rent as currently paid for similar space. The EMS level of service in the County’s AUIR is approximately one unit (vehicle, equipment, station space) per 16,400 population; however, in addition to this metric, EMS also relies on demand factors such as response time and call volume to site new facilities. Call volume is affected by demographics in the service area. For example, nearly 60 percent of the County’s ambulance fee collections are Medicare patients and 10 percent are Medicaid patients. Medicare payments are not based on charged rates, but rather 80 percent of what the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services determines to be allowable. Table 20 calculates the allocable cost of EMS equipment needed to serve the Corkscrew Grove East Village using a peak seasonal resident population approach. 22 Page 238 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 20: Corkscrew Grove East Village EMS Capital Cost EMS Facility and Equipment Cost EMS Direct Capital Costs: Equipment Cost$ 903,567 Level of Service Standard 16,400 Per Capita Cost $ 55.10 Peak Resident Population 9,159 EMS Direct Capital Costs $ 505,000 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 Table 21 compares the allocable EMS equipment needs to the estimated impact fee revenues. Table 21: Corkscrew Grove East Village EMS Capital Impact EMS Net Capital Impact EMS Capital Revenues: Impact Fee Revenue$ 543,000 Other Capital Revenues* 13,000 Total Capital Revenues$ 556,000 EMS Capital Cost: EMS Direct Equipment Cost$ 505,000 EMS Net Capital Revenues Available for EMS-Growth Related Capital Needs 51,000 Total Capital Cost$ 556,000 *Included in the Collier County General Funds net fiscal impact buildout analysis. Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 Personnel and operating costs for staffing and operating a new ambulance, including rent, are allocated in Appendix Table 17 based on the level of service in the 2024 AUIR and the peak residential population of the Corkscrew Grove East Village. The calculated General Fund EMS Expenditure per demand unit was multiplied by 187 percent to recognize the additional EMS cost. For conservatism of this analysis, it is assumed the General Fund will subsize 100 percent of the cost, whereas the actual subsidy is generally around 55 percent. The Corkscrew Grove East Village is deemed fiscally neutral with respect to Roads, Regional and Community Parks, Law Enforcement, Correctional Facilities, and EMS capital and operating impacts. Water and Wastewater The project site is located within the Immokalee Water and Sewer District (“IWSD”) utility service area. Therefore, potable water and wastewater services for the Corkscrew Groves East Village project will be provided by IWSD. To address the potable water demands of the project, the following improvements are anticipated: 1. Regional Water Supply Facility: IWSD plans to construct a regional water supply facility on land currently owned by Alico Land Development Company and located just east of the SRA along the north side of SR 82. This facility will ensure an adequate potable water 23 Page 239 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT supply for the development and comply with the Florida Administrative Code standards for Public Water Systems. 2. Distribution of Potable Water: Within the project boundaries, potable water distribution will be coordinated between the Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District and the IWSD. Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District will oversee the initial installation of distribution infrastructure. The proposed potable water system will comply with all regulatory requirements, including considerations for the disposal of any waste products generated by the water treatment process. The system will adhere to approved generation rates and design criteria to ensure compliance with Level of Service (“LOS”) standards. Potable water demands, including Average Daily Demand (“ADD”) and Maximum Daily Demand (“MDD”), will be calculated in coordination with IWSD and the relevant permitting agencies. The following improvements are anticipated to meet the wastewater demands of the project: 1. Wastewater Treatment Facility: IWSD plans to construct a regional wastewater treatment facility on property currently owned by Alico Land Development Company, located just east of the SRA along the north side of SR 82. This facility will treat wastewater generated by the development in compliance with the Florida Administrative Code standards for wastewater treatment systems exceeding 10,000 gallons per day. 2. Wastewater Collection and Transmission: Within the project boundaries, wastewater collection and transmission infrastructure will be coordinated between the Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District and IWSD. Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District will oversee the initial installation of the necessary gravity sewer lines, force mains, and lift stations. The proposed wastewater treatment system will adhere to all regulatory requirements, including the proper disposal of waste products generated during the treatment process. Wastewater flows, including Average Daily Flow (“ADF”) and Peak Hourly Flow (“PHF”), will be calculated in coordination with IWSD and the appropriate permitting agencies to ensure compliance with Level of Service (“LOS”) standards. The Owner/Developer will not be obligated to pay Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water and wastewater impact fees. Instead, applicable connection fees will be calculated and paid directly to IWSD. The Corkscrew Grove East Village is deemed fiscally neutral with respect to Collier County’s Water and Wastewater capital and operating impacts. 24 Page 240 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Stormwater Management Existing stormwater on the site is generated by the agricultural activities that have historically taken place and are currently permitted. Stormwater is collected through a network of internal ditches and canals, which route the runoff to the on-site Water Retention Areas (“WRAs”) via pumps. Discharges from these WRAs are controlled through regulated control structures that limit offsite discharge rates. Offsite discharges flow into adjacent canals and/or culverts under Corkscrew Road, with the ultimate outfall directed into the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (“CREW”). The proposed SRA encompasses three distinct areas: the property west of Corkscrew Road, the property north of SR 82, and the property east of Corkscrew Road and south of SR 82. The existing site has historically been used for agricultural row crops, primarily oranges and tomatoes. The site is composed of an intricate network of agricultural infrastructure, including dikes, impoundment areas known as WRAs, perimeter ditches, and berms. These perimeter berms effectively prevent external surface water from flowing onto the site, ensuring that no stormwater flows from surrounding properties are accepted. Within the site, stormwater runoff from the agricultural fields is collected in perimeter ditches. From there, agricultural pumps transfer the excess runoff into the WRAs. These WRAs are equipped with drainage structures that direct stormwater either into adjacent canals, through culverts under Corkscrew Road, or directly into the CREW lands. Two canals currently traverse the site, ultimately discharging into CREW. These canals, essential for stormwater conveyance from surrounding properties, will be preserved. One of these, Cabbage Slough, will be partially relocated within the site to accommodate the proposed development. This relocation will maintain the canal's current capacity and flow patterns, ensuring that surrounding hydrology is not adversely affected. The other canal, Gator Slough, will remain unaltered to preserve its existing functionality. All WRAs adjacent to the SRA will be integrated into the stormwater management system. Discharges into the WRAs will occur only after the required water quality treatment has been achieved. Stormwater discharge into the WRA will only occur through control structures permitted by the South Florida Water Management District (“SFWMD”). The Owner of Corkscrew East Village SRA will be responsible for all costs associated with the design, permitting, construction, and operation of the proposed stormwater improvements required to serve Corkscrew East Village development. The SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessment provides additional information. The Corkscrew Grove East Village is deemed fiscally neutral with respect of Stormwater Management capital and operating impacts. 25 Page 241 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Irrigation Water The Corkscrew Groves project site has a long history of permitted agricultural withdrawals from the Lower Tamiami and Sandstone Aquifers that have not resulted in any known adverse impacts to natural environments. The agricultural water allocations currently permitted and used within the Corkscrew Groves project area total approximately 13.78 MGD on an annual average basis (5,028 MGY) and approximately 18.45 MGD on a maximum monthly basis (572 MGM). At build-out, the Corkscrew Groves project will result in converting approximately 1,447 acres of the currently permitted 3,100 acres of agricultural land into a residential development or about 47% of the currently permitted agricultural acreage. Prorating the currently permitted irrigation allocation to the 1,447 acres proposed for development yields an annual average day allocation of 6.48 MGD and a maximum month day allocation of 8.68 MGD for the proposed development area. The transition of agricultural use to residential/commercial use will result in approximately 432 acres of landscaping and turf within the Corkscrew Groves development requiring irrigation. The project irrigation demand for this amount of irrigated acreage as determined using the SFWMD Blaney-Criddle method is:  1.44 MGD on an annual average basis or 524 MGY (78% reduction in current use)  2.24 MGD on a maximum monthly basis or 68 MGM (74% reduction in current use) The proposed change in land use will result in a significant reduction in irrigation water usage at the project site. The Corkscrew Groves project will obtain a water use permit from the SFWMD which will allow withdrawal from onsite surface water and ground water sources to meet irrigation demands. The onsite irrigation water supply system will include stormwater lakes and wells. The lake system will be used to supply irrigation water for the project and wells will be utilized to resupply the withdrawal lakes when needed. The proposed source aquifers for the wells are the Lower Tamiami Aquifer and Sandstone Aquifer as currently permitted to meet the existing agricultural water demands on the project site. The lake withdrawals will provide an efficient and low impact method for effectively harvesting available stormwater supplies while lake storage and re-supply by groundwater will minimize potential impacts to both surface and groundwater levels. The Owner/Developer would be responsible for all costs associated with the permitting, construction, and maintenance of the irrigation system. The SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessment provides additional information. The Corkscrew Grove East Village is deemed fiscally neutral with respect of Irrigation Water capital and operating impacts. 26 Page 242 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Solid Waste According to the Economic Assessment, the proposed SRA will increase the County’s peak residential population by approximately 9,615 peak population persons at buildout for 4,502 total dwelling units, including 362 affordable housing units. Using a tons per capita rate of 0.70 (per the 2024 AUIR), a population increase of 9,615 people will generate an additional 6,730.5 tons disposed per year. Commercial solid waste and residential curbside solid waste, recycling, and horticulture will be collected with Collier County’s franchise agreements by other franchise-approved haulers. Commercial recycling is open to market collection. Construction waste will be collected and processed by a local business specializing in the recycling of construction products. Collier County maintains a Board approved Disposal Capacity Agreement (DCA) with Okeechobee Landfill, Inc., that provides 930,000 tons of reserved capacity at Okeechobee Landfill. The waste generated and transferred to Okeechobee Landfill as part of the DCA is not included in the AUIR capacity LOS. Per the AUIR, for the purpose of demonstrating compliance with the LOS Standard for capacity, it is assumed Collier County will renew, amend, or enter into a new agreement, as necessary, and continue to transfer. Commercial, municipal solid waste, and recycling containers will comply with Collier County ordinances. The project will utilize County-approved bear-resistant dumpsters/trash cans for all residential and non-residential uses, with locations of dumpsters being determined at the time of Site Development Plan (“SDP”) approval. All costs, including maintenance, of bear-resistant dumpsters will be borne by the Owner/Developer. Revenues and expenses of the solid waste operations described above are accounted for in the County’s Solid Waste Fund, a self-supporting enterprise fund. The Corkscrew Grove East Village is deemed fiscally neutral with respect to Collier County Solid Waste. COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOLS FISCAL IMPACT Collier County Schools Capital Impacts Three major sources of capital funds are available to Collier County Public Schools: the Capital Millage Tax, impact fees, capital outlay, and debt service. As shown in Table 22, the Capital Millage Tax has funded most of the School District’s capital projects over the past 10 years. Over that period, the School District collected $1.4 billion in Annual Capital Millage Tax, and annual Capital Millage Tax revenue is projected to triple from $99.1 million in 2015-16 to over $311.0 million in 2028-29. The School District’s capital revenues have provided $386.0 million in debt service funding, thereby positioning the School District to 27 Page 243 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT be debt-free by 2026, and pay-go financing of Aubrey Rogers High School, Bear Creek Elementary School (the District’s first new elementary school in 18 years), and the new elementary school in Ave Maria (scheduled to open in 2026). Table 22: CCPC Historical Enrollment and Capital Revenues Student Membership Capital County Permanent Elementary Middle Improvement School Impact Fee Population & High School(1) Tax (2) Revenue (2) 1 2015-16 356,874 42,748$ 99,171,443 $ 10,000,000 2 2016-17 362,634 43,321 119,452,273 12,000,000 3 2017-18 366,385 43,329 126,312,667 16,312,194 4 2018-19 371,939 43,447 132,117,173 14,000,000 5 2019-20 377,079 43,622 141,768,052 14,000,000 6 2020-21 385,980 41,208 150,062,073 23,918,248 7 2021-22 390,912 41,665 121,221,683 15,600,000 8 2022-23 404,310 42,256 155,853,979 26,152,692 9 2023-24 408,381 42,477 183,473,411 22,640,130 10 2024-25 413,300 42,550 186,718,691 19,000,000 Net Change/Total 56,426 (198)$ 1,416,151,445 $ 173,623,264 Projected: 2025-26 $ 260,439,696 2026-27 $ 275,117,472 2027-28 $ 293,829,264 2028-29 $ 310,913,136 Partial Uses of Capacity-Adding Capital Revenues Reduce Outstanding Debt FY 2016-2024$ 279,223,924 Reduce Outstanding Debt FY 2025 70,800,000 Reduce Outstanding Debt FY 2026 36,000,000 Aubrey Rogers High School (2023) 100,000,000 Bear Creek Elementary School (2025) 83,000,000 Elementary Q (Ave Maria) (2026) 80,000,000 Partial Uses of Capacity-Adding Capital Revenues $ 649,023,924 (1) Month 2 Monthly Membership Report (2) Amounts obtained from Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports and the 2024-25 Work Plan. Italized amounts obtained from Adopted Budgets as they were not separately reported in the ACFR. Source: Collier County, Collier County Public Schools, DPFG, 2025 From 2015-16 to 2024-25, the County added over 56,000 new permanent residents, but enrollment in School District elementary, middle, and high schools remained flat. As a result, the student generation rate per housing unit has declined considerably. According to the CCPC Capital Improvement Plan Fiscal Years 2025 through 2044, a robust housing market is expected in Collier County through 2028; however public school enrollment at brick and mortar schools is projected to remain steady. Factors moderating school enrollment during this growth period include the increase of charter school capacity and an expansion of the private school voucher program. As shown in Table 23, over 4,178 new charter school student stations have been added in the District over the past 10 years. 28 Page 244 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 23: Collier County Charter School Student Stations Student Student Collier County Stations Stations Charter Schools Year Built 2014-15 2024-25 1 Marco Island Charter Middle 1998 470 470 2 Immokalee Community Academy 2000 300 300 3 Marco Island Charter High 2011 350 350 4 Gulf Coast Charter Academy South 2013 336 701 5 Mason Classical Academy 2014 564 1,500 6 Collier Charter Academy 2017 - 1,145 7 BridgePrep of Collier 2018 - 1,000 8 Naples Classical Acadmey 2021 - 1,000 9 Optima Clasical Academy (Virtual Enrolled) 2022 - 97 Total 2,020 6,563 Increase in Charter School Capacity 2014-15 to 2024-25 4,178 Source: Collier County Public Schools, DPFG, 2025 Current school impact fees were adopted in 2015 based on the Collier County School Impact Fee Update Study (June 23, 2015) and were subsequently indexed based on the 2017 Indexing Calculations prepared by the County’s impact fee consultant. A school impact fee update is currently underway, and new school impact fees may be adopted before the end of 2025. Certain methodology and policy decisions are made by the Board of County Commissioners during the adoption of legally defensible impact fees. The new impact fees will take into consideration the decline in student generation rate, available capacity in existing schools, the significant increase in new school construction costs, the F.S. 1013.64(b) statutory cost caps, and the substantial increase in Capital Millage Tax available to fund new schools. It is beyond the scope of this analysis to calculate a legally defensible school impact fee. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed the School District will continue to rely on Capital Millage Tax for new school construction costs, and new development will be charged impact fees at rates enacted by the County at that time. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment model and report will be revised and reissued when the Board of County Commissioners adopts the impact fee update and establishes new rates. Corkscrew Grove East Village’s estimated demand for student stations is projected in Table 24 based on student generation rates in the 2015 School Impact Fee Update, the most recent adopted data available. Table 24: Corkscrew Grove East Village Projected Public School Enrollment Projected Residential Unit Type Units SGR Students Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 0.11 141 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 0.34 968 Total Market Rate Residential 4,127 1,109 Source: Collier County School District, DPFG, 2025 29 Page 245 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Projected enrollment by school type and 2028-29 available capacity in Planning Zone 6 is shown in Table 25. Table 25: Corkscrew Grove East Village Projected Enrollment by School Type Planning Zone 6 Projected 2028-29 School Type Students Percent Avail Capacity Elementary 517 47% 830 Middle 240 22% 455 High 352 32% 448 Total 1,109 100% 1,733 Source: Collier County School District, DPFG, 2025 The property owners of Corkscrew Grove East Village have reserved approximately 24.0 acres for a dedicated School Site, as depicted on the SRA Master Plan. A stipulation to the development order requires the Owner to convey real property for the School Site (public elementary school) in exchange for educational impact fee credits. The proposed stipulation states, “With respect to the conveyance of real property, by the Applicant to the School District, the School Reservation of the School Site to the School District fully mitigates for the development’s impact to the elementary, middle and high schools needed to serve Corkscrew Grove East Village." Projected school impact fee revenue is shown in Table 26. Table 26: Corkscrew Grove East Village School Impact Fee Revenue Units or School Impact Fee Category Sq Ft Impact Fee Total Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 $ 2,844.19 $ 3,638,000 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 $ 8,789.54 25,033,000 Total School Impact Fees 4,127 $ 28,671,000 Source: Collier County Public Schools, DPFG, 2025 As shown in Table 27, capital revenues consist primarily of ad valorem taxes and impact fees. The FY 2025 Capital Outlay Millage, which is determined locally by the School Board within parameters established by the State Legislature, is 1.1332 mills (subject to cap of 1.50 mills). The County voters approved a referendum in 2020 allowing the School District to reduce the Capital Outlay millage by 0.35 mills for four years and levy that millage for operating purposes. 30 Page 246 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 27: Corkscrew Grove East Village School Net Capital Impacts – Total Cash Flow Approach Capital Improvement School Impact Tax over Revenue/Expense Fee Revenue 25 Years Total School Capital Revenues: School Impact Fee Revenue $ 28,671,000 $ - $ 28,671,000 School District Capital Tax Revenue - 38,664,000 38,664,000 Total School Capital Revenues$ 28,671,000 $ 38,664,000 $ 67,335,000 Direct School Capital Expenditures 67,335,000 Net School Capital Expenditures$ - Source: Collier County Public Schools, DPFG, 2025 Collier County Schools Operating Impacts The Florida Legislature establishes the school operating millage based on the General Appropriations Act. Legislative committees meet to debate continuing and new initiatives in education and set a budget based on these results within the General Appropriations Act. The State budget determines the Required Local Effort Millage (“RLE”) for each school district. The RLE is the amount of funding that each district provides annually towards the cost of the Florida Education Finance Program (“FEFP”). The aggregate RLE for all school districts is prescribed by the Legislature as a specific line item in the annual General Appropriations Act. The Commissioner of Education is also authorized to adjust the millage rate to make sure no school district’s RLE exceeds 90 percent of that district’s total FEFP entitlement. The Legislature establishes a per student funding amount which is based upon the local authorities taxing of both the RLE and the 0.748 discretionary tax millage. According to the School District, the school tax millage for Collier County is much lower than the statewide average and typically ranks within the four lowest of all Florida school districts. A comparison of the School District’s millage history is shown in Figure 1. 31 Page 247 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Figure 1: Collier County School District Millage History Source: Collier County Public Schools, 2025 Because the Legislature sets the majority of school district operating revenues through a series of statewide equalization formulas, most fiscal analysts do not attempt to model school operating impacts. An estimate of local ad valorem school operating revenues is shown in Table 28. Table 28: Corkscrew Grove East Village Local Ad Valorem School Operating Taxes at Buildout Operating School District Operating ResultsMillage At Buildout Ad Valorem Local Millage - Residential 3.1800 $ 6,718,000 Ad Valorem Local Millage - NonResidential 3.1800 269,000 Ad Valorem Local Millage Revenues$ 6,987,000 Ad Valorem Local Millage Operating Expenditures$ 6,987,000 Ad Valorem Local Millage Net Revenues$ - Source: Collier County Public Schools, DPFG, 2025 The Corkscrew Grove East Village is deemed fiscally neutral respect to the Collier County School District. 32 Page 248 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Immokalee Fire Control District Immokalee Fire Control District Capital Impact The Corkscrew Grove East Village is located within the service area of the Immokalee Fire Control District (“Fire District”). Fire service for the project will be initially provided by the District’s Headquarters Station 32 in Ave Maria. However, a new fire station may be needed to serve the project at buildout. A stipulation to the development order requires the Owner to convey real property of approximately 3.0 acres for a Fire and co-located EMS station in exchange for fire impact fee credits and/or cash. The proposed stipulation states, “With respect to the conveyance of real property by the Applicant to the Fire District, the Fire Reservation of the Fire Site to the Fire District fully mitigates for the development’s impact to the Fire/EMS facilities needed to serve the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA." Capital impacts are shown in Table 29 and reflect the cost of a new fire station and the related vehicles and equipment. Capital costs are fully funded by impact fee and other capital revenues and an assumed one-time allocation of the annual net operating surplus generated by the project. Table 29: Corkscrew Grove East Village Immokalee Fire Control District Capital Impact Description Amount Amount Impact Fee Revenue: Impact Fee Revenue$ 9,146,000 Other Capital Revenue 1,016,000 Total Capital Revenue$ 10,162,000 New Station, Vehicles, and Equipment New Fire Station Sq. Ft. 12,000 Construction Cost per Sq. Ft.$ 700 Construction Cost$ 8,400,000 Land Value New Station 120,000 Total Land and Building$ 8,520,000 Vehicles and Equipment Engine and Equipment$ 1,219,000 Ladder Truck and Equipment 1,767,000 Attack Truck and Equipment 243,000 Water Tender and Equipment 572,000 Total Vehicles and Equipment 3,801,000 Total New Station, Vehicles and Equipment $ 12,321,000 One-Time Capital Revenue Excess (Deficiency) over Capital Cost (2,159,000) One-Time Allocation of Excess Annual Operating Surplus 2,159,000 Net Capital Impact$ - Source: Immokalee Fire Control District, DPFG, 2025 33 Page 249 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Projected impact fee revenues are presented in Table 30 and total $9.1 million. The adopted rates are based on the 2023 Impact Fee Update Study. Table 30: Corkscrew Grove East Village Immokalee Fire Control Impact Fee Revenues Impact Fee Calculated Land Use Units Total Sq. Ft. Rate Fee Residential 4,127 9,548,725 $ 0.94 $ 8,975,802 Commercial 283,500 283,500 $ 0.60 170,100 Total$ 9,145,902 Source: Immokalee Fire Control District, DPFG, 2025 The square footage of the Project at buildout is provided in Table 31. Table 31: Corkscrew Grove East Village Square Footage Square Feet Land Use Units per Unit Total Multi-Family Type 1 784 1,900 1,489,600 Type 2 210 1,430 300,300 Type 3 157 1,525 239,425 Type 4 128 1,925 246,400 Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 2,275,725 Single-Family Detached Type 1 1,073 2,200 2,360,600 Type 2 908 2,700 2,451,600 Type 3 784 2,800 2,195,200 Type 4 83 3,200 265,600 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 7,273,000 Total Residential 4,127 9,548,725 NonResidential 283,500 283,500 Source: Mr. Mike Timmerman, CRE, DPFG, 2025 Immokalee Fire Control District Annual Operating Impacts Operating expenditures to support a new fire station are estimated in Table 32. Because the current operating millage of the Immokalee Fire Control District is geared to much lower density development, the Corkscrew Grove East Village is projected to generate significant annual operating surpluses for the Fire Control District. 34 Page 250 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Table 32: Corkscrew Grove East Village Immokalee Fire Control District Annual Operating Impacts at Buildout Annual Annual Operating Impact at Buildout Calculations Amounts Annual General Fund Revenue Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Ad Valorem Tax Base $ 2,137,928,000 Immokalee Fire District Control Millage Rate 3.75 Annual Ad Valorem Revenue $ 8,017,000 $ 8,017,000 FY 2025 Annual General Fund Expenditures Personnel$ 7,204,911 Operating 1,468,658 Total Annual Personnel and Operating Costs $ 8,673,569 Square Feet per Facility Station 30 12,884 Station 31 12,000 Station 32 23,988 Headquarters Logistics Building 5,156 Total Square Feet 54,028 Annual Operating Cost per Square Foot$ 160.54 New Station Square Feet 12,000 New Station Annual Operating Expenditures$ 1,926,000 Estimated Ongoing Annual Surplus$ 6,091,000 One-Time Capital Cost (Not Covered by Capital Revenue) (2,159,000) Estimated Annual Surplus after One-Time Capital Cost$ 3,932,000 Source: Immokalee Fire Control District, DPFG, 2025 The Corkscrew Grove East Village is deemed fiscally positive with respect to the Immokalee Fire Control District. 35 Page 251 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT APPENDIX Appendix Table 1: Collier County Base Assumptions COLLIER COUNTY STUDY PERIOD FY 2025 County Budget Year COLLIER COUNTYWIDE POPULATION 413,300 2025 County Permanent Population - Collier County 2024 AUIR 1.2084 Seasonal Population Coefficient - Collier County 499,426 2025 County Peak Seaonal Population - Collier County 2024 AUIR 86,126 2025 County Peak Seasonal Population COLLIER COUNTYWIDE EMPLOYMENT 283,739 Woods & Poole 2025 Employment 0.8897602 FTE Conversion Factor - IMPLAN 252,460 2025 In-Place FTE Employment COLLIER COUNTY PEAK TOURIST POPULATION 266,200 Collier County CVB Profile - March 2024 8,587 Peak Daily Tourists COLLIER COUNTYWIDE POPULATION AND JOBS 665,760 County Permanent Population and Jobs 751,886 County Peak Seasonal Population and Jobs 760,473 County Peak Seasonal Population, Tourists, and Jobs COLLIER UNINCORPORATED COUNTY POPULATION 376,216 2025 Unincorporated County Permanent Population - Collier County 2024 AUIR 1.2082 Seasonal Unincorporated Population Coefficient - Collier County 454,553 2025 Unincorporated County Peak Seaonal Population - Collier County 2024 AUIR 78,337 2025 Unincorporated County Peak Seasonal Population COLLIER COUNTY UNINCORPORATED EMPLOYMENT 229,808 Allocation basis consistent with prior years. COLLIER COUNTY UNINCORPORATED POPULATION AND JOBS 606,024 County Permanent Population and Jobs 684,361 County Peak Seasonal Population and Jobs COLLIER COUNTY MILLAGE RATES FY 2025 3.0107 County General Fund 0.0246 Water Pollution Control 0.2096 Conservation Collier Program 3.2449 County Wide Millage 0.6844 MSTU General Fund COLLIER COUNTY MILLAGE RATES FY 2025 0.2096 Conservation Collier Program Disclosure Only COLLIER COUNTY % HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION Shimberg Center for Housing Studies - 2024 Final Tax Roll Year 67% Single Family 35% Condominium 0% Rental Apartments $ 50,000 County Homestead Exemption $ 25,000 School Homestead Exemption Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 36 Page 252 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 2: Corkscrew Grove East Village Resident Population and Seasonal Population Coefficients Peak Permanent Seasonal Population Seasonal Persons Land Use by Impact Fee Category Per Unit Index Per Unit Residential (Units) Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1.04 1.21 1.26 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2.19 1.21 2.65 Source: Collier County 2016 EMS Impact Fee Update, DPFG, 2025 Appendix Table 3: Corkscrew Grove East Village Population and Employment Estimates Peak Seasonal Peak Permanent Persons Per Seasonal Population Permanent Residential Units Unit Population Per Unit Population Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 1.26 1,612 1.04 1,334 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 2.65 7,547 2.19 6,246 Total Market Rate Residential 4,127 9,159 7,580 Affordable Housing Units 362 Tota Housing Units 4,489 Employment Occupancy Non-Residential Sq Ft Coefficient % Employees Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft 283,500 2.50 95% 673 Total Non-Residential 283,500 673 Civic/Institutional 70,000 Grand Total Non-Residential (sf) 353,500 673 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 Appendix Table 4: Corkscrew Grove East Village Population and Employment Summary Development Program and Demographic Summary At Buildout Permanent Population 7,580 Residential Seasonal Population 9,159 Employment 673 Permanent Population and Jobs 8,253 Residential Seasonal Population and Employment 9,832 Residential Seasonal Population, Tourists, and Employment 9,832 Public School Enrollment 1,109 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 37 Page 253 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 5: Corkscrew Grove East Village Public School Enrollment Projected Residential Unit Type Units SGR Students Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 0.11 141 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 0.34 968 Total Market Rate Residential 4,127 1,109 Source: Collier County Schools, DPFG, 2025 Appendix Table 6: Corkscrew Grove East Village County Tax Base Units or Taxable Value Land Use Sq Ft per Unit/SF Buildout Multi-Family Type 1 784 $ 416,699 $ 326,692,000 Type 2 210 $ 271,939 57,107,000 Type 3 157 $ 320,819 50,369,000 Type 4 128 $ 367,819 47,081,000 Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 $ 481,249,000 Single-Family Detached Type 1 1,073 $ 483,357 $ 518,642,000 Type 2 908 $ 567,957 515,705,000 Type 3 784 $ 614,957 482,126,000 Type 4 83 $ 671,357 55,723,000 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 $ 1,572,196,000 Total Market Rate Residential 4,127 $ 2,053,445,000 Non-Residential Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft 283,500 $ 298 $ 84,483,000 Total Non-Residential 283,500 $ 84,483,000 Total Tax Base $ 2,137,928,000 Source: Mr. Mike Timmerman, CRE, Collier County, Shimberg Center for Housing Studies (Univ. of FL), DPFG, 2025 38 Page 254 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 7: Corkscrew Grove East Village School District Tax Base Units or Taxable Value Land Use Sq Ft per Unit/SF Buildout Multi-Family Type 1 784 $ 425,490 $ 333,584,000 Type 2 210 $ 280,730 58,953,000 Type 3 157 $ 329,610 51,749,000 Type 4 128 $ 376,610 48,206,000 Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 $ 492,492,000 Single-Family Detached Type 1 1,073 $ 500,179 $ 536,692,000 Type 2 908 $ 584,779 530,979,000 Type 3 784 $ 631,779 495,315,000 Type 4 83 $ 688,179 57,119,000 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 $ 1,620,105,000 Total Market Rate Residential 4,127 $ 2,112,597,000 Non-Residential Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft 283,500 $ 298 $ 84,483,000 Total Non-Residential 283,500 $ 84,483,000 Total Tax Base $ 2,197,080,000 Source: Mr. Mike Timmerman, CRE, Collier County, Shimberg Center for Housing Studies (Univ. of FL), DPFG, 2025 39 Page 255 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 8: FY 2025 Collier County General Funds and MSTU Revenue Budget Summaries Inter- Fed Payment GENERAL FUND GROUPING Ad Valorem Licenses & Governmental State Revenue State Sales in Lieu of Charges for Fines & Miscellaneous Interest/ Indirect Service REVENUES AND SOURCES Taxes Permits Revenues Sharing Tax Taxes Services Forfeitures Revenues Miscellaneous Charge 0001 General Fund$ 458,429,200 $ 241,500 $ 491,000 $ 16,438,800 $ 63,275,000 $ 1,250,000 $ 19,103,200 $ 447,800 $ 340,800 $ 1,613,200 $ 9,096,600 0002 AH Impact Fee Deferral Program 0003 Emergency Relief 0004 Economic Development 46,400 0011 Clerk of Circuit Court 3,167,200 70,700 500 469,600 0040 Sheriff 0060 Property Appraiser 0070 Tax Collector 35,146,800 649,700 0080 Supervisor of Elections Total General Fund Grouping Revenues$ 458,429,200 $ 241,500 $ 491,000 $ 16,438,800 $ 63,275,000 $ 1,250,000 $ 57,463,600 $ 518,500 $ 341,300 $ 2,732,500 $ 9,096,600 Inter- Fed Payment UNINCORPORATED GENERAL FUND REVENUES Ad Valorem Licenses & Governmental State Revenue State Sales in Lieu of Charges for Fines & Miscellaneous Interest/ Indirect Service AND SOURCES Taxes Permits Revenues Sharing Tax Taxes Services Forfeitures Revenues Miscellaneous Charge 1011 Unincorporated Area General Fund$ 66,045,800 $ 412,800 $ 3,087,300 $ 220,000 $ 295,800 $ 390,000 Transfers from Transfers from Reimburse from GENERAL FUND GROUPING Communication Special General Fund Constitutional Other REVENUES AND SOURCES Carry Forward Services Tax Assessments (001) Officers Other Transfers Advance/Repay Departments Total Less Restricted Total 0001 General Fund$ 146,698,800 $ 7,600,000 $ 20,000 $ 250,000 $ 1,459,100 $ 726,755,000 (28,536,400) $ 698,218,600 0002 AH Impact Fee Deferral Program 20,000 20,000 20,000 0003 Emergency Relief 542,300 542,300 542,300 0004 Economic Development 172,000 218,400 (2,400) 216,000 0011 Clerk of Circuit Court 15,194,800 18,902,800 (161,900) 18,740,900 0040 Sheriff 266,452,100 266,452,100 266,452,100 0060 Property Appraiser 10,521,700 1,313,300 11,835,000 11,835,000 0070 Tax Collector 35,796,500 35,796,500 0080 Supervisor of Elections 5,331,500 5,331,500 5,331,500 Total General Fund Grouping Revenues$ 147,433,100 $ - $ - $ 297,500,100 $ 7,600,000 $ 1,333,300 $ 250,000 $ 1,459,100 $ 1,065,853,600 $ (28,700,700) $ 1,037,152,900 Transfers from Transfers from Reimburse from UNINCORPORATED GENERAL FUND REVENUES Communication Special General Fund Constitutional Advance/ Other AND SOURCES Carry Forward Services Tax Assessments (001) Officers Other Transfers Repay Departments Total Less Restricted Total 1011 Unincorporated Area General Fund$ 12,982,800 $ 3,800,000 $ 16,000 $ 200,000 $ 388,500 $ 740,100 $ 88,579,100 $ (3,760,400) $ 84,818,700 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 40 Page 256 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 9: FY 2025 Collier County General Funds Revenue Demand Units $ Per Base Demand General Fund Grouping Revenue Category Budget Demand Base Multiplier Demand Unit Ad Valorem Taxes$ 458,429,200 CUMULATIVE AV 1.00 N/A N/A Licenses & Permits 241,500 PERMPOP&JOBS 1.00 665,760 $ 0.36 Inter-Governmental Revenues 491,000 PERMPOP&JOBS 1.00 665,760 $ 0.74 State Revenue Sharing - Fixed Portion 1,036,800 FIXED 1.00 - N/A State Revenue Sharing - Growth Portion 15,402,000 PERMPOP 1.00 413,300 $ 37.27 State Sales Tax 63,275,000 PERMPOP 1.00 413,300 $ 153.10 Fed Payment in Lieu of Taxes 1,250,000 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Charges for Services 57,463,600 PERMPOP&JOBS 1.00 665,760 $ 86.31 Fines & Forfeitures 518,500 PEAKPOP 1.00 499,426 $ 1.04 Miscellaneous Revenues 341,300 PERMPOP&JOBS 1.00 665,760 $ 0.51 Interest/ Miscellaneous 2,732,500 PERMPOP&JOBS 1.00 665,760 $ 4.10 Indirect Service Charge 9,096,600 PERMPOP&JOBS 1.00 665,760 $ 13.66 Carry Forward 147,433,100 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Transfers from General Fund (001) 297,500,100 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Transfers from Constitutional Officers 7,600,000 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 751,886 $ 10.11 Other Transfers 1,333,300 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Advance/Repay 250,000 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Reimburse from Other Departments 1,459,100 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 751,886 $ 1.94 Total$ 1,065,853,600 $ 309.14 Source: Collier County, DFPG, 2025 Appendix Table 10: FY 2025 Collier County MSTU Revenue Demand Units $ Per Base Demand General Fund Grouping Revenue Category Budget Demand Base Multiplier Demand Unit Ad Valorem Taxes$ 66,045,800 CUMULATIVE AV 1.00 N/A N/A Licenses & Permits 412,800 PERMPOP&JOBS 1.00 606,024 $ 0.68 Charges for Services 3,087,300 PERMPOP&JOBS 1.00 606,024 $ 5.09 Fines & Forfeitures 220,000 PERMPOP&JOBS 1.00 606,024 $ 0.36 Miscellaneous Revenues 295,800 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 0.43 Interest/ Miscellaneous 390,000 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 0.57 Carry Forward 12,982,800 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Communication Services Tax 3,800,000 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 5.55 Special Assessments 16,000 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Transfers from General Fund (001) - FIXED 1.00 - N/A Transfers from Constitutional Officers 200,000 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Other Transfers 388,500 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Advance/Repay - FIXED 1.00 - N/A Reimburse from Other Departments 740,100 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 1.08 Total$ 88,579,100 $ 13.76 Source: Collier County, DFPG, 2025 41 Page 257 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 11: Corkscrew Grove East Village General Funds Revenue at Buildout GENERAL FUND GROUPING $ Per REVENUES Demand Base Demand At Buildout Ad Valorem Taxes CUMULATIVE AV$ 3.0107 $ 6,437,000 Licenses & Permits PERMPOP&JOBS$ 0.36 3,000 Inter-Governmental Revenues PERMPOP&JOBS$ 0.74 6,000 State Revenue Sharing - Growth Portion PERMPOP$ 37.27 283,000 State Sales Tax PERMPOP$ 153.10 1,160,000 Charges for Services PERMPOP&JOBS$ 86.31 712,000 Fines & Forfeitures PEAKPOP$ 1.04 10,000 Miscellaneous Revenues PERMPOP&JOBS$ 0.51 4,000 Interest/ Miscellaneous PERMPOP&JOBS$ 4.10 34,000 Indirect Service Charge PERMPOP&JOBS$ 13.66 113,000 Transfers from Constitutional Officers PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 10.11 99,000 Reimburse from Other Departments PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 1.94 19,000 Total General Funds Annual Operating Revenues$ 309.14 $ 8,880,000 Source: Collier County, DFPG, 2025 Appendix Table 12: Corkscrew Grove East Village MSTU Revenue at Buildout MSTU GENERAL FUND $ Per REVENUES Demand Base Demand At Buildout Ad Valorem Taxes CUMULATIVE AV$ 0.6844 $ 1,463,000 Licenses & Permits PERMPOP&JOBS$ 0.68 6,000 Charges for Services PERMPOP&JOBS$ 5.09 42,000 Fines & Forfeitures PERMPOP&JOBS$ 0.36 3,000 Miscellaneous Revenues PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 0.43 4,000 Interest/ Miscellaneous PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 0.57 6,000 Communication Services Tax PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 5.55 55,000 Reimburse from Other Departments PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 1.08 11,000 Total MSTU Annual Operating Revenues$ 13.76 $ 1,590,000 Source: Collier County, DFPG, 2025 42 Page 258 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 13: FY 2025 Collier County General Funds and MSTU Expenditure Budget Summaries GENERAL FUND GROUPING Personal Operating Grants and Advance/ Indirect Cost EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES Services Services Capital Outlay Aid Remittances Repay Reimbursement 0001 General Fund$ 57,775,700 $ 53,775,200 $ 100,000 $ 3,230,600 $ 10,200,500 $ 11,356,800 0002 Impact Fee Deferral Program 0003 Emergency Relief 0007 Economic Development 149,400 56,000 10,600 0011 Clerk of Circuit Court 13,917,100 3,441,400 262,400 0040 Sheriff 213,395,800 47,017,100 6,039,200 0060 Property Appraiser 9,178,600 2,616,400 40,000 0070 Tax Collector 17,404,100 3,339,500 2,480,600 0080 Supervisor of Elections 3,298,900 2,002,600 30,000 Total General Fund Grouping Expenditures$ 315,119,600 $ 112,248,200 $ 8,952,200 $ 3,230,600 $ 10,200,500 $ 11,356,800 $ 10,600 UNINCORPORATED GENERAL FUND Personal Operating Grants and Advance/ Indirect Cost EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES Services Services Capital Outlay Aid Remittances Repay Reimbursement 1011 Unincorporated Area General Fund$ 22,574,100 $ 16,232,100 $ 40,000 $ 500,000 $ 1,597,900 Personal Services Operating Services Transfers to Transfers to Restricted for Distribution of Capital Outlay GENERAL FUND GROUPING Constitutional General Fund Unfunded Excess Fees to Grants and Aid EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES Officers (001) Other Transfers Reserves Requests Govt Agencies Total Remittances 0001 General Fund$ 323,224,600 $ 160,992,400 77,562,800 $ 698,218,600 $ 125,082,000 0002 Impact Fee Deferral Program 20,000 20,000 - 0003 Emergency Relief 542,300 542,300 - 0007 Economic Development 216,000 216,000 0011 Clerk of Circuit Court 1,120,000 18,740,900 17,620,900 0040 Sheriff 266,452,100 266,452,100 0060 Property Appraiser 11,835,000 11,835,000 0070 Tax Collector 12,572,300 35,796,500 23,224,200 0080 Supervisor of Elections 5,331,500 5,331,500 Total General Fund Grouping Expenditures$ 323,224,600 $ 20,000 $ 162,654,700 $ 77,562,800 $ - $ 12,572,300 $ 1,037,152,900 $ 449,761,700 Personal Services Operating Services Capital Outlay Grants and Aid Transfers to Transfers to Restricted for Distribution of Remittances UNINCORPORATED GENERAL FUND Constitutional General Fund Unfunded Excess Fees to Indirect Cost EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES Officers (001) Other Transfers Reserves Requests Govt Agencies Total Reimbursement 1011 Unincorporated Area General Fund$ 2,279,500 $ 35,407,400 $ 6,187,700 $ 84,818,700 $ 40,944,100 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 43 Page 259 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 14: FY 2025 Collier County Expenditure Budget Summaries Fund # General Fund Description Total Budget 0001 General Fund$ 698,218,600 0002 Utility Impact Fee Deferral Program 20,000 0003 Emergency Disaster 542,300 0004 Economic Development 216,000 0011 Clerk of Circuit Court 18,740,900 0040 Sheriff 266,452,100 0060 Property Appraiser 11,835,000 0070 Tax Collector 35,796,500 0080 Supervisor of Elections 5,331,500 Total General Fund Groupings$ 1,037,152,900 Fund Type Operating Budget General Fund Groupings$ 449,761,700 Special Revenue Funds 278,884,400 Capital Funds - Enterprise Funds 68,414,700 Internal Service Funds 118,394,800 Trust and Agency Funds 84,200 Transfers and Reserves 232,707,200 Total Operating Services, Excluding Public Utilities$ 1,148,247,000 Division/Agency Operating Budget Board of County Commissioners$ 25,789,500 Constitutional Officers 351,914,300 Corporate Business Operations Department 153,104,600 Public Safety 94,921,800 Growth Management Community Development 210,823,600 Court Related Agencies 7,041,300 Office of the County Manager 129,404,900 Public Services Department 74,844,400 Transportation Management Services 100,402,600 Total Operating Budget Before Public Utilities$ 1,148,247,000 Public Utilities 401,592,400 Grand Total Total Operating Budget$ 1,549,839,400 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 44 Page 260 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 15: FY 2025 Collier County Appropriations by Program Budget Summaries General Funds Permanent Grouping Total General Funds Special Revenue Capital Funds Enterprise Internal Service (Trust) Funds Transfers and Less Division Grouping Total Funds Total Total Funds Total Funds Total Total Reserves Total Remittances Board of County Commissioners$ 1,625,300 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,625,300 $ 1,625,300 County Attorney 3,526,600 193,000 - - - - - 3,719,600 3,526,600 Other General Administration 16,831,200 3,613,400 - - - - - 20,444,600 7,264,300 Property Appraiser 12,105,100 - - - - - - 12,105,100 12,105,100 Supervisor of Elections 5,507,800 - - - - - - 5,507,800 5,507,800 Clerk of Courts 18,506,200 - - - - - 1,120,000 19,626,200 18,506,200 Sheriff 271,823,100 3,989,100 - - - - 2,706,700 278,518,900 271,823,100 Tax Collector 23,584,000 - - - - - 12,572,300 36,156,300 23,584,000 Corporate Business Operations Administration 541,300 - - - - - - 541,300 541,300 Human Resources 5,728,200 532,900 - - - - - 6,261,100 5,728,200 Information Technology - - - - 19,343,000 - 3,438,500 22,781,500 - Procurement Services 3,049,900 - - - - - - 3,049,900 3,049,900 Risk Management Division - - - - 83,286,400 - 37,184,400 120,470,800 - Emergency Management Division 5,073,400 2,798,100 - - - - 613,100 8,484,600 5,044,600 Emergency Services & Fire District Grants - 7,542,300 - - - - 9,364,700 16,907,000 - Emergency Medical Services EMS - - - 52,283,800 - - 11,414,400 63,698,200 - Fire Districts - 4,920,800 - - - - 911,200 5,832,000 - Growth Mgt - Administration - 12,501,200 - - - - - 12,501,200 - Growth Mgt - Planning 1,525,200 6,563,100 - - - - - 8,088,300 1,525,200 Growth Mgt - Regulation 2,058,100 32,606,900 - - - - 710,500 35,375,500 2,058,100 Growth Mgt - Housing Policy and Econ Development 1,486,000 1,671,800 - - - - 2,310,800 5,468,600 981,200 Growth Mgt - Econ Development and Innovation Zones - 7,296,800 - - - - 12,701,800 19,998,600 - Growth Mgt - Conservation Collier - 44,258,000 - - - 84,200 61,166,400 105,508,600 - Growth Mgt - Reserves and Transfers - - - - - - 23,882,800 23,882,800 - Court Administration - 3,514,800 - - - - 488,800 4,003,600 - Circuit & County Court Judges 71,700 - - - - - - 71,700 71,700 Public Defender 486,800 - - - - - - 486,800 486,800 State Attorney 730,000 - - - - - - 730,000 730,000 Guardian Ad Litem Program 4,600 - - - - - - 4,600 4,600 Court Related Technology - 1,630,800 - - - - 113,800 1,744,600 - County Manager Operations 2,319,100 - - - - - - 2,319,100 2,319,100 Office of Management & Budget 2,823,700 1,179,300 - - - - 1,284,100 5,287,100 2,823,700 Communications Government & Public Affairs - 2,542,500 - - - - - 2,542,500 - Pelican Bay Services - 5,944,200 - - - - 2,224,800 8,169,000 - Dori Slosberg Driver Education - 193,000 - - - - 82,600 275,600 - Corporate Compliance & Continous Improvement 831,800 - - - - - - 831,800 831,800 Tourist Development Council - 26,089,000 - - - - 15,246,600 41,335,600 - Sports & Special Events Complex - 8,213,100 - - - - 2,244,900 10,458,000 - Bayshore CRA - 4,400,800 - - - - 8,269,100 12,669,900 - Immokalee CRA - 1,861,200 - - - - 1,980,400 3,841,600 - Fleet Management - - - - 15,765,400 - 902,600 16,668,000 - Facilities Management Division 22,471,200 90,400 - - - - 2,445,100 25,006,700 22,471,200 Public Services Administration 420,500 - - - - - - 420,500 420,500 Operations and Veteran Services 2,721,300 - - - - - - 2,721,300 2,721,300 Domestic Animal Services 4,736,000 329,500 - - - - 8,200 5,073,700 4,636,000 Community and Human Services 9,182,200 2,692,900 - - - - 617,900 12,493,000 9,182,200 Library 8,987,300 285,400 - - - - 522,600 9,795,300 8,987,300 Museum - 2,861,000 - - - - 42,200 2,903,200 - Parks & Recreation 17,930,400 19,438,500 - - - - 1,516,800 38,885,700 17,930,400 Public Health 1,490,200 - - - - - - 1,490,200 1,490,200 University Extension Service 1,005,000 43,200 - - - - 13,300 1,061,500 1,005,000 Transportation Mgt - Operations - 33,495,000 - - - - 1,303,800 34,798,800 - Transportation Mgt - Landscaping - 3,018,800 - - - - - 3,018,800 - Transportation Mgt - Stormwater Operations - 11,631,900 - - - - 252,400 11,884,300 - Transportation Mgt - Water Pollution Control - 4,157,600 - - - - 2,555,300 6,712,900 - Transportation Mgt - Coastal Zone Management - 1,328,600 - - - - 161,800 1,490,400 - Transportation Mgt - Airport Operations - - - 9,128,300 - - 2,195,200 11,323,500 - Transportation Mgt - Public Transit & NE 578,500 - - 7,002,600 - - 1,203,400 8,784,500 578,500 Transportation Mgt - MPO - 11,700 - - - - - 11,700 - Transportation Mgt - Improvements Districts & MSTU - 15,443,800 - - - - 6,933,900 22,377,700 - Total$ 449,761,700 $ 278,884,400 $ - $ 68,414,700 $ 118,394,800 $ 84,200 $ 232,707,200 $ 1,148,247,000 $ 439,561,200 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 45 Page 261 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 16: FY 2025 Collier County General Funds Expenditure Demand Units $ Per Department Budget Demand Base Multiplier Base Demand Demand Board of County Commissioners$ 1,625,300 FIXED 1.00 - N/A County Attorney 3,526,600 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 751,886 $ 2.35 Other General Administration 7,264,300 PERMPOP 0.50 413,300 $ 8.79 Property Appraiser 12,105,100 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 751,886 $ 8.05 Supervisor of Elections 5,507,800 PERMPOP 0.50 413,300 $ 6.66 Clerk of Courts 18,506,200 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 751,886 $ 12.31 Sheriff Law Enforcement 195,143,000 PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 1.00 760,473 $ 256.61 Law Enforcement Paid by BCC 5,371,000 PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 1.00 760,473 $ 7.06 Detention & Corrections 64,783,800 PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 0.15 760,473 $ 12.78 Bailiffs 6,525,300 PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 0.05 760,473 $ 0.43 Tax Collector 23,584,000 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 751,886 $ 15.68 Corporate Business Operations Administration 541,300 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Human Resources 5,728,200 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 751,886 $ 3.81 Procurement Services 3,049,900 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 751,886 $ 2.03 Emergency Management Division 5,044,600 PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 1.00 760,473 $ 6.63 Growth Mgt - Planning 1,525,200 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 751,886 $ 2.03 Growth Mgt - Regulation 2,058,100 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 751,886 $ 2.74 Growth Mgt - Housing Policy and Econ Development 981,200 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Circuit & County Court Judges 71,700 PEAKPOP 1.00 499,426 $ 0.14 Public Defender 486,800 PERMPOP 1.00 413,300 $ 1.18 State Attorney 730,000 PERMPOP 1.00 413,300 $ 1.77 Guardian Ad Litem Program 4,600 PERMPOP 1.00 413,300 $ 0.01 County Manager Operations 2,319,100 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 751,886 $ 1.54 Office of Management & Budget 2,823,700 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 751,886 $ 1.88 Corporate Compliance & Continous Improvement 831,800 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Facilities Management Division 22,471,200 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 751,886 $ 14.94 Public Services Administration 420,500 PERMPOP 0.50 413,300 $ 0.51 Operations and Veteran Services 2,721,300 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Domestic Animal Services 4,636,000 PERMPOP 1.00 413,300 $ 11.22 Community and Human Services 9,182,200 PERMPOP 0.50 413,300 $ 11.11 Library 8,987,300 PEAKPOP 1.00 499,426 $ 18.00 Parks & Recreation 17,930,400 PEAKPOP 1.00 499,426 $ 35.90 Public Health 1,490,200 PERMPOP 0.20 413,300 $ 0.72 University Extension Service 1,005,000 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Transportation Mgt - Public Transit & NE 578,500 PERMPOP 1.00 413,300 $ 1.40 General Funds Grouping Totals Less Remittances$ 439,561,200 Remittances 10,200,500 FIXED 1.00 - N/A General Funds Grouping Totals Plus Remittances$ 449,761,700 Transfer to 1001 Road & Bridge 27,675,800 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 751,886 $ 36.81 Transfer to 1051 Court Administration 2,401,700 PEAKPOP 1.00 499,426 $ 4.81 Transfer to 1060 MHz Radio System 1,323,700 PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 0.50 760,473 $ 0.87 Transfer to 3081 Growth Mgt Transportation Cap 9,660,000 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 751,886 $ 12.85 Transfer to 4030 CATT Transit Enhance 2,761,600 PEAKPOP 1.00 499,426 $ 5.53 Transfer to 4033 Transp Disadv 2,380,400 PERMPOP 1.00 413,300 $ 5.76 Transfer to 4050 EMS Fund 30,421,000 PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 1.87 760,473 $ 74.76 Other Transfers 86,030,500 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Transfers to General Fund 1001 20,000 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Advance/Repayments 11,356,800 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Restricted for Unfunded Requests - FIXED 1.00 - N/A Transfers to Constitutional Officers 323,224,600 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Reserves 77,562,800 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Distributions in Excess of Fees to Govt Agencies 12,572,300 PEAKPOP 1.00 499,426 $ 25.17 Total$ 1,037,152,900 1.00$ 614.82 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 46 Page 262 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 17: EMS Adjusted Operating Expenditures for New Ambulance Description Amount Transfer to 4050 EMS Fund$ 30,421,000 PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 760,473 $$ Per Demand Unit$ 40.00 Corkscrew Grove East PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 9,832 Projected EMS Operating Expenditures$ 393,280 Index 187% Projected EMS Operating Expenditures$ 735,000 Corkscrew Grove East PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 9,832 Revised $$ Per Demand Unit$ 74.76 Alternate Calculation based on Level of Service Company Description Officer Paramedics EMTs New Ambulance Annual Operating Expenditures: Annual Personnel Cost per FTE$ 159,310 $ 111,000 $ 84,000 # of FTEs 3 3 3 Annual Personnel Cost$ 477,930 $ 333,000 $ 252,000 Personal Services$ 1,062,930 Operating Expense 228,000 17% Annual Facility Lease 26,000 Total Annual Operating Cost$ 1,316,930 Description Amount New Ambulance Annual Operating Expenditures: Total Annual Operating Cost$ 1,316,930 General Fund Subsidy Percentage 100% General Fund Annual Cost$ 1,316,930 Level of Service Standard 16,400 Per Capita Amount$ 80.30 Corkscrew Grove East PEAKPOP 9,159 Projected EMS Operating Expenditures$ 735,000 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 Emergency Medical Service (“EMS”) for the project will be initially provided by Collier County Medic Station 32 which is co-located at the Fire District’s Headquarters Station 32. If call volume and response time for Corkscrew Grove East Village and the immediate area generate the need for an additional ambulance, Collier County EMS may choose to co-locate a medic facility at the new Immokalee Fire Control District station. For purposes of the Economic Assessment, it is assumed the space needed for a new ambulance will be leased at the highest annual rent as currently paid for similar space. Personnel and operating costs for staffing and operating a new ambulance, including rent, are allocated in Appendix Table 17 above based on the level of service in the 2024 AUIR and the peak residential population of the Corkscrew Grove East Village. The calculated General Fund EMS Expenditure per demand unit was multiplied by 187 percent to recognize the additional EMS cost. For conservatism of this analysis, it is assumed the General 47 Page 263 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Fund will subsize 100 percent of the cost, whereas the actual subsidy is generally around 55 percent. Appendix Table 18: FY 2025 Collier County MSTU Expenditure Demand Units $ Per Department Budget Demand Base Multiplier Base Demand Demand Other General Administration 1,515,500 PERMPOP 0.50 376,216 $ 4.03 Human Resources 532,900 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 684,361 $ 0.78 Emergency Management Division 21,000 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 0.03 Growth Mgt - Administration 375,900 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 0.55 Growth Mgt - Planning 2,142,300 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 3.13 Growth Mgt - Regulation 6,966,500 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 10.18 Communications Government & Public Affairs 2,542,500 PEAKPOP&JOBS 0.50 684,361 $ 3.72 Pelican Bay Services 156,300 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Immokalee CRA 237,600 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Parks & Recreation 17,899,400 PEAKPOP 1.00 454,553 $ 39.38 Transportation Mgt - Operations 2,757,800 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 4.03 Transportation Mgt - Landscaping 3,018,800 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 4.41 Transportation Mgt - Coastal Zone Management 256,900 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 0.38 Transportation Mgt - Improvements Districts & MSTU 422,800 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Indirect Cost Reimbursement 1,597,900 PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.00 684,361 $ 2.33 Remittances 500,000 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Transfers 37,686,900 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Advances - FIXED 1.00 - N/A Reserves 6,187,700 FIXED 1.00 - N/A Total$ 84,818,700 1.00$ 72.94 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 48 Page 264 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 19: Corkscrew Grove East Village General Funds Expenditures at Buildout GENERAL FUND GROUPING $ Per EXPENDITURES Demand Base Demand At Buildout County Attorney PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 2.35 $ 23,000 Other General Administration PERMPOP 8.79 67,000 Property Appraiser PEAKPOP&JOBS 8.05 79,000 Supervisor of Elections PERMPOP 6.66 51,000 Clerk of Courts PEAKPOP&JOBS 12.31 121,000 Sheriff Law Enforcement PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 256.61 2,523,000 Law Enforcement Paid by BCC PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 7.06 69,000 Detention & Corrections PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 12.78 126,000 Bailiffs PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 0.43 4,000 Tax Collector PEAKPOP&JOBS 15.68 154,000 Human Resources PEAKPOP&JOBS 3.81 37,000 Procurement Services PEAKPOP&JOBS 2.03 20,000 Emergency Management Division PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 6.63 65,000 Growth Mgt - Planning PEAKPOP&JOBS 2.03 20,000 Growth Mgt - Regulation PEAKPOP&JOBS 2.74 27,000 Circuit & County Court Judges PEAKPOP 0.14 1,000 Public Defender PERMPOP 1.18 11,000 State Attorney PERMPOP 1.77 13,000 Guardian Ad Litem Program PERMPOP 0.01 - County Manager Operations PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.54 15,000 Office of Management & Budget PEAKPOP&JOBS 1.88 18,000 Facilities Management Division PEAKPOP&JOBS 14.94 147,000 Public Services Administration PERMPOP 0.51 4,000 Domestic Animal Services PERMPOP 11.22 85,000 Community and Human Services PERMPOP 11.11 84,000 Library PEAKPOP 18.00 165,000 Parks & Recreation PEAKPOP 35.90 329,000 Public Health PERMPOP 0.72 5,000 Transportation Mgt - Public Transit & NE PERMPOP 1.40 11,000 Transfer to 1001 Road & Bridge PEAKPOP&JOBS 36.81 362,000 Transfer to 1051 Court Administration PEAKPOP 4.81 45,000 Transfer to 1060 MHz Radio System PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 0.87 9,000 Transfer to 3081 Growth Mgt Transportation Cap PEAKPOP&JOBS 12.85 126,000 Transfer to 4030 CATT Transit Enhance PEAKPOP 5.53 51,000 Transfer to 4033 Transp Disadv PERMPOP 5.76 44,000 Transfer to 4050 EMS Fund PEAKPOPTOUR&JOBS 74.76 735,000 Distributions in Excess of Fees to Govt Agencies PEAKPOP 25.17 231,000 Total General Funds Annual Operating Expenditures$ 614.82 $ 5,877,000 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 49 Page 265 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 20: Corkscrew Grove East Village MSTU Expenditures at Buildout MSTU GENERAL FUND $ Per EXPENDITURES Demand Base Demand At Buildout Other General Administration PERMPOP$ 4.03 $ 31,000 Human Resources PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 0.78 8,000 Emergency Management Division PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 0.03 - Growth Mgt - Administration PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 0.55 5,000 Growth Mgt - Planning PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 3.13 31,000 Growth Mgt - Regulation PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 10.18 100,000 Communications Government & Public Affairs PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 3.72 37,000 Parks & Recreation PEAKPOP$ 39.38 361,000 Transportation Mgt - Operations PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 4.03 40,000 Transportation Mgt - Landscaping PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 4.41 43,000 Transportation Mgt - Coastal Zone Management PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 0.38 4,000 Indirect Cost Reimbursement PEAKPOP&JOBS$ 2.33 23,000 Total MSTU Annual Operating Expenditures 72.94 $ 683,000 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 50 Page 266 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 21: Collier County Impact Fee Schedule for Applicable Services Demand Regional Community Law ` Unit Roads Parks Parks Enforcement Jail EMS Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) Unit$ 6,950.00 $ 1,230.24 $ 455.20 $ 296.56 $ 228.91 $ 67.50 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. Unit$ 8,090.00 $ 2,694.32 $ 933.83 $ 586.95 $ 499.19 $ 142.07 Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft Sq Ft$ 13.77400 N/A N/A$ 0.73064 $ 0.64536 $ 0.18367 Demand Land Use Unit Schools Water Wastewater Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) Unit$ 2,844.19 N/A N/A Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. Unit$ 8,789.54 N/A N/A Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft Sq Ft N/A N/A N/A Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 51 Page 267 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 22: Corkscrew Grove East Village Impact Fee Revenues for Applicable Services Demand Demand Regional Community Law Land Use Units Unit Roads Parks Parks Enforcement Jail EMS Schools Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 Unit$ 6,950.00 $ 1,230.24 $ 455.20 $ 296.56 $ 228.91 $ 67.50 $ 2,844.19 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 Unit$ 8,090.00 $ 2,694.32 $ 933.83 $ 586.95 $ 499.19 $ 142.07 $ 8,789.54 Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft 283,500 Sq Ft$ 13.77400 N/A N/A$ 0.73064 $ 0.64536 $ 0.18367 N/A Demand Demand Regional Community Law Land Use Units Unit Roads Parks Parks Enforcement Jail EMS Schools Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors) 1,279 Unit$ 8,889,000 $ 1,573,000 $ 582,000 $ 379,000 $ 293,000 $ 86,000 $ 3,638,000 Single-Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft. 2,848 Unit$ 23,040,000 $ 7,673,000 $ 2,660,000 $ 1,672,000 $ 1,422,000 $ 405,000 $ 25,033,000 Retail 200,001 - 400,000 Sq Ft 283,500 Sq Ft$ 3,905,000 $ 207,000 $ 183,000 $ 52,000 $ - Total$ 35,834,000 $ 9,246,000 $ 3,242,000 $ 2,258,000 $ 1,898,000 $ 543,000 $ 28,671,000 Source: Collier County, DPFG, 2025 52 Page 268 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT Appendix Table 23: Collier County School District Base Assumptions STUDENT GENERATION RATES - 2015 IMPACT FEE UPDATE 0.34 Single Family 0.11 Multi Family and Single Family Attached 0.28 Mobile Home FY 2024-2025 SCHOOL FTE ENROLLMENT (Part 2 General Fund by Schools) 18,788 Elementary 9,324 Middle 13,594 High 675 Alternate Schools 5,256 Charter Schools 47,637 Total SCHOOL ENROLLMENT 2015 IMPACT FEE UDPATE 49% Elementary 23% Middle 28% High 100% Total FY 2025 MILLAGE RATES 2.0820 Required Local Effort 0.7480 Discretionary 0.3500 Addiitional Millage 3.1800 Total General Fund Millage 1.1332 Capital Improvement Millage 4.3132 Total Millage 2.0820 Required by State Law 2.2312 Total Discretionary Local 4.3132 Total Millage Source: Collier County School District, DPFG 2025 53 Page 269 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT GENERAL LIMITING CONDITIONS Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that the data contained in this report are accurate as of the date of this study; however, factors exist that are outside the control of DPFG and that may affect the estimates and/or projections noted herein. This study is based on estimates, assumptions and other information developed by DPFG from its independent research effort, general knowledge of the industry, and information provided by and consultations with the client and the client's representatives. No responsibility is assumed for inaccuracies in reporting by the client, the client's agent and representatives, or any other data source used in preparing or presenting this study. This report is based on information that was current as of March 6, 2025 (except for sections identified as being updated June 20, 2025, July 29, 2025, and August 29, 2025), and DPFG has not undertaken any update of its research effort since such date. Because future events and circumstances, many of which are not known as of the date of this study, may affect the estimates contained therein, no warranty or representation is made by DPFG that any of the projected values or results contained in this study will actually be achieved. Possession of this study does not carry with it the right of publication thereof or to use the name of DPFG in any manner without first obtaining the prior written consent of DPFG. No abstracting, excerpting or summarization of this study may be made without first obtaining the prior written consent of DPFG. This report is not to be used in conjunction with any public or private offering of securities, debt, equity, or other similar purpose where it may be relied upon to any degree by any person other than the client, nor is any third party entitled to rely upon this report, without first obtaining the prior written consent of DPFG. This study may not be used for purposes other than that for which it is prepared or for which prior written consent has first been obtained from DPFG. Any changes made to the study, or any use of the study not specifically prescribed under agreement between the parties or otherwise expressly approved by DPFG, shall be at the sole risk of the party making such changes or adopting such use. This study is qualified in its entirety by, and should be considered in light of, these limitations, conditions and considerations. 54 Page 270 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Solid Waste A solid waste assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall identify the means and methods for handling, transporting and disposal of all solid waste generated including but not limited to the collection, handling and disposal of recyclables and horticultural waste products. The applicant shall identify the location and remaining disposal capacity available at the disposal site. According to the Economic Assessment, the proposed SRA will increase the County’s peak residential population by approximately 9,615 peak population persons at buildout for 4,502 total dwelling units, including 362 affordable housing units. Using a tons per capita rate of 0.70 (per the 2024 AUIR), a population increase of 9,615 people will generate an additional 6,730.50 tons disposed per year. Commercial solid waste and residential curbside solid waste, recycling, and horticulture will be collected with Collier County’s franchise agreements by other franchise-approved haulers. Commercial recycling is open to market collection. Construction waste will be collected and processed by a local business specializing in the recycling of construction products. Collier County maintains a Board approved Disposal Capacity Agreement (DCA) with Okeechobee Landfill, Inc., that provides 930,000 tons of reserved capacity at Okeechobee Landfill. The waste generated and transferred to Okeechobee Landfill as part of the DCA is not included in the AUIR capacity LOS. Per the AUIR, for the purpose of demonstrating compliance with the LOS Standard for capacity, it is assumed Collier County will renew, amend, or enter into a new agreement, as necessary, and continue to transfer. Commercial, municipal solid waste, and recycling containers will comply with Collier County ordinances. The project will utilize County-approved bear-resistant dumpsters/trash cans for all residential and non-residential uses, with locations of dumpsters being determined at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP) approval. All costs, including maintenance, of bear-resistant dumpsters will be borne by the owner/developer. Potable Water A potable water assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either Florida Administrative Code for private and limited use water systems, or for Public Water Systems. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the potable water assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products, if any, generated by the proposed treatment process. The applicant shall identify the sources of water proposed for potable water supply. Page 1 of 8 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Resubmittal\Public Facilities Impact Assesssment Report (7-28-2025).docx Page 271 of 4116 The project site is located within the Immokalee Water and Sewer District (IWSD) utility service area. Therefore, potable water services for the Corkscrew Grove East Village project will be provided by IWSD. To address the potable water demands of the project, the following improvements are anticipated: 1. Regional Water Supply Facility: IWSD plans to construct a regional water supply facility on land currently owned by Alico Land Development Company and located just east of the SRA along the north side of SR 82. This facility will ensure an adequate potable water supply for the development and comply with the Florida Administrative Code standards for Public Water Systems. 2. Distribution of Potable Water: Within the project boundaries, potable water distribution will be coordinated between the Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District and the IWSD. Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District will oversee the initial installation of distribution infrastructure. The proposed potable water system will comply with all regulatory requirements, including considerations for the disposal of any waste products generated by the water treatment process. The system will adhere to approved generation rates and design criteria to ensure compliance with Level of Service (LOS) standards. Potable water demands, including Average Daily Demand (ADD) and Maximum Daily Demand (MDD), will be calculated in coordination with IWSD and the relevant permitting agencies. The Owner/Developer will not be obligated to pay Collier County potable water impact fees. Instead, applicable connection fees will be calculated and paid directly to IWSD. Irrigation Water An irrigation water assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall quantify the anticipated irrigation water usage expected at the buildout of the SRA. The assessment shall identify the sources of water proposed for irrigation use and shall identify proposed methods of water conservation. The Corkscrew Grove project site has a long history of permitted agricultural withdrawals from the Lower Tamiami and Sandstone Aquifers that have not resulted in any known adverse impacts to natural environments. The agricultural water allocations currently permitted and used within the Corkscrew Grove project area total approximately 13.78 MGD on an annual average basis (5,028 MGY) and approximately 18.45 MGD on a maximum monthly basis (572 MGM). At build-out, the Corkscrew Grove project will result in converting approximately 1,447 acres of the currently permitted 3,100 acres of agricultural land into a residential development or about 47% of the currently permitted agricultural acreage. Prorating the currently permitted irrigation allocation to the 1,447 acres proposed for development yields an annual average day allocation of 6.48 MGD and a maximum month day allocation of 8.68 MGD for the proposed development Page 2 of 8 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Resubmittal\Public Facilities Impact Assesssment Report (7-28-2025).docx Page 272 of 4116area. The transition of agricultural use to residential/commercial use will result in approximately 432 acres of landscaping and turf within the Corkscrew Grove development requiring irrigation. The project irrigation demand for this amount of irrigated acreage as determined using the SFWMD Blaney-Criddle method is: • 1.44 MGD on an annual average basis or 524 MGY (78% reduction in current use) • 2.24 MGD on a maximum monthly basis or 68 MGM (74% reduction in current use) The proposed change in land use will result in a significant reduction in irrigation water usage at the project site. The Corkscrew Grove project will obtain a water use permit from the SFWMD which will allow withdrawal from onsite surface water and ground water sources to meet irrigation demands. The onsite irrigation water supply system will include stormwater lakes and wells. The lake system will be used to supply irrigation water for the project and wells will be utilized to resupply the withdrawal lakes when needed. The proposed source aquifers for the wells are the Lower Tamiami Aquifer and Sandstone Aquifer as currently permitted to meet the existing agricultural water demands on the project site. The lake withdrawals will provide an efficient and low impact method for effectively harvesting available stormwater supplies while lake storage and re-supply by groundwater will minimize potential impacts to both surface and groundwater levels. The Owner/Developer would be responsible for all costs associated with the permitting, construction, and maintenance of the irrigation system. Wastewater A wastewater assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either Standards for Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems, contained in Florida Administrative Code for systems having a capacity not exceeding 10,000 gallons per day or for wastewater treatment systems having a capacity greater than 10,000 gallons per day. In addition to the standard requirements of the analysis required above, the wastewater assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products generated by the proposed treatment process. The project site is located within the Immokalee Water and Sewer District (IWSD) utility service area. Therefore, wastewater services for the Corkscrew Grove East Village project will be provided by IWSD. The following improvements are anticipated to meet the wastewater demands of the project: 1. Wastewater Treatment Facility: IWSD plans to construct a regional wastewater treatment facility on property currently owned by Alico Land Development Company, located east side of the SRA on the north side of SR 82. This facility will treat wastewater generated by the development in compliance with the Florida Administrative Code standards for wastewater treatment systems exceeding 10,000 gallons per day. 2. Wastewater Collection and Transmission: Within the project boundaries, wastewater collection and transmission infrastructure will be coordinated between the Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District and IWSD. Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District will oversee the initial installation of the necessary gravity sewer lines, force mains, and lift stations. Page 3 of 8 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Resubmittal\Public Facilities Impact Assesssment Report (7-28-2025).docx Page 273 of 4116The proposed wastewater treatment system will adhere to all regulatory requirements, including the proper disposal of waste products generated during the treatment process. Wastewater flows, including Average Daily Flow (ADF) and Peak Hourly Flow (PHF), will be calculated in coordination with IWSD and the appropriate permitting agencies to ensure compliance with Level of Service (LOS) standards. The Owner/Developer will not be obligated to pay Collier County wastewater impact fees. Instead, applicable connection fees will be calculated and paid directly to IWSD. Stormwater Management A stormwater management impact assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The stormwater management impact assessment shall, at a minimum, provide the following information: A. An exhibit showing the boundary of the proposed SRA including the following information: All responses to the questions below are shown on the Village Master Plan submitted as Exhibit A to this Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report. 1) The location of any WRA delineated within the SRA; Areas designated WRA within the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA are shown on the Village Master Plan submitted as Exhibit A to this Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report. 2) A generalized representation of the existing stormwater flow patterns across the site including the location(s) of discharge from the site to the downstream receiving waters; and Existing stormwater on this site is generated by the agricultural activities that have historically taken place and are currently permitted. Stormwater is collected through a network of internal ditches and canals, which route the runoff to the on- site Water Retention Areas (WRAs) via pumps. Discharges from these WRAs are controlled through regulated control structures that limit offsite discharge rates. Offsite discharges flow into adjacent canals and/or culverts under Corkscrew Road, with the ultimate outfall directed into the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW). Please reference the “Storm Water Management Impact Assessment Exhibits” included with this submittal. 3) The land uses of adjoining properties and, if applicable, the locations of stormwater discharge into the site of the proposed SRA from the adjoining properties. Page 4 of 8 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Resubmittal\Public Facilities Impact Assesssment Report (7-28-2025).docx Page 274 of 4116 Land uses to the north, east, and west is agricultural. Lands to the south are agricultural and public lands outside of the RLSA boundary. B. A narrative component to the report including the following information: 1) The name of the receiving water or, if applicable, FSA or WRA to which the stormwater discharge from the site will ultimately outfall; Corkscrew Grove East Village will ultimately outfall to the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW). 2) The peak allowable discharge rate (in cfs/acre) allowed for the SRA per Collier County Ordinance 90-10 or its successor regulation; The site is located within the Cocohatchee River Canal Basin. The peak allowable discharge, per Ordinance No. 2019-19, is 0.04 cfs/ac. 3) If applicable, a description of the provisions to be made to accept stormwater flows from surrounding properties into, around, or through the constructed surface water management system of the proposed development; The proposed SRA encompasses three distinct areas: the property west of Corkscrew Road, the property north of SR82, and the property east of Corkscrew Road and south of SR82. The existing site has historically been used for agricultural row crops, primarily oranges and tomatoes. The site is composed of an intricate network of agricultural infrastructure, including dikes, impoundment areas known as WRAs, perimeter ditches, and berms. These perimeter berms effectively prevent external surface water from flowing onto the site, ensuring that no stormwater flows from surrounding properties are accepted. Within the site, stormwater runoff from the agricultural fields is collected in perimeter ditches. From there, agricultural pumps transfer the excess runoff into the WRAs. These WRAs are equipped with drainage structures that direct stormwater either into adjacent canals, through culverts under Corkscrew Road, or directly into the CREW lands. Two canals currently traverse the site, ultimately discharging into CREW. These canals, essential for stormwater conveyance from surrounding properties, will be preserved. One of these, Cabbage Slough, will be partially relocated within the site to accommodate the proposed development. This relocation will maintain the canal's current capacity and flow patterns, ensuring that surrounding hydrology is not adversely affected. The other canal, Gator Slough, will remain unaltered to preserve its existing functionality. Page 5 of 8 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Resubmittal\Public Facilities Impact Assesssment Report (7-28-2025).docx Page 275 of 4116 4) The types of stormwater detention areas to be constructed as part of the surface water management system of the proposed development and water quality treatment to be provided prior to discharge of the runoff from the site; and In the post-development condition, all agricultural operations will be discontinued, agricultural ditches will be filled, and the site will be redeveloped into a mixed-use village with a master surface water management system. The existing perimeter berms will be retained to ensure that surrounding flow patterns remain unaffected; however, these berms may be modified during construction to comply with South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) criteria. The master surface water management system will provide the necessary water quality treatment and nutrient removal through a combination of traditional stormwater storage methods, such as wet detention and dry retention areas, prior to discharging into WRAs or the offsite CREW Lands. Stormwater from the site will discharge into CREW via multiple existing culverts under Corkscrew Road and the two (2) existing canals that traverse the property described in the previous section. 5) If a WRA has been incorporated into the stormwater management system of an SRA, the report shall demonstrate compliance with the provisions of Section 4.08.04.A.4.b. All WRAs adjacent to the SRA will be integrated into the stormwater management system. Discharges into the WRAs will occur only after the required water quality treatment has been achieved. Stormwater discharge into the WRA will only occur through control structures permitted by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The owner of Corkscrew East Village SRA will be responsible for all costs associated with the design, permitting, construction, and operation of the proposed stormwater improvements required to serve Corkscrew East Village development. School Concurrency The adopted level of service for schools is based upon permanent Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) capacity: 100% for high school Concurrency Service Areas (CSAs); 95% for elementary school CSAs; and 95% for middle school CSAs. The subject site is within the E11 Immokalee Area 1 CSA for elementary schools, the M5 Immokalee Area CSA for middle schools, and the H5 Immokalee Area CSA for high schools. The FISH capacity and enrollment data below is per the Collier County Public Schools (CCPS) Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for fiscal years 2025 through 2044. The E11 CSA includes three elementary schools, Eden Park, Highlands, and Lake Trafford. They have a combined FISH capacity of 2,517 students, a 2024/2025 enrollment of 1,922 students, and a projected 2028/2029 enrollment of 2,063 students (82% capacity). Page 6 of 8 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Resubmittal\Public Facilities Impact Assesssment Report (7-28-2025).docx Page 276 of 4116The M5 CSA includes one middle school, Immokalee Middle. There is a FISH capacity of 1,715 students, a 2024/2025 enrollment of 1,419 students, and a projected 2028/2029 enrollment of 1,260 students (73% capacity). According to the CCPS CIP, enrollment at Immokalee Middle is being monitored. The H5 CSA includes one high school, Immokalee High. There is a FISH capacity of 2,221 students, a 2024/2025 enrollment of 1,993 students, and a projected 2028/2029 enrollment of 1,773 students (80% capacity). According to the CCPS CIP, enrollment at Immokalee High is being monitored. The proposed Corkscrew Grove East Village consists of up to 4,127 dwelling units (not including the 375 affordable housing units), broken down by type in the table below in accordance with Collier County Impact Fee Ordinance(s) methodology and terminology and applying the student generation rates (SGR) established in the 2015 Collier County School Impact Fee Study (the most recent data available) the Corkscrew Grove East Village is anticipated to generate 1,109 new students at buildout. Residential Unit Type Units SGR Projected Students Multi-family (condo, duplex, 1,279 0.11 141 single-family attached, etc.) Single-family detached < 4,000 2,848 0.34 968 SF TOTAL 4,127 1,109 As the total projected number of students will be distributed between the E11, M5, and H5 CSAs, the Owner/Developer of the Village has reserved a 24-acre dedicated school site as depicted on the SRA Master Plan (Exhibit A of this document). The Owner/Developer will also design the Village stormwater system to accommodate necessary stormwater treatment and storage for the school site. A stipulation to the development order requires the Owner/Developer to convey real property for the school site in exchange for education impact fee credits. The proposed stipulation states: “With respect to the conveyance of real property, by the Applicant to the School District, the reservation of the school site to the School District fully mitigates for the developments impact to the elementary, middle, and high schools needed to serve the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA.” Fire and EMS The Corkscrew Grove East Village is located within the service area of the Immokalee Fire Control District (Fire District). Fire and EMS services for the project will be initially provided out of Station 31 in Immokalee. However, a new fire (and co-located EMS) station may be needed to serve the project at buildout. A stipulation to the development order requires the Owner/Developer to convey real property for a three-acre site for a fire and co-located EMS station in exchange for fire impact fee credits and/or cash. The proposed stipulation states: “With respect to the conveyance of real property by the Applicant to the Fire District, the reservation of the site to the Fire District fully mitigates for the developments impact to the fire and EMS facilities needed to serve the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA.” Page 7 of 8 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Resubmittal\Public Facilities Impact Assesssment Report (7-28-2025).docx Page 277 of 4116Transportation Impacts See the Traffic Analysis provided as part of this SRA application for transportation impacts. Page 8 of 8 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023120\WP\Resubmittal\Public Facilities Impact Assesssment Report (7-28-2025).docx Page 278 of 4116MEMORANDUM Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment PREPARED FOR: Michael Bosi, Collier County Amy Patterson, Collier County Trinity Scott, Collier County James French, Collier County Kenneth Kovensky, Collier County Ian Barnwell, Collier County COPY TO: Bill Gramer, Jacobs PREPARED BY: Dave Green, Jacobs Michael Oyakojo, Jacobs DATE: January 5, 2025 Introduction Collier County, Florida (the County) Growth Management Division (GMD) engaged Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs) to conduct a peer review of the “Economic Assessment of Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) (Report) prepared by Development Planning & Financing Group (DPFG) on behalf of Alico, Inc. (the Applicant). The version reviewed herein was the most recently revised version dated June 20, 2025. The purpose of the peer review was to assess: • The reasonableness of the assumptions in the assessment. • The consistency of the assessment with the underlying assumptions. • The reasonableness of the anticipated future revenue from ad valorem taxes, impact fees, and other sources for the appropriate forecast period; and reasonableness of expenditures (capital and operating) for the appropriate forecast period. • The consistency of the recommendations and findings with generally accepted governmental accounting and finance conventions, financial forecasting, impact-fee-setting practices, balanced development concepts (growth pays for growth), and/or applicable County policies (such as the Collier County Land Development Code). Our procedures in reviewing the Report included sample verification of significant calculations, testing of consistency among underlying assumptions, data, and calculation methods, and reviewing the consistency of results with the County’s current plans and forecasts. Jacobs did not replicate or develop an independent Fiscal Impact Analysis Model (FIAM), but peer reviewed DPFG’s alternative fiscal impact model and tested significant and sensitive variables. A record of our verification of sources and assumptions is provided in Appendix A. Page 1 of 16 Page 279 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment In preparing this peer review, Jacobs relied, in whole or in part, on data and information provided by the County and third parties, which has not been independently verified by Jacobs and which Jacobs has assumed to be accurate, complete, reliable, and current. Therefore, while Jacobs has utilized its best efforts in preparing the peer review and providing comments and recommendations to the County, Jacobs does not warrant or guarantee the conclusions set forth herein or in the DPFG Report or its fiscal impact model, which are dependent and/or based upon data, information, or statements supplied by the County or third parties. Legal Basis Collier County’s Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) program was established under the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Its objective is the creation of an incentive-based land use overlay system based on the principles of rural land stewardship found in Florida Statutes, Section 163.3177(11), including environmental preservation, agricultural preservation, and smart growth development. Through the RLSA program, Stewardship Sending Areas (SSAs) can be approved for preservation purposes, creating credits to entitle Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRAs), typically towns, villages, hamlets, and compact rural developments (CRDs). The credit system is designed to incentivize preservation of the most important environmental lands, including large, connected wetland systems and significant habitat for listed species, by awarding higher credit values for high value preservation areas.”1 Pursuant to the GMP RLSA, Policy 4.18 states “the SRA will be planned and designed to be fiscally neutral or positive to Collier County at the horizon year [emphasis added] based on a cost/benefit fiscal impact analysis model acceptable to or as may be adopted by the County. The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) may grant exceptions to this policy to accommodate affordable-workforce housing, as it deems appropriate. Techniques that may promote fiscal neutrality, such as Community Development Districts and other special districts, shall be encouraged. At a minimum, the analysis shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, parks, law enforcement, jail, emergency medical services (EMS), schools, and fire control district. Development phasing, developer contributions and mitigation, and other public/private partnerships shall address any potential adverse impacts to adopted levels of service standards.” Further, the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), Section 4.08.07 defines the requirements for SRA Designation, which “is intended to encourage and facilitate uses that enable economic prosperity and diversification of the economic base of the RLSA District….]. One of several preconditions for the SRA designation is an economic assessment, per Section 4.08.07 L. of the LDC, as follows: L. SRA Economic Assessment. An Economic Assessment meeting the requirements of this Section shall be prepared and submitted as part of the SRA Designation Application Package. At a minimum, the analysis shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire, and schools. Development phasing and funding 1 https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/government/growth-management/divisions/planning-and-zoning-division/comprehensive-planning- section/rural-lands-stewardship-area/rural-lands-stewardship-area-history-and-archive Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 280 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment mechanisms shall address any adverse impacts to adopted minimum levels of service pursuant to Chapter 6 of the LDC. 1. Demonstration of Fiscal Neutrality. Each SRA must demonstrate that its development, as a whole [emphasis added], will be fiscally neutral or positive to the Collier County tax base. 2. This demonstration will be made for each unit of government responsible for the services listed above, using one of the following methodologies: a. Collier County Fiscal Impact Model. The fiscal impact model officially adopted and maintained by Collier County. b. Alternative Fiscal Impact Model. If Collier County has not adopted a fiscal impact model as indicated above, the applicant may develop an alternative fiscal impact model using a methodology approved by Collier County. The BCC may grant exceptions to this policy of fiscal neutrality to accommodate affordable or workforce housing. DPFG was retained to prepare an economic assessment for Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA to demonstrate fiscal neutrality using an Alternative Fiscal Impact Model, as defined by the LDC Section 4.08.07 L.1. b. Although the fiscal impact requirements are specified in the LDC, there remains a considerable amount of flexibility in both the interpretation and application of the law. DPFG is required to measure fiscal neutrality at the project’s horizon year or buildout. The timing of when buildout is expected to occur is not identified in the DPFG report. The neutrality assessment is simply evaluated for whenever buildout is achieved. The overall assessment is underpinned by this fundamental assumption, and DPFG’s analysis is consistent with this assumption throughout the assessment. It is important to recognize that fiscal impact analysis is not a cash flow analysis, and therefore does not include a year-by-year examination of the County’s sources and uses of funds over the development period. New development may or may not achieve fiscal neutrality in the early stages of new development. The County must make initial investments to accommodate growth – prior to a compensatory public revenue stream from a new development to fund the necessary infrastructure and services. This lag effect is inherent in any new development plan, but its annualized impacts are beyond the scope of this peer review and are beyond the County’s requirements for fiscal neutrality. There are also inherent limitations of fiscal impact modeling. While we determined that DPFG’s analysis largely fulfills the fiscal impact analysis requirement, the following caveats and shortcomings are noted: • Fiscal impact modeling is static and not dynamic. It is a snapshot in time, and therefore known variables (e.g., the costs of construction, the state of the US economy, the pace and mix of the development plan, etc.) are assumed constant. As such, substantial changes to these variables could render the analysis obsolete. • The cost of future financing may not be included in the analysis. This factor can add substantially to the overall costs of infrastructure development and thereby could negatively affect any findings of positive or neutral fiscal impacts should financing be employed by the County, the Fire Rescue District, or School District. The County or Districts may employ various funding and financing options to construct such facilities, which are unknown at this time. • Fiscal impact analysis assumes an average and/or marginal cost basis. Compensatory revenues whether in the form of impact fees or ad valorem, sales, or other taxes may over-recover (subject to Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 281 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment economies of scale) or under-recover (subject to dis-economies of scale) actual costs for any given development. • While fiscal impact analysis is intended to measure project-specific revenue and cost drivers, certain obligations are subject to the analyst’s discretion. The County recognizes and has acknowledged that there are possibilities that the development plans for the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will change, which introduces factors beyond the County’s control, and beyond the constraints of fiscal impact analysis, generally. DPFG’s methodology and assumptions are described in detail in the following sections. Methodology DPFG’s approach to “the fiscal impact analysis of the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA uses a marginal/average cost hybrid methodology to determine the project’s impact on capital and operating costs,”2 which is customary for fiscal analyses. A marginal approach is used to estimate ad valorem tax revenues. To estimate certain marginal costs, DPFG applied the case study approach for the capital analyses of the: • Sheriff Department • Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Department • Immokalee Fire Control District • School District The case study approach is based on the analyst’s determination that other standard approaches have material limitations, and as such, a case study approach is a more appropriate application for the particular use. DPFG’s approach also included an analysis of the fiscal impacts to the Unincorporated Area General Fund Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU). Overall, Jacobs agrees with the marginal/average cost hybrid approach taken in this analysis, and the case study approach applied to the referenced departments. 1.1 Key Assumptions Jacobs was provided with DPFG’s Report and their corresponding fiscal analysis Microsoft Excel model (filename: Corkscrew Grove SRA Econ Assess 2025.08.29 VIEW ONLY.xlsx). DPFG also spent a significant amount of time answering Jacobs’ questions, providing source documentation, and facilitating our understanding of their methodology and assumptions. 2 DPFG Report, Page 8 Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 282 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1.1.1 Inflation All costs (whether historical or future) were adjusted to reflect 2025 dollars. Inflation is typically excluded from fiscal neutrality analysis (constant dollar approach), which enables comparisons across years and across projects. The County’s FY 2025 budget, and the FY 2025 budgets for Collier County School District and Immokalee Fire Control District were used for the analysis. 1.1.2 Sales, Just and Taxable Real Estate Values To estimate potential tax revenues, DPFG utilized estimated taxable values for residential (per unit) and non-residential (per sq. ft.) land uses. Sales values for residential units were provided by the Applicant based on their internal market analysis and market analysis performed by third party consultant. 1.1.3 Annual Absorption by Use Not applicable 1.1.4 Millage Rates DPFG utilized fiscal year (FY 2025) millage rates as follows to determine annual ad valorem (property) tax revenues for the forecast period for the County and MSTU. • 3.0107 County General Fund • 0.0246 Water Pollution Control • 0.2096 Conservation Collier Program • 3.2449 County Wide Millage • 0.6844 MSTU General Fund 1.1.5 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Population Growth Forecasts DPFG used residents per housing unit data published in the Collier County Emergency Medical Services Impact Fee Update Study, dated October 10, 2016, to estimate residential seasonal population growth due to Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA development. The seasonal population per unit assumptions utilized were: • Single Family Detached < 4,000 Sq Ft: 2.65 • Total Multifamily (Low Rise, 1-2 Floors): 1.26 Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 283 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1.1.6 Structure of Funds For the purposes of fiscal impact analysis, three taxing authorities were evaluated: Collier County (through its General Fund), the Immokalee Fire Control District, and the Collier County School District (“School District”). Each has separate taxing authority, and the Collier County School Board levies its own taxes and receives part of its funding from the State of Florida. The DPFG Report tests the project’s fiscal neutrality for County operating impacts, County capital impacts, Fire operating impacts, Fire capital impacts, Schools operating impacts, and Schools capital impacts. 1.1.7 General Fund The General Fund pays for those services benefiting residents and visitors of Collier County. These services include maintenance and operation of the various regional recreational facilities, governmental facilities, social services, animal services, libraries, transportation system, and general administrative services. The largest source of revenue for the General Fund is Ad Valorem – or property tax revenue. Municipal Service Taxing Units exist in various locations and are intended to provide extraordinary services within a specific district, funded by a separate ad valorem property tax. In addition, a water pollution control tax is collected county-wide. 1.1.8 Immokalee Fire Control District Service to the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will be provided by the Immokalee Fire Control District from the Immokalee Fire Control District / County Public Safety Complex Headquarters (Station #32) in Ave Maria. These facilities are funded from impact fees revenues and operations from an Ad-valorem property tax revenues. 1.1.9 Collier County School District School districts in Florida utilize a State mandated accounting method which separates revenues and expenses into specific funds. Each fund is earmarked for a specified purpose or activity and carries specific requirements, restrictions, or limitations. Accordingly, the School District maintains and reports the following segregated major funds: general, debt service, capital projects, special revenue, and internal service. The General Fund covers the day-to-day operations of the School District and accounts for most operational expenses that are incurred. The Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP) provides equalized student funding for school districts. This concept guarantees that the availability of educational programs and services will be substantially equal for all students, regardless of geography and/or local economic factors. Funding for the FEFP includes required local effort property taxes that districts must levy, state taxes, and some local discretionary tax mills recommended by the State. 1.1.10 Enterprise and Internal Service Funds Collier County maintains two different types of proprietary funds: enterprise and internal service. Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 284 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment Enterprise funds report, with more detail, the same functions presented as business-type activities in the government-wide financial statements for water and sewer, solid waste disposal, emergency medical services, transit, and the airport authority. The Collier County Water and Sewer District Fund, the Solid Waste Disposal Fund, and the Emergency Medical Services Fund are tracked individually as major funds. The County also maintains two other (non-major) enterprise funds: Airport Authority Fund and the Collier Area Transit Fund. Table 8 and Appendix Table 16 of the DPFG Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment reflect the impact of the annual general fund contributions to Fund 4030 CATT Transit Enhance and Fund 4033 Transportation Disadvantaged, which are enterprise funds. There are no other impacts to consider with respect to transit enterprise funds in the Economic Assessment.3 Internal service funds are primarily maintained to allocate and accumulate costs internally for Collier County. The County uses internal service funds to account for health insurance, workers compensation insurance, property and casualty insurance, fleet operations, and information technology. While the RSLA program requires that the fiscal impacts on the County’s potable water, wastewater, stormwater, irrigation water, and solid waste enterprise funds be examined, enterprise funds are inherently fiscally neutral because they are created for a specific purpose and intended to be self- supporting through user rates and fees. As such, the fiscal impact of the proposed development is expected to be fiscally neutral to the County. Jacobs finds DPFG’s exclusion of enterprise funds to be an acceptable and reasonable approach. Fiscal Impacts Recall that the fiscal impact analysis, at a minimum, “shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, parks, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire, and schools,” each of which is reviewed in the following sections. This peer review is presented in order of services listed in the LDC. 1.1.11 County Operating Impacts Operating impacts are reflected in DPFG’s analyses of both the General Fund and MSTU General Fund groupings. These analyses cover transportation (roads), parks, law enforcement, EMS, schools, fire control district, and correctional facilities. Based on the analysis, at buildout, Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA annual total general fund operating expenditures are projected at approximately $5,877,000 against revenues of approximately $8,880,000, resulting in a fiscal surplus of $3,003,000. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA annual total MSTU operating expenditures are projected at approximately $683,000 against revenues of approximately $1,590,000, resulting in a fiscal surplus of $907,000. 3 DPFG Report, Page 14 Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 285 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1.1.12 Transportation (Roads) 1.1.12.1 Operating Impacts Transportation Services is a special revenue fund within the County’s budget. This fund was established for the maintenance of roads and bridges countywide. The principal funding source for Transportation Services is a subsidy from the General Fund. Based on the 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions Traffic Impact Statement, the Corkscrew Grove East Village is a significant traffic generator and may adversely impacts these three road segments: SR 29 from 9th to CR 29A North, SR 29 from Hendry County Line to SR 82 and SR 82 from Hendry County Line to SR 29. The developer may be required to provide some assistance to the County on capacity/operational improvements to the road segments that may be significantly impacted by the project. 1.1.12.2 Capital Impacts The County imposes road impact fees on new development occurring to fund the construction of growth- related improvements. Consistent with impact fee statutory requirements, these fees place a fair share of the cost burden on new development for transportation-related expansions and improvements, which are necessitated by such development. DPFG treats road impacts from the perspective that the owner will pay road impact fees according to the number of units (residential) or square footage (non-residential) in the development plan and the corresponding fee schedule established by the County. Using DPFG’s approach, Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will generate approximately $35.8 million in Road Impact Fee revenues to the County, based on the development parameters and current road impact fee rate table. This is more than the $24.9 million proportionate fair-share estimate for the project. The operational fair share estimate is pending as of the time of our review. Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of fiscal neutrality for transportation (road) impacts to be reasonable, subject to the approval of the companion Developer Agreement. 1.1.13 Potable Water and Wastewater The Corkscrew Groves East Village project is located within the Immokalee Water and Sewer District (“IWSD”) utility service area. Hence, IWSD will be responsible for the provision of water and wastewater utility services to Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. To meet the potential demands due to this project, necessary capital infrastructure improvements to the water and wastewater systems are envisaged in line with all regulatory requirements and standards. The project developer will be required to pay the applicable connection fees to IWSD. Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of fiscal neutrality for potable water and wastewater public facilities and services to be reasonable. Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 286 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1.1.14 Stormwater Management “The proposed SRA encompasses three distinct areas: the property west of Corkscrew Road, the property north of SR 82, and the property east of Corkscrew Road and south of SR 82. The existing site has historically been used for agricultural row crops, primarily oranges and tomatoes. The site is composed of an intricate network of agricultural infrastructure, including dikes, impoundment areas known as WRAs, perimeter ditches, and berms. These perimeter berms effectively prevent external surface water from flowing onto the site, ensuring that no stormwater flows from surrounding properties are accepted.”4 All associated costs with the design, permit, construction, and operation of the proposed stormwater improvements will be borne by the Owner. Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of fiscal neutrality for stormwater management public facilities and services to be reasonable. 1.1.15 Irrigation Water “The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA project site has a long history of permitted agricultural withdrawals from the Lower Tamiami and Sandstone Aquifers that have not resulted in adverse impacts to natural environments.”5 The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA project will result in converting approximately 1,447 acres of agricultural land into a residential development at build-out. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will apply for a water use permit from SFWMD for the use of surface water and ground water sources onsite for irrigation needs. Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will be responsible for all relevant costs for the permitting, construction, and maintenance of the irrigation system. Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of irrigation water as fiscally neutral to be reasonable. 1.1.16 Solid Waste The approved Collier County hauler contractor will be responsible for the collection of solid waste generated within Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. County-approved bear-resistant dumpsters and trash cans will be used for the project. The developer will cover the costs associated with the maintenance and operations of the dumpsters. Solid waste collected within Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will be disposed at Okeechobee Landfill through Immokalee Transfer Station. The county maintains a disposal capacity agreement with Okeechobee Landfill with 930,000 tons of reserved capacity. Solid waste capital and operational costs are accounted for in the County’s Solid Waste Fund, a self- supporting enterprise fund. Enterprise funds are inherently fiscally neutral because they are created for a 4 DPFG Report, page 25 5 DPFG Report, Page 26 Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 287 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment specific purpose and intended to be self-supporting through user rates and fees. Again, enterprise funds were excluded from DPFG’s analysis. Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of fiscal neutrality for solid waste facilities and services to be reasonable. 1.1.17 Parks Per the County’s 2022 AUIR, the current level of service (LOS) for all county-owned and maintained community and regional parks is a combined 3.90 acres per 1,000 residents. The County’s LOS (per 1,000 residents) by type is compared to DPFG’s assumptions, as follows: • Community Parks: achieved 1.22 acres • Community Parks: adopted 1.20 acres • Regional Parks: adjusted achieved 1.82 acres • Regional Parks: adopted 2.70 acres It is noted that the DPFG value for Regional Parks achieved of 1.82 acres are based on a county staff recommendation. 1.1.17.1 Capital Impacts The County imposes separate impact fees for community and regional parks. The impact fee revenues of community parks were calculated to be $3,242,000 (plus other capital revenues of $52,000 for a total of $3,294,000), and regional parks were $9,246,000 (plus other capital revenues of $481,000 for a total of $9,727,000). The cost of estimated acreage ($283,638 per acre) required to achieve the County LOS for community parks forms the basis for capital impacts, which DPFG estimated at $3,117,000, leading to an estimated surplus of $177,000 for community parks. The cost of estimated acreage ($590,288 per acre) required to achieve the County LOS for regional parks forms the basis for capital impacts. While the adopted level of service for regional parks is 2.70 acres per 1,000 peak population, the adjusted achieved LOS of 1.82 acres was recommended by the County. With the recommended LOS and cost per acre, results in an estimated capital cost for regional parks of $590,288. The cost of the regional parks of $9,840,000 is more than the estimated impact fee and other capital revenues of $9,727,000 of the regional parks by $113,000. While there is a projected deficit of $113,000 for the regional parks, the forecast surplus of $177,000 for community parks offsets this, and results in the total regional and community parks capital impact to be 6 a slightly positive $64,000. 6 DPFG Report, Page 19 Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 288 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment DPFG’s assumption that regional park acreage costs will reflect average costs is a conservative assumption compared to the relative cost of inland acreage. If inland acreage costs less, on average, than the blended County average, then capital fiscal surplus for parks would be higher than DPFG’s calculations. Based on the adjustment to the achieved LOS discussed above, Jacobs finds that parks are fiscally neutral or slightly positive. 1.1.18 Law Enforcement (Sheriff Department) 1.1.18.1 Capital Impacts The capital needs for law enforcement were established using the case study approach. The law enforcement impact fee is intended to recover the cost of capital construction and expansion of law enforcement related facilities and assets. DPFG estimated impact fee revenue to be $2,258,000 and other capital revenues at $409,000. Capital costs are included to equip the required number of officers, amounting to a total of $2,115,000. The estimated revenues exceed the forecasted direct capital costs and result in a fiscal surplus in the amount of $552,000. This surplus will likely be expended on indirect capital costs and future law enforcement infrastructure needs. Therefore, the impact is neutral. Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of law enforcement as fiscally neutral to be reasonable. 1.1.19 Emergency Medical Services 1.1.19.1 Capital Impacts According to EMS management, Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will be served by the EMS facility located within the Immokalee Fire District’s Headquarters Station 32. If the call volume necessitates it, an additional ambulance may be leased, and space rented for its operation. DPFG projects total capital revenues of $556,000. EMS direct capital costs were estimated at $505,000, which is less than the combined projected impact fee of $543,000 and other capital revenues of $13,000, leaving about $51,000 for indirect / related capital cost. Therefore, the impact is neutral. Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of emergency medical services as fiscally neutral to be reasonable. 1.1.20 Immokalee Fire Control District 1.1.20.1 Operating Impacts The current millage rate and the projected tax base of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA result in annual ad valorem revenues of $8,017,000. The annual operating expenses to serve Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA population, based on an average of the fire district’s existing stations and population served, are $1,926,000. Thus, there is a projected operating fiscal surplus. Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 289 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1.1.20.2 Capital Impacts The capital needs for fire control district will be funded by impact fees. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will generate adequate capital revenues for Immokalee Fire Control District, with matching levels of capital costs. In exchange for impact fee credits, and prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, a 3.0-acre parcel shall be donated by the owner to the Immokalee Fire Control and Rescue District. The parcel shall be located within proximity to the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA development. A new station will be constructed and placed into operation if sufficient development occurs within the potential service area to ensure the funding of capital and operating costs of the new station is financially feasible. DPFG projects total capital revenues of $10,162,000 with additional operating surplus of $2,159,000 to match $12,321,000 capital cost for construction, vehicles, and equipment. Therefore, the impact is neutral. Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of fire control district as fiscally neutral to be reasonable. 1.1.21 Schools The analysis uses student generation rate (SGRs) as shown below: • Single Family Detached < 4,000 Sq Ft: 0.34 • Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors): 0.11 1.1.21.1 Operating Impacts Based on projections of school enrollment by type, as well as the operating revenue and costs impacts, the calculations estimating the fiscal impacts on the County School District indicate that Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is fiscally neutral. DPFG estimates ad valorem local millage revenues at buildout of $6,987,000, with matching levels of operating expenditures. 1.1.21.2 Capital Impacts The capital needs for schools were established using the case study approach. The analysis uses the current impact fee structure defined in the 2015 Collier County School Impact Fee Update Study (and indexed on the 2017 Indexing Calculations) to determine the appropriate application of the fees and the revenues derived from fees. DPFG uses adopted school impact fee as shown below: • Single Family Detached <4,000 Sq. Ft.: $8,789.54 • Multi-Family (Low-Rise, 1-2 Floors): $2,844.19 Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 290 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment Revenues to pay for growth related capital expenditures are derived from ad valorem taxes and impact fees on residential-only units, and a capital outlay millage of 1.1332 mills (subject to a cap of 1.50 mills).7 Hence, the residential development will have an impact on the determination of fiscal neutrality. In this case, the revenue from the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA development program results in a net fiscal neutrality. Source: Collier County Schools, DPFG, 2025 Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of schools as fiscally neutral to be reasonable. 1.1.22 Additional Public Services Correctional facilities were evaluated by DPFG for fiscal neutrality. Jacobs categorizes correctional facilities as an additional service because they are not required by the minimum requirements defined in the Collier County LDC. While this additional public service is not a required element of the economic assessment, DPFG did include it in their analysis. 1.1.22.1 Correctional Facilities 1.1.22.1.1 Capital Impacts The correctional facilities impact fee is intended to recover the cost of capital construction for jail facilities (both land and building) and related equipment. Impact fees are charged based on residential units. The County’s current LOS was used to calculate the correctional facilities’ capital costs. DPFG applied the impact fee study coefficients for population and employment to calculate functional population. Combined revenues from impact fees of $1,898,000 and other capital revenues of $104,000 amount to $2,002,000, with comparable capital outlays, resulting in a finding of fiscal neutrality.8 7 As the result of a referendum, the school capital millage rates were reduced by 0.35 mills for 4 years, beginning in FY 2020. DPFG provided a comparative analysis if the capital millage rate reverts to the 1.50 millage rate at the end of the 4-year referendum period. 8 DPFG Report, Page 21 Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 291 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment Jacobs finds DPFG’s determination of additional public services as fiscally neutral to be reasonable. Conclusions and Recommendations Through this independent analysis and peer review, Jacobs confirms the reasonableness of DPFG’s analysis and in the project’s fiscal neutrality, as defined. It is our opinion that the Applicant fulfilled the intent of the fiscal neutrality requirement and that the proposed Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA development is fiscally neutral, as defined, for Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA for Collier County, the Immokalee Fire Control District, and the Collier County School District. It is important to recognize that fiscal neutrality relies on accurate projections – often 20 years or more into the future. A significant deviation from the development plan will require an adjustment or new analysis to capture changes to this fiscal neutrality determination, which may involve, for example, adjusting the mix of uses or other mechanisms that will impact the future revenue and expense streams. In addition, fiscal impact analysis is only one step in the development program and the County-Developer relationship framework. This fiscal impact analysis will be supplemented and augmented by several DCAs, MOUs, and/or interlocal agreements. Careful negotiation, execution, and administration of DCAs, MOUs, and/or interlocal agreements is required to ensure that the County continues to achieve its fiscal neutrality objectives. Based upon DPFG’s analysis and this peer review of that analysis, Jacobs concurs that Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA qualify as fiscally neutral, as defined, with respect to County capital and operating impacts, subject to the approval of the companion Developer Contribution Agreement that is being negotiated between the Collier County School District and the Developer. The DPFG analysis, which, in Jacobs’ opinion, is professionally prepared and thorough in its treatment of revenues and expenses, is accurate in its determination that the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA development would meet the County’s requirements for fiscal neutrality. Attachment E-Peer Review of Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment 1-5-26 (1).docxCorkscrew Grove East Village SRA Economic Assessment_PeerReviewDraft Page 292 of 4116 [Document title] APPENDIX A [Document number] 15 Page 293 of 4116 [Document title] 2. Sources and Assumptions Assumption / Calculation Source Model Tab / Report Chart Comment Collier County Impact Fee Schedule Collier County Residential Impact Fees (Residential) 2025 Impact Fee Schedule Checked Collier County Impact Fee Schedule Collier County Commercial Impact Fees (Commercial) 2025 Impact Fee Schedule Checked Community Parks Impact Fees Impact Fee Schedule Comm Parks Impact Fee Rev Checked Regional Parks Impact Fees Impact Fee Schedule Regional Parks Impact Fee Rev Checked Roads Impact Fees Impact Fee Schedule Roads Impact Fee Rev Checked EMS Impact Fees Impact Fee Schedule EMS Impact Fee Rev Checked Law Enforcement Impact Fees Impact Fee Schedule Law Enforce Impact Fee Rev Checked Jail Impact Fees Impact Fee Schedule Jail Impact Fee Rev Checked Collier County Fiscal Year 2025 Collier County Millage Rates Adopted Budget County Inputs Checked 2025 Unincorporated Country Peak Seasonal Population Collier County 2024 AUIR County Inputs Checked 2025 Collier County Permanent Population Collier County 2024 AUIR County Inputs Checked Collier County Peak Tourist Population Collier County CVB Profile- March 2024 County Inputs Checked Collier County Fiscal Year 2025 State Revenue Sharing Adopted Budget General Fund Rev Demand Units Checked Collier County Fiscal Year 2025 Ad Valorem Taxes Adopted Budget General Fund Rev Demand Units Checked Average Taxable Value Per Unit Calculation Residential Just+Taxable Value Checked Total Taxable Value Calculation Residential Just+Taxable Value Checked General Fund Grouping Revenues and Collier County Fiscal Year 2025 Sources-- General Fund Adopted Budget General Fund Grouping Matrix Checked Residents Per Housing Unit Calculation Persons Per Unit Checked Residential Functional Population Coefficient Calculation EMS Pop & Employ Checked Functional Resident Coefficient Calculation EMS Funct Res Non-Residential Checked Total Land & Facility Cost Per Acre Parks Impact Fee Study Parks Impact Per Res Checked Student Generation Rates School Impact Fee Update Study School Inputs Checked FY 2025 Millage Rates CCPS FY25 Final Budget Book School Inputs Checked FY 2025 School FTE Enrollment CCPS FY25 Final Budget Book School Inputs Checked [Document number] 16 Page 294 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA (PL-20240010212) PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES Page 295 of 4116 GMCD Public Portal Land Development Code Administrative Code CollierZoning County Pre-Application Meeting Notes Petition Type: SRA & SSA' s Date and Time: Tuesday 10 /1/2 0 24 at 3: 00prn COMPANION ITEMS: Property Information I Alica East Village (SRA) - PL2 0 240 0 10 212 -Nancy Gundlach Assigned Planner: Alica SSA 23 (SSA) - PL2 0 240 0 10 214 -Austin Grubb Alica SSA 22 (SSA) - PL2024 0 0 10 213 -Austin Grubb Project __ Name: .;;.;A=l=i=--c=--o;;,_..;;S;;..;S=A;.:._2;;;;;...::.4-----1,,(..:.;S..:.;S=A::..}_ ----=P:..:L=2==-0 2;;;;;...::.4 0 0..;;:;;1..;;:0..:;;;2:...::l;..;;6 --A_u_s_t_i_n_ G_r_u_b_b__ PL#: -------------------------------- Property ID#: Current Zoning: See attached _A_-_M_H_o_-_R_L_S_A_o______ _ Project Address: ________ City: Irnrnokalee State: FL Zip: 3 414 2 Applicant: Hole Montes, Inc - Stephanie Karol 239-2 5 4-20 18 Hole Montes, Inc - Bob MulherE?...th Senior VP Bowman A gen t N ame: _______________ t' one: ___________ _ Agent/Firm Address: 95 0 Encore Way City: Naples State: FL Zip: 3411 0 Property Owner: Ali co Land Dev Co. Please provide the following, if applicable: i. Total Acreage: l ,4 5 0 ii. Proposed # of Residential Units: 4 , 3 5 1 iii. Proposed # of Affordable Housing Units: _______ _ iv. ProposedCommercialSquareFootage: 23 0 ,5 5 0 plus 43, 5 0 0 Civic v. For Amendments, indicate the original petition number: __________ _ vi. If there is an Ordinance or Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the type and number: ------------------------ vii. If the project is within a Plat, provide the name and AR#/PL#: _______ _ viii. Is Project within an Area of Historical/Archaeological Probability? ______ _ Pre-Application Meeting Notes 6/26/2024 Page 1 of 5 Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • \\\\W.collicrcoumytl gov/ Page 296 of 4116, Collier County Cev • 4 7-o/V, 1v.b 01''> - $ e- A-71,teh<- C> >'ILA A- SSA Aft'LtCAf1 0..u fu(\,.':1 ,s 1p ()-4-1 ,.v S'«, 1- s. . . R..a.«':S 'f:Sd: StSctS fl- r- 'ih -.t_. C\ c:J ·'th s-L-- /\_£. A(} N oI a'> - 'L9c:le,1, l) f,..t.:,;'1 R '2.Jv 't (! lC.'\J rt",,G1,t1 G tY W .1 s, · Required· The most current Application Forms & the Property Ownership Disclosure Form are required for your submittal. Download from this link: https://www.colliercountyfl.govlgovernment/growth-management/divisions/planning-and- zoning- division/land-use-applications#!/ Disclaimer- Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre-Application Meeting is based on the best available data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the applicant of issues that could arise during the process. The Administrative Code and LDC dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided of required data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to provide all required data. Pre-Application Meeting Notes 6/26/2024 Growth Management Community De,·clopment • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252 2400 • W\\W colli,;;rrnunt ·t1 gm·/ Page 297 of 4116ThomasClarkeVEN From: Laurie Beard Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2024 3:35 PM To: ThomasClarkeVEN /,./07 _;;; Subject: Zoning Pre-App R:ESL•1REH for Alica East Village (SRA - PL20240010212 & SSA's Attachments: Transportation-SRA monitoring pre app handout 2023.docx Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged UD/SRA Monitoring pre-app notes are attached. Laurie Beard Project Manager II Development Review i!) Office:239-252-5782 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL34104 Colliero■mcom Count) Laurie.Beard@colliercountyfl.gov Under Florida Law. e-mail addresses are public records If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request. do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead contact this office by telephone or in writing 1 Page 298 of 4116 Transportation Planning and SRA Monitoring Pre-App Notes Developer Commitments: Transportation Planning "The maximum total daily trip generation for the SRA shall not exceed __ two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval." Use Codes Provide both ITE and SIC use codes in the TIS. SRA Monitoring "One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for SRA monitoring until close- out of the SRA, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the SRA. At the time of this SRA approval, the Managing Entity is the Insert Company Name Here. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of the commitments required by the SRA by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the SRA is closed-out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of SRA commitments." Miscellaneous "Pursuant to Section 125.022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development." J Page 299 of 4116ThomasClarkeVEN From: Michael Sawyer Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2024 3:58 PM To: ThomasClarkeVEN; Nancy Gundlach Subject: Pre-App notes for Alica East Village SRA. Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Please provide the following notes for Transportation Planning: Transportation Planning: A methodology virtual meeting is required (the preview already provided is much appreciated). Provide a note on the TIS cover sheet that the fee will be collected at the time of PUD submittal. Address all transportation elements of the GMP including SRA provisions. Provide both ITE and SIC use codes in the TIS. Provide trip limit/cap Developer Commitment based on TIS using standard language: "The maximum total daily trip generation for the PUD shall not exceed __ two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the /TE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval." Also, provide all potential interconnections where possible to adjacent parcels. Please follow the same review document/format and timing successfully used for previous SRA projects and let us know of any questions or concerns. Due to the development location, there will be additional coordination with other agencies as discussed. Respectfully, Michael Sa"yer Project Manager II Transportation Management Services Department Transportation Planning 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34 I 04 239-252-2926 michael.sa\\')'er@colliercountyfl.gov Michael Sawyer Project Manager II Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees and Program Management £) Office:239-252-2926 Michael. Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov CollierDlilmGJm County Under Florida Law. e-mail addresses are public records If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request. do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead. contact this office by telephone or in writing. Page 300 of 4116ThomasClarkeVEN From: , Austin Grubb Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2024 1:01 PM To: ThomasClarkeVEN Subject: Alica Village East Attachments: PL20240010212, 13 and 14.docx Here you go Tom. Austin Grubb Planner Ill Zoning Office:239-252-2834 Collier Count) Austin.Grubb@colliercountyfl.gov OIJ£tl!JII CJnder Florida Law. e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request. do not send electronic mail to this entity Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing Page 301 of 4116 October 29, 2024 GMP Amendment Pre-Application Meeting Standard Comments PL20240010212, PL20240010213 and PL20240010214 Alico East Village Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive // Naples, FL 34104 // Phone: 239-252-2400 The Comprehensive Planning Section schedules all GMP amendment pre-application meetings, which are mandatory, and coordinates the review of all amendment petitions received. Per the current Fee Schedule (Resolution 2021-193), the non-refundable pre-application meeting fee is $500.00; it is credited towards the petition fee if the petition is submitted within nine months. The petition fee is $16,700.00 for a large-scale petition ($9,000.00 for a small-scale petition), which is non-refundable, plus a proportionate share of the legal advertising costs. For small-scale petitions, there are only two hearings - one each before the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) and Board of County Commissioners (BCC); one legal ad is placed in the Naples Daily News prior to CCPC hearing, and one prior to BCC hearing. For all other amendment petitions, a total of four public hearings are held - Transmittal hearing before CCPC and BCC, and Adoption hearing before CCPC and BCC. The estimated legal advertising costs will be provided to each petitioner and payment will be required prior to advertising for any hearings; any refund due the petitioner after hearings will be provided at that time. J In addition to the petition fee and legal ad costs noted above, payment must also be made for a Traffic Impact Study Review Fee. This fee should be submitted directly to the Transportation Planning Section. Please see their website and/or contact them for more details. There is cost to advertise for and conduct a Neighborhood Information Meeting, and to post a public hearing notice(s) (sign(s)). Chapter 10 of the Land Development Code (LDC) and requires the petitioner of a site-specific GMP amendment to hold a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM); this would occur after a finding of sufficiency of the petition submittal but prior to the first public hearing. The LDC also requires the petitioner of a site-specific GMP amendment to post a notice(s) of the public hearings on the property, for both Transmittal and Adoption hearings. A small-scale amendment is limited to a parcel _s50 acres and is limited to a map amendment only and any directly-related text; the map amendment cannot result in a conflict between the map and text - there can be no internal inconsistency in the GMP. Note: Notwithstanding the significant changes made in 2011 (HB7207) to Ch. 163, Florida Statutes, Collier continues to consider demonstration of need and reduction in greenhouse gas in evaluating GMP amendments. 1. Please address any applicable policies contained in the Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA). Specifically policies 4.1-4.23. If any policies are not applicable, please indicate why they are not applicable. 2. Please address the applicable requirements of Attachment "C", the Collier County RLSA Overlay Stewardship Receiving Area Characteristics for the category of Village. 3. Please ensure that all of the Water Resource Areas are mapped within both the Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) and the Stewardship Sending Area (SSA). 4. In addition, please address the Collier County RLSA Overlay: Attachment A Stewardship Credit Worksheet Proposed. For the most part, there is no guidance/criteria/standards provided in the GMP by which to review amendments for consistency; an exception is for significant impacts upon public facilities as provided for in Policy 1.1.2 of the CIE. However, Chapter 163, F.S., does provide guidance. Note particularly the requirement to provide appropriate data and analysis. Generally, staff reviews for, and an applicant should adequately address in the submittal: 1 Page 302 of 4116 October 29, 2024 • Appropriateness of uses/compatibility with surrounding area. • Impact upon surrounding properties - will it make them less developable under their present FLUM designation? Will it create a domino effect leading to future designation changes on the surrounding properties? • Need for the designation change - data and analysis, e.g. market demand study for commercial uses, to demonstrate the change is warranted, that more inventory of the requested uses is needed. Too often, the data only demonstrates the petition site is viable for the proposed uses ("build it & they will come") rather than demonstrate there is a need for a new or expanded GMP provision to provide for the proposed uses, and that the need is at the subject location. The data should be specific to the proposed land uses, proposed trade service area, persons per household in subject area, etc. as applicable. It is recognized there is more than one acceptable methodology, e.g. radial distance from site (ULI standards for neighborhood/community/regional commercial centers), drive time, etc. Regardless of methodology, the raw data needs to be submitted to allow staff to review it for completeness and accuracy (sometimes parcels are omitted, double counted, included when shouldn't be, etc.). Also, as with all submitted documents, maps of trade service area need to be legible and include adequate identification features, e.g. major roads, Section-Township-Range. • Whether there is a specific or general community vision that the amendment addresses, e.g. a redevelopment area. • The proposed amendment should correlate to the results of the needs analysis. Too often a need is demonstrated for one set of uses but the amendment is for other uses or goes beyond those uses for which a need is demonstrated (e.g., need is for rental apartments, but amendment allows multifamily uses generally). • LOSS (level of service standards) impacts upon public facilities - roads, potable water, sanitary sewer, drainage, solid waste, parks & recreation facilities, etc. • Within the above is consideration of site-specific impacts, e.g. impact upon wetlands and listed species habitats on-site and nearby; and, traffic impacts (operational/safety) from the traffic volume generated/attracted and/or the ingress/egress points - turning movements, median openings, traffic signals, etc. Included within this would be a comparison between impacts that would be expected under the existing zoning and/or FLUM designation vs. that which could be expected under the proposed amendment. • Consistency/conformity/harmony with other Goals, Objectives, Policies (GOPs) and provisions in the Element being amended and any other Element of the GMP relevant to the petition, as well as any other applicable regulations (e.g. Manatee Protection Plan, specific LDC provisions). • Furtherance of existing GOPs relevant to the petition. • Furtherance of any other plans or designations that is applicable or relevant to the petition (e.g. a redevelopment plan, Area of Critical State Concern, Rural Area of Opportunity). • Energy efficiency and conservation, reduction of greenhouse gases, reduction of vehicle miles travelled, etc., as [previously] required in HB 697 (2008). • GMP amendment provisions/requirements for a comprehensive plan and plan amendment in Ch. 163.3177(1)(f), and 163.3177(6)(a)2. and 8., Florida Statutes. It is important to carefully organize the amendment package; be sure all exhibits are consistently labeled, are in the proper order, and are correctly referenced on the pages of the application. For site-specific amendments, be sure to clearly identify the subject site, include North arrow and scale, and source. A petition narrative is often helpful. 2 Page 303 of 4116 Collier County Meeting Notes-Continued -- }}euaL.of'.-n XH I:':>, fe!,vT. K"2--Vi 5 e .e.. e0 A-Tl h aM "2 u CocJ.+t L JV P.+ s A.,, /f(i O J["Q., CJ,-v G.-e. ...... EJV I.I I ()_o.'L, M -fl11\.:1n-L - C/LA i<:- , n. I,;. w .--...) $2-<2- lT.4-t(I; N yt\,(> L S. s: 47T/toh ll °'2N(\.{.L, Att-,.') &< "T,1vL Nu'rt._5 -- p\,\, l1c.., lA&,l,\\.&'· 1)/\-£--W C.voy o.'\./ A-tt-7hc.i, y <;tGLt.:::;J... .{)L Q.. AA• u., •J:h a b -..1.5 ti O·..., S: - Co&: T AA 't- Ca NT Note 1: {fsite is within the City ofNaples Water Service Area please send to Naples Utilities and Planning Departments. Then. ifthe petition is submitted. we are to send it (by email) to the four persons below in their Utilities and Planning Department along with a request that they send us a letter or email of "no objection" to the petition. Bob Middleton RMiddleton(iv.naplesgov.com ,Allyson Holland AMHolland(@naplesgov.com, Robin Singer RSinger@.'naplesgov.com. Erica Martin emartin@'naplesgov.com Note2: The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance ofa Certificate ofOccupancy to help offset the impacts ofeach new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element ofthe Growth Management Plan (GMP) as needed to maintain the adopted Level ofService (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance ofa building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to anazvze tlzis petition. Pre-Application Meeting Notes 6/26/2024 W\\"\\ Growth Management Community Oe,·clopment • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Napb, FL 34104 • 139-252-2400 • collicrcountytl.gm·/ Page 304 of 4116ThomasClarkeVEN From: Jaime Cook Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2024 5:14 PM To: Craig Brown; ThomasClarkeVEN Subject: RE: Zoning Pre-App RESE.A:tK!=t for Alico East Village (SRA - PL20240010212 & SSA's ,t)tl , s Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Craig, For this pre-app, please make sure the client knows we need: 1. NRI Assessment, including Listed Species Surveys for each SSA and SRA 2. GIS Files each for NRI Assessment 3. Credit Agreement for SRA 4. Individual Credit Agreements for each SSA 5. Individual Escrow Agreements for each SSA 6. Individual Easement Agreement for each SSA Any questions, please let me know. Thanks! Jaime Cook M.S., CPM Division Director - Development Review Development Review 1!) Office: 239-252-6290 Mobile:239-571-3800 Collier County 2800 Horseshoe Drive N Naples, FL 34104 OlistCOIID Jaime.Cook@colliercountyfl.gov From: Heidi Ashton Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 10:48 AM To: ThomasClarkeVEN ; Brett Rosenblum ; Claudia Vargas ; Jaime Cook ; Cormac Giblin ; Craig Brown ; David Roe ; Derek Perry ; Drew Cody ; Eric Ortman ; lmpactFees ; James Sabo -5Ja es.Sabo@colliercountyfl.gov>; Jessica Malloy ; Jocelyn-Nageondelestang ; Jocelyn Nageondelestang ; Laurie Beard ; Lisa / Blacklidge ; Maria Estrada ; Mark Templeton ; Michael Sawyer ; Michele osca . A ; Napleslinda ; Sally Ashkar Pf10£ 3 N ,,I' 1 Page 305 of 4116ThomasClarkeVEN From: Craig Brown Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 10:24 AM To: ThomasClarkeVEN Cc: Nancy Gundlach ,,1./Ji:"Es- Subject: RE: Zoning Pre-App Re E BG I for Alice East Village (SRA - PL20240010212 & SSA's Attachments: SRA Designation Checklists.docx Thomas, Here are my notes for Alice East Village SRA. Jaime has provided the SSA notes, correct? Please provide a Natural Resource Index Assessment Map (NRI) with calculations, FLUCFCS, Soil mapping and Listed Species Survey. If there are changes to the Natural Resource Index value, please provide supporting documentation. Please provide any supporting documents from State and Federal agencies if available. Please include exhibits for Panther, Bonneted bat, Cara Cara, Black bear, and locations for potential wildlife road crossings, wildlife fencing ect ect. Please show buffers for conservation areas adjacent to development areas. (See checklist). Provide the credit agreement for the SRA. 1. Please provide Environmental Data: Please provide FLUCFCS aerial map of the subject property please include the invasive exotic plant percentage amounts and indicate which FLUCFCS are being considered Native Vegetation. Identify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) and provide a legend for each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified. Aerials and overlay information must be legible at the scale provided. Provide calculations for the acreage of native vegetation required to be retained on-site. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve selection criteria pursuant to 3.05.07 have been met. Where applicable, include in this report an aerial showing the project boundaries along with any undeveloped land, preserves, natural flowways or other natural land features, located on abutting properties. 2. Please provide a current Listed species survey, which should include listed plants for the subject property. Provide supporting exhibits (i.e. Panther zones Panther Corridors.) be sure to include Black Bear, and Florida Bonneted Bat as part of the evaluation. Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the guidelines or recommendations of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Please provide Human wildlife coexistences plan. Indicate how lighting will be addressed in relation to wildlife protection (Dark skies Compliant) Provide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03. 3. Provide the following Natural Resource Index Assessment and Support Documentation (LDC 4.08.07.D.3-4): 1. Calculations that quantify the number of acres by index values, the level of conservation being offered, and the resulting number of credits being generated. 2. The acreage of agricultural and non-agricultural lands by type being preserved 3. The acreage of all lands by type within the proposed SRA that have an index value greater than 1.2. All lands designated as SRA within the ACSC. NRI assessment GIS Files each for NRI Assessment p ff(., 4?_ - l Page 306 of 4116 4. Provide acreage calcs. for lands being put into an SRA, including WRAs within the SRA boundary. (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.b) 5. Please address how the proposed project is consistent with Conservation Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 6.1.3 and Objective 7.1, Policy 7.1.3. FLUE Policies 5.5,5.6, and 5.7. 6. Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation requirements and minimizes impacts to listed species as required in the CCME. (The preservation requirement is acreages greater than NRI 1.2). 7. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. (If found onsite). 8. Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project's design compensates for wetland impacts. 9. Demonstrate that the design of the proposed stormwater management system and analysis of water quality and quantity impacts fully incorporate the requirements of the Watershed Management regulations of 3.07.00. 10. The County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project's compliance with LDC and GMP requirements. (LDC 10.02.02.A.3 f) 11. After the first review please contact ES Staff to arrange a field visit. Please Check off $2500 Environmental Data Fee. Craig Brown Manager - Environmental Services Development Review ® Office:239-252-2548 Collier County 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 o llJ mco1111 Craig. Brown@colliercountyfl.gov From: ThomasClarkeVEN Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2024 3:05 PM To: Craig Brown Cc: Nancy Gundlach Subject: FW: Zoning Pre-App RESEARCH for Alico East Village (SRA - PL20240010212 & SSA's Hi Craig, Forwarding you Jaime's email as a reminder to work on the Pre-App Notes for Alica East Village SRA. I am attaching the Aerials and location map for all the parcels. Thanks Tom 2 Page 307 of 4116 SRA Designation Sufficiency Checklist (Environmental) 1. Provide the following Natural Resource Index Assessment and Support Documentation (LDC 4.08.07.D.3-4): a. Calculations that quantify the number of acres by index values, the level of conservation being offered, and the resulting number of credits being generated. b. The acreage of agricultural and non-agricultural lands by type being preserved c. The acreage of all lands by type within the proposed SRA that have an index value greater than 1.2 d. All lands designated as SRA within the ACSC. RI assessment 2. Provide acreage calcs. for lands being put into an SRA, including WRAs within the SRA boundary. (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.b) 3. Provide a Natural Resource Index map of the area being designated as a SRA. (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.e) RI map 4. Provide a RLSA Overlay map and aerial delineating the location boundaries of the area being designated as a SRA. (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.c-d) location map 5. Provide a FLUCFCS map on an aerial photograph delineating the area being designated as SRA. (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.f) FLUCCS map 6. Provide a listed species occurrence map delineating the area being designated as SRA. (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.g) 7. Provide a soils map delineating the area being designated as SRA. (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.h) 8. Provide documentation to support a proposed change to the related Natural Resource Index Value of the site. (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.i) RIV change 9. Provide the SRA Master Plan identifying all conservation/preservation lands and wetland preservation and buffer areas. Provide documentation of professional credentials of environmental consultant involved with its preparation. (LDC 4.08.07.D.5) 10. Provide the SRA Development Document. (LDC 4.08.07.D.6) . ?4(,Ji:.. {'-,, Paget of? Page 308 of 4116 SRA Designation Review Checklist (Environmental) 1. Demonstrate compliance with environmental zoning overlay requirements (i.e. ST, f ACSC-ST, SRA etc) (LDC 2.03.05-2.03.08; 4.08.00) zoning compliance 2. Lands designated FSA, HSA, or SSA cannot be designated SRA. Remove any areas under this designation from the SRA boundaries. WRAs can be within the boundaries of the SRA for water management, but cannot be designated SRA. (LDC 4.08.07 .A) designation 3. Lands greater than one acre with an index Yalue greater than 1.2 shall be retained in a natural state. (LDC 4.08.07.A. l .d) 4. The master plan shall direct incompatible land uses from FSAs, HSAs, WRAs and Conservation. (LDC 4.08.07.G. l) 5. Demonstrate how the SRA shall not encroach into an FSA or HSA. (LDC 4.08.07.A. l .g) SRA encroachment 6. When a proposed SRA adjoins an FSA, HSA or Conservation land, the master plan shall provide a 300' open space buffer. Specify on the plan the permitted uses within the buffer. (LDC 4.08.07.J.6.d.ii) buffer 7. When the SRA abuts the west boundary of FSAs and HSAs in Camp Keais Strand the buffer shall be 500' wide; golf course fairways and turf areas shall not be located within the first 300'. (LDC 4.08.07.J.6.d.ii) west buffer .. ... ' 8. SRA's located within the ACSC or adjoining land designated as Conservation, FSA or HSA shall be heard before the EAC. (LDC 4.08.07 .. F. l .a) ACSC F- Additional Comments: Stipulations for approval (Conditions) (1 Page 309 of 4116Linda Naples Sr. Fire Plan Examiner Building Plan Review & Inspection Office:239-252-2311 Collier Count) Linda.Naples@colliercountyfl.gov 011mcom How are we doing ? Please Click here to fill out a Customer Survey We appreciate your Feedback! Under Florida Law. e-mail addresses are public records If you do not want your e-mail address released 1n response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity Instead. contact this office by telephone or in writing 2 Page 310 of 4116COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 Meeting Notes North Collier Fire District Pre-app notes for Pre-Application Meeting PL20240010212, PL20240010213, PL20240010214, & PL20240010216 - Alica East Village (SRA) + (SSA) On the cover sheet, please provide the occupancy classification as per the FL Fire Prevention Code, the occupant load, the construction type and total square footage. Please also include the sprinkler intent for this structure. If sprinkler system will be installed, also show point of service and appurtenances PIV, backflow, FDC. Please show FD access road requirements are met with a road within 50 of an entry point/ exterior door and the furthest point of the building cannot be greater than 150 ft from a fire department access road in unsprinklered buildings and 450 ft in sprinklered occupancies. Lastly, please show existing hydrants and provide a fire flow test on district letterhead that is no greater than 6 months old. Please call (239) 597-9227 to schedule a fire flow test. If any further assistance is needed please feel free to contact North Collier Fire Plan Review at (239)252-2311 and ask for Linda Naples Above may not apply for this SRA at this time Applicant stated they will be meeting with Fire Officials At a later date. Page 311 of 4116 Collier CountyZoning Pre-Application Meeting Sign-In Sheet PL# 20240010212 Collier County Contact Information: 20240010213 20240010216 Name Review Discipline Phone Email J □ Mike Bosi Division Director-Planning&Zoning 252-1061 Michael.Bosi@colliercountyfl.gov □ Ray Bellows Manager- Planning & Zoning 252-2463 raymond.bellows@colliercountyfl.gov □ Richard Henderlong Zoning -Planner Ill 252-2464 richard.henderlong@colliercountyfl.gov □ Laura DeJohn Zoning - Vendor 252-5587 Laura.dejohn@colliercountyfl.gov □ John Kelly Zoning -Planner Ill 252-5719 john.kelly@colliercountyfl.gov □ Tim Finn, AICP Zoning - Planner Ill 252-4312 timothy.finn@colliercountyfl.gov % Nancy Gundlach, AICP Zoning - Planner Ill 252-2484 nancy.gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov □ Eric Ortman Zoning - Planner Ill 252-1032 Eric.Ortman@colliercountyfl.gov □ Sean Sammon Zoning - Planner Ill 252-8422 Sean.sammon@colliercountyfl.gov [] Maria Estrada Zoning Planner II 252-2408 Maria Estrads@colliercountyfl.gov [j'' Tim Finn, AICP Zoning - Planner Ill 252-4312 timothy.finn@colliercountyfl.gov □ Thomas Clarke Zoning - Operations Analyst 252-2526 thomas.clarke@colliercountyfl.gov 0 Anthony Stoltz Utility Planning - Supervisor 252-5835 Anthony.stoltz@colliercountyfl.gov □ Drew Cody Utility Planning - Project Mgr 111 252-2917 Drew.cody@colliercountyfl.gov □ Brandi Pollard Utility Impact fees 252-6237 brandi.pollard@colliercountyfl.gov LJ Shon Fandrich Utilities-Project Mgt-Supervisor 252-8835 Shon.fandrich@colliercountyfl.gov [J Steve Baluch Transportation Planning 252-2361 stephen.baluch@colliercountyfl.gov Michael Sawyer Transportation Planning 252-2926 michael.sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov LJ Michael Gibbons Structural/Resident Plan Review 252-2426 michael.gibbons@colliercountyfl.gov [J Alicia Humphries Right-Of-Way Permitting 252-2326 alicia.humphries@colliercountyfl.gov lZJ Laurie Beard PUD Monitoring-Project Mgr II 252-5782 laurie.beard@colliercountyfl.gov LJ Sean Lintz Battalion Chief - N. Collier Fire 597-9227 slintz@northcollierfire.com lJ Bryan Horbal Captain - N. Collier Fire 552-1367 Bryan.horbal@colliercountyfl.gov Daniel Turner Plan Examiner - N. Collier Fire 252-2521 Daniel.turner@colliercountyfl.gov l)l Linda Naples Sr. Plan Examiner - N. Collier Fire 252-2311 Linda. na ples@col Iiercou ntyfl .gov 11 Shar A. Beddow Dep. Fire Marshal - Gr Naples Fire 241-1422 sbeddow@gnfire.org r·] Thomas Mastroberto Gr. Naples Fire Site Plans Rev. Ill 252-7348 thomas.mastroberto@colliercountyfl.gov - Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Asst. County Attorney 252-8773 heid i.ashton@col Iiercountyfl .gov Derek Perry Assistant County Attorney 252-8066 Derek.perry@colliercountyfl.gov 17 James Sabo, AICP GMP, Comp Planning Manager 252-2708 james.sabo@colliercountyfl.gov ix Parker Klopf GMP-Comp Planning- Planner Ill 252-2471 Parker.klopf@colliercountyfl.gov i:)/( Jessica Malloy GMP-Comp Planning -Planner II 252-4329 Jessica.malloy@colliercountyfl.gov f'ir". Stephenne Barter GMP-Comp Planning- Planner II 252-7707 Stephenne.barter@colliercountyfl.gov Pre-Application Meeting Notes 6/26/2024 Page 4 of 5 Growth Management Community Development• Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • ,,ww coll1l'rcountyt1 om·/ Page 312 of 4116□CollierMichele Mosca,AICP County Community Development 252-2834 Michele.mosca@colllercountyfl.gov Planner Ill [( Craig Brown Environmental Review-Mgr. 252-2548 craig.brown@colliercountyfl.gov □ Alexandra Mitchel Environmental Specialist 252-2907 Alexandra.Mitchel@colliercountyfl.gov David Roe Environmental Specialist 252-2915 David.Roe@colliercountyfl.gov □ Lauren Murray Environmental Specialist 252-2306 Lauren.murray@colliercountyfl.gov □ John Houldsworth Engineering Subdivision Vend. 252-5757 john.houldsworth@colliercountyfl.gov □ Jocelyn Nageon De Lestang, P .E. Engineering - Stormwater 252-2434 ocelvn.Nag-eondeLestanr,(@colliercountvfl.eov □ Jack McKenna, P.E. Engineering Services 252-2911 jack.mckenna@colliercountyfl.gov □ Matt McLean, P.E. Division Director - IF, CPP & 252-8279 matthew.mclean@colliercountyfl.gov PM Cormac Giblin, AICP Division Director - 252-2460 Cormac.giblin@colliercountyfl.gov Economic. Dev. & Housing □ Sarah Harrington Manager - Planning 252-4211 Sarah.harrington@colliercountyfl.gov □ Jamie Cook Division Director- 252-6290 Jaime.cook@colliercountyfl.gov Development Review □ Lisa Blacklidge Development Review 252-2758 Lisa.blacklidge@colliercountyfl.gov Manager- Planning □ Christine Willoughby Planner Ill 252-5748 christine.willoughby@colliercountyfl.gov □ Brett Rosenblum-P.E. Development Review - 252-2905 brett.rosenblum@colliercountyfl.gov Supervisor Project Mgr. □ Mark Templeton Landscape Review - Planner Ill 252-2475 mark.templeton@colliercountyfl.gov □ Peter Shawinsky Architectural Review 252-8523 peter.shawinsky@colliercountyfl.gov □ Gino Santabarbara Impact Fees - Planner Ill 252-2925 Gino.santabarbara@colliercountyfl.gov [J Diane Lynch Management Analyst I 252-4283 diane.lynch@colliercountyfl.gov □ Renald Paul Client Services 252-2443 Renald.paul@colliercountyfl.gov □ Connie Thomas Client Services-Supervisor 252-6369 Consuela.thomas@colliercountyfl.gov r:tus·,i o (i., e, Pctt-"-':v 2 {). - .J £13' 4 Additional Attendee Contact Information· Name Representing Phone Email -e t> /J ,l .,/) .11,.. A,n . / 7C>vAA /-/;f;qc )1e b , I KwM. Pre-Application Meeting Notes 6/26/2024 Page 5 of 5 Growth Management Community Dc\'clopment • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252 2400 • \\\\·w.collicrcountytl go\·/ Page 313 of 4116 .,, l r.J • Austin Grubb % D beard_l % Bryan Horbal CFR % II ca rly.sa nseveri no % Corn,ac Giblin % • Craig Brown % r-·i:J I rJ m Daniel Turner, CFR % a DavidRoe % Gm Derek D. Perry, County Attorney·s Office % en m Gary Ferrante % m Heidi As ,ton-Cicko % C)J Jeremie C ,astain .% • ,- D Jessicar-.t'lalloy % kl ,-IJ a Josh's iPhone % ,-n II LBrunetti % a Linda aples % Ill LucyGallo E Norn,an Trebitcock Ask to unmute m Parker Klopf % V-JJ - sawyern,ichael % 1_ 1 - SCa1:ala % !=CJ 0 Solid Was1:e Division % V-JJ S1:ephenne.Barter % OJ m Timo1:hy Finn % V-tl Page 315 of 4116 Co -r County - -- - Growth Management Community Development Dept. ZONING STAFF FORM FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRE-APPLICATION MEETING Meeting Date: Tuesday 10/1/24 at 3:00 Zoning Operations Staff: Thomas Clarke COMPANION ITEMS: Alico East Village (SRA) - PL20240010212 Planner: Nancy Gundlach Alico SSA 23 (SSA) - PL20240010214 Planner: Austin Grubb Alico SSA 22 (SSA) - PL20240010213 Planner: Austin Grubb Alico SSA 24 (SSA) - PL20240010216 Planner: Austin Grubb • Applicant Submitting Request: Hole Montes, Inc - Stephanie Karol 239-254-2018 stephaniekarol@hmeng.com • Agent to list for PL# Hole Montes, Inc - Bob Mulhere, Senior VP Bowman • Owner of property {all owners for all parcels) Alico Land Dev Co. • Confirm Purpose of Pre-App: Establish an SRA and three SRA's • Please list the density request of the project if applicable and number of homes/units/offices/docks (any that apply): TBD • Details about Project: Alico, Inc. proposes to establish the Alico East Village SRA. The subject property is located at the intersection of Corkscrew Road and SR 82 in Eastern Collier, on both the west and east side of Corkscrew Road, and north and south of SR 82. (Folio Numbers: 00050160000, 00050120008,00050480007,00050440005,00050240001,00050400003,00050360004, 00050320002) Page 316 of 4116The SRA is proposed to consist of 1,450 Acres, 4,351 Dwelling Units (3.0 per gross acre), 230,550± square feet of Neighborhood Commercial and 43,500± square feet of Civic (per RLSA). This is a companion item to Alica SSA 22, Alica SSA 23 and Alica SSA 24. Alica, Inc. proposes to establish a new+/- 1.285.3 acre Stewardship Sending Area designation for property generally located east of Corkscrew Road, and north and south of SR 82. The SSA number is to be determined by Collier County but presumed to be SSA 22. (Folio Numbers 00050120008, 00050120007, 00050160000, 00050440006). This is a companion item to Alica SSA 23, Alica SSA 24 and Alica East Village SRA. Alica, Inc. proposes to establish a new+/- 388.9-acre Stewardship Sending Area designation for property generally located west of Corkscrew Road, and south of SR 82. The SSA number is to be determined by Collier County but presumed to be SSA 23. (Folio Numbers 00060240001, 00050400003, 00050320002, 00050360004). This is a companion item to Alica SSA 22, Alica SSA 24 and Alica East Village SRA. Alica, Inc. proposes to establish a new+/- 2,119.9-acre Stewardship Sending Area designation for property generally located east of SR 29, northeast of the lmmokalee Urban Area, and adjacent to the Hendry County line. The SSA number is to be determined by Collier County but presumed to be SSA 24. (Folio Numbers 00063200009, 00064600006, 00089120008, 00064440004, 00089200009, 00089280003, 00089600007, 00089320002, 00089240001). This is a companion item to Alico SSA 22, Alico SSA 23 and Alico East Village SRA. Cancellation/Reschedule Requests: Contact Connie Thomas- Supervisor - Permitting Consuela.thomas@colliercountyfl.gov - Phone: 239-252-2473 Created April 5, 2017 Location: K:\CDES Planning Services\Current\Zoning Staff Information Zoning DP.lision • 2800 North Horseshoe Drnte • Naples, Flooda 34104 • 2 252-2400 • www.coltierg,.,.net Page 317 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING A APPLICA The following documents the necessary items, exhibits and agreements "'"'"1i+,,,,,-'.+-!T'Tr '!Tn7<1 Designation Application. SUBMITTAL PACKAGE Submit the Application to: Growth Management Department Attn: Operations & Regulatory 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples Florida 34104 Phone (239) 252-2400 / Fax (239) 643-6968 The Applicant shall submit one copy of the application or may submit electronically for verification of completeness. The application package shall also contain completed copies of the appropriate form(s) as provided herein. The Applicant is responsible for providing additional copies for public hearings and for County records, once the application is finalized. REQUIRED FEES Application Fee: $7,000.00 plus $25.00 per acre l Comprehensive Plan Consistency Review $2,250.00 FIAM (Fiscal Impact Analysis) $4,000.00 0' BCC Legal Advertising $500 1 f, Q_ \.411,, '- g; er' Nh /.\1'\ C'4/l v \61) CCPC Legal Advertising $1,125 - NO"e·.\,VutNe \ V\UW (J.__ -Jv oy, •Vl 1 • XJI,/ Fire Pre-Application Meeting: $1 50.00 (Applied as credit towards fire review fee upon submittal of applicatio if within 9 months of the pre-opp meeting dote) Fire Planning Review Fee: $1 000.00 Transportation Fees -refer to pre-application meeting notes School Concurrency Review Fees, if required. Mitigation Fees, if applicable, to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County Refer to pre-application meeting notes for additional required fees. Please make check payable to: Boord of County Commissioners APPLICATION REVIEW SCHEDULE (LDC 4.08.07.E.) The application review schedule is as follows: Within thirty (30) days of receipt of the SRA Application, the applicant will be notified in writing that the application is complete and sufficient for review. If required, the applicant shall submit additional information. Within twenty (20) working days of receipt of the additional information the applicant will be notified if the application is complete. Staff review and written comments shall be submitted to the applicant sixty (60) days after sufficiency hos been determined. Staff shall provide a written report containing their findings and recommendations of approval, approval with conditions or denial within ninety (90) days after sufficiency is determined. EAC hearing per LDC 4.08.07 F. l .a. The CCPC shall hold an advertised public hearing on the proposed application and agreement. The notice of this hearing shall be given ten ( l 0) days prior to the meeting date. The BCC shall hold an advertised public hearing on the proposed application and agreement. The notice of this hearing sha II be given ten ( l 0) days prior to the meeting date. AMENDMENTS Collier County shall consider an amendment to an approved SRA in the same manner as designated in this application. Revised 2024 Page 318 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA (SRA) APPLICATION PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED To be completed by staff APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): _______________________ _ Name of Applicant if different than owner: __________________ _ Address: ______________ City: _____ State: ____ ZIP: __ _ Telephone: _________ Cell: __________ Fax: ________ _ E-Mail Address: ____________________________ _ Agent:--------------------------------- Firm: --------------------------------- Address: ______________ City: _____ State: ____ ZIP: __ _ Telephone: ________ Cell: _________ Fax: _________ _ E-Mail Address: ____________________________ _ PROPERTY INFORMATION You must include the County's Property Ownership Disclosure Form with this application in order lor it to be considered complete. This lorm is located at: https://www.colliergov.net/Home/ShowDocument?id=75093. Section/Township/Range: __ / __ / __ Zoning: __________ _ General Location and Cross Streets: _____________________ _ Folio Numbers: Total Area of Project: _________ acres List any previously approved or pending petition numbers affecting the property. ______ _ Revised 2024 Page 319 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net ADJACENT ZONING/LAND USE Zoning Land Use N s E w LIST OF CONSULT ANTS Name: Phone: Mailing Address: Name: Phone: Mailing Address: Name: Phone: Mailing Address: Name: Phone: Mailing Address: Name: Phone: Mailing Address: Applicant is responsible for providing finalized copies as required for public hearing. I hereby submit and certify the application to be complete and accurate. Printed Name of Agent Signature of Agent Date Revised 2024 Page 320 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net SECTION I NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX ASSESSMENT (LDC 4.08.07.D.3.) 1. Submit an Assessment that documents the Natural Resource Index Value Scores. The Assessment is to include an analysis that quantifies the number of acres by Index Values. The Assessment shall include the following: a. Identify all lands within the proposed SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2. b. Verify that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are still valid through recent aerial photography, satellite imagery, agency-approved mapping, or other documentation, as verified by field inspections. c. If the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are no longer valid the applicant shall document the current Index Value of the land. d. Quantify by type the acreage of agricultural lands being converted. e. Quantify by type the acreage of non- agricultural acreage being converted. f. Quantify by type the acreage of all lands within the proposed SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2. g. Quantify by type the acreage of all lands being designated as an SRA within the ACSC, if any. h. Demonstrate compliance with the Suitability Criteria contained in Section 4.08.07 .A.1 SECTION II NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX ASSESSMENT SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.) 1. Documentation to support the Natural Resource Index Assessment shall be provided for each SRA being designated a. Legal description, including sketch or survey. b. Acreage calculations of lands being put into the SRA, including acreage calculations of WRAs (if any) within the SRA boundary but not included in the SRA designation. c. RLSA Overlay Map delineating the area of the RLSA District being designated as an SRA. d. Aerial photograph delineating the area being designated as an SRA. e. Natural Resource Index Map of the area being designated as an SRA. f. FLUCCS map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA. Revised 2024 Page 321 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net g. Listed species map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA. h. Soils map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA. i. Documentation to support a change in the related Natural Resource Index Value(s), if appropriate. SECTION Ill OTHER REQUIRED DOCUMENTS 1. Submit a SRA Master Plan consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07.G. 2. Submit a SRA Development Document consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07.H. 3. Submit a Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report addressing the requirements of Section 4.08.07.K. 4. Submit an Economic Assessment Report addressing the requirements of Section 4.08.07.L. S. School Concurrency - if the proposed project includes a residential component, you are required to contact the School District of Collier County at 239-377-0267 to discuss school concurrency requirements. (Download the School Impact Analysis Application from the website) SECTION IV STEWARDSHIP CREDIT USE AND RECONCILIATION APPLICATION (LDC 4.08.07.D.9) 1. The legal description of, or descriptive reference to, the SRA to which the Stewardship Credits are being transferred. 2. Total number of acres within the proposed SRA and the total number of acres of the proposed SRA within the ACSC (if any). 3. Number of acres within the SRA designated "public use" that do not require the redemption of Stewardship Credits in order to be entitled (does not consume credits). 4. Number of acres of "excess" open spaces within the SRA that do not require the consumption of credits. 5. Number of acres of WRAs inside the SRA boundary but not included in the SRA designation. 6. Number of acres within the SRA that consume credits. 7. The number of Stewardship Credits being transferred to (consumed by) the SRA and documentation that the applicant has acquired or has a contractual right to acquire those Stewardship Credits. 8. The number of acres to which credits are to be transferred (consumed) multiplied by 8 Credits/ acre equals the number of Credits to be transferred (consumed). Revised 2024 Page 322 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net 9. A descriptive reference to one or more approved or pending SSA Designation Applications from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. Submit copies of SSA Stewardship Credit Agreement and related documentation, including: a. SSA Application Number b. Pending companion SRA Application Number c. SSA Designation Resolution (or Resolution Number) d. SSA Credit Agreement (Stewardship Agreement) e. Stewardship Credits Database Report 10. A descriptive reference to any previously approved Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Applications that pertain to the referenced SSA(s) from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. 11. A summary table in a form provided by Collier County that identifies the exchange of all Stewardship Credits that involve the SRA and all of the associated SSAs from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. SECTION V STEWARDSHIP RECIEVING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT {LDC 4.08.07.D.11.b) 1. The applicant for designation of an SRA shall enter into an SRA Credit Agreement with the County for each SRA. 2. The SRA Credit Agreement shall contain: a. The number of SSA credits applied to the SRA land in order to carry out the plan of development on the acreage proposed in the SRA Development Documents. b. The legal description of the SRA land and number of acres. c. The SRA Master Plan, which must include the following: i. Identify the land uses ii. Identifying the number of residential dwelling units iii. Gross leaseable area of retail square footage iv. Gross leaseable office square footage v. All other land uses depided on the master plan. 3. Description of the SSA credits that are needed to entitle the SRA land and the anticipated source of said credits. 4. Acknowledgement from the applicant that development of SRA land may not commence until the applicant has recorded a SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum with the Collier County Clerk of Courts; and 5. The applicant's commitment, if any, regarding conservation or any other restriction on development on any lands within the SRA including wetlands, as may be depicted on the SRA Master Plan for special treatment. Revised 2024 Page 323 of 4116 GMCD Public Portal Collier County Land Development Code STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA PLICATION -- LDC subsecflnft-A n-t - The following documents are the necessary items, exhibits, and agreements for the Stewardship Sending Area Designation Application. Collier County shall consider an amendment to an approved SSA in the same manner as designated in this application. Application Review Schedule • The application review schedule is as follows: • Within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of the SSA Application, the applicant will be notified in writing that the application is complete and sufficient for a review. • If required, the applicant shall submit additional information. • Within ten (10) working days of receipt of the additional information the applicant will be notified if the application is complete. • Staff review and written comments shall be submitted to the applicant sixty (60) days after sufficiency is determined. • Staff shall provide a written report containing their findings and recommendations of approval, approval with conditions or denial within ninety (90) days after sufficiency is determined. • The BCC shall hold an advertised Public Hearing on the proposed application and agreement. The notice of this hearing shall be given fifteen days prior to the meeting date. Applicant Contact Information Name of Property Owner(s): ______________________ _ Name of Applicant, if different than owner: __________________ _ Address: ________________ City: ____ State: ___ ZIP: __ _ Phone: __________ E-Mail Address: __________ _ Name of ApplicanUAgent: _______________ _ Firm: ------------------------ Address: _______________ City: ____ State: ___ ZIP: __ _ Phone: __________ E-Mail Address: __________ _ Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) Designation 6/11/2024 Page 1 of 8 Growth Management Community Oc,·dopmcnt • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Ori\'e • Naples, FL 34104 • 139-252-2400 • ,, "" lollic·run1nt\ll.,,o, / Page 324 of 4116Collier County List of Consultants Name: ________________________ Phone: _______ _ Address: Zip: ________ _ Name: ________________________ Phone:. ________ _ Address: Zip: ________ _ Name:. ________________________ Phone:. ________ _ Address: ______________________ Zip: ________ _ Name: ________________________ Phone:. ________ _ Address: ___________________ _ Zip: _______ _ Name: ________________________ Phone: _______ _ Address: Zip: ________ _ Name: ________________________ Phone: _______ _ Address: _____________________ Zip: ________ _ Property Information Property Address: __________ Property I.D. Number: ________ _ Section/Township/Range: ___ /___ /__ _ Subdivision: ___________ Unit: ____ Block: ____ _ Lot: ___ _ Plat Book: _____ Page#: __ _ Metes & Bounds Description: ________________________ _ Size of Property: ____ ft. x ____ ft. = ____ Total Sq. Ft. Acres: ___ _ Total Area of SSA: ---------- Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) Designation 6/11/2024 Page 2 of 8 Gro,, th Management Community Dc\'elopmcnt • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • ,, ''" .colltcrrnunt ll <,, I Page 325 of 4116Collier Co unty I Project Information Name: --------- Location: ----------------- Agreement: General Location and Cross Streets: _____________________ _ Current Zoning: __________ Land Use: ______________ _ I Adjacent Zoning and Land Use Zoning Land Use Any contiguous prope rty owned by Applicant or Owner, if so provide legal description: Stewardship Sending Area {SSA) Designation 6/11/2024 Page 3 of 8 Growth Managcmc:nt Community D..:n:lopment • Planning & Zoning 2800 N orth Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • """. ollk1rnu11t ·tl.om / Page 326 of 4116 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist Collier County The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of submittal with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Documents shall be submitted electronically. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. Requirements For Review Completed Application (download current form from County website) IZl Pre-Application meeting notes Project Narrative Affidavit of Authorization, signed & notarized ProQerty OwnershiQ Disclosure Form All documents shall be submitted in PDF format unless otherwise noted. SECTION ONE 1) Legal Description and General Description 2) Aerial photograph(s) having a scale of one inch equal to at least 200 feet when available from the County, or a scale of at least one inch equal to 400 feet is acceptable, delineating the area being designated as an SSA. SECTION 1WO 1) Natural Resource Index Assessment a. Summary Analysis quantifying the number of acres by Index Values. b. Level of Conservation being proposed. C. Resulting Number of Credits generated d. GIS files for each factor of the Natural Resource Index Assessment. i. Boundary GIS file of SSA xxx ii. FLUCCS (FL Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System) for SSA xxx iii. Remaining Uses for SSA xxx iv. All Listed Species for SSA xxx V. Restoration (if any- this is an optional file) for SSA xxx vi. Soils for SSA xxx vii. Stewardship for SSA xxx viii. Proximity for SSA XXX These GIS files shall be submitted by email and sent to: Beth.Yang@CollierCountyFL.gov 2) Verification of Index Value Scores. a. Submit validation of Scores assigned during the RLSA Study through Aerial Photography or Satellite Imagery, agency- approved mapping, or other documentation, as verified by field inspections. Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) Designation 6/11/2024 Page 4 of 8 Growth Management Community Dcn:lopmcnt • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drh·e • Naplc , FL 34 I 04 • 2 39-252-2400 • "" ,, .((>111, i-cou11t dl.n,,, / Page 327 of 4116Collier County b. If the verification establishes that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are no longer valid, documentation of the Index Value of the land as of the date of the SSA Designation Application is to be submitted. 3) Establish the suggested "Restoration Potential" Index Value for any acres as appropriate. 4) Quantify the acreage of agricultural lands, by type, being preserved. 5) Quantify the acreage of non-agricultural lands, by type, being preserved. 6) Quantify the acreage of all lands by type within the proposed SSA that have an Index Value Qreater than 1.2. 7) Quantify all lands, by type, being designated as SSA within the ACSC, if any. SECTION THREE-LIST OF EXHIBITS AND SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION IZI 1) Legal Description, including sketch or survey. 2) Acreage calculations, e.g., acres of FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs, being designated in the SSA. 3) Stewardship Overlay Map delineating the area being designated as an SSA. a. Flowway Stewardship Areas (FSAs) b. Habitat Stewardship Areas ( HSAs) C. Water Retention Areas ( WRAs) d. General Conditional Uses, Earth Mining and Processing and Recreational Uses 4) Aerial Photograph(s) having a scale of one inch equal to at least 200 feet when available from the county, otherwise, a scale of at least one inch equal to 400 feet is acceptable, delineating the area being designated as an SSA. 5) Natural Resource Index Map of area being designated as an SSA. 6) Florida Department of Transportation Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) map indicating area being designated as an SSA on an aerial photograph having a scale of one inch equal to at least 200 feet when available from the County, otherwise, a scale of at least one inch equal to 400 feet is acceptable. 7) Listed species occurrence map(s) from United Sates Fish and Wildlife Services, Florida Fish Wildlife Conservation Commission and Florida Natural Areas Inventory, delineating the area being designated as an SSA. 8) United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service Soils map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SSA. 9) Documentation to support a change in the related Natural Resource Index Value(s), if appropriate. 10) Stewardship Credit Calculation Table that quantifies the number of acres by Index Values, the level of conservation being offered, and the SECTION IV- STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT 1. The number of acres and a legal description of all lands subject to the SSA Credit Aqreement. 2. A map or plan (drawn at a scale of 1"= 500') of the land subject to the agreement which depicts any lands designated Flowway Stewardship Stewardship Sending Area (SSA} Designation 6/11/2024 Page 5 of 8 Growth Management Community Dl ,clopmcnt • Planning & Zoning 2800 Nortl1 Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104 • 2 39-2 52-2400 • "\\" -< nlli, rwmn: tl_,,,,, / Page 328 of 4116 Areas (FSA), Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA) or Water Retention Areas (WRA), and the acreaQe of lands so desiQnated. Collier3. ACounty narrative description of all land uses, including conditional uses, if any, that shall be removed from the land upon approval of the SSA Credit Agreement. 4. A Natural Resource Index Assessment worksheet for the land subject to the Agreement and the total number of SSA credits that result from the Natural Resource Index Assessment. 5. A copy of the Stewardship Easement, (or deed if a fee simple transfer is proposed) applicable to the land, which shall be granted in perpetuity and shall be recorded by the County upon approval of the SSA Credit Agreement. 6. Land Management measure. a. Submit Agreement, that the owner shall not seek or request, and the County shall not grant or approve, any increase in density or intensity of any permitted uses remaining on the SSA lands or any additional uses beyond those specified in the SSA Credit Agreement on the land. b. Submit Agreement ensuring the enforceability of the SSA Credit Agreement between the landowner and the County 7. If applicable, the number of credits to be granted for restoration (Restoration Credits) together with the following information: a. A legal description of lands to be designated for restoration. b. A map depicting the land being designated as SSA, with the lands to be dedicated for restoration, but which the applicant makes no commitment to undertake restoration, identified as Restoration I ("R I"); and the lands dedicated for restoration identified as Restoration II ("R II"). c. The number of Restoration Credits to be granted for the lands designated R I and R II. d. A Restoration Analysis and Report, inclusive of a written evaluation of the restoration area's existing ecological/ habit value and the necessary restoration efforts required to reestablish original conditions; enhance the functionality of wetlands or wildlife habitat; or remove exotics so as to enhance the continued viability of native vegetation and wetlands. e. When the restoration is to be undertaken by the applicant, a Restoration Plan that addresses, at a minimum, the following elements; 1. Restoration goals or species potentially affected. 2. Description of the work performed. 3. Identification of the entity responsible for performing the work. 4. Work Schedule 5. Success Criteria and 6. Annual management, maintenance and monitoring. Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) Designation 6/11/2024 Page 6 of 8 Growth Management Community Dcn:lopmcnt • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drh·c • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • """ .u,lli, 1c<>unt 11. •<,, / Page 329 of 4116Collier County Fee Requirements t8J Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 (to be credited towards the application fee if the application is filed within 9 months of pre- application meeting). Applications submitted 9 months or more after the date of the last pre- application meeting shall not be credited towards application fees and a new pre- application meeting will be required. Application Fee: $9,500.00 Make all checks payable to the Board of County Commissioners. *The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Community Development Department I GMCD Porta I: https:/ / cvportal .colliercountyfl.gov / cityviewweb Questions? Email: GMDclientservices@colliercountyfl.gov Applicant is responsible for providing finalized copies as required for Public Hearings. I hereby submit and certify this application to be complete and accurate. SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE PRINTED NAME Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) Designation 6/11/2024 Page 7 of 8 0 Growth Managcnwnt Community Dc,elopmcnt • PIJnning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drh·e • Naples, Fl 34104•239-252-2400•111111 col111 r,ount l1. m / Page 330 of 4116Collier County AFFIDAVIT We/I, -----------J being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/I am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief We/I understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted. As property owner We/I further authorize _________________ to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. Administrative Agent Administrative Agent The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of ____ 2024, by who is personally known to me. State of Florida County of Collier (Signature of Notary Public - State of Florida) (Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned Name of Notary Public) Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) Designation 6/11/2024 Page 8 of 8 Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 Nortl1 Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • ,, '"' cnl11acnu111dl.__', th,: Ci!.-,ltal, th1s the ... ... f. = 14lh cf,1yof January, :, \t f (00) SECRETARY OF STATE i.. j• ,i Ord r: 10560886 Doc: FLHEND:176-00I37 Page f of3 Requested By: chuck.forguson, Prfnled: 6/2112022 8:46 AM Page 340 of 4116 ......... CUT1ne>. or !ffH75 ,m138 'IO tn CU.ffrte.ATZ OP (l{COU'OMTIOK or AJ.1co WID t>mu,r;o:HT wawn c,e of St•t ea;i,,- bornrtrer.t r·- r:::; .,, Tillnhr,oaee, flotlf.a r :!;· 6"' rn Th• J, R, &lid CLO:U 11, J.l. ;' '!Qdudmad, srFATr, Pnetdont, c:, l:cuour-.1, of l..llco f.:::cicl VGv:10 , :\t l'iJ!I.Yr ros;,c.ctfull1 r-1:c,v t'hf;tl:4:_} .tond t>f· Phaeton at • bw.o:itly u1etl11,1 held ln 11rto-.r, l'lorlda on )rove->- lier 4, 1'7), 111!opte4 a rt1eolutlo:\ tr,;>rov.tn, tlte lollovtni on n4:>eat to tho CerU.ficate of lac:orr-"r tlo:i Jncl ilrectinit t 1t 1ueh 1111ond-::cn\ 111 ll\llmittcd to 6. Vl'te of tlle atoclrotiol\ al\1\11 ... ALlCO, D:C, t And itlt rrtndrd r,l cci d <1s!nc.to ohdl l-c !,.\') th Jfd'l Strc<:t, La tqUo, )'Jc-dda, ol' we other pl12ce tn tho liUte of Flc:.r-ldn e111 tLe r,01.rd of D1rec:tor11 eh.all frClll U.no to t.l!:16 4cm advfn'blo &lid II\ tho but irlurctt of th, C0t1:,.criy," (1>) 11ao ,,,:,01tut1o:1 of th tollovillr, tn'Ur.u of J.rtlclo (i 1,,11 rr11.- omtly vrlttGn: ".utfatc; 6, the ro:n. ofU.ca arlJrou c,f tho 11rfoclpal C'.fflce of th cortN· uon h11 te Jlolla, l'lo Lt.fl, or ruc'I otlusr ptaee .fn lh'll Cto'ltc c,f )'J..c,zf,ila tis th lloim! «'f Dincton e.' 1nl l frcr.i tl J.t: ,•; it mul r.cotin lllt ·uUc:d IICI-! held 1n La tollt, Flod«:;1, cm Januat · 7, 19)4, th,, c:t 1: .:,Uuc t•t1uo11t or rc.i:,rea,1:\tOcl l•y ftv:"Q" t.nd r.:\tlU,:.S to v.:itl Jn re:s;, ct c,( c,31d i.:.tsn! e:tt. to tho c-,rtlf.t nt• o! Ir.cotp,,rotic-::i dU .CfFt" ,, t);o GI\Jd l!.L'\.'O'!!t>ll'.lt 1,y t'.10 a!Ctr.:.::til.-..: \•ote of tb ltcllen of rt len Ll\1., ,, tHjodty f ti: outcl,..n,l!n!\ ati.1ru •:it.ltU·I to Voto: lh(lt>'.;in, ll,c nu-.!:,er ,•, r "!1, ,:2 11ot1D1 in fo\'Cl>r or ll:c .c •,-.:i&- -it t.air.<'I l,Mn,951 . .,r h.Mior 2,(S?,7'1 (':.:fllt . H,:s a:i.tr6S entttll',t to vrt\l o L Order: 10550666 Paga 2 of3 Doc: FLHEND:176-00137 Page 341 of 4116 ·• ·• \ •, •, .• • ,... "\· .: .. , ', .. ,. :.·. ,' •' _. • .,: .. , ,":.Jl": 1-· "' .•_,.1, ·rrt:l 75 ,,u139· &v.Tfl OP lLO!tlDA m:iJ:rt OP. ilfliDIY lldoro tao the 111,&inli;tlod ,·oury PubUc tr. AM fo1' tb Colr.it)' and Stat• .11boYe M'l'.ed, rcoaally ltpt,e.'lt:d J •.n. Sl'P.ATT and (;WllA: n. JJ :. t:ir.iictlvllly 1'red'1eilt ua· SeeretarY. of .Alico l.c:id l>e'valot'C)(,r.t ()oopan:,. to h1i wll knovn to l>e thl!I tnd.tviduale "1101 1111!,er:dbo,f J;Jidr r.s.r.:ar to U:e !!oxetof,.._t J:e tUic:at• of kJc:ac!l:lcrlt to ttie Artfcle■ of Incotr0ratioo -of add A1ico LIII\.S 'Dcvclc,;,oGnt C<:Q- rllllf end the:, acltQwbdzed bcfoJ9 r,o that th'!! Cr.c!,.e stat d l:>t""refu • ttue snd t'-Cltrec.t end th4t the; c::r.a.cutcd tho. rx,:,;o lo·t tt,c 1-111110,11a tbuorr. utt cuaecd. (l:Otarlat r.,_al) ,. !:.·· ·---c-..... Ii -· ... --··-··-· . \ _:.; .. . -- ' :, .. ·, l,.: . \\i, l ,!£. ./ Order: 10660666 Page 3 of3 Requested By: chuckJerguson, Piinted: 6/21/2022 9:46 AM Doc: FLHEND:176-00137 Page 342 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA (PL-20240010212) ADDRESSING CHECKLIST Page 343 of 4116 GMCD Public Portal J!)collier County Land Development Code Administrative Code Addressing Checklist Please complete the following and upload via the CityView Portal with your submittal. Items marked with a* are required for every application, other items are optional and may not apply to every project. Forms are valid for 6 months following their submittal; an updated form will be required for a new submittal after that timeframe and any time the properties within the project boundary are modified. Applicant Contact Information *Name of owner/Agent: Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, Senior Vice President Firm [if agent]: _B_o_w_m_an____________________________ _ *Address: 950 Encore Way *City: Naples *State: *ZIP: 34110 *Telephone: (239) 254-200° Cell: _________ Fax: _______ _ *E-Mail Address: RMulhere@bowman.com Location Information *Folio (Property ID) Number(s) of the subject property or properties [Attach list if necessary]: 00050120008,00050160000, 00050240001,00050320002,00050360004,0005040000300050440005,00050480007 *Legal Description of subject property or properties [Attach list if necessary]: Sections 3, 4, 8-10, Township 46S and Range 28E Street Address(es) where applicable, if already assigned: 6900 SR 82 & 4571, 4607, 4625, 4646, 4980, 5005 Corkscrew Road, lmmokalee, FL 34142 Addressing Checklist 6/14/2024 Page 1 of 2 www Growth Management Community Development • Operations & Regulatory Management 2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • collierc:ountyf1 gov/ Page 344 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA (PL-20240010212) SRA APPLICATION Page 354 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA (SRA) DESIGNATION APPLICATION The following documents the necessary items, exhibits and agreements for the Stewardship Receiving Area Designation Application. SUBMITTAL PACKAGE Submit the Application to: Growth Management Department Attn: Operations & Regulatory 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples Florida 341 04 Phone (239) 252-2400 / Fax (239) 643-6968 The Applicant shall submit one copy of the application or may submit electronically for verification of completeness. The application package shall also contain completed copies of the appropriate form(s) as provided herein. The Applicant is responsible for providing additional copies for public hearings and for County records, once the application is finalized. REQUIRED FEES Application Fee: $7,000.00 plus $25.00 per acre Comprehensive Plan Consistency Review $2,250.00 FIAM (Fiscal Impact Analysis) $4,000.00 BCC Legal Advertising $500 CCPC Legal Advertising $1, 1 25 Fire Pre-Application Meeting: $150.00 (Applied as credit towards fire review fee upon submittal of application if within 9 months of the pre-app meeting date) Fire Planning Review Fee: $1 000.00 Transportation Fees -refer to pre-application meeting notes School Concurrency Review Fees, if required. Mitigation Fees, if applicable, to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County Refer to pre-application meeting notes for additional required fees. Please make check payable to: Board of County Commissioners APPLICATION REVIEW SCHEDULE (LDC 4.08.07.E.) The application review schedule is as follows: Within thirty (30) days of receipt of the SRA Application, the applicant will be notified in writing that the application is complete and sufficient for review. If required, the applicant shall submit additional information. Within twenty (20) working days of receipt of the additional information the applicant will be notified if the application is complete. Staff review and written comments shall be submitted to the applicant sixty (60) days after sufficiency has been determined. Staff shall provide a written report containing their findings and recommendations of approval, approval with conditions or denial within ninety (90) days after sufficiency is determined. EAC hearing per LDC 4.08.07 F.1.a. The CCPC shall hold an advertised public hearing on the proposed application and agreement. The notice of this hearing shall be given ten ( 10) days prior to the meeting date. The BCC shall hold an advertised public hearing on the proposed application and agreement. The notice of this hearing shall be given ten ( 10) days prior to the meeting date. AMENDMENTS Collier County shall consider an amendment to an approved SRA in the same manner as designated in this application. Revised 2024 Page 355 of 4116 eo1lreT County -'1 -- COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA (SRA) APPLICATION PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED To be completed by staff APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): Alico, Inc. (f/k/a Alico Land Development Company) Name of Applicant if different than owner: __________________ _ 10070 Daniels Interstate Ct. #200 . Fort Myers FL 33913 A ddress: _____________ c,ty: _____ State: ___ _ ZIP.· 239-226-2000 N/A Telephone: Cell: Fax:_N_I_A______ _ E-Mail Address: mhutchcraft@alicoinc.com Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, Sr. VP & Jeremie Chastain, Planner III* Agent: ________________________________ _ Bowman Firm: __________________________________ _ 950 Encore Way Naples FL 34110 Address: City: State: ----·ZIP: 239-254-2000 N_IA Telephone: Cell: __ _______ Fax: __N_IA _______ _ RMulhere@bowman.com & JChastain@bowman.com E -M a1•1 Add ress: ______________________________ _ *Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq.,Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., 4001 Tamiami Trail N., Ste.300 Naples, FL 34103; Phone:239-435-3535; Email:ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com PROPERTY INFORMATION You must include the County's Property Ownership Disclosure Form with this application in order lor it to be considered complete. This lorm is located at: https;//www.coUiergoy,net/Home/ShowDocument?jd=75093. Portions of Sections 3-10/Township 46S/Range 28E Section/Township/Range: __ /__ /___ Zoning: __________Zoning: A-Agricultural _ General Location and Cross Streets: North and south of intersection of SR 82 & Corkscrew Rd, Folio Numbers: and east & west of Corkscrew Road. 00050120008,00050160000,00050240001,00050320002,00050360004,00050400003, 00050440005 & 00050480007 6 Total Area of Project: _l_,_4_4__· _5_9 ±_____ acres ____ List any previously approved or pending petition numbers affecting the property. __ N_/_A _ Revised 2024 Page 356 of 4116 rCou.nty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net ADJACENT ZONING/LAND USE Zoning Land Use N A-MHO-RLSAO; PUD (Hendry) Farm fields; mining (Hendry) s A-MHO Public Lands (C.R.E.W.) E A-MHO-RLSAO Farm fields w A-MHO-RLSAO Farm fields LIST OF CONSULT ANTS Bowman 239-254-2000 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 Name: Phone: Mailing Address: ________ _ Coleman,Yovanovich Koester 239-435-3535 4001 Tamiami Tr N., Naples, FL 34103 Name: Phone: M 01.1. mg Add ress: ________ _ Passarella & Associates 239-274-0067 13620 Metropolis Ave, Ft Myers, FL 33912 N ame: Phone: M 01'I' mg Add ress: ________ _ PA 239-405-9148 33913 Name: JR Evans Engineering, Phone: Mailing Address:9961 Interst Comm Dr, Ft Myers, FL Name: Trebilcok Consulting Solut. Phone: 239-566-9551 Mailing Address:2800 Davis Blvd, Naples, FL 34104 DPFG-Development Planning & Financing Group, Inc., 250 International Pkwy, #280, Lake Mary, FL 32746 Applicant is responsible for providing finalized copies as required for public hearing. I hereby submit and certify the application to be complete and accurate. Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, Sr. VP Printed Name of Agent Si Date Revised 2024 Page 357 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net SECTION I NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX ASSESSMENT (LDC 4.08.07.D.3.) 1. Submit an Assessment that documents the Natural Resource Index Value Scores. The Assessment is to include an analysis that quantifies the number of acres by Index Values. The Assessment shall include the following: a. Identify all lands within the proposed SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2. b. Verify that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are still valid through recent aerial photography, satellite imagery, agency-approved mapping, or other documentation, as verified by field inspections. c. If the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are no longer valid the applicant shall document the current Index Value of the land. d. Quantify by type the acreage of agricultural lands being converted. e. Quantify by type the acreage of non- agricultural acreage being converted. f. Quantify by type the acreage of all lands within the proposed SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2. g. Quantify by type the acreage of all lands being designated as an SRA within the ACSC, if any. h. Demonstrate compliance with the Suitability Criteria contained in Section 4.08.07.A.1. SECTION II NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX ASSESSMENT SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION (LDC 4.08.07.D.4.) 1. Documentation to support the Natural Resource Index Assessment shall be provided for each SRA being designated a. Legal description, including sketch or survey. b. Acreage calculations of lands being put into the SRA, including acreage calculations of WRAs (if any) within the SRA boundary but not included in the SRA designation. c. RLSA Overlay Map delineating the area of the RLSA District being designated as an SRA. d. Aerial photograph delineating the area being designated as an SRA. e. Natural Resource Index Map of the area being designated as an SRA. f. FLUCCS map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA. Revised 2024 Page 358 of 4116 rCounty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net g. Listed species map(s} delineating the area being designated as an SRA. h. Soils map(s} delineating the area being designated as an SRA. i. Documentation to support a change in the related Natural Resource Index Value(s}, if appropriate. SECTION Ill OTHER REQUIRED DOCUMENTS 1. Submit a SRA Master Plan consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07.G. 2. Submit a SRA Development Document consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07.H. 3. Submit a Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report addressing the requirements of Section 4.08.07.K. 4. Submit an Economic Assessment Report addressing the requirements of Section 4.08.07.L. 5. School Concurrency - if the proposed proiect includes a residential component, you are required to contact the School District of Collier County at 239-377-0267 to discuss school concurrency requirements. (Download the School Impact Analysis Application from the website} SECTION IV STEWARDSHIP CREDIT USE AND RECONCILIATION APPLICATION (LDC 4.08.07.D.9) 1. The legal description of, or descriptive reference to, the SRA to which the Stewardship Credits are being transferred. 2. Total number of acres within the proposed SRA and the total number of acres of the proposed SRA within the ACSC (if any). 3. Number of acres within the SRA designated "public use" that do not require the redemption of Stewardship Credits in order to be entitled (does not consume credits). 4. Number of acres of "excess" open spaces within the SRA that do not require the consumption of credits. 5. Number of acres of WRAs inside the SRA boundary but not included in the SRA designation. 6. Number of acres within the SRA that consume credits. 7. The number of Stewardship Credits being transferred to (consumed by} the SRA and documentation that the applicant has acquired or has a contractual right to acquire those Stewardship Credits. 8. The number of acres to which credits are to be transferred (consumed) multiplied by 8 Credits/ acre equals the number of Credits to be transferred (consumed). Revised 2024 Page 359 of 4116 Cojtf T 9™-nty ...... COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.collierqov.net 9. A descriptive reference to one or more approved or pending SSA Designation Applications from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. Submit copies of SSA Stewardship Credit Agreement and related documentation, including: a. SSA Application Number b. Pending companion SRA Application Number c. SSA Designation Resolution (or Resolution Number) d. SSA Credit Agreement (Stewardship Agreement) e. Stewardship Credits Database Report 10. A descriptive reference to any previously approved Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Applications that pertain to the referenced SSA(s) from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. 11. A summary table in a form provided by Collier County that identifies the exchange of all Stewardship Credits that involve the SRA and all of the associated SSAs from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. SECTION V STEWARDSHIP RECIEVING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT (LDC 4.08.07.D.11.b) 1. The applicant for designation of an SRA shall enter into an SRA Credit Agreement with the County for each SRA. 2. The SRA Credit Agreement shall contain: a. The number of SSA credits applied to the SRA land in order to carry out the plan of development on the acreage proposed in the SRA Development Documents. b. The legal description of the SRA land and number of acres. c. The SRA Master Plan, which must include the following: i. Identify the land uses ii. Identifying the number of residential dwelling units iii. Gross leaseable area of retail square footage iv. Gross leaseable office square footage v. All other land uses depicted on the master plan. 3. Description of the SSA credits that are needed to entitle the SRA land and the anticipated source of said credits. 4. Acknowledgement from the applicant that development of SRA land may not commence until the applicant has recorded a SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum with the Collier County Clerk of Courts; and 5. The applicant's commitment, if any, regarding conservation or any other restriction on development on any lands within the SRA including wetlands, as may be depicted on the SRA Master Plan for special treatment. Revised 2024 Page 360 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA (PL-20240010212) PROJECT NARRATIVE Page 361 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Project Narrative & Statement of Compliance The proposed request is to establish a Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) in the form of a Village. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is located in northern Collier County in portions of Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Township 46 South, Range 28 East. The Corkscrew Grove East Village ("Village") contains a total of 1,446.59± acres. A portion of the Village is located on the north side of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road. The remainder of the Village is located south of the intersection of State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road, east and west of Corkscrew Road. Lands north of the Village within Collier County are zoned A-Agricultural and within the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA). Lands to the north within Hendry County are zoned PUD (mining). Lands to the south are zoned A-Agricultural and designated Public Lands. Lands to the east are zoned A-Agricultural and within the RLSA, with a portion designated Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA). Lands to the east are also identified as a Panther Corridor. Lands to the west are within the RLSA, with a portion designated Water Retention Area (WRA). In accordance with the RLSA Overlay definition, the Village is primarily a residential community which includes a diversity of housing types and a maximum of 4,502 dwelling units (±3.11 DUs per gross acre) , which includes 362 affordable housing units. The Village includes 145.58± acres of a mixed-use Village Center providing for the required neighborhood-scaled retail, office, civic, and community uses. Compliance with RLSAO SRA Village Design Criteria The SRA Master Plan lays out the design and development intent for this Village. Corkscrew Grove East Village contains three Context Zones: Neighborhood General (1,237.41± acres), Village Center (169.55± acres), and Affordable Housing (39.63± acres). The SRA Document and Master Plan also provide for the following required perimeter landscape buffers: • Adjacent to Corkscrew Road and State Road 82: 25-foot-wide Type D buffer; • Adjacent to A-Agricultural lands: 10-foot-wide Type A buffer, except adjacent to an SSA or designated preserve, where no landscape buffer is required; and • Adjacent to Preserve or SSA: No landscape buffer required. Page 1 of 19 https: ,us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com msoffice wopi files 51 cee484-3 l 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce WOPIServiceld _TP _ EGNYTE _PLUS WOPIUserld _ 209.bowman.egnyte.cointProject Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 362 of 4116 based on all units including the affordable units. The Traffic Impact Statement does not include the square footage associated with the affordable units. 11. The SRA allows for up to 4,502 dwelling units (3 .11 dwelling units per acre), which includes 362 affordable housing units. 12. In compliance with the requirement to provide a diversity of housing types within a Village, a minimum of 10% of units shall be multi-family, based upon the Land Development Code (LDC) definition of Multifamily Dwelling (a group of3 or more dwelling units within a single building), a minimum of 10% of the units shall be single family detached, and a minimum of 10% of the units shall be single family attached or villas. 13. The SRA provides approximately 24.33± acres of parks, park preserves, wetland park preserves, and a Neighborhood General Amenity Center. This exceeds the SRA requirement of providing 1% of the SRA gross acreage (14.4 7 acres) for recreation and parks for neighborhoods. 14. The SRA has direct access to Corkscrew Road, which is classified as major collector road and State Road 82 which is classified as principal arterial road. 15. The SRA is consistent with the standards set forth in the RLSA Overlay Attachment C, applicable to Villages. 16. The Village will be served by the Corkscrew Grove Stewardship District. 17. The total acreage requiring stewardship credits is 1,382.96 acres (total SRA acreage excluding 63.63 acres of public benefit use). This is calculated as follows: Total SRA Acreage 1,446.59 Acres Public Benefit Use Acreage 1 - 63.63 Acres Total 1,382.96 Acres 1 Public benefit uses include 36.22 acres for affordable housing, 24 acres for a public-school site, and 3.41 acres for afire station site (essential services tract as depicted on the SRA Master Plan). 18. Eight (8) Credits shall be required for each acre of land included in a SRA, where such Credits were created from an SSA submitted for review or approved prior to July 13, 2021. The SRA utilizes 8,504.80 Stewardship Credits from SSA 11 created prior to July 13, 2021, which entitles 1,063.10 acres of the SRA. 19. Ten (10) Credits per acre shall be required for each acre of land included in an SRA, where such Credits were created from an SSA submitted for review or approved after July 13, 2021. The SRA utilizes 3,198.60 Stewardship Credits from SSA 22 created after July 13, 2021, which entitles 319.86 acres of the SRA. 20. The proposed schedule of development within the Village SRA is as follows: a. Anticipated timeframe for receipt of required jurisdictional agency permits (or permit modifications) and date of commencement of residential development: two years from approval of this SRA. b. Anticipated sequence of residential development: An average of 250 units per year commencing after receipt of federal, state, and local permits. c. Anticipated timeframe for commencement of minimum required neighborhood retail and office uses: 10 years from date of approval of this SRA. d. Anticipated project completion date: fourteen (14) years from date of approval of this SRA or upon approval of any required jurisdictional permits, whichever occurs last. Page 3 of 19 https: us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com msoffice wopi, files 51 cee484-3 l 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28t2ce1 WOP!Serviceld TP _ EGNYTE _PLUS WOPIUserld 209 .bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 364 of 4116Natural Resource Index The required Natural Resource Index Assessment (detailed environmental data and analysis) was prepared by Passarella and Associates, Inc. Please refer to the Environmental Assessment Report provided in Sections I and II. In summary, the subject property has been significantly impacted through long term agricultural operations. Under the RLSA Overlay, the property is eligible to be designated as an SRA. The proposed Village SRA does not include any lands with a score greater than 1.2 on the Natural Resource Index and there are no lands designated Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA) or Flowway Stewardship Areas (FSA). There is a Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) surrounded by the SRA that includes 81.56 acres ofWater Retention Area (WRA). This WRA will not provide storm water quality treatment for the SRA. The Village does not include any lands within the Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC). SRA Master Plan The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Master Plan is consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07.G. SRA Development Document The SRA Development Document is consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07.H. Public Facilities Impact Assessment (LDC Section 4.08.07 .K.) Transportation: See TIS. Sewer and Water: See Public Facilities Report. Public Schools: See Public Facilities Report. Economic Assessment (per LDC Section 4.08.07 .L.) Please see Fiscal Analysis included with this submittal. Additional GMP Consistency & LDC Compliance Evaluation Background The Final Order (AC-99-002) was issued by the Administration Commission (Governor and Cabinet) on June 22, 1999. The Final Order required the County to conduct "The Collier County Rural and Agricultural Assessment" (Assessment). The Assessment was required to identify the means to accomplish the following: 1. Identify and propose measures to protect prime agricultural areas. Such measures should prevent the premature conversion of agricultural lands to other uses. Page 4 of 19 https: us-partner-integrations.egnyte.comimsoffice ·wopi •files, 51 cee484-3 J9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce WOPIServiceld_ TP _EGNYTE_pLUS WOPIUserld _209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 365 of 4116 2. Direct incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat in order to protect water quality and maintain the natural water regime as well as to protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats. 3. Assess the growth potential of the Area by assessing the potential conversion of rural lands to other uses, in appropriate locations, while discouraging urban sprawl, directing incompatible land uses away from critical habitat and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques including, but not limited to, public and private schools, urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area-based allocations, clustering and open space provisions and mixed use development. The Assessment shall recognize the substantial advantages of innovative approaches to development which may better serve to protect environmentally rural land uses, and provide for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. The County bifurcated the Assessment area into two major geographic areas, then referred to as the Rural Fringe Area and the Immokalee Area Study. After completion of the Immokalee Area Study, the County amended the GMP to adopt the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay (covering the ±195,000 acres within the Immokalee Study Area), followed by LDC amendments to implement the GMP RLSA Goals, Objectives, and Policies. The various state agencies with jurisdictional oversight approved these amendments, finding that the RLSA Overla GOPs address the Final Order requirements related to the Assessment, including: • Providing measures to protect and prevent premature conversion of "prime agricultural lands ... ", • Providing measures to direct incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat to protect water quality and quantity ... , • Assessing the growth potential of the Area by assessing potential conversions of rural lands to other uses in appropriate locations, while discouraging urban sprawl, directing incompatible uses away from critical habitat, and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques, including but not limited to, public and private schools, urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area based allocations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed use development. Collier County GMP (related to the RLSA) The GMP (through the RLSA Goals, Objectives, and Policies) is structured into five (5) Groups, the following analysis addresses compliance with Group 4 Policies: Group 4 - Policies to enable conversion of rural lands to other uses in appropriate locations, while discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques by the establishment of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Policy 4.1: Collier County will encourage and facilitate uses that enable economic prosperity and diversification of the economic base of the RSLA. Collier County will also encourage development Page 5 of 19 https: 1us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com msoffice wopi, files, SI cee484-3 l 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce WOPJServiceld_ TP _EGNYTE_PLUS WOPIUserld_209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 366 of 4116that utilizes creative land use planning techniques and facilitates a compact form of development to accommodate population growth by the establishment of Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRAs). Incentives to encourage and support the diversification and vitality of the rural economy such as flexible development regulations, expedited permitting review, and targeting capital improvements shall be incorporated in the LDC Stewardship District. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA allows for a large range ofresidential, commercial, and civic uses to ensure the economic prosperity ofboth the Village and Collier County. Creative land use planning techniques, such as clustered development, mixed use town centers, integrated open space and conservation areas, and a large multi-modal network will be utilized to facilitate a compact form ofdevelopment and, in part, accommodates population growth in Collier County. Policy 4.2: All privately owned lands within the RLSA which meet the criteria set forth herein are eligible for designation as a SRA, except land delineated as a FSA, HSA, WRA or land that has been designated as a Stewardship Sending Area. The exception, consistent with Policy 3.13, is when a WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, then the acreage of the WRA used for stormwater quality treatment for the SRA shall be included in the SRA. Land proposed for SRA designation shall meet the suitability criteria and other standards described in Group 4 Policies. Due to the long-term vision of the RLSA Overlay, and in accordance with the guidelines established in Section 163.3248, Florida Statutes, the specific location, size and composition of each SRA cannot and need not be predetermined in the GMP. In the RLSA Overlay, lands that are eligible to be designated as SRAs generally have similar physical attributes as they consist predominately of agriculture lands which have been cleared or otherwise altered for this purpose. Lands shown on the Overlay Map as eligible for SRA designation include approximately 72,000 acres outside of the ACSC and approximately 15,000 acres within the ACSC. Total SRA designation shall be a maximum of 45,000 acres. Because the Overlay requires SRAs to be compact, mixed-use and self-sufficient in the provision of services, facilities and infrastructure, traditional locational standards normally applied to determine development suitability are not relevant or applicable to SRAs. Therefore, the process for designating a SRA follows the procedures set forth herein and the adopted RLSA Zoning Overlay District. Compliance Analysis: As demonstrated by the data and analysis provided as part of the SRA application process and using creative design techniques and innovative characteristics established for a Village in the RLSA Overlay, the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with this policy. Policy 4.3: Land becomes designated as an SRA upon petition by a property owner to Collier County seeking such designation and the adoption of a resolution by the BCC granting the designation. The petition shall include an SRA master plan as described in Policy 4.5. The basis for approval shall be a finding of consistency with the policies of the Overlay, including required suitability criteria set forth herein, compliance with the LDC Stewardship District, and assurance that the applicant has acquired or will acquire sufficient Stewardship Credits to implement the SRA uses. The County has adopted LDC amendments to establish the procedures and submittal requirements for designation as a SRA, providing for consideration of impacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts, and for public notice of and the opportunity for public participation in any consideration by the BCC of such a designation. Compliance Analysis: As Policy 4.3 states, "The basis for approval shall be a finding ofconsistency with the policies ofthe Overlay, including the required suitability set forth herein, compliance with the LDC Stewardship District, and assurance that the applicant has acquired or will acquire Page 6 of 19 https:, lus-partner-integrations.egnyte.com1msoffice 'wopi/files, 51 cee484-3 l 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce WOPIServiceld _ TP _ EGNYTE _PLUS WOPIUserld _209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 367 of 4116sufficient Stewardship Credits to implement the SRA uses. The County has adopted LDC amendments to establish the procedures and submittal requirements for designation as a SRA. providing for consideration ofimpacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts, and for public notice ofand the opportunity for public participation in any consideration by the BCC ofsuch a designation. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is consistent with all applicable policies in the Overlay and meets or exceeds all applicable LDC requirements. Policy 4.4: Collier County will update the Overlay Map to delineate the boundaries of each approved SRA. Such updates shall be incorporated into the adopted Overlay Map by amendment periodically initiated by the County, or sooner at the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners. Compliance Analysis: No analysis specific to Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is required. This policy is a Collier County responsibility. Policy 4.5: To address the specifics of each SRA, a master plan of each SRA will be prepared and submitted to Collier County as a part of the petition for designation as a SRA. The master plan will demonstrate that the SRA complies with all applicable policies of the Overlay and the LDC Stewardship District and is designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from wetlands and critical habitat identified as FSAs and HSAs on the Overlay Map. The SRA Master Plan shall comply with the County's then- adopted MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), and Access Management procedures. Each SRA master plan shall include a Management Plan with provisions for minimizing human and wildlife interactions. Low intensity land uses (e.q. passive recreation areas, golf courses) and vegetation preservation requirements, including agriculture, shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas dominated by human activities. Consideration shall be given to the most current Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human wildlife conflict. The management plans shall also require the dissemination of information to local residents, businesses and governmental services about the presence of wildlife and practices that enable responsible coexistence with wildlife, while minimizing opportunities for negative interaction, such as appropriate waste disposal practices. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Master Plan demonstrates compliance with all applicable policies of the Overlay and the LDC Stewardship District and is designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from wetlands and critical habitat identified as FSAs and HSAs on the Overlay Map. Policy 4.6: SRA characteristics shall be based upon innovative planning and development strategies referenced in Section 163.3248, Florida Statutes. These planning strategies and techniques include urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area-based allocations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed-use development that allow the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and providing for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. The SRA shall also include a mobility plan that includes vehicular, bicycle/ pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas of outside development and land uses. The mobility plan shall provide mobility strategies such as bus subsidies, route sponsorship or other incentives which encourage the use of mass transit services. The development of SRAs shall also consider the needs identified in the MPO Long Range Transportation Needs Plan, and plan land uses to accommodate services that would Page 7 of19 https: ·/us-partner-integrations.egnyte.comlmsoffice wopi1filesl5 lcee484-319e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce WOP!Serviceld_TP _EGNYTE_PLUS WOP!Userld_209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 368 of 4116increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long- distance travel. Such development strategies are recognized as methods of discouraging urban sprawl, encouraging alternative modes of transportation, increasing internal capture and reducing vehicle miles traveled. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with (meets or exceeds) the innovative characteristics established for a Village in the RLSA Overlay, such as clustered development, creating a mixed-use town center that allows for commercial development to serve the Village and surrounding region, and providing a comprehensive multi-modal network. Policy 4.7: There are three specific forms of SRA permitted within the Overlay. These are Towns, Villages, and Compact Rural Development (CRD). The Characteristics of Towns, Villages, and CRD are set forth in Attachment C and are generally described in Policies 4.7.1, 4.7.2, and 4.7.3. Specific regulations, guidelines and standards within the LDC Stewardship District to guide the design and development ofSRAs to include innovative planning and development strategies as set forth in Section 163.3248, Florida Statutes. The size and base density of each form shall be consistent with the standards set forth on Attachment C. The maximum base residential density as set forth in Attachment C may only be exceeded through the density blending process as set forth in density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan or through the affordable housing density bonus as referenced in the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element. The base residential density is calculated by dividing the total number of residential units in a SRA by the overall area therein. The base residential density does not restrict net residential density of parcels within a SRA. The location, size and density of each SRA will be determined on an individual basis during the SRA designation review and approval process. Compliance Analysis: The proposed density within the Village SRA is consistent with applicable LDC provisions and Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives, and Policies. Policy 4.7.1: Towns are the largest and most diverse form of SRA, with a full range of housing types and mix of uses .... Compliance Analysis: Not applicable to the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. Policy 4.7.2: Villages are communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be not less than 300 acres and up to 1,000 acres inside the Area of Critical State Concern and up to 1,500 acres outside the Area of Critical State Concern. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed-use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Policy 4.15. Appropriately scaled uses described in Policy 4.7.3 shall also be permitted in Villages. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. Design criteria for Villages are included in the LDC Stewardship District. Villages greater than 500 acres shall include an internal mobility plan which shall include a transfer station or park and ride area that is appropriately located within the village to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. Page 8 of 19 https: us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com, msoffice wopi files/5 I cee484-319e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce WOP!Serviceld _ TP _ EGNYTE _PLUS, WOP!Userld _209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 369 of 4116Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is outside the Area of Critical State Concern and under 1,500 acres; and complies with (meets or exceeds) the innovative characteristics established for a Village in the RLSA Overlay such as: • Providing for a mixed-use Village Center that will create economic opportunities for and provide goods and services to the Village and the surrounding area; • Creating a multi-modal pedestrian and bicycle network to safely facilitate non-vehicular travel throughout the Village; • Providing ±23. 03 acres ofparks, park preserves, wetland park preserves, and Neighborhood General amenity centers, exceeding the SRA requirement ofproviding 1 % ofthe SRA gross acreage (14.47 acres) for parks and recreation/or the neighborhoods; and • Providing a school and fire/ems sites. Policy 4.7.3: Compact Rural Development (CRD) is a form of SRA that shall support and further Collier County's valued attributes of agriculture, natural resources and economic diversity .... Compliance Analysis: Not applicable to the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. Policy 4. 7.4: Existing urban areas, Towns and Villages shall be the preferred location for business and industry within the RLSA, to further promote economic sustainability and development, diversification and lob creation. The business and industry use allowed includes, but is not limited to, those as defined as Florida Qualified Target Industries. The appropriate scale and compatibility of these uses within a Town or Village will be addressed during SRA application process. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with this policy through the establishment ofa mixed-use Village Center permitting a large range ofcommercial uses that can service the Village and surrounding area. Policy 4.7.5: To address the accommodation of Affordable Housing in a Town or Village, the SRA applicant shall utilize one of the following options: 1. Affordable Housing Land Reservation a. Reservation of one or more site(s) within the SRA or within a proximal SRA in the RLSAO with densities and development standards that accommodate Affordable Housing residential uses at a minimum density of 10 units per acre, for acquisition by either Collier County, a Community Land Trust, a private developer or any other affordable housing provider. b. The aggregate acreage of such site(s) shall be equal to or greater than 2.5% of the gross area of the SRA. c. The acreage of land reserved for Affordable Housing will be considered as a Public Benefit Use and not require the consumption of Stewardship Credits but shall be included in the calculation of total SRA acreage. d. The County shall verify the site(s) is/are appropriate and approve the site(s) at time of SRA approval, subject to standards to be established in the LDC. e. Affordable Housing Page 9 of 19 https: us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com msoffice wopi files,5 I cee484-3 I 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce, WOPIServiceld _ TP _ EGNYTE_PLUS1 WOP!Userld_209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 370 of 4116 units shall be excluded from the Traffic Impact Statement or trip cap for the SRA in which they are located. 2. Alternatives proposed by the SRA Applicant a. While compliance with the Land Reservation described above shall be deemed to satisfy affordable housing requirements, other options may be proposed by the SRA applicant and approved by the Board of County Commissioners to address housing affordability issues in the subject SRA. 3. The process and procedures to implement this policy, including a definition to be used to determine "proximal SRA" and specific guidelines and standards in those instances in which alternative options may be proposed, shall be set forth in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA proposes a ±36.22-acre Affordable Housing context zone to be acquired by Collier County with a minimum density often dwelling units per acre to satisfy the affordable housing requirement. Policy 4.8: An SRA may be contiguous to a FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in Policy 4.13. A SRA may be contiguous to and served by a WRA in accordance with Policy 3.12 and 3.13. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with this policy. Policy 4.9: An SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the planned development in an environmentally acceptable manner. The primary means of directing development away from wetlands and critical habitat is the prohibition of locating SRAs in FSAs, HS As, and WRAs unless the WRA is being used to provide water quality treatment volume as referenced in Policy 3 .13, in which case the WRA shall retain its WRA Overlay classification and be included in the SRA acreage total. To further direct development away from wetlands and critical habitat, residential; commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, and transient housing, institutional, civic and community service uses within a SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. In addition, conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, with the exception of those necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety, shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. Infrastructure necessary to serve permitted uses may be exempt from this restriction, provided that designs seek to minimize the extent of impacts to any such areas. The Index value of greater than 1.2 represents those areas that have a high natural resource value as measured pursuant to Policy 1.8. Less than 2% of potential SRA land achieves an Index score of greater than 1.2. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with this policy. The SRA does not include any lands with a NRI greater than 1.2 nor any lands within the A CSC Overlay. Policy 4.10: Within the RLSA Overlay, open space, which by definition shall include public and private conservation lands, underdeveloped areas of designated SSAs, agriculture, water retention and management areas and recreation uses, will continue to be the dominant land use. Therefore, open space adequate to serve the forecasted population and uses within the SRA is provided. To ensure that SRA residents have such areas proximate to their homes, open space shall also comprise a minimum Page 10 of 19 https:I, us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com, msoffice wopi files 51 cee484-319e-4459-92e7- ec540d28t2celWOPIServiceld TP EGNYTE_PLUS WOPIUserld_209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 371 of 4116of thirty-five percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town, or Village. Lands within a SRA greater than one acre with Index values of greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space except for the allowance of uses described in Policy 4.9. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA shall provide a minimum of 35% open space in compliance with this policy. Policy 4.11: The perimeter of each SRA shall be designed to provide a transition from higher density and intensity uses within the SRA to lower density and intensity uses on adjoining property. The edges of SRAs shall be well defined and designed to be compatible with the character of adjoining property. Techniques such as, but not limited to setbacks, landscape buffers, and recreation/open space placement may be used for this purpose. Where existing agricultural activity adjoins a SRA, the design of the SRA must take this activity into account to allow for the continuation of the agricultural activity and to minimize any conflict between agriculture and SRA uses. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with this policy. Multi- family development has been located within the mixed-use Village Center or in locations that have frontage on and/or access to Corkscrew Road or State Road 82. Policy 4.12: Where a SRA adjoins a FSA, HSA, WRA or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the Overlay Map, best management and planning practices shall be applied to minimize adverse impacts to such lands. SRA design shall demonstrate that ground water table draw down or diversion will not adversely impact the adjacent FSA, HSA, WRA or conservation land. Detention and control elevations shall be established to protect such natural areas and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA shall have no adverse impact on FSA, HAS, or WRA designated lands as demonstrated by the environmental data and analysis provided. Policy 4.13: Open space within or contiguous to a SRA shall be used to provide a buffer between the SRA and any adjoining FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the Overlay Map. Open space contiguous to or within 300 feet of the boundary of a FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land may include: natural preserves, lakes, golf courses provided no fairways or other turf areas are allowed within the first 200 feet, passive recreational areas and parks, required yard and set-back areas, and other natural or man made open space. Along the west boundary of the FSAs and HSAs that comprise Camp Keais Strand, i.e., the area south of Immokalee Road, this open space buffer shall be 500 feet wide and shall preclude golf course fairways and other turf areas within the first 300 feet. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with this policy. SSA 22 provides a buffer between the Village and nearby FSA and HSAs, and the Village provides sufficient buffering adjacent to adjoining FSA, HSA, and public or private conservation land delineated on the Overlay Map. Policy 4.14: The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation planning standards. At the time of SRA approval, an SRA proposed to adjoin land designated as an SRA or lands designated as Open Lands shall provide for the opportunity to provide direct vehicular and pedestrian connections from said areas Page 11 of 19 https:l•us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com1msoffice wopi, files 51 cee484-319e-4459-92e7- ec540d28t2ce1WOPIServiceld TP EGNYTE _PLUS1WOPIUserld_ 209 .bowman.egnyte,com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 372 of 4116to the County's arterial/ collector roadway network as shown on the MPO's LRTP Needs Plan so as to reduce travel time and travel expenses, improve interconnectivity, increase internal capture, and keep the use of county arterial roads to a minimum when traveling between developments in the RLSA. Public and private roads within an SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. Signalized intersections within or adjacent to an SRA that serves the SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. No SRA shall be approved unless the capacity of County collector or arterial road(s) serving the SRA is demonstrated to be adequate in accordance with the Collier County Concurrency Management System in effect at the time of SRA designation. A transportation impact assessment meeting the requirements of Section 2.7.3 of the LDC, or its successor regulation shall be prepared for each proposed SRA to provide the necessary data and analysis. To the extent required to mitigate an SRA's traffic impacts, actions may be taken to include, but shall not be limited to, provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossings, environmental mitigation credits, right of way dedication(s), water management and/or fill material which may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network. Any such actions to offset traffic impacts shall be memorialized in a developer contribution agreement. These actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or proposed roadways. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA has direct access to State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road and meets the requirements of the County's Concurrency Management System. Policy 4.15.1: SRAs are intended to be mixed use and shall be allowed the full range of uses permitted by the Urban Designation of the FLUE, as modified by Policies 4.7, 4.7.1, 4.7.2, 4.7.3, 4.7.4 and Attachment C. An appropriate mix of retail, office, recreational, civic, governmental, and institutional uses will be available to serve the daily needs and community wide needs of residents of the RLSA. Depending on the size, scale, and character of a SRA, such uses may be provided either within the specific SRA, within other SRAs in the RLSA or within the Immokalee Urban Area provided the capacity of those adjoining area' s facilities as described in Attachment C to be utilized by the newly created SRA can demonstrate sufficient capacity exists for their desired uses per the standards of Attachment C. By example, each Village or Town shall provide for neighborhood retail/office uses to serve its population as well as appropriate civic and institutional uses, however, the combined population of several Villages may be required to support community scaled retail or office uses in a nearby Town. Standards for the minimum amount of non-residential uses in each category are set forth in Attachment C, and shall be also included in the Stewardship LDC District. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA meets or exceeds the requirements of Attachment "C" and provides for an appropriate mix of retail, office, recreational, civic, governmental, and institutional uses to serve the daily needs and community wide needs ofresidents and surrounding lands. Policy 4.15.2: The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) may, as a condition of approval and adoption of an SRA development, require that suitable areas for parks, schools, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use. When the BCC requires such a set aside for one or more public facilities, the set aside shall be subject to the same provisions of the LDC as are applicable to public facility dedications required as a condition for PUD rezoning. Compliance Analysis: The SRA Master Plan designates areas for parks, schools, and other public facilities. The need for any such public facilities will be determined as part ofthe SRA Designation review process. Page 12 of 19 https: us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com,msoffice wopi files15 lcee484-3 l 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce WOPIServiceld _TP _ EGNYTE _PLUS WOPIUserld _ 209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 373 of 4116Policy 4.15.3: Applicants for SRA designation shall coordinate with Collier County School Board staff to allow planning to occur to accommodate any impacts to the public schools as a result of the SRA. As a part of the SRA application, the following information shall be provided: 1. Number of residential units by type; 2. An estimate of the number of school-aged children for each type of school impacted (elementary, middle, high school); and 3. The potential for locating a public educational facility or facilities within the SRA, and the size of any sites that may be dedicated, or otherwise made available for a public educational facility. Compliance Analysis: The SRA Master Plan sets aside areas that could be used for public educational facilities. The need for any such public educational facilities will be determined as part ofthe SRA Designation review process. Policy 4.16: A SRA shall have adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed development, or such infrastructure must be provided concurrently with the demand. The level of infrastructure provided will depend on the form of SRA development, accepted civil engineering practices, and LDC requirements. The capacity of essential services and infrastructure necessary to serve the SRA at build- out must be demonstrated during the SRA designation process. Infrastructure to be analyzed includes but not limited to, transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, and solid waste. Transportation infrastructure is discussed in Policy 4.14. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities are required in Towns and Villages, and may be required in CRDs depending upon the permitted uses approved within the CRD. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities shall be constructed, owned, operated and maintained by a private utility service, the developer, a Community Development District, the Immokalee Water Sewer Service District, Collier County, or other governmental entity. Innovative alternative water and wastewater treatment systems such as decentralized community treatment systems shall not be prohibited by this Policy provided that they meet all applicable regulatory criteria. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems, limited to a maximum of 100 acres of any Town, Village or CRD of 100 acres are permitted on an interim basis until services from a centralized/decentralized community system are available. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems may be permitted in CRDs of 100 acres or less in size. Compliance Analysis: These matters are addressed as part ofthe SRA review process. The Public Facilities Impact Assessment provided deals with initial infrastructure needs, and we are coordinating with the Immokalee Water and Sewer District regarding the provision of water and sewer supply. Please see the Letter from IWSD for additional information. Policy 4.17: The BCC will review and approve SRA designation applications in accordance with the provisions of Policy 1.2 of the Capital Improvement Element of the GMP and public facilities pursuant to Policy 1.1 of the Capital Improvement Element in addition to the following: jails, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire service, government buildings and libraries. Final local development orders will be approved within a SRA designated by the BCC in accordance with the Concurrency Management System of the GMP and LDC in effect at the time of final local development order approval. Page 13 of 19 https: us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com msoffice wopi files 5 lcee484-3 l 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce, WOPIServiceld_TP _EGNYTE _ PLUS, WOPIUserld_209 .bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 374 of 4116Compliance Analysis: The necessary supporting information to evaluate the impacts on Category A public facilities is provided with this application. Policy 4.18: The SRA will be planned and designed to be fiscally neutral or positive to Collier County at the SRA horizon year based on a public facilities impact assessment, as identified in LDC 4.08.07.K. The BCC may grant exceptions to this Policy to accommodate affordable housing, as it deems appropriate. Techniques that may promote fiscal neutrality such as Community Development Districts, and other special districts, shall be encouraged. At a minimum, the assessment shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement, and schools. Development phasing, developer contributions and mitigation, and other public/private partnerships shall address any potential adverse impacts to adopted levels of service standards. In the event that an SRA development, generates surplus revenues to Collier County, Collier County may choose to allocate a portion of such surplus revenues to ensure that sufficient resources are available to allow Collier County to respond expeditiously to economic opportunities and to compete effectively for high- value research, development and commercialization, innovation, and alternative and renewable energy business protects. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village Economic Analysis provided with this application demonstrates fiscal neutrality. Policy 4.19: Eight (8) credits shall be required for each acre of land included in a SRA, where such Credits were created from a Stewardship Sending Area submitted for review or- approved prior to July 13, 2021. Ten Credits per acre shall be required for each acre ofland included in an SRA, where such Credits were created from any other Stewardship Sending Area. Land that is designated for a public benefit use described in Policy 4.20 do not require the use of Credits. In order to promote compact, mixed use development and provide the necessary support facilities and services to residents of rural areas, the SRA designation entitles a full range of uses, accessory uses and associated uses that provide a mix of services to and are supportive to the residential population of a SRA, as provided for in Policies 4. 7, 4.15 .1 and Attachment C. Such uses shall be identified, located and quantified in the SRA master plan. Compliance Analysis: These uses are located and quantified within the SRA Master Plan. Policy 4.20: The acreage of a public benefit use shall count toward the maximum acreage limits of an SRA, unless such public benefit uses were approved as part of an SRA approved prior to July 13 ,2021 in which case such public benefit uses shall continue to be excluded from the maximum acreage limitation pursuant to the policy in effect at the time of approval. Public benefit uses shall not count toward the consumption of Stewardship Credits. For the purpose of this Policy, public benefit uses include: affordable housing as defined by the LDC, public schools (preK-12) and public or private post-secondary institutions, including ancillary uses; community parks exceeding the minimum acreage requirements of Attachment C, municipal golf courses; regional parks; and governmental facilities as defined in the LDC. The location of public schools shall be coordinated with the Collier County School Board, based on the interlocal agreement, Section 163.3248 F.S. and in a manner consistent with 235.193 F.S. Schools and related ancillary uses shall be encouraged to locate in or proximate to Towns and Villages subject to applicable zoning and permitting requirements. Page 14 of 19 https:f/us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com msoffice wopi files15 l cee484-319e-4459-92e7- ec540d28t2celWOPIServiceld_ TP _ EGNYTE_PLUS, WOPIUserld _ 209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 375 of 4116Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with this policy by providing lands for affordable housing and schools, as depicted on the SRA Master Plan. Policy 4.21: Lands within the ACSC that meet all SRA criteria shall also be restricted such that credits used to entitle a SRA in the ACSC must be generated exclusively from SSAs within the ACSC. Further, the only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC east of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be CRDs of 100 acres or less and the only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC west of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be CRDs and Villages of not more than 300 acres. Provided, not more than 1,000 acres of SRA development in the form of Villages or CRDs, exclusive of any lakes created prior to June 30, 2002 as a result of mining operations, shall be allowed in areas that have a frontage on State Road 29 and that had been predominantly cleared as a result of Ag Group I or Earth Mining or Processing Uses. This Policy is intended to assure that the RLSA Overlay is not used to increase the development potential within the ACSC but instead is used to promote a more compact form of development as an alternative to the Baseline Standards already allowed within the ACSC. No policy of the RLSA Overlay shall take precedence over the Big Cypress ACSC regulations and all regulations therein shall apply. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is not within an A CSC. Policy 4.22: When historic or cultural resources are identified within the RLSA through the SRA designation process, the applicant in conjunction with the Florida Division of Historic Resources will assess the historic or cultural significance and explore the educational and public awareness opportunities regarding significant resources. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA does not contain any identified historic or cultural resources but will comply with this policy ifthese resources are identified during the SRA designation process. Please see the Cultural Assessment Report for additional details. Policy 4.23: Any development on lands participating in the RLS Program shall be compatible with surrounding land uses. Within one year of the effective date of this Policy LDC regulations shall be implemented for outdoor lighting to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Compliance Analysis: The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will be compatible with the surrounding land uses and will comply with the applicable LDC requirements related to outdoor lighting to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Collier County LDC (related to SRA Designation) LDC Section 4.08.07 states: "SRA designation is intended to encourage and facilitate uses that enable economic prosperity and diversification of the economic base of the RLSA District, and encourage development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques and facilitates a compact form ofdevelopment ... " Through requirements, allowances, and incentives LDC Section 4.08.07 includes the following innovative planning techniques for various types of SRA developments, including Villages. Page 15 of 19 https: us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com:msoffice wopi files 5 Jcee484-3 J 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce WOPIServiceld _ TP _ EGNYTE ]LUS. WOPIUserld _209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 376 of 4116 A. Lands Within the RLSA District that can be Designated as SRAs. All privately owned lands within the RLSA District that meet the suitability criteria contained herein may be designated as SRA, except lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map as FSA, HSA, or WRA, or lands already designated as an SSA. WRAs may be located within the boundaries of an SRA and may be incorporated into an SRA Master Plan to provide water management functions for properties within such SRA, subject to all necessary permitting requirements. 1. Suitability criteria. The following suitability criteria are established to ensure consistency with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the RLSA Overlay. a. An SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the planned development. b. Residential, commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, and transient housing, institutional, civic and community service uses within an SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. c. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, with the exception of those necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety, shall not be sited on land that receives a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2, regardless of the size of the land or parcel. d. Lands or parcels that are greater than one acre and have an Index Value greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space and maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated state. e. Open space shall also comprise a minimum of thirty-five percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town, Village, or those CRDs exceeding 100 acres. Gross acreage includes only that area of development within the SRA that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits. f. As an incentive to encourage open space, open space on lands within an SRA located outside of the ACSC that exceeds the required thirty-five percent retained open space shall not be required to consume Stewardship Credits. g. An SRA may be contiguous to an FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in Section 4.08.07 J.6. An SRA may be contiguous to, or encompass a WRA. h. The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation planning standards. The Corkscrew Grove East VUlage complies with all the above suitability criteria. Page 16 of 19 https: •us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com msoffice, wopi files 51cee484-319e-4459-92e7- ec540d28t2ce WOPIServiceld_TP _EGNYTE_pLUS WOPIUserld 209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 377 of 4116 2. SRAs Within the ACSC. SRAs are permitted within the ACSC subject to limitations on the number, size, location, and form of SRA described herein. Nothing within this Section shall be construed as an exemption of an SRA from any and all limitations and regulations applicable to lands within the ACSC. Lands within the ACSC that meet all SRA suitability criteria shall also be restricted such that credits used to entitle an SRA in the ACSC must be generated exclusively from SSAs within the ACSC. No early entry bonus credits can be used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC. a. The only forms of SRA allowed in the ACSC east of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Hamlets and CRDs of 100 acres or less and the only forms of SRA allowed in the ACSC west of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Villages and CRDs of not more than 300 acres and Hamlets. Provided, however, two SRAs, consisting of any combination of Villages or CRDs of not more than 500 acres each, exclusive of any lakes created prior to the effective date of this amendment as a result of mining operations, shall be allowed in areas that have a frontage on State Road 29 and that, as of the effective date of the RLSA Overlay, had been predominantly cleared as a result of Ag Group I (Layer 5) or Earth Mining or Processing Uses (Layer 3). b. The Town form of an SRA shall not be located within the ACSC. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA is not located within the A CSC. B. Establishment and Transfer of Stewardship Credits. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Stewardship Credits will be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis, as described in Section 4.08.07 B.2. Stewardship density and intensity will thereafter differ from the Baseline Standards. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA has provided evidence ofhaving enough Credits to entitle the SRA, consistent with County requirements. C. Forms of SRA developments. SRA developments are a compact form of development, which accommodate and promote uses that utilize creative land use planning techniques. SRAs shall be used to facilitate the implementation of innovative planning and flexible development strategies described in§ 163.3177 (11), F.S. and Rule 91-5.006(5)(1), F.A.C. These planning strategies and techniques are intended to minimize the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while discouraging urban sprawl, protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and, providing for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Only the following four specific forms of rural development in SRAs are permitted within the RLSA District. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2. Villages. Villages are primarily residential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be not less than 100 acres or more than 1,000 acres. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed-use village center to Page 17 of 19 5 https:' us-partner-integrations.egnyte.comrmsoffice wopi files lcee484-319e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce, WOP!Serviceld_TP _EGNYTE_PLUS WOP!Userld_209.bowman.egnyte.com/Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 378 of 4116 serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.07 J.1. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. The Village form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.07 A.2. The Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA complies with the above, as well as all other applicable requirements and standards in the LDC as they related to a Village. Conclusion In addition to meeting or exceeding the requirements set forth in the LDC for the Village form of an SRA, the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA incorporates a number of innovative elements, including: • A design that provides multi-modal interconnectivity through the Village, including sidewalks and pathways; • Utilizing the RLSA Special District provisions to allow for neighborhood scale goods and services in proximity to State Road 82 and Corkscrew Road; • The Village Center is accessible to residents in the surrounding area, which will effectively reduce vehicle miles traveled by providing closer access to neighborhood goods and services; • Providing neighborhood parks throughout the village connected accessible to the residential units via sidewalks and pathways; • Providing a minimum of 35% open space; • Does not include lands designated as WRA, HSA, or FSA; • Utilizing perimeter water buffers where feasible to discourage wildlife from entering residential areas; and • Providing education/information for residents regarding living with wildlife and the potential for prescribed bums for conservation land management. The Growth Management Plan provides the following Goal and Objective for the RLSA: Goal: To address the long-term needs of residents and property owners within the lmmokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment by retaining agricultural activities, directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, enabling the conversion ofrural land to other uses in appropriate locations, discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that employs creative land use planning techniques through the use of established incentives. [Underline added for emphasis.} Page 18 of 19 llttps: us-partner-integrations.egnyte.comlmsoffice wopi files 51 cee484-3 I 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28f2ce WOPIServiceld_TP _EGNYTE_PLUS WOPIUserld_209.bowman.egnyte.com Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 379 of 4116Objective: Create an incentive based land use overlay system. herein referred to as the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, based on the principles ofrural land stewardship as defined in Chapter 163.3248. FS. The policies that implement this Goal and Obiective are set forth below in groups relating to each aspect ofthe Goal. Group 1 policies describe the structure and organization ofthe Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Group 2 policies relate to agriculture, Group 3 policies relate to natural resource protection, and Group 4 policies relate to conversion of land to other uses and economic diversification. Group 5 are regulatory policies that ensure that land that is not voluntarily included in the Overlay by its owners shall nonetheless meet the minimum requirements of the Final Order pertaining to natural resource protection. [Underline added for emphasis.} LDC Section 4.08.07.A. l. states the Suitability Criteria are "established to ensure consistency with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the RLSA Overlay". The Village is located on land shown as "Open" on the Overlay Map and is designated for a Town and/or Villages on the Adopted Conceptual Development Plan. Adherence to the applicable LDC requirements and limitations ensures compliance with the Group 4 Policies in the GMP and ensures that an SRA utilizes creative and innovative land use planning techniques. These creative and innovative land use planning techniques are embedded in the RLSA program. Accordingly, it is our position that an application for SRA designation which demonstrates compliance with the requirements within the LDC established for SRA designation, both generally and specifically as they relate to a particular form of SRA, must then be deemed to be consistent with the GMP. The LDC requirements implement the GMP Goals, Objectives, and Policies. The LDC requirements are highly detailed and specific in terms of requirements for each form of SRA. Page 19 of 19 https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com msoffice wopi files, 51 cee484-3 I 9e-4459-92e7- ec540d28t2ce, WOPIServiceld_ TP _EGNYTE PLUS1WOPIUserld_209.bowman.egnyte.com,Project Narrative Statement of Compliance (rev 2-19-2026).docx Page 380 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA (PL-20240010212) PROJECT LOCATION MAP Page 381 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA (PL-20240010212) DEEDS Page 383 of 4116 I•••· l-: -: c s _:···: : ··:·. : • t; _:: ;\- -• ,:,,. .:, .:,'. .:• .. ·,. STATS OF l!'I.Diu;t)l oourm: OF ottmR Tlll Im>EHTURE,• lt\1ie thin 29t,11 '3ay or . Fobruoey .' , A,;fi.,. 1960, Tit& A'l'JAl ll'! O rArm· \HJ> J:t11RCN l l1' OOl_"'PAHY.; a .corpoi,tt;lop '.',lnd$i" the · ,bl!tuoon . . in,,.; of t.he· E:ttito ot Virginia, -pnrty· or tbo .firot part; ·a ALICO IAt · Dh'VELOpt_.'l:11r ·c !·tt, a: >;'t,drat i> -W1der tho .. l.ava ot ·:the rtatet •!)1':li'lorid a, at J c eo?V:lll'!t Flo ' r o£ aoo: -- t, .: , - 1e ,tquo ra 1 .., WI'rt ETHi : t th.a said .}ltirly oft. iret.. part,: ·tor t'ri ih oon- <· > .. · cQnsidei'llt.ion• to i ,tit)ep1t:l.-on .or 'tba:au . of 'ra_n. Uollo.rs antl otht'r vduable at. or bet0%'G tl;la"enaoallns _ . in·. "-ttri id by tbe se.io ·pirty- or ·the ,tocond part _ a.• - et,, of· the·n·e: srnts, the reQeipt ,i,hereot s he.r '.bY .ao no eds d·; a. g1· _nntt ·. ,}, r JJ.10 atll\ oJA 11nc,. by tbt-9 preeenta doe . fl_$nt, bn·aain, ·oell a bnvey unto tho 1;1a.id pRr of tbo. socond.parli., and its iucoessora. _. _o.M a ignp1 .. Jo "Over all.tho e cert.ain-tracts.o parc s of' labd: d uo;t;a, i,_ si.te or nodda, •anrt desol'ibetl .. as tollowtt; .I¥1u,a ani\;. \l:}tt)Ln Co1:,Uo.r Coun :, ., • • • . _ • : • • • • o. wits :: . / ; o/. l , ·_nv. e a: 11st.:. _ . • To p f . ·- . . •AU .se °Qn} .. :le sit 26 .:t.l a re·s of sta.te . Rend :ri!t '\--o · .. Y- 11.nr\ ditch,. . • 6 .13, ac·r aJ · .. •• . . .. . • • \_ ·:,:·· - .•• \.. .. . . t o • • $t j rr _r.1;.:a•l9 -, .63:9,33_ •I • ·:· A:P.S !)t1on6, .. ,•19 aoreeJ- - All Sec cm U, l.e S$ 16.o acres rlght / ___:- •• • • V-.W u. s. IU.g!M9 641, . . 624.00 acresJ Section 15, 64<>.oo • . 1 a-: , All Section 17, .• 6'0.00 aere J- section J.9, 64o.oo a res; All. Se lon 21. •1 640-.(X) &ON9J All. Sect on 23, 640.CX> acret::J • ll ction 2.S, 640." 35,·· , /·,,,...." . . .. A tot;d area .ot----:-- • : ::, (. ).: \ • l'.tf Taw !\hip 53 r.outh 1 Rl.m_ge O Ea11'b i: -; . -,,,,.;/. ,., .· •. . '··. ·AJ.:L_ - furv :,,eii part of ecition·5, •• '1.tti 's/ct1.on 'I, po ti of •ction 9, .All. i.t::? e t n·11-, r • . - . - : • i\ l ecti9 -- /\ . .?. - •. . . . All unnu1 y.dc1 S · .. a_ction 21 1 • ti Alt ction 29• [}a,ys,-1; " :,e portion:,· sold ' t ,c. . S""'1llv iv : That pn\-i. or \f._: of mt¾ Rl'ld lrl'l-,t·fr!\W}\whfoh lion ia.s · or •rurnor 1:, Jllve1•·, .-9d .. \r part pt the I- of 1Mi· whiol1 l:lett 6utJr'.:Jr en11t or · 0 ·; TurMr' IU.vcr,. s&,l. ot _'.,m",o. ( NJ;')-,:: of S\J;i.-.. : .4ao OO ·ac osJ •• \.·(\···,::),, . -, E or H{· lllll\ \11·. or \rJ: _°109.c:\thnt [-tn•h or Oholq. nlct1e !P.:J,an.} 1-,. \:--·t • ·- .\···;·j._ •• •. : • • An ia/ aip : i nr ', • / .- , • he prese CJe ot: •. , • • • • •::/ , .. •'!'."ti· :,, 'I,f . -·--· • _,:;! - 'it--..·· --:-·· . ••.., ,. . J _i t;f:!::::=::=:!;::..:_.:..'.._ . -,By: ,. 1 . yr. 'l'. -n'tcE Pl'eside. _- ': <.\ • ... { ;; t) • : ••. • • .•.. ·• • ::•·;;. .. • ... . ·,··•·.... . ... ..... At st: --. ...• -,,:.;...:;;;J. Ase .et an•- :; se•GI_:, •. "" - ,. ·.• I. . .:j '• \ i • • :i •• ' .. -. Page 387 of 4116 --....,..---:----..--:------··--·····-······---··-... ••1·•· .. OR .ll'LOR A l'OlUI 60 ;acc485 ' . . I •. -:. •. .! :,, • ··• .. ' .· -_. ·'·' .. . •,'. :I •. w\ i :;_/• •• :;I - tU-· r-· Page 388 of 4116 •,1 ,: ., •• ,.••• • Ill ,• •• • • •• ::\••'; .: • :,. • •· .}(<> ' :· c '-:·; .. _.::L • , ,.. ,. : ...., ; :.. - - -.,. :.c . -::. l;..;:: "'; ;';:,..- • , .- "I . . • OR.·· . ii,IJJ•J.9 ./. :. DBED • ,i.' \.:.. (Aur1'aoe R4-6h_ts Onlf) -· . - . ;.:- ... :· ··.:•. . ·sii: n OF F.LORlDA ') ....:. r • : • COlJliTl'Y OF oOtt,.mlt ... ·INDl'Uf!'UIW, 291:,h . A.n., , : _THL«; '-tilde thitr day Qr J'e · ,.-.·-=,·•:·. . • ,: 1960, betHetin THE A'.rIAN','CIO ND AND If.!PROI/Et4ENT C().. ANY, q; corpora't1!,)il untlar \ :.· • ·the· lawti· of :thtt S•te or Virginia• party .or .hf'. f,i'rst pai-t, and ALICO L\Nr> - . :· .. DEVELO.Pt N'r.9o.,pAMI, a_coi-po:ra.tion under the l4vs· the St te t_Fl da, ;;: .. • with he quru-:tors at Jacksonville, Florida, party ·or the JJGOOnd -part, ·• .. _r ..... • • . • :, :. .• \·l Nf.. 'IH:_ :Tl, t ·.tlie. AO rt :,, : tif th:. ti; t -, i'ot and. o -- ".1• .,.A:l:«.e ti<>n. or the ·fl\1"' or 'l'(ln Dalli.r hd othel' v lU4blf1 con...,1deration .it . •• t ·jJstt,i paid _by :t e- '•tiai1 .party. of the !l'eoond ·part at or be.fore tho rfoeal1ng. -·•· aok1\Cllledged, )'>.tr:·.·.:_ - ;$W. vety of these -prceont , the .i:eoeipt whereor is hereby s(ar. ... d .. , .bargain 111.ld aold anc, b,y'··.:theti1e preaentn d ds &l:!ln ,·.btl ga. u and • oonve· . •.. o ad,l ty of the· acao part., . ts -auoae·nR r• am· astiigns, . . t-qreve.r ,•·r :t!-!!f ACE RI,9fiTP. \ ONIK_ .in· a'Jld tp those •certain traots ,o:r •,l)&i'oelat' ot - FlOl' a• • • • land ll e; •:cying and ing in Collier. OotulV • ate . • •• .• . dancribc,d ?,,- m, , to \fi't:. · • • • t;;::'.,.·. ;, ... '-:' . · _26 Ea_ t a .. .... •• I ,, 4 i ; . outh1 :Rang • . All of;)'se ;'ltion ;3, \ lesB 25 .31 nci'.er. il! rinht . .. ., . .. •. or _,,,, _,f/ Rc,ad l/.62, . • . . 6 .7l: a esJ • . / ! •. ubjeot,·- '?;, t, eaRo,,, n.t,'for acoell!I •. ro d •grn11 .; /\ . · ·: 6 .94· acJ'AsJ, .. ) '... · : . 11 o.('. Pootion 1,, .. •\'_- ' ·) ,. -64p.oo aol'esJ ; .··. .. I No- ot the tre¼0£ Pe tio/, - ) • • iI' {:/. . ..•• Al or tho nbova doooribed\.i .·f! j _ot to·tho e oertni9 ro ervnti ns o af d I •• I! .. '.- in di:,ncJ dnted nooP"'bel' 21, 95)·, - q;;i- Is ··. r _T'-dew ter Cyp?'e,,:1 Oo,.many t. Th., )tt nti' \) In ntl ll.nd ·1, p_rovn"'c-int Q0r11.1M , ·reoo\44'!,J : .i .. O. n. Rook 31, l'ae 76, Ool -tar Oaunty( ,,,..\ .. .-," . • l- r t,he t1,Ji or mtJ· o .Aoo • ·.: ..) / ?•oo ronJ • ,Subj«u t, hO'.,ev,n-, tn tho a ca :bain 1'e,ierv'a,;.., r-:- ···· ·Ueno An .rost'l·lntionn oon Bin. r1 n tho door\ . rr0ri w. w.· nl:l,,bury, Gt we,., to t.be party of tho f:\. ot·part horein,.dnt rt Hova ... ber 20,· 1?5St rocordad in o. R. Book 41+,. e 116, Coll er Co ty. A total Rrea ot In T0lm,-hip 46 south yee 29 En - All' ot Seotion l, lo s richt of way ot' • . Atl.nnt10· Coaa Li o Re.Ur.Mt\ ·oOrGpa • : . ....... .. - ":,,.,..... ......... · .. L.. ·- ,-,- ... ..........,...,, ...... , .,'. , Page 389 of 4116 All or· "cc1;1.on :a on .. t; or rillht or llny- or Att ntic Oontit L1.ne• Jtiil rol\,1 Om'f)l\tty1 . t :or tioh U·oa or i nt'or uay r At-l11nt o Coa"t Lin_ct ".l:i- ,t Co,npn , •• • .• 9 • ·QC':6P.J ·Ail ot Qcttion• l ,- "':-"'Mo oo a \ :s & A .t.oto'l aro of. 1,,4,n.9, ao e,r.. . ubj ot- t .thoen •cr,rt in" rn11o atj,01,,.. aontdn d :ln- doacl f111ted • 1'cl y 113, 1951, frorti th Atlnnt.iQ Coan . ld.l}e ilroM •C0111pa?1 . . .. • 1;o 'J.'hc- A'ftltmt:lc !Jincl. atlrl I111provoment C0111pany-, x:ap rdE>d. :f:n • C ur,tt, Fl 1:"9-nt . ·f• -I . • •. • •J.J -.t or eotion 2, • '•--...; •• ... . fa_ r Section '•• : . ·- .. A),l.·. ! Sact:l:on· 6, ... ' ,, __ r· .7 ·· -. . eoti01i 1.; l.f:n" fM} or ffllt, ··wt ··1,.. . :. . .• .• • 640 •. 00 acres;- A .1 _ar i - -J.\a, ... "' •... All or. - i-6 .)p, . _640.00 a·o . •· .. . •.. .-:(-. :i.,''?..•, _All; or oqti l \ • .. .. _. - 40. il e · :. . ·t ,,.·,: ·;- •. • • . ...,.. . . /l.J:l nl10vci deq:ori: crt q)l_nd_ 0uhjoot· o tho e • . •ce 11ln -ro"erva:t'A.01111.,;; ta necl in. -ia,,1 dood Mt,irl .,J,um.2a1-y :t, t\9,-0,'•'i"rom Collier Co-rpora- • • Mon; ·aln9 . • ..- /·:_:\ • . . . .,,,,, •• : (;, !" . . A l f'1Jat:lon :i. ·, : ubj,,ct,: hoH<> or, 9 ·<:/;>..\·. ·l;l j6 11_itl . narva•. .. • - • t.Lon,, c • t_11i1w,1 .li:, c1r.•oil • t (! i.t)ltif?1• l 1.3, 1951, tr<>"' J. J . )Unrt"Y, O'-?tx •\t 'l'he Atl.an lo !o.f1,\ 1.mrl Iwio .. ovn ... r.n ·?fio111win.r; rMor,k,] _;Jn· llool: 1 , 11n{ n 51 ►0; ...11 1'1\'.\ n1 ,., o • ruhj otj hot1 yer, 1;,, ccr ,r:d'.n ro1aa110·9 _'iJJ _nee d te rpb 1 30, ·1959, tr + ; 110111 or :Ctlu<,a.1,:1. u . -r .l:'lol' laa, rP. o ··:1;n • pook 52, 1>11r,e 3')1.1 Gollier Oo\,\nty-. •.;_:_(·>:} · .. · : ·-. \ ·i..- of W?:- 0£ ,..nr.+.'1on :n, ----7 /> -160.co aorei,.J .. ·· ·to subkcli, hownvor,. tlioro oortnin 'l' r,e'r'V -<- }) •• • t.l n-- cont,;intll1 in tlr.crl·rloh d Jant1M7 ,, . ·, ,. ,. 1- llJ!19, 1'1•9 .., Gayno1· Thorp to 'l'ho Atlnn·I. l.o ·-:/_____ • !1111,1 ,ui,1 !l'lpt• vr .. ,.r,,►• Co•"rmny, rocor,l<"-tl )l')oli j(,, l'na 221, Colli r C >Unty. A bota 1. area of Totar r. ll•--t nrca hdnr, convr: '"·_ ,1 Ul"lrlar' _th;J... rlop.3" .1 n '1,<.I -113 •'-"'"" a._c_1-en,. "'011' i- lor.,. uhjnct, t =wevnr• to 111\ cn.ro"'t'ni.:,1 ri!!bli ,i 0£ "ay o-r other i-ent1•io-•• tiol\!t llhlcl1 '12'1"1 or ('COl'rl on. bh ,1iito ·or. t,M r. <1ocd. I J 6 ... ,; .. ,.. .·· :. ·· Page 390 of 4116-·--· __ ,.;..__, ___....__ ....- ....... -...;.. - . ---.- ... _:_ - ................. _..,,,..,.:.,__ ... _..;........:...:. , . ..,..... _ ...:-...--:··.......,_., .. __ .9!,........ .....-- PLO IDA POBM OR. -- 4 Page 392 of 4116 Jfafe.,f €ount9 of • cl . . . J.'·Mertbg ·ttrtify-, Tltai-o.n # . dZ S'1"176- 87. 19"'3- - --er:-:::.--.. .. -z. ... 14 ...... "': ST202 08 - .. a::..--.--=-=.,.•--• . .... .... ---.. Figure I. Map of the Ali co Parcel area, southwest portion 0 1/8 1/4 1f2 Mile approx 0 2 4 8 Km approx 00 Page 403 of 4116 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE Kurt S. Browning Secretary of State DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES Mr. Robert Carr April 21, 2008 Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. 4800 S.W. 64th Ave., Suite 107 Davie, Florida 33314 Re: DHR Project File No.: 2008-06240-B / Received by DHR: September 25, 2008 Additional Information Received: March 23, 2009 and April 21, 2009 A Phase I Cultural Resource Survey ofthe Alico Parcel, Collier County, Florida Dear Mr. Carr: We note that in June and July 2008, the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. (AHC) conducted the above referenced survey for Alico Land Development, Inc. in anticipation of a request by the Florida Division of Historical Resources for a cultural resource assessment survey. Our office proceeded to review this report with the expectation that Alico Land Development, Inc. will be engaging in permitting processes that will require this office to comment on possible adverse impacts tot cultural resources listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), or otherwise of historical, architectural, or archaeological significance. We recommend at the time such actions are taken, a copy of this letter be forwarded to the permitting agency(ies) with the application. This may eliminate the permitting agency(ies) from having to submit an application to the Division of Historical Resources for review, or, if applications are forwarded to the Division with this letter, it would facilitate our review. AHC identified one previously unrecorded archaeological site (8CR1073) within the parcel during the investigation and determined that it did not meet minimum criteria for listing in the NRHP. Based on the information provided, our agency concurs with these determinations and finds the submitted report complete and sufficient in accordance with Chapter lA-46, Florida Administrative Code. It is the opinion of this agency that the proposed development will have no effect on cultural resources listed, or eligible for listing, in the NRHP. No further investigation is necessary. For any questions concerning our comments, please contact Rudy J. Westerman, Historic Preservationist, by electronic mail at amwestem1an(@.dos.state.fl.us, or by phone at (850) 245-6333. We appreciate your continued interest in protecting Florida's historic properties. Sincerely, • n. (;_..._.... s------ Frederick P. Gaske, Director, and State Historic Preservation Officer 500 S. Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 • http://www.flheritage.com Cl Director's Office □ Archaeological Research Iii Historic Preservation (850) 245--6300 • FAX: 245-6436 (850) 245-6444 • FAX: 245-6452 (850) 245-6333 • FAX: 245-6437 Page 405 of 4116- - - A Phase I Cultural Resource Survey - of the Alica Parcel, Collier County, - Florid.a - - By: Robert S. Carr, M.S. - Matthew .Betz, B.A. Jobn G. Beriault, B.A. - Scott F au Ikner ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL CONSERVANCY, INC. 4800 SW64thAvenue, Suite 107 - Davie, Florida 33314 (954} 792-9776 archlgd@bellsouth.net - www.flarchaeology.org ... - For: - ALICO LAND DEVELOPMENT, INC - - August 2008 - AHC Project No. 2008.49 AHC Technical Report No. 861 - ··.... . .. .. . : . .. . : . Page 406 of 4116TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ii CONSULTANT SUMMARY 1 PROJECT SETTING 3 PREVlOUS RESEARCH 13 CULTURAL SUMMARY 20 METHOD LOGY 30 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 37 REFERENCES CITED 39 APPENDIX I: ALICO PARCEL TARGET LOG 49 APPENDIX II: FIELD SPECIMEN LOG 53 APPENDIX Ill: SURVEY LOG 54 APPENDIX IV: FLORIDA SITE FORM, 8CR1073 57 Page 408 of 4116LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Map of the Alico Parcel 2 Figure 2. Portion of the 1873 Plat Map for Township 46S, Range 28E with the modern parcel boundaries superimposed 6 Figure 3. 1953 black and white aerial photograph mosaic of the Alica parcel area 7 Figure 4. 2005 color aerial orthophotograph of the Alica parcel area 8 Figure 5. Soil map showing soil types found in the Alica parcel 9 Figure 6. View east at the Intersection of Corkscrew Road with State Road 82 in the northeastern portion of the project parcel 10 Figure 7. View north at the interface in northern portion of parcel 10 Figure 8. View east at oak cluster along edge of citrus grove 11 Figure 9. View south down main access road in southeastern portion of parcel 11 Figure 10. View west at PPZ-28, a cluster of oaks 12 Figure 11. View north across interior of MPZ-27 12 Figure 12. Map of the Alico Parcel showing location of previously recorded sites 19 Figure 13. Map of the Alica Parcel area showing location of assigned probability areas and shovel tests 20 Figure 14. 2005 aerial orthophotograph of the Alico parcel area showing location of assigned probability zones and shovel tests. 33 Figure 15. Map of the Handfern Hammock, 8CR01073 area showing location of shovel tests 35 Figure 16. View west across MPZ-34 36 Figure 17. View west at positive Shovel Test 192 36 ii Page 409 of 4116CONSULTANT SUMMARY In June and July of 2008, the Archaeological & Historical Conservancy, Inc. (AHC) conducted a Phase I cultural resource survey for Alico Land Development, Inc. of the Alico parcel. The ±4800-acre parcel adjoins State Road 82 in the Corkscrew area of northern Collier County, Florida. The parcel is divided into two adjacent portions by the SR82 right of way. The parcel was surveyed to locate and assess any sites of archaeological and/or historical significance. This assessment was conducted to fulfill historic and cultural resource requirements for Florida,s Chapters 267 and 373 and cultural resource requirements of the Collier County Historic Commission. This assessment was conducted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-665), as amended in 1992, and 36 C.F.R., Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties. The work and the report conform to the specifications set forth in Chapter IA-46, Florida Administrative Code. The project parcel is located within Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, I 0, 15, and 16 in Township 46S, Range 28E (Figure I). Historically this parcel was characterized by pine and cypress flatwoods located north and west of Corkscrew Marsh. The parcel is currently active citrus groves with few undisturbed natural areas. Seven modem structures occur on the parcel; none of them older than fifty years. This Phase I cultural resource assessment included an archival review, a pedestrian survey, and subsurface testing across the parcel. A site search with the Florida Division of Historic Resources determined that six previously recorded sites occur within one mile of the parcel. Of these, three are prehistoric archaeological sites: 8CR709, 8CR838, and 8CR839. All lie south of the parcel within Corkscrew Marsh. Three other sites are a resource group including a historic road and bridge structures 8CR979, 8CR980, and 8CR981 associated with State Road 82, which passes through the northern portion of the parcel. A total of 222 shovel tests were excavated in 37 transects representing low and moderate probability zones identified during this assessment. One archaeological site, Handfern Hammock, 8CR1073, was discovered in MPZ-34. This site is a prehistoric scatter of a single freshwater snail shell and a sand-tempered plain sherd on the upland interface edge of the Corkscrew Marsh. It is the consultant's opinion that site SCRI 073, based on available data, is not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. 1 Page 410 of 4116,- .... PROJECT PARCEL - I \, Figure l Map of the Ali cu Parcel area. ,... - TOVVNSHIP 465, RANGE 28E, SECTIONS 3, 4, 5, 6 7,8,9, 10, 15, 18 0 1/2 1 2 Mies approx. USGS Maps: CORKSCREW, 18V 1973 0 8 16 3.2 Km app-ox - JU.VA SE. rev. 1973 2 - Page 411 of 4116PROJECT SETTING The subject parcel is located in parts of Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 16 in Township 46S, Range 28E adjoining County Road 82 in northwestern Collier County (Figure 1). The ±1920 hectare (±4800 acre) project area is a polygon with straight and irregular sides. The subject parcel is bordered partially to the west and east by Corkscrew Road (State Road 850), on a portion of the northern side by State Road 82, and on the other sides by cleared fields, undeveloped woodland, scattered residences, and Corkscrew Marsh and CREW Trust lands. The relevant USGS maps are Alva SE and Corkscrew, Fla. The parcel is divided into two adjacent portions by the SR82 right of way. Historically much of the area was fairly low to moderately elevated slash pine flatwoods/saw palmetto prairie which dropped to the south and east into Corkscrew Marsh, a large drainage trough which includes part of the Lake Trafford drainage to the south and east which in tum feeds sloughs such as Fort Keis and Bird Rookery Strand trending south and southwest down a physiographic region called the Southwestern Slope. Much of this region was alternating southern slash pine/saw palmetto flatwoods together with low pond cypress forests, linear cypress sloughs, and cypress dome/pond features. The subject parcel is largely improved as extensive citrus groves which cover an estimated 90-95 percent of the parcel. Wetlands also occur that are currently used as water impoundment areas for the groves. Prior land alterations include clearing, grading and ditching. Most portions of the parcel have been previously farmeq with winter vegetables. The project region is low-lying to moderately elevated (20-30 feet, NGVD) vegetated in slash pine/saw palmetto flatwoods with grassy marshes and scattered cypress heads/domes or sloughs. Throughout the immediate area are isolated rounded cypress dome/solution ponds surrounded by what were historically hydric (seasonally flooded) slash pine/saw palmetto flatwoods. The vegetation in these flatwoods has limited diversity of plant species. A variety of annual and perennial wildflowers such as marsh pinks, asters, St. John's worts, mints, Ludwegias, and composites that can be found blooming seasonally in clearings defined by concentrations of wire grass (Aristida spp.) amidst the patches of saw palmettos. The slash pines are now limited to scattered immature, emerging specimens due to extensive logging of old-growth pines in the region from the l 920s through the 1940s. Slash pine flatwoods communities are usually situated on high ground in much of northern Collier County. Historically, floral communities which contain a dense, often head-high understory of saw palmetto, were subject to and maintained by periodic forest fires. Fires either began naturally through lightning strikes or were started by prehistoric Indians or by early settlers to aid hunting or cattle grazing. Among the plants typically found in the slash pine/saw palmetto flatland/prairie environments are: slash pine, saw palmetto, gallberry, shiny lyonia, rusty lyonia, staggerbush, dahoon holly, ground oak, 3 Page 412 of 4116wire grass, broom sedges, shiny blueberry, xyris, and a variety of annual and perennial herbs and wildflowers blooming seasonally. Scattered through the pine flatwoods are large circular or irregular grass marsh ponds. Many of these are solution ponds created initially through geologic processes including ongoing peat accumulation through decay of succulent marsh plants in the deepest portions of the ponds. Many of these pond features are oval or circular and fairly symmetrical in shape. Some ponds exhibit a concentric "banding" of plant communities determined by depth and situation within the ponds. Most ponds seldom exceed two feet depth, but many have hydroperiods lasting the better part of the year and are home to alligators, wading birds, snakes, amphibians, fish, turtles, and other animals. Bordering high ground areas and running as north-south linear transverse depressions are deep sloughs and bald cypress swamp, cypress heads and marsh ponds. These areas even with present-day drainage activities contain standing water much of the year and support a rich diversity of plant and animal life. Some of the plant species present in freshwater swamp/sloughs (generally immediately north of the subject parcel) include cordgrasses (Spartina spp.) and succulent marsh plants such as pickerelweed (Pontederia lanceolata) and arrowhead (Sagittaria spp.) and fems such as swamp fem (Blechnum serrulatum), Thelypteris and Osmunda fems. At present, many of these features contain pop ash (Fraxinus caroliniana), pond apple (Annona glabra), coastal plain willow (Salix caroliniana), and buttonbush. All of these environmental zones were heavily exploited by prehistoric Indians, early white settlers, and more recent recreational hunters. At present there are approximately twenty-eight wetland features including ponds and sloughs on the project parcel. The features have been altered to serve as water impoundment areas for regulating water levels in the citrus groves. A ground-trothing of all these features indicated very little undisturbed high ground in association with the preserved wetland areas. Any discreet high ground areas adjacent to or within wetlands encountered during fieldwork were regarded as potential moderate probability zones and were systematically shovel tested. One higher ground mesic oak hammock occurs on the parcel. This hammock has live oak/laurel oaks with a very limited tropical hardwood hammock component that exists mostly as patchy understory. The feature was given the designation HPZ-1, was systematically tested with nine shovel tests, all of which were negative. The geology of the central Lee County area is characterized fine-grained wind and wave born sands overlying shelly marls. Most of the surfacial sands are characterized in the Lee County Soil Survey as "hydric, level, poorly drained" and are fine-grained wind and water-born deposits from the late Pleistocene/early Holocene. Gray and tan sands found extensively in the district usually overlie relict marine deposits of shelly marl and marly limestone caprock that are part of Pleistocene formations. Many of these formations are linked to the Caloosahatchee/F ort Thompson/Coffee Mill Hammock series. Marine marls contain lenses and deposits of clay intermixed with varying percentages of sand. These clays may have been a source for ceramic manufacture by the Formative period Native Americans. Mantling the Pleistocene sands are windblown deposits of gray sands 4 Page 413 of 4116of varying depths. The Alico Parcel contains seventeen soil types (Figure 5). Most of these are characterized as fine, poorly drained sand or sandy loams. Many of these occur in the area as formations on moderately elevated ground; others are depressional and are located in the ponds, sloughs and wetlands of the parcel. Among those noted are: Myakka fine sand (2.6%); Boca fine sand (.5%); Pineda and Riviera fine sands (4.3%); Immokalee fine sand (4.2%); Oldsmar fine sand (12.4%); Malabar fine sand (1.3%); Wabasso fine sand (18.9%); Winder, Riviera, limestone substratun, and Chobee soils, depressional (1.7%) Riviera, limestone substratum-Copeland fine sands (0.9%); Riviera fine sand, limestone substratum (1.5%); Bassinger fine sand (3.4%); Fort Drum and Malabar, high fine sands (2. 7% ); Chobee Winder and Gator soils, depressional (8.2% ); Holopaw and Okeelanta soils, depressional (0.2% ); Boca, Riviera, limestone substratum, and Copeland fine sands, depressional (0.6%); Holopaw fine sand (13.8%); and Tuscawilla fine sand (20.9%). Areas of the parcel contain tan and gray sand surfacial zones overlying a dense brown sand spodic horizon (often referred to as "hardpan"). This formation is a zone of organic leaching accumulation. Occasionally, harder "nuggets" or nodules of an iron oxide precipitate will be found in this zone, which is sometimes a basal archaeological zone. Limestone caprock can contain the index fossil bivalve, Chione cancellata, in quantity. Many higher ground formations in the area appear to be bedrock unconformities that consist of fully exposed tabular slabs of limestone caprock containing numerous rounded solution holes. There is a fine grain limestone siltstone, naturally occurring in the region of the parcel which has cleavage planes similar to chert; the chert will be cryptocrystalline and frequently translucent, the natural limestone/siltstone will not and lacks the hardness of chert. The northern Collier/south central Lee County area has been the focus of low-impact/low density ranching and farming activities for many years. "Improved" areas are interspersed with undeveloped woodlands. Recently, the area has had increased growth in the form of planned residential communities that have advanced at a steady rate along State Roads 82 and Corkscrew Road. 5 Page 414 of 4116,,. ,.. ,.. r- PROJECT • PARCEL ti• ,- ,... - Figure 2. Portion of the 1873 plat map for Township 46S, Range 28E with the modem parcel boundaries superimposed ,... 6 Page 415 of 4116,- ,- - ,- - ,- Figure 3. 1953 black and white aerial photograph of the Alico parcel area. 0 1/2 1 2 Miles approx. 0 .8 1.6 3 .2 Km. approx. 7 ,... Page 416 of 4116,,.. - - ,,.. - ,- Figure 4. 2005 color aerial orthophotograph of the Alico parcel area. N 0 1/4 1 /2 1 Mile approx. ,,,.. 0 .4 .8 1.6 Km. approx . 8 Page 417 of 4116,... - - - - ... ¥-··:: · ... J• -: .. :• ,..,; •-,: ,- .;,. .. . Figure 6 View east at the intersection of Corkscrew Road with State Road 82 in the northeastern portion of the project parcel. State Road 82 has been designated an historic - roadway in Collier County, 8CR979. - - Figure 7. View north at interface in northern portion of parcel between cultivated citrus groves and the slough/floway draining toward Corkscrew Marsh. Several concentrations of oaks in this area proved to by hydric hammocks and only marginal Moderate Probability Zones (MPZs). 10 Page 419 of 4116r - - ,... - ,... Figure 8. View west at oak cluster along edge of citrus grove dropping west to wetland - in the southern portion of parcel. These isolated clusters often indicative of higher hammocks proved to be seasonally flooded hydric formations or second-growth oaks on edges of recent ditch/berm areas. ,... - Figure 9. View south down main access road in southestem portion of parcel. Nearly all available high-ground areasof the parcel are currently highly-disturbed areas being farmed in citrus groves. - Page 420 of 4116,- ,- ,- - Figure 10. View west at MPZ-28, a cluster of laurel oaks. Shovel test 173-175 were dug - at this locale. - ,- Figure 11. View north across interior of :MPZ-27, a hydric hammock with laurel oaks ,_ situated along the south edge of the Carson Gully slough. Shovel tests 168-172 were dug across this feature. 12 Page 421 of 4116PREVIOUS RESEARCH Southwest Florida has been a focus of archaeological investigations since the 1880s, although much of the early work was directed toward the recovery of museum quality artifacts rather than understanding cultural processes. Griffin (1988:48-50) discussed some of the very early references to archaeological sites in South Florida. He noted that these early reports were mostly casual observations, and few appear to refer to southwest Florida, but rather refer to the southeast and Key West areas. Kenworthy's (1883) informal report on shell mounds and ancient canals was one of the first reports on southwest Florida archaeological sites. At about the same time as Kenworthy's investigations, Simons (1884) gave a narrative account of some of the very large coastal shell middens, and Douglass ( 1885) provided further information about prehistoric canals (although he did not accept that they were prehistoric). One account described a canal near Gordon's Pass that is probably the Naples Canal (8CR59), and another further north may be the Pineland Canal. Douglass' diaries record excavations of a post-contact era site (8CR4 l) on Horrs Island, as evidenced by the presence of European artifacts (Griffin, 1988:50-51). Douglass visited Lostman's River and other areas in the Ten Thousand Island area including Horrs Island (1890). In 1895 Durnford reported that cordage and other artifacts were recovered from a mangrove muck pond on Marco Island (8CR49). The material was shown to Cushing, who mounted a major project to recover more material from the site. Cushing (1897) reported recovering wood and other perishable artifacts from the muck pond on Marco Island, adjacent to a large shell works and midden village site. Publication of illustrations of the spectacular finds generated a great deal of subsequent interest. Wells M. Sawyer, a young artist accompanying the expedition, produced an excellent and presumably accurate contour map for the entire Key Marco Shell Midden. This map is valuable to present-day efforts in understanding many of the now obliterated features and interpreting (reconstructing) the "architecture" of the shell midden. Widmer (1983) notes that Cushing also focused attention on the nonagricultural chiefdom level of social organization supported by the rich estuary and marine resources, although his anthropological observations have remained overshadowed by the wealth of artifacts. Moore (1900, 1905, 1907) investigated a number of sites along the Collier/Lee County coast, apparently attempting to find material comparable to Cushing's finds. Although Moore provided information about site locations and general contents, most of his work was extremely crude and uncontrolled, by both contemporary archaeological standards, and by modem standards. The first attempt to systematically survey and investigate archaeological sites was initiated by Ales Hrdlicka, who visited a number of sites along the coast and tidal mangrove estuaries in 1918, focusing on the Ten Thousand Island region (Hrdlicka 1922). Hrdlicka noted that southwest Florida was a distinct region within south Florida and made an attempt to type sites by function. 13 Page 422 of 4116Matthew Stirling's (1931, 1933) excavation of a burial mound on Horrs Island represents one of the first controlled excavations in Collier/Lee Counties (although he attempted stratigraphic control, Cushing had little success in his wet site excavation). The site was named the Blue Hill Mound, but it is not recorded under that name in the FMSF (either as a primary or secondary name), so it is unclear exactly which site he excavated, although it was probably site 8CR4 l (McMichaels, 1982). These reports by Stirling are preliminary, and apparently neither a final report nor a skeletal analysis has been published. John M. Goggin was the first to define a south Florida cultural area (Glades Area), and describe south Florida ceramics (Glades ware), establishing a basis for later archaeological work. He published an analysis of the ceramic sequence in south Florida (Goggin, 1939, 1940). In later reports (Goggin, 1947, 1949a, 1949b), he formulated a basic framework of cultural areas and chronologies that is still current (although modifications with additional data have been made, see further discussion below). Goggin (1949b) summarized much of this information in an unpublished manuscript, which Griffin (1988) thoroughly described. In passing, one unfortunate aspect of Goggin' s work was a dependence on informant information for location of sites (especially interior sites) and he had a real concern that existing sites would be looted. This concern resulted in his either deliberately or incidentally reporting vague locational data for many sites. Some of these sites have never been satisfactorily relocated, although a few have undoubtedly been re-recorded by later investigators. For several decades, much of the subsequent archaeological investigations in the region took place in Lee and Charlotte Counties, especially in the Cape Haze, Charlotte Harbor and Pine Island areas. It is rumored that Goggin had a "gentleman's agreement" with many of the other leading practicing Florida archaeologists of the time that the South Florida area was his exclusive province to investigate. If this rumor is correct, it might explain the neglect shown the southwest Florida area in the archaeological arena from the end of World War II to Goggin's death in 1964. In 1956, Sears reported on a large village and mound complex at the mouth of Turner River on Chokoloskee Bay south of Marco Island, and in 1967 he reported on the results of a survey of the Cape Coral area (Sears, 1956, 1957). Laxson ( 1966) reported on excavations at Turner River Jungle Garden site, which is upriver from the Turner River site, although these have been confused in recent accounts. Van Beck and Van Beck ( 1965) excavated three small test pits on Marco Island (at the Marco midden, 8CR48) associated with the Cushing site (8CR49). The resulting publication of this work was some of the first reported scientific archaeological work to come from the southwest Florida area in nearly twenty years (Van Beck and Van Beck, 1965). 14 Page 423 of 4116 In 1967 through 1969, Marco Island was extensively surveyed and a few sites were tested through excavation by Cockrell, Morrell, and others (Morrell, 1969). No complete site report was ever published, although an unpublished and incomplete manuscript is available. Some of these sites were discussed in Cockrell's master's thesis (1970). Widmer performed a survey of Big Key, John Stevens Creek, Barfield Bay, Blue Hill Bay, and Collier Bay, which are proximal to Marco Island (Widmer, 1974). Widmer eventually utilized his southwest coast experience to write a doctoral dissertation on the Calusa that not only remains the definitive work on that group, but also explored the relationship between subsistence adaptation and cultural evolution (Widmer, 1983). In Lee County, Arlene Fradkin and other investigators from the University of Florida began an ongoing involvement with the Pine Island Sound/Sanibel Island area in the l 970s. Her first investigations were at the Wightman site on northern Sanibel Island (Fradkin, 1976). Several archaeologists excavated at Horrs Island in the l 980s. McMichaels (1982) reviewed sites on Horrs Island in a Master's thesis. In 1983, Marquardt began a series of investigations at Josslyn Key, Useppa Island, Pineland, Buck Key, Galt Island in Lee County, and at Big Mound Key in Charlotte County (Marquardt, 1984, 1987, 1988, 1992). Marquardt and Russo have investigated Horrs Island in Collier County. A number of the large shell midden village sites they excavated appear to be late Archaic, and they expect to document a more elaborate social organization at these sites and larger sedentary or semi-sedentary population sizes than previously known for that period (Russo, 1990, and pers. comm.). Most of these studies focused on the coastal sites, as have subsequent summaries and discussions. Recent work on the interior has made significant advances in documenting the extent and intensity of inland resources, especially in the Big Cypress and Everglades parks (Ehrenhard et al., 1978, 1979; Ehrenhard and Taylor 1980; Ehrenhard et al., 1980; Taylor and Komara 1983; Taylor, 1984, 1985). Griffin's (1988) synthesis of the Everglades Park data is the defining work on south Florida archaeology to date. Athens (1983) summarized some of the results of the Big Cypress survey, but more analysis of this data resource is needed. Beriault and colleagues ( 1981) reported on salvage excavations at Bay West Nursery (8CR200). Their description of the site includes a well known but rare and infrequently documented Early and Middle Archaic use of ponds for cemeteries. In 1995, Widmer and Story began an ongoing investigation at the Key Marco Midden (Widmer, 1996). In the first season they excavated with the help of graduate students and volunteers. The results of their work have appeared in the Florida Anthropologist. In the last two decades the pressure of development as well as a recognized need for preservation or mitigation of prehistoric sites has led to a number of reports by commercial cultural resource management consultants. While most of these reports are - limited in scope due to restriction to a small tract of land, many have produced useful 15 Page 424 of 4116swnmaries of regional archaeological, as well as insightful analysis of the relationship between site types and location and ecotypes (Almy and Deming 1982, 1986a, 1986b, 1986c, 1987, Austin 1987, Carr and Allerton 1988a, 1988b, Deming and Almy 1987, 1988, Fay and Carr 1990, Fuhrmeister et al. 1990, Martinez 1977, Miller and Fryman 1978, Swift and Carr 1989). Arthur W. Lee, John Beriault and others in the Southwest Florida Archaeological Society (SWF AS) have recorded and investigated a large number of archaeological sites in Collier and Lee Counties. It is an ongoing effort of the Society to publish and disseminate reports and manuscripts (Lee et al., 1993, 1997, 1998; Beriault, 1973, 1982, 1986, 1987; Beriault and Strader, 1984). Many of these reports deal with small interior seasonal sites. In addition, Beriault has provided several unpublished manuscripts as to site types and areas (Beriault 1982, 1987). The Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. (AHC) has investigated several large parcels in the Corkscrew Road area. In 1998, AHC personnel assessed the Standerfer Parcel which is located five miles west of the present subject parcel. In 1999, ABC personnel conducted a Phase I assessment of the ±300-acre Brown's Citrus Parcel located six miles west of the subject parcel and the 1000-acre Habitat Parcel five miles west of the subject parcel locating one archaeological site. In 2003 AHC personnel conducted a phase one archaeological survey one mile west of the subject parcel at the 300+-acre Corkscrew Links Parcel. The present investigator (Beriault) has also produced an historic study of the Caloosahatchee River east of Ft. Myers (Beriault 2001). In July through November 2007, the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. (AHC) conducted a Phase I cultural resource assessment of the ±6600-acre Old Corkscrew DRI Parcel located in southeastern Lee County immediately west of the present project parcel. This assessment resulted in the discovery of one prehistoric site, 8LL24 73, and one historic site, 8LL2474, believed to be associated with a sawmill (McIntosh et al. 2007). LITERATURE REVIEW A site search was requested on 6-20-08 with the Florida Division of Historic Resources for relevant archives and literature produced for the project area. This included, but was not limited to, site forms from the Master Site File in Tallahassee concerning previously recorded sites within a 1.6 kilometer ( 1.0 mile) radius of the Alico Parcel and reports for cultural resource investigations previously conducted within a 1.6 kilometer (1.0 mile) radius of the Alico Parcel (Table 1). Table 1. Literature Review Summary Previously Recorded Sites: Abutting Survey Parcel 3 (8CR00979, 8CR00980, 8CR00981) Within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of Parcel 3 (8CR00709,. 8cr00838, 8CR00839) Previous Investigations: In Survey Parcel 0 16 Page 425 of 4116 Within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of Parcel 3 A review of state site files conduced on 20 June 2008 resulted in the identification of three previously recorded sites, 8CR00979, 8CR00980, and 8CR00981, adjacent to the survey parcel (Table 2). These three sites are historic State Road 82 and two l 950s FOOT bridge structures associated with that state road. They are part of a Resource Group including portions of the road and other roadway structures in Collier, Lee and Hendry Counties. No standing historic structures within the parcel are indicated. Table 2. Previously Recorded Sites Summary1 In Survey Outside of Site No. Site Chronology Site Type References Parcel Parcel Prehistoric, Glades Dickel, et al, Collier 8CR00709 Midden County Survey, unspec., 1991 Halperin et al, Cultural Resources Survey of the Corkscrew Marsh Tract of the 8CR00838 Prehistoric Mound Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed, Collier County, Florida Halperin et al, Cultural Resources Survey of the Corlunty.,. ..... Ltw COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION 239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net This SRA Balance of SSA Credits Remaining 0 796.10 Page 475 of 4116CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA (PL-20240010212) DEVIATIONS & JUSTIFICATIONS Page 476 of 4116 Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA Deviations and Justifications 8.1. Neighborhood General Standards: Note: LDC Section 4.08.07.J.3.d.iii requires that Neighborhood General design standards in a Village be the same as those required in a Town for a Neighborhood General Context Zone. Therefore, the following deviations are requested from Section 4.08.07 .J.2.d.iii. a) through i) on the basis of how such standards apply to Neighborhood Center in a Village. 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.J.2.d.iii.f)iv), "Non-residential uses," which states "the maximum square footage per [non-residential] use shall be 3,000 square feet and per location shall be 15,000 square feet," to instead allow [non-residential uses] the Amenity Center sites to be a maximum of 30,000 square feet each per location. Justification: Community Centers, will provide multiple amemtles and uses for Village residents (and guests). This effectively reduces external trips. This also requires flexibility in size, in order to be sufficient to meet market demands. Note: This LDC Provision (and thus this deviation request) is unique to the RLSA Overlay. 2) A Deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.J.d.iii.e)ii), which states that in the case of "Multi-Family residential," "side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet and rear yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 20 feet for the primary structure ... " to instead allow for a side yard setback of 0 or 5 feet and a rear yard setback of 10 feet for zero lot line and townhome development, as set forth in Table 1: Neighborhood General - Required Minimum Yards and Maximum Building Height and Table 3: Affordable Housing - Required Minimum Yards and Maximum Building Height. Justification: The RLSA encourages a diversity of housing types. Allowing for Townhome and Villa type development in the Neighborhood General Context Zone promotes such diversity. To build such units effectively and efficiently they must be consistent with design used in other similar developments where the market has responded favorably. There are many approved projects that allow for such setbacks for villas and townhomes. We have maintained the required minimum 10-foot side and 20-foot rear yard setbacks for traditional multi-family product and this deviation is limited to the Villa Townhome product. Note: This is a deviation that has routinely been granted for pro_jects in the Urban area and in other approved RLSA Villages, when requested. 3) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.J.2.d.iii.e)i), which establishes multi-family residential lots to be a maximum of 4 acres, to instead allow multi-family lots to be a maximum of 25-acres. Page 1 of6 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDAT A-NP2\2023\2023 I 20\WP\Initial Submittal\Deviations and Justifications (3-10-2025).docx Page 477 of 4116 Justification: This deviation will allow for additional flexibility in the design of the different multi-family housing options proposed within this village. 4) A deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02 C., which limits fences or walls to a maximum height of six (6) feet in residential districts to instead allow a twelve (12) foot wall/berm combination. The maximum height of the wall will be eight (8) feet. Justification: The deviation will allow for additional visual screening and noise attenuation from adjacent properties and roadways. Approval of the deviation will promote the public health, safety and welfare and enhance the visual appeal of the proposed development and community park internally and to existing external uses. 8.2 Village Center Standards 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.J.3.d.ii.p)ii) "General Parking Criteria," which states "The majority of parking spaces shall be provided off-street in the rear of buildings or along the side secondary streets. Parking is prohibited in front of buildings ... " to instead allow parking in front of buildings in the Village Center, when such parking is in support of a shopping center, or when located on a lot with two or more street frontages, or when located on a lot fronting on Corkscrew Road or State Road 82. A Type 'D' buffer per LDC at time of permitting will be required when parking is adjacent to or abutting a road. Justification: The Village Center fronts on Corkscrew Road and State Road 82 and is separated by a 25-foot-wide Type D Buffer. To remain viable in the marketplace, the Village Center commercial uses need to be accessible to and convenient to motorists from Corkscrew Road or State Road 82. This may warrant parking in the front yard. However, with a 25-foot-wide Type D Buffer along Corkscrew Road and State Road 82, such parking will be adequately screened from view. Without direct access and exposure to and from these roadways, the commercial enterprises will not be viable in the marketplace. The request is to eliminate the restriction on the amount of parking that may be located within any yard. Notes: This LDC provision (and thus this deviation request) is unique to the RLSA Overlay. 2) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.J.3.d.ii.q), which requires that the majority of parking be located in the rear of buildings and prohibits parking in the front of building except on-street parking within the right-of-way to instead allow parking in the front, side, and rear yards, when such parking is in support of a shopping center, or when located on a lot with two or more street frontages, or when located on a lot fronting on Corkscrew Road or State Road 82. A Type 'D' buffer per LDC at time of permitting will be required when parking is adjacent to or abutting a road. Justification: This deviation is requested to allow parking in front, side, or rear yards in the Village Center to provide for maximum design flexibility for what will be a relatively small number of commercial uses providing neighborhood goods and services. Also see Justification for Village Center Standards# 1, above. Convenience 2 of6 Page Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDAT A-NP2\2023\2023 I 20\WP\lnitial Submittal\Deviations and Justifications (3-10-2025).docx Page 478 of 4116 and easy access are critical for achieving market viability for the nonresidential uses in the Village Center, particularly for the pass by traffic which is necessary for the viability of the commercial elements. Design flexibility is also necessary. Note: This LDC Provision (and thus this deviation request) is unique to the RLSA Overlay. 3) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.J.3.d.ii.q), which requires that the amount of required parking in the Village Center "be demonstrated through a shared parking analysis submitted with an SRA designation application ... " and be "determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies ... " to instead allow the parking demand analysis to be submitted at the time of initial Site Development Plan (SDP) or, at the discretion of the County Manager or designee, at the time of a subsequent SDP or SDP Amendment, in order to allow for a more comprehensive parking demand analysis based upon the mix of uses at the time of the initial SDP or subsequent SDP or SDP Amendment. Justification: Requiring this parking demand analysis at the time of SRA application makes no sense as the type and mix of uses in the Village Center is undetermined at the time of SRA application. This analysis should be conducted at the time of initial (or possibly subsequent) SDP for non-residential uses in the Village Center. 4) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.J.3.d.ii.g), which establishes a maximum block perimeter of 2,500 feet in the Village Center to instead allow for the Neighborhood General block perimeter prov1s10ns per LDC Section 4.08.07.J.2.d.iii.c): the maximum block perimeter shall be 3,500 feet, except that a larger block perimeter shall be allowed where an alley or pathway provides through access, or the block includes water bodies or public facilities. Justification: The road network within the Village Center has been designed to accommodate the required separation of the limited access points to Corkscrew Road and State Road 82. The Village Center development tracts will contain connecting and entry driveways, sidewalks, and lakes, to effectively break up the block length and provide through access. This design effectively meets the LDC intent to have smaller blocks. It recognizes that there are limited opportunities to accomplish this through additional roadways connections to these roadways and allows for alternatives that accomplish the LDC intent. 5) A deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02 H. l .b. and c., which requires non-residential development to provide a wall within the right-of-way landscape buffer when located on property opposite a residentially zoned district but fronting on a local street or roadway to instead not require a wall. This deviation shall not apply to the rear of shopping centers and building areas where overhead doors are located and facing towards a residential district. Justification: The Village SRA is required to include a mixed-use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. The Village Center will include most of the non-residential development and to require a Page 3 of6 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023 I 20\WP\Initial Submittal\Deviations and Justifications (3-10-2025).docx Page 479 of 4116 wall between this area the adjoining residential tracts will create a physical barrier where there should be a seamless connectivity between the uses. 8.3 Transportation Standards 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.08.07.J.1.b, "Figures 5, 6, and 7, Local Street Neighborhood General" which requires a 6-foot-wide planting area between the travel lane and the sidewalk, to instead allow for a 4-foot-wide planting area in the same location for local roads within the project in Neighborhood General. In such cases, either a root barrier or structural soil shall be utilized. If the option of structural soil is utilized, a minimum of 2 cubic feet of structural soil per square feet of mature tree crown projection shall be provided. Justification: This is a minimal reduction and is required to ensure the necessary (LDC required) 23 feet, measured from the back of the sidewalk to the garage, to allow room to park a vehicle on the driveway without parking over the sidewalk. Please see the Local Street Sections in the Master Concept Plan for additional details. The substantive deviations from the LDC cross-section for a local road in a village are the planting area between the sidewalk and travel lane is 4 feet verses 6 feet. Note: This local street cross section is unique to the RLSA - SRA Village. 8.4 Sign Standards 1) A deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a, "On-premises directional signs within residential districts," which requires on-premise directional signs to be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of the roadway, paved surface or back of the curb, to instead allow a minimum setback of 5 feet from the edge of the roadway, paved surface or back of the curb, limited to signs internal to the SRA only. This excludes signage along County owned roadways. Justification: This deviation will allow more flexibility for directional signage internal to the project. A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the community. All roads and drives will be privately owned and maintained. This deviation is typical of master-planned residential developments in Collier County Note: This deviation is from a requirement that applies throughout the County (per the Section 5.06 .00 (Signs Regulations). Note that the deviation does not apply to such signs located along County Roads. 8.5 Landscape Standards 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02.C., Buffer Requirements, "Types of buffers," Table 2.4 Information, Footnote (3) which requires "Buffer areas between commercial outparcels located within a shopping center, Business Park, or similar commercial development may have a shared buffer 15 feet wide with each abutting property contributing 7 .5 feet", to instead allow a shared buffer 10 feet wide with each abutting property contributing 5 feet. Page 4 of6 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDA TA-NP2\2023\2023 I 20\ WP\Initial Submittal\Deviations and Justifications (3-10-2025 ).docx Page 480 of 4116 Justification: The combined I 0-foot shared buffer will provide for sufficient separation and "breaking up" of parking areas within the Village Center. Note: This deviation is from a requirement that applies throughout the County and similar deviations have been granted. 2) A deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02 A., which requires landscape buffer strips to be shown and designated on the final plat within an easement, to instead allow the same required landscaping materials to be demonstrated on a planting plan, for staff review as part of the respective plans and plat application (PPL), with no requirement to provide a landscape buffer for any residential development adjacent to a lake regardless of location within the Village. Justification: This deviation is intended to remove the required buffer easement for single-family residential development when adjacent to other single-family and multi- family subdivisions located within the same neighborhood context zone and when they are separated by a lake. The LDC already allows for clustering of the buffer requirements in this circumstance. In addition, sufficient transition and buffering between single-family and multi-family uses will be maintained as the multi-family residential developments will still be required to provide a 15' Type B buffer to adjacent single-family uses. The deviation is only to eliminate the requirement to establish a buffer easement in this limited circumstance. All required planting will be provided and depicted on a planting plan for staff review as part of the subdivision plats and plans application, and again, only in limited circumstance where single-family uses are adjacent to other single-family or multi-family residential subdivisions or developments within the Neighborhood General Context Zone and when separated by a lake. Since the landscape plan will be part of the approved PPL, it will have an enforcement mechanism. 8.6 Other Deviations 1) A deviation from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, "Parking Space Requirements," which requires 1 parking space per 100 square feet for recreation facilities (indoor) sports, exercise, fitness, aerobics, or health clubs to instead allow for parking for the Amenity Center sites to be calculated at I space per 200 square feet of indoor square footage, excluding kitchen or storage space. Justification: The project will have a complete system of interconnected sidewalks and multi-use pathways that can accommodate golf carts and bicycles, allowing residents to travel to the amenity center without using a car. Additionally, the Amenity Center is restricted for use by only Village residents and guests and are not open to the general public. The 1 space per 100 square feet for these "community" amenity centers is excessive. Note: This deviation is from a requirement that applies throughout the County and similar deviations have been granted. 2) A deviation from LDC Section 3.05.1 0.A.2. - "Location Criteria," which requires that "LSPA [littoral shelf planting areas] shall be concentrated in one location of the lake(s), preferably adjacent to a preserve area," to instead allow for required littoral shelf Page 5 of6 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2023\2023 I 20\WP\lnitial Submittal\Dcviations and Justifications (3-10-2025).docx Page 481 of 4116 planting areas to be aggregated in certain specific development lakes, including the development lake that runs along the western and northern perimeter of the SRA. It shall also be permitted to utilize Gator Slough and Cabbage Slough as part of all of the required LSPA. Justification: These areas will be designed to create, enhance or restore wading bird/waterfowl habitat and foraging areas. They will be designed to recreate wetland function, maximize its habitat value and minimize maintenance efforts. They will enhance survivability of the littoral area plant species, as there is a lower survivability rate in littoral planting areas along larger lakes subject to more variable water levels and wind and wave action, which negatively affects these littoral planting areas. Note: This deviation is from a requirement that applies throughout the County. 3) A deviation from LDC section 5.04.04.B.5. - "Model Homes and Model Sales Centers", which permits a maximum of five (5) model homes, or a number corresponding to ten ( I 0) percent of the total number of platted lots, whichever is less, per platted approved development prior to final plat approval. The requested deviation is to allow for a maximum of 30 model homes at any one time within the overall Village irrespective to the number of platted lots. With each building permit for a model home, the applicant shall provide documentation as to the current number of model homes in existence. Justification: The Village allows for a maximum of 4,502 residential dwelling units, which will take a significant amount of time to get to completion and include multiple developers. The allowance of the maximum of 30 model homes will allow for the different styles associated with different developers and current trends or architectural styles that may change throughout this build out stage. A similar deviation was approved in the Town of Big Cypress SRA, Willow Run RPUD and the San Marino RPUD. Page 6 of6 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDA T A-NP2\2023\2023 l 20\ WP\Initial Submittal\Dcviations and Justifications (3-10-2025).docx Page 482 of 4116 CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE SRA (PL-20240010212) TRAFFIC IMPACTMENT STATEMENT - SECTION 1 Page 483 of 4116 Traffic Impact Statement Corkscrew Groves East Village Stewardship Receiving Area Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis Collier County, Florida 12/23/2025 Prepared for: Prepared by: Alico, Inc. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 10070 Daniels Interstate Court, Suite 200 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Ft Myers, FL 33913 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-226-2000 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee* - $500.00 Fee Collier County Transportation Review Fee* - Major Study - $1.500.00 Fee Note - *to be collected at time of first submittal Page 484 of 4116 Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Digitally signed Norman by Norman Trebilcock Trebilco Date: 2025.12.23 ck 08:16:00 -05'00' This item has been electronically signed and sealed Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, P.E. by Norman J. Trebilcock, P.E., State of Florida license 47116, using a SHA-1 authentication code. FL Registration No. 47116 Printed copies of this document are not considered Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA signed and sealed, and the SHA-1 authentication code must be verified on any electronic copies. 2800 Davis Blvd., Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 12 Page 485 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Table of Contents Project Description ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Model Adjustments ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Trip Distribution and Assignment ............................................................................................................... 15 Future Background Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................... 19 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Without Project ......................................................................... 22 FY25 - FY29 Five-Year Work Program/CIE/TIP ........................................................................................... 22 Collier 2045 LRTP - Highway Cost Feasible Plan ......................................................................................... 22 Future Conditions with Project ................................................................................................................... 25 Project Traffic Impacts ................................................................................................................................ 25 Impacts to Agricultural Products Transport ................................................................................................ 27 Improvement Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 27 Mitigation of Impact ................................................................................................................................... 28 East Village without West Village ............................................................................................................... 29 Appendices Appendix A: Project Conceptual Site Plan ................................................................................................. 30 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) ................................................................. 32 Appendix C: Project Trip Generation Calculations ..................................................................................... 45 Appendix D: FSUTMS Inputs and Outputs ................................................................................................. 73 Appendix E: Collier County 2024 AUIR Attachment F- Significantly Impacted Roadway Segments ........ 99 Appendix F: Collier County FY25 - FY29 Five Year Work Program/CIE .................................................... 101 Appendix G: Collier 2045 LRTP Tables 6-2 and 6-3 .................................................................................. 103 Appendix H: Collier County 2024 AUIR Attachments H-1 and H-2 .......................................................... 107 Appendix I: FOOT Sources ........................................................................................................................ 110 Appendix J: Collier County Transportation Element Map TR-7 ............................................................... 119 Appendix K: 2045 - All Road Segments .................................................................................................... 121 Appendix L: Concurrency Proportionate Share ....................................................................................... 123 Appendix M: East Village Alone ............................................................................................................... 129 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 13 Page 486 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Project Description The proposed Corkscrew Groves East Village Stewardship Receiving Area project is in north-eastern Collier County roughly centered on Section 5, Township 46S, Range 28E. The project is predominantly south of SR 82 and west of Corkscrew Rd, with small portions north of SR 82 and east of Corkscrew Rd (see Figure 1). Corkscrew Groves (East and West Villages) will be developed as a pair of Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) Villages (West Village application to follow). This report examines the effect when both are built out. Figure 1 - Project Location • Fe da • • ,.. N • , . \ l ,, .. Project Location O'I • N CRE '/ Wildlife and Enwonmen1al Area caracara Prairie Preserve • For traffic analysis purposes, the two villages will add the following land uses: 9,003 residential dwelling units (including affordable housing); 567,000 commercial square feet (SF), and 140,000 SF of civic/institutional uses. The traffic analysis excludes 750 Affordable Housing units. The purpose of this Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) is to document the transportation impacts associated with the proposed request at its buildout in 2048. This analysis consists of two reports: Section 1, Road Segment Analysis; and - Section 2, Intersection Analysis. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 14 Page 487 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 This traffic report agrees with the latest adopted Collier County Traffic Impact Study Guidelines and Procedures per the submitted Methodology (Appendix B). Consistent with the adopted Collier County Traffic Impact Study Guidelines and Procedures, traffic generated by a site is estimated using the latest Institute ofTransportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation publication (12 th edition) or other rates as requested and/or approved by the County. The project buildout and future planning horizon year for this analysis is 2048. An initial methodology meeting was held with Collier County Transportation Planning staff on November 26, 2024 (Appendix B). Preliminary estimates of Project access connections to the surrounding roadway network are illustrated in the proposed Conceptual Site Plan (Appendix A). A detailed evaluation of applicable access points will be performed at the time of site development permitting. Trip Generation Gross trip generation was estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual 12 th ed. equations. Table 1 contains the intensities at buildout in 2048, and land use codes chosen to represent the uses. ITE Land Use Code (LUC) represents retail plazas from 40,000 SF to 150,000 SF each. This development was assumed to contain a grocery store. Civic uses are analyzed as Office Park. A summary of the 12 th edition formula types and coefficients, along with excerpts from the 12th edition Trip Generation Manual are in Appendix C. LUC 750 has no data page for daily traffic in the 12th edition; 11 th ed. information is used here. Analyzed intensities may not agree with other parts of the SRA application but yield a conservative estimate of project traffic when they don't. The ITE PM peak internal capture method (which is based on capture rates recommended in NCHRP 684) result with the proposed collection of uses is 18.6 percent (see Appendix C). This method is insensitive to the location of the project and ignores the number, nature and proximity of complementary land uses outside the project and hence their effect on traffic internalization. For this reason, the internal capture rate proposed here is the trip internalization produced using the adopted 2045 travel demand model when the project uses are placed at the project location. The model estimate is 30.3 percent (see Appendix D Intra-zonal and Inter-zonal captured trips tables). Appendix C contains a trip generation summary and internal capture development tables (AM and PM) based on the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd ed. method of estimating internal capture. The upper two tables contain the directional percentage limits on internal trip ends from the Handbook Tables 6.1 and 6.2. The middle two tables apply those percentages to the total entering and exiting trips for each use. The result at that point is unconstrained by comparison with the alternate estimate at the other end of the trip interaction, which is limited using a different percentage. The lower left table contains the lesser of the two possibilities. The lower right table contains the summary of all trips. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page IS Page 488 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 applied to the AM ITE internal capture estimate. The internal capture development tables consistent with Table 1 are also in Appendix C. Pass-by capture for LUC 821 is limited by Collier County to 25 percent and is applied to the commercial external traffic following the deduction of internally captured trips. That volume result (25% of 3615 = 904) is compared with ten percent of the projected future adjacent PM peak background traffic volumes on the segments of Corkscrew Rd and SR 82 that border the project. To estimate the total two-way peak hour volume required, the future directional background traffic volumes on the two roads were divided by a D factor of 0.55 consistent with the Methodology Memo as follows: Corkscrew Rd. peak hour directional volume =480 (Table 5). SR 82 peak hour directional volume = 1596 (see Table 5). Total adjacent peak hour 2-way = (480 + 1596)/0.55 = 3775. Total Captured Pass-by Two-Way Volume limit= 3775 x 10% = 377. Because it is less than 904 it replaces the project traffic-based pass-by volume estimate in Table 1. Collier County allows the use of a maximum AM peak hour pass by capture rate comparable to the PM rate. Because in this instance the pass-by capture is limited by the adjacent street volume, but the AM peak hour background traffic is unknown, the AM pass-by capture rate proposed here is the same as the PM rate. In agreement with the Collier County TIS guidelines, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project's highest peak hour trip generation (net external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in the Collier County Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for the adjacent roadway network is PM peak hour. The daily traffic internal capture rate is the average of the AM and PM rates. The daily traffic pass-by rate can normally be 10% less than the peak hour rate. Because that peak hour rate is 10.4%, the daily pass-by volume estimate is the sum of the AM and PM pass-by volumes. The estimated net new increase in external trips at project buildout condition of both the East and West Villages is 7,108 PM peak hour two-way trips (adjusted). The final report section summarizes the impact of the East Village alone in its projected buildout year of 2038 without interaction with the West Village. The estimated net new increase in external trips at project buildout condition of the East Village is 4,092 PM peak hour two-way trips (adjusted). This is greater than half the cumulative impact of both villages because one village alone will have a smaller internal capture rate than two villages interacting together. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 17 Page 490 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Model Adjustments The project traffic distribution pattern, project internal capture, and background traffic volumes were estimated using FSUTMS. The model used currently in Collier County was developed by the Florida Department ofTransportation (FOOT), encompasses the entirety of FOOT District One, is called the District One Regional Planning Model (01RPM) and is the basis for Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) Updates adopted by all MPOs in District One. The model reflecting the adopted LRTP updates throughout District One is maintained by FOOT and downloaded with approval from the District One Model Coordinator. The 2048 buildout analysis involves two model runs both based on the county's adopted 2045 Cost Feasible model (Figure 2). Discussed in more detail below, one contains the buildout project contents in the project traffic analysis zones (TAZs) and one without project zones is used to estimate future background traffic volumes. All adjustments to the adopted 2045 Cost Feasible model described below were made for both model runs. One involved the representation of developments that were approved after the model was adopted. Centroid contents and connections in the adopted model (Figure 2) were adjusted to reflect the approved projects those TAZs contain. Appendix D contains the development of all the zonal contents, including tables converting areas of non-residential use to employees by type, and development of full socio- economic data contents based on averages in nearby zones. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 18 Page 491 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Figure 2 - 2045 LRTP Cost Feasible Network as downloaded Corkscrew Rd .....__ Number of Lanes 2 -4 4230 -6 -8 _,o Fac1hty Type - Toll Facilities - Freeways & Ramps - Minor & Ma1or Arterials - Collectors Centroid Connectors Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 19 Page 492 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Zonal Changes to the With Project and Without Project Model Runs Kingston Kingston is a large (10,000 homes, 1850 employees) mixed-use community in Lee County, with a spine road that extends from Corkscrew Rd. to SR 82. At the request of Collier County, both model runs contain a representation of it consistent with work done for the Lee MPO. It involves adjustments to the location and centroid connections of TAZ#s 4230 and 4433 (no changes to zonal contents), and the addition of TAZ#s 4492 through 4496 (see Figure 3). The model files provided to the applicant for guidance in this are included with this application. Julian Grove Julian Grove is a mixed-use development (1800 homes, 2700 employees) in Hendry County on the north side of SR 82 between Calumet Rd on the west and Church Rd. on the east. As depicted in Figure 3, it is represented here by two zones, one containing all residential uses (1582) and one containing all commercial uses (1583). A short length of entrance road was added to simplify notation of trip interactions with the project as a whole. TAZ development tables are in Appendix D. Table 2 summarizes the zonal contents described above. Table 2- Nearby Project Zonal Adjustments DUs EMP Model Adjusted Model Adjusted TAZ Name (1) (2) Change (1) (2) Change Julian Grove 1582 0 1800 1800 0 0 0 Residential Julian Grove 1583 0 0 0 0 2700 2700 Commercial 4230 668 668 0 16 16 0 4433 389 389 0 46 46 0 4492 Kingston 0 3000 3000 0 400 400 4493 Kingston 0 1400 1400 0 0 0 4494 Kingston 0 4300 4300 0 125 125 4495 Kingston 0 1100 1100 0 0 0 4496 Kingston 0 200 200 0 1325 1325 Notes: 1) Adopted 2045 DlRPM 2) Kingston as modeled for Lee MPO. Julian Grove consistent with Rezone TIS. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 110 Page 493 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Figure 3 - 2045 Without Project Network and Zones 1512 ii L:. :::, L:.u 2202 2639 4434 Kingston Number of ---lanes 2 -4 4230 -6 -8 -10 Facility Type - Toll Facilities Freeways & Ramps - Minor & Major Artenals - Collectors Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 111 Page 494 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Network Changes in the With Project and Without Project Model Runs Two lanes on SR 29 were removed between Oil Well Rd. and Agriculture Way near lmmokalee to be consistent with the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization's (MPO) list of Financially Feasible Plan improvement projects in the currently adopted Collier MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The facility type is consistent with those in the 2015 validation model. Figure 3 shows the Without Project Model set up used to forecast future background traffic volumes. With Project Model Set Up The increase in uses analyzed in this application spans two villages. TAZ#s 3001 to 3004 compose the East Village. TAZ#s 3005 and 3006 compose the West Village. Also represented separately as their traffic is not included are Affordable Housing units in TAZ#s 3009 to 3011, which are physically near TAZ#s 3001, 3003 and 3005 respectively. The zonal contents used presumed 375 affordable housing units in each village. The current estimate is that 362 will be in the East Village, the remainder in the West Village. Table 3 summarizes the uses in each of the TAZs. Figure 4 depicts the new TAZs. The commercial land use types were converted into employees by type (Industrial, Commercial and Service) used in the model using conversion rates recommended by FOOT in their Multimodal Transportation Site Impact Handbook (2024) Table 9 (see Appendix D). The household attributes (household size, vacancy percentages, auto ownership levels, average income) used are the averages of those attributes found in the 2045 adopted model in TAZ#s 4221, 4230, 4433, 4434 (see Figure 4). Figure 4 shows the With Project zones and their connection to the network consistent with the site plan in Appendix A. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 12 Page 495 of 4116 ., AH in AH in AH in lb EV-1 EV-2 EV-3 EV-4 WV-5 WV-6 EV-1 EV-3 WV-5 :E TAZ# TAZ# TAZ# TAZ# TAZ# TAZ# TAZ# TAZ# TAZ# Land Use 3001 3002 3003 3004 3005 3006 3009 3010 3011 Total Size Units Single Family 325 823 733 966 485 2,363 - - - 5,695 DUs Detached (DUs) IQ Single Family 100 206 240 238 215 569 - - - 1,568 DUs Attached (DUs) ., :::,- Multi-Family "ti" 150 60 150 135 345 150 - - - 990 DUs :ti (DUs) lb -f -=:· G) 5· ffordable - - er IQ - - - - 200 175 375 750 DUs ;;- }:,. Housing {DUs) w "1 Cl I I "' :::! ::a V'I - - - )> V'I Civic (SF) 20,000 5,000 40,000 5,000 60,000 10,000 140,000 SF lb N r, 0 g. 00 :::3 C .... - - - - II) I Retail (SF) 5,000 273,500 5,000 273,500 10,000 567,000 SF n> :ti II) C Cl Cl.. Guidance on ratios and employee type: FDOT 2024 Multimodal Transportation Site Impact Handbook Table 9 IQ 3 lb Single Family Detached (DUs) 5,695 }:,. :::3 Single Family Attached (DUs) 1,568 Cl c:;·"' Multi-Family (DUs) 990 b Total Residential not Affordable Housing (DUs) 8,253 3 0- Affordable Housing (DUs) 750 lb., I\J 1:3 --0 Total Dwelling Units 9,003 V, OJ O'ti ro Civic (SF) 140,000 Retail (SF) 567,000 w.... Page 496 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Figure 4 -With Project Network and Zones Jll Page 497 of 4116 en f!? a.., 0 E t: tl .. <: ., w a:: 0 2 .4! .4! CO iij" 0 u,O -0 .... ,0 .. IL 3 f--o IL ::;, i(.) iliiiiillll .. i 8 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 14 Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Trip Distribution and Assignment Figure 4 shows the location of villages' centroid locations and adds a representation of connections to the surrounding road network consistent with the site plan depicted in Appendix A. The connections of the affordable housing zones are intended to ensure their trip interactions with the project zones. Their trips are not part of the project traffic distribution pattern, consistent with the prior analyses. For the collection of uses proposed for Corkscrew Groves, in the location involved, the model projects an internal capture rate of 30.3 percent. The Intra-zonal and Inter-zonal trip tables in Appendix D show the daily volumes involved. The model output file INTRA_DAY.dbf contains the total trip generation for each project zone along with the trips captured within the zone. The companion table in Appendix D reports the trips that exit each project zone but travel no further than other project zones. Summing both the intra-zonal and inter-zonal totals is an estimate of the portion of total trips that stay within the project daily and thus likely underestimates the internal capture rate in the PM peak period for which it is used in this analysis. Mathematically, a daily internal capture rate is a volume weighted average of the capture rates in all the periods in the day. Thus, it could exceed the PM rate only if a combination of volumes and higher capture rates in enough of the remaining periods in the day moved the average for the day higher than the PM period. For this collection of uses, the ITE estimate for internal capture is 16.7% PM and 2.5% AM (Appendix C), so the PM rate is higher than the average capture rate for just the two peak periods alone. In the model loaded network file, the total daily project trips on each road segment are expressed as percentages of the town's total external traffic and populate the loaded highway network link attribute PCT _CG_EXT. On each road segment, the percentage used in the analysis is the average of the percentages at the segment end points consistent with the Methodology Memo (Appendix B). Figure 5 illustrates the resulting percentages in the vicinity of the project. The highlighted percentages sum to 99.98. Exhibit A, Appendix K and all calculations that follow display and use the percentages to one decimal place only. Appendix K displays information for all road segments that are either significantly impacted or tested for significance to ensure the limit of significance has been identified. Tables 4-7 contain subsets of information in Appendix K. In Appendix K, the significantly impacted segments are listed with existing traffic volumes from the 2024 AUIR. On a separate page are the insignificantly impacted segments listed with enough information to verify that. The service volumes in all tables reflect the 2024 AUIR and all cost feasible improvements through the end of the planning period in which the analysis year falls consistent with the Methodology Memo (Appendix B). In a study area this size, many FSUTMS plot elements are needed to populate the tables in this report. The sheer number of model output plot elements and the tendency for overlap to conceal needed values if zoomed out too far result in a cumbersome number of plots of project traffic distribution percentages (and 2015 and 2045 background traffic AADTs) to display all needed values without overlap. To verify all the entries in Appendix K requires either the travel demand model files that accompany this report, viewed in the model software, or a 3-page companion PDF file (Exhibit A) that provides all the needed plot elements if zoomed in sufficiently in a PDF viewer, but is not legible if printed on any normal printer (PDF page size is 92" x 92"). Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 15 Page 498 of 4116Corkscrew Groves Eost Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Figure 5 - Percentage Distribution of Corkscrew Groves Trips ll"O _, C: Q) 0.. u t=(II 0 Q) 0..e Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 16 Page 499 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 In Table 4, the distribution percentages are the averages of those at the segment endpoints, as depicted in Exhibit A, listed in Appendix K, and consistent with the Methodology Memo (Appendix B). Their product with the net new external PM peak hour trip generation from Table 1 becomes the estimated project traffic on each segment, shown in each direction. The maximum directional project volume (regardless of background traffic peak direction) is expressed as a percentage of the road's adopted minimum standard service volume. That percentage is compared with the significance threshold for the road segment, which varies with distance from the project entrance in accordance with the Collier County Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. Table 4 contains all the Collier County road segments on which the project has a significant impact and those tested to verify the extent of significantly impacted segments. Roadway configuration and service volumes for most segments are from the 2024 AUIR (Appendix E) or the LRTP. The Corkscrew Rd. service volume is from the 2023 FOOT Generalized Service Volumes, LOS 0, Context Class C3R (Appendix I). Appendix K contains the AUIR contents for the significantly impacted road segments and the insignificantly impacted segments that were tested to determine the limit of the significance area. Because of the 2048 timeframe for the project buildout, future improved geometries are used, based on information in the adopted five-year work program and in the Collier MPO's 2045 Cost feasible LRTP (see discussion below in the section Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Without Project) and consistent with the Methodology Memo (Appendix B). For any existing roads scheduled for improvement, the roadway service volumes in the improved condition use the Collier County AUIR unimproved condition service volume multiplied by the ratio of LOS 0 service volumes shown in FOOT 2020 Generalized Service Volume Table 7 (Urban Condition, Class I Arterial, Appendix I) between the improved and unimproved cross sections (product rounded to the nearest hundred). Ex ratios: • 2 lanes to 4 = 2,000/880 = 2.27 • 2 lanes to 6 = 3,020/880 = 3.43 • 4 lanes to 6 = 3,020/2,000 = 1.51 That ratio isolates the effect of the additional lanes while keeping all other factors affecting service volumes constant. The effect of all those other factors is reflected in the County's published service volume in the unimproved condition and explains its relation to the average for all roads of like cross section. These ratios are similar enough for other area types that they are used here regardless of area type. FOOT 2023 Context Class Service Volume tables were not considered as a source because Collier County does not recognize context classes in its service volumes. For any roads that do not exist today, the projected peak hour peak direction service volumes assumed are 1000 for 2-lane roads, 2000 for 4-lane roads and 3000 for 6-lane roads, which represent rough averages for those facility types in the AUIR. The calculations that the table contains are performed with more decimal places than those displayed. Using only the displayed decimals will yield slightly different results. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 17 Page 500 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Table 4 -2048 Project Traffic Distribution and PM Peak Hour Impact Peak Direct- Peak ion Hour Project PM PM Peak Traffic Percent Peak Peak LOS Direct- Signif- as Per- of Total Hour Hour Mini- ion icance centage Signif- Project Project Project Config- mum Service Thres- of icant AUIR Traffic Traffic Traffic uration Stan- Volume hold(%) Service Impact ID# Roadway Link From To (1) N/E (2) S/W(2) (3) dard (3) (4) Volume Y/N lmmokalee Everglades Camp Keais 46.0 0.4 16 12 2U D 900 3 1.8 No Road Boulevard Road lmmokalee Camp Keais 46.0 Eustis Ave 2.3 90 70 2U D 900 3 10.0 Yes Road Road lmmokalee 46.0 Eustis Ave SR 29 2.7 108 84 4D D 2000 3 5.4 Yes Road New Market SR-29 (Main 58.0 N. 1st Street 2.7 108 84 2U D 900 3 12.0 Yes Road Street) New Market 59.0 Broward Street SR 29 0.5 16 20 2U D 900 3 2.2 No Road Pope John Paul II lmmokalee 61.0 Camp Keais 1.6 64 50 2U D 1000 3 6.4 Yes Boulevard Road Pope John 61.0 Camp Keais Oil Well Road 0.4 16 12 2U D 1000 3 1.6 No Paul 11 S of Agriculture 83.0 SR 29 CR846 1.5 58 45 4D D 2000 3 2.9 No Wav New Market 84.0 SR 29 CR846 0.3 12 9 4D D 1700 3 0.7 No Rd 84.0 SR 29 New Market Rd 9th Street 0.4 14 11 4D D 1700 3 0.8 No 85.0 SR 29 9th Street CR 29A North 5.1 202 157 2U D 900 3 22.4 Yes 86.0 SR 29 CR 29A North SR 82 20.9 837 649 4D D 2000 2 41.9 Yes Hendry County 87.0 SR 29 SR 82 3.3 102 133 2U D 800 2 16.6 Yes Line Hendry County Church Rd/ 88.0 SR 82 34.5 1382 1070 4D D 1850 2 74.7 Yes Line/ W Entrance 2 Church Rd/ 88.0 SR 82 Entrance 3 40.1 1606 1244 4D D 1850 2 86.8 Yes Entrance 2 88.0 SR 82 Entrance 3 Corkscrew Rd. 20.3 813 630 4D D 1850 2 43.9 Yes 88.0 SR 82 Corkscrew Rd. SR 29 24.5 758 980 4D D 1850 2 53.0 Yes Westclox 116.0 Carson Road SR 29 3.5 140 109 2U D 800 3 17.5 Yes Road SR 29 SR 29 S SR 29 N 8.9 275 354 4D D 2000 3 17.7 Yes Bypass SR 29/SR 29 Hendry CR846 0.4 12 16 2U D 1000 3 1.6 No Bvoass Countv Line Corkscrew Collier County W Project 6.1 242 188 2U D 1110 2 21.8 Yes Rd. Line Entrance 1 Corkscrew W Project Entrance 2 0.4 16 12 2U D 1110 2 1.4 No Rd. Entrance 1 Corkscrew Entrance 2 Entrance 3 1.3 52 40 2U D 1110 2 4.7 Yes Rd. Corkscrew Entrance 3 SR82 5.6 224 174 2U D 1110 2 20.2 Yes Rd. Notes: 1) Average of the endpoint values, Appendix K, Exhibit A. 2) Percentage times PM peak hour net new external directional project traffic totals Table 1. 3) Collier 2024 AUIR and approved future roadway improvements. Corkscrew Rd. per FDOT, Class C3R, LOS D. For roads that do not exist today, defaults are 1000 (2U), 2000 (40), and 3000 (60). 4) Collier County TIS Guidelines. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 18 Page 501 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Future Background Traffic Volumes The rate of change between the base (2015) and forecast (2045) Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) model volumes reflect far more future influences on traffic volumes than any continuation of historical traffic volume growth rates can capture. At a minimum, the model reflects the fact that in certain areas, the buildout capacity of the land based on Future Land Use Element (FLUE) densities will be reached before the forecast year. The portion of the historical traffic volume growth due to the historical land use intensification towards buildout cannot continue in those areas. Conversely, in areas where there has been little historical development activity and hence little traffic volume growth in the past, the model can estimate what the effect will be on traffic volumes of new large- scale developments in that area. Historical traffic volume growth rates can also slow when the road's capacity is approached. Increasing congestion and delay at that point motivates drivers to find alternate paths that, although maybe longer in distance, are quicker. Thus, there is a disconnect between historical growth in demand and historical growth in traffic volume on these road segments. Model volumes account for this effect and thus reflect the effect of network changes yet to occur, which in some instances can produce future year volumes lower than the base year model volumes or current traffic counts. This happens when network improvements create new and superior paths to currently congested road segments, and trip makers on the congested segments divert to a superior path. For the reasons above, and consistent with the Collier County TIS Guidelines, the method used here to estimate future background traffic is to use the growth rate in AADT volumes between the adopted model's two scenario years (2015 base and 2045 forecast) and apply that growth rate to current year peak hour peak direction traffic counts, in effect replacing what the model predicted for this year when it was developed with the volume that actually exists today, while preserving the other influences described above that are reflected in the growth rate between base year and forecast year model volumes. The Trip Bank value for each segment is not added to this forecast, nor is the forecast compared to an AUIR existing count plus Trip Bank sum. The change in model volumes from base to forecast year is due to the influence of all the development projects foreseen from the base year, whether subsequently adopted but not yet constructed (and thus contributing to the trip bank) or not. As an enhancement, this project's analysis reflects the influence of a handful of other large projects (described above) that were adopted after 2045 LRTP model development. Adding the Trip Bank volume to such a forecast is double counting the traffic from the trip bank contributors. Replacing a model-based background traffic forecast with an AUIR count plus Trip Bank sum ignores the effect of network improvements as described above. One concern with using model volumes directly as estimates of future traffic magnitude is whether the model was underestimating or overestimating the counted traffic in the base or validation year. Compensations for such discrepancies may be applied to the model's future year volumes, in essence as if the distortion observed in the base year model still exists in the future year model. Using the model volumes for growth rates alone can ignore this concern since any estimation distortion presumed to exist at both ends of the line between base and future year volumes has negligible effect on its slope. The road segments in Table 5 are the significantly impacted segments in Table 4. The existing peak hour peak direction volumes for all but Corkscrew Rd. are from the 2024 AUIR (Appendix E). The Corkscrew Rd. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 19 Page 502 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 current peak hour volume calculation is based on FOOT Station 4126: 2024 AAOT of 7,000 x K=.09 x 0=0.55. These are reasonable Kand O estimates given this is a planning level study. The K factor was used by FOOT in their 2020 Generalized Service Volume Tables. The O factor is suggested in the 2023 Multimodal Quality/level of Service Handbook pg. 42. This O factor will be used in other parts of the analysis (converting peak hour peak direction volumes to 2-way volumes) as needed. Both were agreed for use on all segments in the Methodology Memo (Appendix B). All FOOT related information are in Appendix I. The AAOT volumes from the base year 2015 model and the 2045 cost feasible model (modified as described previously) are displayed in hundreds. On each segment, the AAOT volumes displayed are the average of those at the segment endpoints (see Exhibit A and Appendix K). The average annual percentage (compounded) growth rate from 2015 to 2045 based on the two model volumes is shown, along with the growth factor using it for 24 years (from 2024 to the analysis year 2048), and the resulting 2048 background traffic peak hour peak direction projection. Peak directions for most segments are from the 2024 AUIR. New Market Rd. is the current SR 29 Bypass route around lmmokalee and its peak direction is used for the new Bypass route to be constructed. The calculations that the table contains are performed with more decimal places than those displayed. Using only the displayed decimals will yield slightly different results. Exhibit A contains the model plots showing the AAOT volumes in hundreds that appear in Appendix Kand whose averages are used in Table 5. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 20 Page 503 of 4116-I ;;; 2024 2048 n ,.., 0 Annual Peak Hour n ;,,:- Existing FSUTMS FSUTMS Growth Peak ::E () 0 Year Peak 2015 2045 Rate Growth Direction :::, :::, V> Hour Peak Peak AADT AADT (Percent Factor to Background 3· AUIRID Direction Direct- (100s) (100s) Compound- Analysis Traffic (IQ V> # Roadway Link From To Volume (1) ion (2) (3) (3) ed) (4) Year (5) Volume (6) 0 s 46.0 lmmokalee Road Camp Keais Road Eustis Ave 600 E 117.5 229.5 2.3% 1.708 1025 lQ :::, :::, o· 11) .!" 46.0 lmmokalee Road Eustis Ave SR 29 600 E 112.5 224.0 2.3% 1.735 1041 I "'t) v, l> -4 11)... 58.0 N. 1st Street New Market Road SR-29 (Main Street) 720 44.0 106.5 3.0% 2.028 1460 Ill ::E N CT 0.... Pope John Paul II ii" 61.0 Camp Keais lmmokalee Road 340 s 62.0 160.0 3.2% 2.135 726 U1 ::,- Boulevard I '6' N 11) 85.0 SR 29 9th Street CR 29A North 680 s 106.0 134.5 0.8% 1.210 823 11) 00 CD : 86.0 SR 29 CR 29A North SR 82 680 s 147.0 287.0 2.3% 1.708 1161 Ill lQ n l> ';II:' 87.0 SR 29 Hendry County Line SR 82 300 s 32.0 105.0 4.0% 2.587 776 OIi 0 0... Hendry County Line/ W C ::! 88.0 SR 82 Church Rd/ Entrance 2 890 s 124.0 255.0 2.4% 1.780 1584 ::::, v, Entrance 1 a.. vi ,..,11) -,-4 Ill 88.0 SR 82 Church Rd/ Entrance 2 Entrance 3 890 s 120.0 249.0 2.5% 1.793 1596 ::,g. n .... 88.0 SR 82 Entrance 3 Corkscrew Rd. 890 s 120.0 249.0 2.5% 1.793 1596 I ::,;, ::,;, ;:; 0 88.0 SR 82 Corkscrew Rd. SR 29 890 s 120.0 254.0 2.5% 1.822 1621 :T 0. 0 vi C 11) 116.0 Westclox Road Carson Road SR 29 280 w 54.0 116.0 2.6% 1.844 516 r+ lQ 3 -,"ti 11) SR 29 Bypass SR 29 S SR 29 N E 0.0 172.5 2.0% 0.000 906 0 ...::, N/A .....II) l> n ::, Corkscrew Rd. Collier County Line W Project Entrance 1 347 E 8.0 12.0 1.4% 1.383 480 r+ 0 Corkscrew Rd. Entrance 2 Entrance 3 347 E 8.0 12.0 1.4% 1.383 480 .:;;· Corkscrew Rd. Entrance 3 SR 82 347 E 8.0 12.0 1.4% 1.383 480 3 0- Notes: 1) 2024 AUIR for all but Corkscrew Rd. Its 2024 peak hour volume is 2024 AADT 7,000 (FOOT sta. 4126, 4139) • K=.09* D=.55 11) 2) 2024 AUIR for all but SR 29 Bypass. Its peak direction matches New Market Rd., the current SR 29 Bypass route. "'t) 3) Appendix Kand Exhibit A-Average of the Segment Endpoints Qj (IQ 4) Growth Rate R = (2045 FSUTMS Vol/2015 FSUTMS Vol)"(l/30)-1 or, if 2015 AADT unavailable, 2%. rt) rt) 5) G= Growth Factor= (l+R)"24. ,_.N 6) 2024 Peak hour volume x G or, if either existing volume or 2015 AADT unavailable, (2045 FSUTMS AADT x K=.09 x D=.55) • (l+R)"3 Page 504 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Without Project Appendix E: Collier County 2024 AUIR Attachment F - Roadway Segments indicates one significantly impacted road segment that currently exceeds its adopted LOS standard: SR 82 from the Lee County line to SR 29. Improving this segment to four lanes was fully funded in FY 2023, is partially completed (from SR 29 to Gator Slough Ln) and doesn't appear in the lists below because its construction funding precedes the current work program's first year. Consistent with the Collier County's TIS Guidelines, roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement Program (CIP) are considered committed improvements. The adopted FY2025 - FY2029 Five Year Work Program/CIE for Collier County is in Appendix F. In addition, because the analysis year is 2048, all LRTP improvements through 2045 are reflected in Table 5. FY25 - FY29 Five-Year Work Program/CIE/TIP With potential impact to study network, the document depicts the following committed road improvements: - Collier Blvd. from Green Blvd. to the Golden Gate Canal - expand from 4 lanes to 6 lanes. - Oil Well Rd. (CR 858) - widening from 2-lane to 6-lane roadway from Everglades Blvd. to Oil Well Grade Rd. - Everglades Blvd. - widening from 2-lane to 4-lane roadway from Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Extension to Randall Blvd. - Wilson Blvd. from Golden Gate Blvd. to lmmokalee Rd. - expand from 2 lanes to 4 lanes. - Construction of 2 new bridges: 16th St NE, 47th Ave NE - Randall Blvd./lmmokalee Rd. Intersection -At grade intersection improvements to include 4-lane widening of Randall Blvd., from lmmokalee Rd. to 8th St NE. Collier 2045 LRTP - Highway Cost Feasible Plan The Collier MPO's adopted 2045 LRTP (December 2020) Highway Cost Feasible Plan contains the following pertinent improvements: a) Highway Improvements 2026-2030 - SR 29 - widening from 2-lane to 4-lane roadway from New Market Rd. N. to north of SR 82 b) Highway Improvements 2031-2035 - Randall Blvd. - widening from 2-lane to 6-lane roadway from 8th Street NE to Everglades Blvd. c) Highway Improvements 2036-2045 - Everglades Blvd. -widening from 2-lane to 4-lane roadway from Randall Blvd. to south of Oil Well Rd. - Everglades Blvd. - widening from 2-lane to 4-lane roadway from Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to 1-75. - Everglades Blvd. - new interchange at 1-75. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P age I 22 Page 505 of 4116 Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 - SR 29 Bypass - new 4-lane roadway from lmmokalee Rd. (CR 846) to New Market Rd. N. - SR 29 - widening from 2-lane to 4-lane roadway from Agriculture Way to CR 846 E. The Collier 2045 LRTP Tables 6-2 and 6-3 Cost Feasible Plan Projects are contained in Appendix G. Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Extension east of Collier Blvd. is represented consistent with the configuration for it contained in the LRTP adopted 2045 Cost Feasible model: • Collier Blvd. to Curry Canal bend (NW 7th/9th Street)- Six lanes; • Curry Canal bend (NW 7th/9th Street) to Wilson Blvd. - Four lanes; and • Wilson Blvd. to Everglades Blvd. - Two lanes. Table 6 compares the future background traffic volumes with future improved conditions, based on the improvements described above. For any existing roads scheduled for improvement, the roadway service volumes in the improved condition use the Collier County AUIR unimproved condition service volume multiplied by the ratio of LOS 0 service volumes shown in FOOT 2020 Generalized Service Volume Table 7 (Urban Condition, Class I Arterial, Appendix I) between the improved and unimproved cross sections (product rounded to the nearest hundred). Ex ratios: • 2 lanes to 4 = 2,000/880 = 2.27 • 2 lanes to 6 = 3,020/880 = 3.43 • 4 lanes to 6 = 3,020/2,000 = 1.51 That ratio isolates the effect of the additional lanes while keeping all other factors affecting service volumes constant. The effect of all those other factors is reflected in the County's published service volume in the unimproved condition and explains its relation to the average for all roads of like cross section. These ratios are similar enough for other area types that they are used here regardless of area type. FOOT 2023 Context Class Service Volume tables were not considered as a source because Collier County does not recognize context classes in its service volumes. For any roads that do not exist today, the projected peak hour peak direction service volumes assumed are 1000 for 2-lane roads, 2000 for 4-lane roads and 3000 for 6-lane roads, which represent rough averages for those facility types in the AUIR. The calculations that the table contains are performed with more decimal places than those displayed. Using only the displayed decimals will yield slightly different results. As shown in Table 6, the following significantly impacted roadway segments are projected to exceed the adopted LOS standard under 2048 background traffic conditions: - lmmokalee Rd. from Camp Keais Rd. to Eustis Ave. - N. p t St. from SR 29/Main St. to New Market Rd. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P age I 23 Page 506 of 4116 -I n1 Q". 2048 2048 2048 2048 2048 n 0 Peak Hour n 7'" Peak Level of ("') ("') 0 Peak Hour Direction Serv- :::, "':::, C Future Peak Back- Back- ice lb a: VI :::, :::, Config- Direction ground ground Defic- (IQ VI Vl .... 0 AUIR uration Service Im- Traffic Traffic iency c r+ ID# Roadway Link From To Volume (1) proved Volume (2) V/C Yes/ No -I (1) DJ IQ :::, :::, a· lb "' 46.0 lmmokalee Road Camp Keais Road Eustis Ave 2U 900 No 1025 1.14 Yes I "ti ;;; )> O'\ lb I 46.0 lmmokalee Road Eustis Ave SR 29 4D 2000 No 1041 0.52 No N Cl 0 ..., ::ra- 58.0 N. 1st Street New Market Road SR-29 (Main Street) 2U 900 No 1460 1.62 Yes 00 -5· "Tl :l;J :l;J C lb Pope John Paul II l"l 61.0 Camp Keais lmmokalee Road 2U 1000 No 726 0.73 No C... lb ... <:' Boulevard tD s· ::0 IQ 85.0 SR 29 9th Street CR 29A North 2U 900 No 823 0.91 No 0 DJ c.. Cl 86.0 SR 29 CR 29A North SR 82 4D 2000 Yes 1161 0.58 No :e DJ :.:l < V\ 87.0 SR 29 Hendry County Line SR 82 2U 800 No 776 0.97 No m lb DJ n Hendry County Line/ W ::,g. 88.0 SR 82 Church Rd/ Entrance 2 4D 1850 Yes 1584 0.86 No Entrance 1 0... C I :l;J :l;J :::, 0 88.0 SR 82 Church Rd/ Entrance 2 Entrance 3 4D 1850 Yes 1596 0.86 No c.. Cl -I Q. V\ DJ... lb 88.0 SR 82 Entrance 3 Corkscrew Rd. 4D 1850 Yes 1596 0.86 No IQ =: 3 n· lb 88.0 SR 82 Corkscrew Rd. SR 29 4D 1850 Yes 1621 0.88 No n 0 ):,. :::, ::, 116.0 Westclox Road Carson Road SR 29 2U 800 No 516 0.65 No c.. Cl ;:;: iii' SR 29 Bypass SR 29 S SR 29 N 4D 2000 Yes 906 0.45 No o·:::, I Ill lb Corkscrew Rd. Collier County Line W Project Entrance 1 2U 1110 No 480 0.43 No 0- Corkscrew Rd. Entrance 2 Entrance 3 2U 1110 No 480 0.43 No N N "'O Corkscrew Rd. Entrance 3 SR 82 2U 1110 No 480 0.43 No OJ CJ'Q l'i) l'i) Notes: 1) 2024 AUIR and approved future roadway improvements 2} Table 5 N Page 507 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Future Conditions with Project Table 7 adds the project traffic volumes developed in Table 4 to the 2045 background traffic volumes developed in Table 5. In most cases the peak direction of project traffic aligns with the peak direction of background traffic. In those cases, the background traffic portion of the total traffic is the peak hour peak direction volume from Table 5. In the cases where the two peak directions (background and project) are opposed, a D factor of 0.55 is assumed for the background traffic, consistent with guidance from the FOOT in their 2023 Quality /Level of Service Handbook (Appendix I) and the Methodology Memo (Appendix B). This factor is used to estimate the background two-way volume, and hence the two directional components of that two-way volume. Directional project traffic volumes from Table 4 are added and the maximum of the resulting two total traffic directional volumes is used as the basis of analysis. The calculations that the table contains are performed with more decimal places than those displayed. Using only the displayed decimals will yield slightly different results. Project Traffic Impacts As shown in Table 7, the following significantly impacted roadway segments are projected to exceed the adopted LOS standard under 2045 total (background plus project) traffic conditions: - lmmokalee Rd. from Camp Keais Rd. to Eustis Ave. - N. p t St. from SR 29/Main St. to New Market Rd. SR 29 from 9th St. to CR 29A North - SR 29 from Hendry County Line to SR 82 - SR 82 from Hendry County Line to SR 29 (displayed in separate segments due to changing project traffic volumes). The following roadway segments are adversely impacted: the 2048 background traffic meets the adopted LOS standard and the segment becomes deficient with the addition of project traffic: - SR 29 from 9th St. to CR 29A North - SR 29 from Hendry County Line to SR 82 - SR 82 from Hendry County Line to SR 29 (displayed in separate segments due to changing project traffic volumes). Collier County designated hurricane evacuation routes are depicted in Collier County Transportation Element - Map TR - 7. For details refer to Appendix J. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 25 Page 508 of 4116 !2: 0n 2048 2048 2048 2048 n fl) ><" Peak n 0 Hour V,:::, C Peak Peak Level Direct- Back- PM PM Back- Hour of "' :::, (7Q ion Back ground Peak Peak ground Total Peak Service V, 0 ground Traffic Hour Hour Traffic Back- Back- Traffic Direct- Defic- Traffic Peak Project Project Direct- ground ground Total Total Analy- ion Serv Total iency 5· IQ :::, AUIR , Volume Direct- Traffic Traffic ional Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic sis Vol- ice Vol- Traffic Yes/ fl) -t I ID# Roadway Link I From To (1) ion (1) N/E (2) S/W(2) Split (3) N/E S/W N/E S/W ume ume(4) V/C No Ill V, )>.,, er 46.0 lmmokalee Road Camp Keais Road Eustis Ave 1025 N/E 90 70 1115 900 1.24 Yes ii" " Q 46.0 lmmokalee Road Eustis Ave SR 29 1041 N/E 108 84 1149 2000 0.57 No I "'a N :::,- 58.0 N. 1st Street New Market Road SR-29 (Main Street) 1460 N/E 108 84 1568 900 1.74 Yes i:i" ::0 R fl) Pope John Paul II ..... 61.0 Camp Keais lmmokalee Road 726 S/W 64 50 0.550 594 726 658 776 776 1000 0.78 No fl) Boulevard C.,, ;;;· 5· ..C IQ 85.0 SR 29 9th Street CR 29A North 823 S/W 202 157 0.550 673 823 875 980 980 900 1.09 Yes ID ),. ;;i 86.0 SR 29 CR 29A North SR 82 1161 S/W 837 649 0.550 950 1161 1787 1810 1810 2000 0.91 No ::ICI Q 0 Ill ::! 11 87.0 SR 29 Hendry County line SR 82 776 S/W 102 133 909 800 1.14 Yes Cl. V, ! Hendry County line/ W Ill 88.0 SR 82 Church Rd/ Entrance 2 1584 S/W 1382 1070 0.550 1296 1584 2678 2654 2678 1850 1.45 Yes < ..... Entrance 1 g. :, SR 82 Church Rd/ Entrance 2 Entrance 3 1596 S/W 1606 1244 0.550 1306 1596 2912 2840 2912 1850 1.57 Yes .. I 188.0 ::0 88.0 SR 82 Entrance 3 Corkscrew Rd. 1596 S/W 813 630 0.550 1306 1596 2119 2226 2226 1850 1.20 Yes -t 0 ... Q Ill Q. 88.0 SR 82 Corkscrew Rd. SR 29 1621 S/W 758 980 2601 1850 1.41 Yes =: V, ;;· 116.0 Westclox Road Carson Road SR 29 516 S/W 140 109 0.550 422 516 562 625 625 800 0.78 No n 3 0 fl) ::, :, SR 29 Bypass SR 29 S SR 29 N 906 N/E 275 354 0.550 906 741 1181 1095 1181 2000 0.59 No Cl. ... ;:;: ),. Corkscrew Rd. Collier County line W Project Entrance 1 480 N/E 242 188 722 1110 0.65 No 5· Q ::, "' Corkscrew Rd. Entrance 2 Entrance 3 480 N/E 52 40 532 1110 0.48 No Ill i;j· Corkscrew Rd. Entrance 3 SR 82 480 N/E 224 174 704 1110 0.63 No fl) Notes: 1) Table 5 2) Table 4 fl) .,, 3) Appendix I - Background and project praffic directional components are developed only when needed. If their peak directions align, directional volume cells are empty. ru 4) Table 6 (7Q ID N a, Page 509 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Impacts to Agricultural Products Transport Agriculture is the number two industry in Florida behind tourism. With population growth, the urban site development is expected to encroach upon existing agricultural land. This will cause a shift in the land use and influence property decisions for the producers of agricultural goods. This shift in production location will result in a reconfiguration of transportation and freight logistics for agricultural products. Collier County is part of FOOT District One, which represents 12 counties in Southwestern Florida. The FOOT District One conducted a study to analyze the impact of agricultural development on the transportation network for the 2017 - 2035 period ("Agricultural Growth and Development in District One and the Impacts to Transportation and Freight Logistics- FOOT District One 2017"). This report concluded that encroachment is anticipated to have a small impact on total volume of agricultural goods produced in District One due to internal shifts within the District One counties. In addition, the report illustrates that Collier County is anticipated to be the recipient of some shifted agricultural production from other counties, but its truck volumes are primarily anticipated to decrease slightly due to a net reduction in agricultural production because of urban growth in the county. The project's site-related improvements (access turn lanes) will accommodate efficient operations of agricultural related transportation. Improvement Analysis Based on the results illustrated within this traffic analysis, the proposed project is a significant traffic generator for the roadway network at this location, and adversely impacts the following roadway segment: - SR 29 from 9th St. to CR 29A North - SR 29 from Hendry County Line to SR 82 - SR 82 from Hendry County Line to SR 29. Policy 5.1 of the Collier County Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) states that "the County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved." The Developer proposes to provide a transportation mitigation plan to stay consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Collier County's GMP. The Developer may be required to assist the County with potential capacity/operational improvements for the roadway segments that are significantly impacted by the project. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 27 Page 510 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 A detailed evaluation of applicable access points will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting to determine turn lane requirements, as more accurate parameters will be made available. The estimated net new increase in external trips at project buildout conditions of both the East and West Villages is 7,108 PM peak hour two-way trips (adjusted). The maximum total daily trip generation for the Corkscrew Groves East Village SRA shall not exceed 4,092 two-way PM peak hour net trips (see final section) based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval, or other trip generation rates approved by the County. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the applicable Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. The developer proposes to provide transportation commitments that will be incorporated into the Development Document for the project. The mitigation plan will include specific improvements to be undertaken, fair share contribution commitments where appropriate, and site related improvements. The specific offsite improvements and their cost estimates are discussed in detail in a companion Fair Share Mitigation report. Site-related improvements are addressed as development occurs. Appendix L contains the roadway concurrency proportionate share calculation. The project traffic's consumption of the projected added capacity is the total traffic volume with project (Table 7) minus the unimproved service volume. The estimated roadway service volume in the improved condition uses the Collier County AUIR unimproved condition service volume multiplied by the ratio of LOS D service volumes shown in FOOT Generalized Service Volume Table 7 (Urban Condition, Class I Arterial, Appendix I) between the improved and unimproved cross sections (product rounded to the nearest hundred). Ex ratios: • 2 lanes to 4 = 2,000/880 = 2.27 • 2 lanes to 6 = 3,020/880 = 3.43 • 4 lanes to 6 = 3,020/2,000 = 1.51 That ratio isolates the effect of the additional lanes while keeping all other factors affecting service volumes constant. The effect of all those other factors is reflected in the County's published service volume in the unimproved condition and explains its relation to the average for all roads of like cross section. These ratios are similar enough for other area types that they are used here regardless of area type. FOOT 2023 Context Class Service Volume tables were not considered as a source because Collier County does not recognize context classes in its service volumes. The cost per lane-mile assumes construction and design costs consistent with the most recent Collier County impact fee study, and a slightly conservative estimate of CEI (11% of construction cost) compared to the impact fee study (9% of construction cost). Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 28 Page 511 of 4116 Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 The resulting roadway concurrency proportionate fair share estimate is $50.384 million. The projected impact fees consistent with the December 1, 2024 Impact Fee Schedule and the project development program described in the first section is $71.661 million (Appendix L). The project impact fair share estimate is approximately 70.3% of the impact fees to be collected. The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as applicable. East Village without West Village This report has analyzed the cumulative impact of the East and West Villages together in a buildout/analysis year 2048. If the West Village were never developed, Appendix M contains the relevant tables and exhibits examining the impact of the East Village alone. Its highlights: • The buildout/analysis year is 2038. • Its development program is half the combined uses. 375 Affordable Housing Units were used in the model set up. The current estimate is 362 units. • The 01RPM estimates an internal capture rate of 19.3%, lower due to the lack of trip interaction with the West Village. • The pass-by capture volume estimate is limited to 10% of the adjacent 2038 background traffic volumes. • The PM net-new two-way volume is 4,092 trips. • The project traffic causes SR 82 to become deficient from the Hendry County line to SR 29. • The estimated concurrency proportionate share contribution is $6.91 M. • The estimated impact fees are $35.8 M. • A separate Exhibit B is required to support Appendix M due only to the different project traffic distribution pattern; the 2015 and 2045 AADT volumes used to estimate 2038 background traffic are the same. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P age I 29 Page 512 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Appendix A: Project Conceptual Site Plan Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 30 Page 513 of 4116 ro-I Q: n 0 n,... (") 0 ::::, CORKSCREW GROVES EAST VILLAGE - SRA LAND USE SUMMARY V> C S.Vl,l&OL I Olr:SC.RIPTlON ACRES 'I.OPC;N$PACE OPEN SPACE (AC) a: AA=OROA&I..E HOUSING !CONTEXT ZONE AH} 3622 .,. ,,. ::::, BUFHRLAKES S.l,O 20' TYPE •o· (IQ '""' """ FOOT WATER MANAGEMENT AREA 1 BUFFER HENDRY COUNTY Vl OAAll+'.GECAHAI..S U7e ,,,,. 32.78 [ 0 E&SEHT CES ,., ,.. ".'"".:- - - - -=-..:r:.,..:.:.:l ... =::-:-.-.PE_D" - -ll- l- - c NElGH H0000!!:111!.AAL (AM€NITY)IICONTEJ(l ZONE NG I ,,. ::H 1 a· NEIGHBOAHOOOGENERAL {CONTEJIIT Zc,t,;E N G J ,.,,. 2'i9.2i IQ ::::, OPEN SPACE - l◄,S3 .!" '"' "'"' r.. ·-.. ROAD RIGMT-01=-WA'I' ,, , V, -0 .... . .. ·•. A.O.W RESERVATION (CORKSCREW R01 •• litl,;, r.tt,. 11 ..,J )> ""' ... ,., 24.00 .,. "' Cl .,,, ""' '259 1':!158 ""' '3tif UA BOUNDARY TOTAL l 1MU8 ,. ... 117.09 1.Zl'S l , 129':'i 1 i5• ... :0 ,..., ,... 3888; '1) SSA BOONDUY TOIAL I 1.l&U(I "'" 1,U.UI : OPEN SPACE TABLE IQ )>, I AAEA(AC.I I RiOUIREO 5003 . I I ,,. Cl PROVIDED I !l,171 I "" :::! V, LEGEND INTERNAL CONNECT ON .. LOCATION g.:, exttRNAL CONNECTION -C> LOCA1'•0N ..... I -<> OPTIQNALC-ONNECTON LOCArlON :0 PROJECT ACCESS POINTS 0 ALONG SR 82 AUGN WTH Cl * PROPOSED MEOLAN BREAl, :, Cl '<° POD14 POTENTlAL GUARDHOUSE P (NG':'! ENTRY FEATURE .;;· TREATMENT MARSH GENERAL NOTES: liiiiii1 i LOCATIONS (OUTSIDE 3 600' 1200" MASTER SWPJIS) MASTER PL.AN IS CONCEPTUAL INTERNAL ROAD 0- '1) 22x SCALE 1•=600' AUGNMENlS, LAKE Sil ING ANO CONFIGURATION 11 ,c 17 SCALE 1• = 1200' OF DEVELOPMENT AREAS ARE SUBJECT TO ., NO BUFFER REQUIRED C.R.E.W MOOIFIGATION WITHIN THE RLSA GUIDELINES AT ADJACENT TO SSA 122 TIME OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT ORDER (ZONING. A-MHO) -0 Q/ SEE MOBILITY P1..N-1 FOR PATHW'AYS (IQ ro w.... Page 514 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Appendix 8: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 32 Page 515 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply, or N/A (not applicable). Dates: November 6. 2024 Location: N/A- Via Email People Attending: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1) Michael Sawyer. Collier County GMO 2) Norman Trebilcock. TCS 3) Gavin Jones. TCS 4) Ciprian Malaescu. TCS 5) Lorraine Lantz. Collier County 6) Greg Root. AIM Engineering Study Preparer: Preparers Name and Title: Norman Trebilcock. AICP. PTOE. PE Organization: Trebilcock Consulting Solutions. PA Address & Telephone Number: 2800 Davis Boulevard. Suite 200. Naples. FL 34104: ph 239-566-9551 Revlewer(s): Reviewer's Name & Title: Michael Sawyer. Project Manager Organization: Collier County Transportation Planning Department Telephone Number: 239-252-2926 Applicant Applicant's Name: Alica. Inc fAttn: Mitch Hutchcraft) Address: 10070 Daniels Interstate Court. Suite 200. Fort Myers. FL 33913 Telephone Number: 239-226-2000 Proposed Development: Name: Corkscrew Groves. a pair of villages tentatively called East Village and West Village. Location: In Collier County. predominantly south of SR 82 and west of Corkscrew Rd. with small portions north of SR 82 and east of Corkscrew Rd fsee Figure 1 and site plan on pg. lll. Pag.: 1 ofl2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 33 Page 516 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Figure 1- Project location Felda •I Project ---- Location Ca ! d r Pt rt . P•ese,.e 0 Land Use Type: Mixed-Use Residential ITE Code#: Per ITE Trip Generation Manual. 11 th Edition. as applicable. Description: Corkscrew Groves is a proposed master planned mixed use residential community. At buildout it may contain up to: • 8.253 dwelling units (mix of types. not including affordable housing). • 750 affordable housing units (not included in project traffic distribution or trip generation}. • 567.000 square feet (SF) mixed retail. • 140,000 SF civic uses. Corkscrew Groves will be developed as a pair of Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) villages. Page 2 of12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 134 Page 517 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 l=indings of the Prelimina1V Study: The purpose of the study is to provide a reasonable estimate of the cost to mitigate the project's impact as provided by the county's proportionate share calculation method, and to verify that impact fees will provide the fiscal amount needed. It thus establishes a nexus between the amount of impact caused, and the mitigation contribution provided, in order to preserve public health. safety and welfare. This is a PLANNING LEVEL study. It is NOT a design study. The applicant is not required to replace public funding for intersection design studies or corridor studies of arterial or collector roadways. The proposed analysis will be based on information contained in the 2023 AUIR, the 2045 LRTP, and the ITE llth ed. Service volumes and LOS standards are from 2023 AUIR. Proportionate share costs are based on unit costs in the current adopted impact fee study. The Traffic Impact Study (TISI will be consistent with Collier County Traffic Impact Study Guidelines and Procedures. Study type: Since projected net external AM or PM project traffic is greater than 100 two-way peak hour trips this study qualifies as a Major TIS - significant roadway and/or operational impacts. Proposed TIS will include trip generation traffic distribution and assignments. significance test (based on 2%/2%/3% criteria). Trip Generation - based on Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures Institute of Transportation Engineers IITEl Trip Generation Manual.11th Edition and ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. Internal capture and the project's trip interaction with other nearby developments will be estimated using the adopted FSUTMS model. The TIS will determine if there is consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element. The report will provide existing level of Service /LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on designated arterial and collector roads. Roadway concurrency analysis - based on estimated net new external PM traffic. The analyzed development is not located within the County's Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEAl or within the County's designated Transportation Concurrency Management Areas ITCMAs). The TCEAs' and TCMAs' designations are provided in Policy 5.4 and 5.6 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Roadway Committed Improvements - per adopted County's 5-year TIP and cost feasible road projects per adopted 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan ILRTPl Update. Pagi:: 3 of 12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 35 Page 518 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Study Type: (if not net increase, operational study) Small Scale TIS O Minor TIS □ Major TIS [8J Study Area: Boundaries: All significantly impacted road segments. Additional intersections to be analyzed: Intersection locations will be agreed upon after the internal capture is finalized and initial model runs have been completed. Analyses will reflect peak season existing conditions. future buildout conditions (2048) without project and future buildout conditions with project. Build Out Year: lQ.i§. Analysis Years: Four, in five-year increments from proposed opening: 2033 2038 2043 2048. Analysis Time Period(s): PM Peak Hour Future Off-Site Developments: Julian Grove and Kingston are added to the 2045 LRTP model. Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE Trip Generation Manual 11 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3•d Edition. Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None:!::Ji.A Pass-by trips: Retail - County allowable maximum ms Guidelines Section 6.) - 25% reduction -AM/PM peak hour· 15% reduction - daily traffic· or PM peak hour pass-by volume limited to 10% of adjacent background traffic. If the last condition governs, the resulting deduction can change due to any changes in the estimation of future background traffic. While this does not affect the total project traffic entering and exiting volumes at the driveways, it does change the total net-new project traffic (net of pass-by} that is distributed to all the analyzed road segments. Compared to the magnitude of the net new traffic used in the link LOS and intersection analyses the effect of such a change is negligible. but requires miniscule adjustments to a large number of link LOS and intersection analysis project traffic inputs. For this reason. the applicant recommends addressing ONE comment. in the first comment round. on the estimate of adjacent future background volumes. If that background volume governs the allowable total pass- by volume, that result should be used unchanged throughout all subsequent comment rounds, regardless of any further adjustments to background traffic volumes. Internal trips: FSlITMS (see below). Transit use: Other: Pagl! 4 of 12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page I 36 Page 519 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Analysis Year Roadway Network Improvements: for each analysis year. all the programmed improvements to the end of the planning period shown in the Long-Range Transportation Plan that contains the analysis year. Methodology & Assumptions: Non-site traffic estimates: Collier County traffic counts and FSUTMS. Site-trip generation: rTE n•h Edition Trip Generation Manual. The project will be represented by six zones numbered 3001 to 3006 as shown in Figure 2. Zones 3001 to 3004 compose the East Village: 3005 and 3006 compose the West Village. Zones 3009 through 3011 contain the affordable housing units located in zones 3001. 3003 and 3005 respectively. Their trips are not included for trip distribution purposes or trip generation. Trip distribution method: based on FSUTMS (FOOT District One Regional Planning Model) -example: Figure 2. The distribution percentages shown are subject to change with any change to model inputs. Highlighted percentages sum to 99.99. The project traffic distribution pattern will be modeled four times. once in each of the analysis years. The contents of the traffic analysis zone (TAZsl containing the project will be adjusted to reflect the cumulative development plan to that analysis year. The remaining TAZs will contain adopted 204S contents or those adjusted as described above. The network will include all cost feasible improvements through the end of the planning period in which the analysis year falls. On each roadway segment. the model's project traffic volume will be expressed as a percentage of the project's total net external (after removing intra-zonal and inter-zonal trips) traffic volume. and that percentage will be applied to the PM Peak net new external traffic estimate developed separately: rTE based generation. with the internal capture rate from FSUTMS. retail pass-by capture from the Trip Generation Handbook. limited by County standards (TIS Guidelines Section 6). On each road segment. the project traffic percentage used will be the average of the values at the segment endpoints. This provides a reasonable overall estimate ofproject impact. Inspecting all the percentages along a segment to find minimum and maximum rarely produces a different result. and never produces a superior result. only a different one. There is no nexus between the cost of the effort needed to compare endpoint percentages with possible minimums and maximums within the segment. and any quantifiable improvement in public health. safety and welfare. Page: 5of12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page I 37 Page 520 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section l - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Figure 2 - Project Traffic Distribution Percentages Page 6 of 12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 38 Page 521 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Internal Capture: The FSUTMS model will be used to estimate the percentage of project trip making that stays within the project (a combination of intra-zonal capture within TAZs and inter-zonal trips between proiect TAZsl and the percentage that uses the collector/arterial road network to reach desired destinations. The preliminary estimate of project internal capture is 30.3 percent Cat buildout). This "project" capture rate produced bv FSUTMS will be developed four times once in each of the analvsis years. It will be produced in the same model run used to develop the project traffic distribution pattern for that year: cumulative development in the project zones 2045 socio-economic (SE) data in the remaining zones network with cost feasible improvements through the end of the respective planning period. Traffic assignment method: project trip generation with background growth. Background Traffic: Future background traffic (without the project) will be developed for each of the analysis years using the contents in the adopted 2045 model adjusted as described above. In each analysis year the network used will include all cost feasible improvements through the end of the planning period in which the analysis year falls. Thus the 2038 2043 and 2048 networks will be the 2045 cost feasible network since the last planning period spans 2036 to 2045. The 2033 network will include all cost feasible improvements through the end of 2035. For each road segment, the observed exponential rate of change necessary to adjust the 2015 Base Year model AADT volume to the 2045 model AADT volume will be used to adjust the 2023 AUIR peak hour peak direction volume to the analysis year. That annual exponential rate may be negative. This is typical when network improvements in the future provide paths superior to the ones available to traffic in 2015 so trip makers abandon a segment in favor of the superior path. This method is consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines Section 12.c. The model volumes used will be the averages of those at the segment endpoints. This provides a reasonable estimate of average traffic on the segment. Inspecting all the volumes along a segment to find minimum and maximum rarely produces a different result and never produces a superior result only a different one. There is no nexus between the cost of the effort needed to compare endpoint volumes with possible minimums and maximums within the segment, and any quantifiable improvement in public health safety and welfare. This background traffic estimation method overcomes any concern about the degree to which the model is over-estimating or under-estimating (when compared with actual traffic counts) the volumes on road segments in the base year model. Typical reactions to this situation can include either model adjustments (to both base and forecast year models) or post processing adjustments to the forecast volumes commensurate with the adjustment needed to correct the observed discrepancy in the base year volume. Both methods Pagl! 7 of 12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 39 Page 522 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 would raise or lower the endpoints of the line between base year and forecast year model volumes. but not affect the line's slope, which is the only model insight used for future background traffic estimation. For roads without an AUIR peak hour volume to adjust, the 2045 model AADT volume will be adjusted to the analysis year (forward or backward) at the exponential rate described above (observed 2015 model to 2045 model). If the road is not in the 2015 model, the rate used (to inflate or deflate) the 2045 AADT will be 2%. which is the minimum growth rate used by Collier County for short term forecasts. On all segments requiring this method, the resulting analysis year AADT will be factored to peak hour. peak direction using K=0.09 and D=0.55. These are reasonable estimates given this is a planning level study. The K factor was used by FOOT in their 2020 Generalized Service Volume Tables. The D factor is suggested in the 2023 Multimodol Quality/level of Service Handbook pg. 42. This D factor will be used in other parts of the analysis (converting peak hour peak direction volumes to 2-way volumes) as needed. D factors that change from facility to facility and year to year are not relevant to a study of this type. given its purpose and forecast horizon. Analysis Summary: The County F5UTMS model will be run twice for each analysis year: 1. With cumulative project contents to that analysis year included to determine expected project internal capture and project traffic distribution pattern: and 2. With all project contents removed to determine background traffic growth rates to a 2045 without- project condition. In each analysis year the network used will include all cost feasible improvements published to the end of the planning period in which the analysis year falls. Thus. one network with all improvements through 2045 will be used for the 2038. 2043 and 2048 analyses. In each analysis year. the net-new external project traffic will be based on ITE using the cumulative development program to that analysis year. reduced by the internal capture rate for that year as described above. This external traffic total will be distributed to road segments using the distribution pattern for that analysis year as described above. The background traffic on each segment will be the 2023 AUIR peak hour peak direction volume adjusted to the analysis year at the rate of change for that segment derived from comparing the 2015 Base Year model AADT to the 2045 model AADT volume described above. Intersections: To be agreed upon after the internal capture is finalized and preliminary model runs have been completed. Intersection Turning movements: To be collected in 15-minute intervals from 7-9 AM and 4-6 PM on a mid- week (Tues .• Wed .. or Thurs.) day. Special Features: (from preliminary study or prior experience) Accident locations: Pagl:! 8 of12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 140 Page 523 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Sight distance: Queuing: Access location & configuration: To be examined during site development. Traffic control: MUTCD Signal system location & progression needs: On-site parking needs: Data Sources: Collier County 2023 AUIR: Collier County Traffic Counts Base maps: Prior study reports: Access policy and jurisdiction: Collier County Access Management Resolution. latest adopted. Review process: Requirements: Miscellaneous: Small Scale Study- No Fee Minor Study - S 750.00 Major Study - $1,500.00 X Methodology Fee $500 X Includes O intersections TBD Additional Intersections - $500.00 each All fees will be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and must be paid to Transportation prior to our sign-elf on the application. TBD = To Be Determined. SIGNATIJRES 'f/{on,uzn..f: Jre5i/coc{ Study Preparer-Norman Trebilcock Reviewer(s) Applicant Pagl! 9 of 12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 41 Page 524 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Methodology Review, Analysis Review, and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional meetings or other optional services are also provided below. Methodology Review - $500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement, including review of submitted trip generation estimate(s), distribution, assignment, and review of a "Small Scale Study" determination, written approval/comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confirmation of a re- submitted, amended methodology statement, and one meeting in Collier County, if needed. "Small Scale Study'' Review - No Additional Fee Qndudes one sufficiency review) Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review includes: a concurrency determination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study compliance with trip generation, distribution, and maximum threshold compliance. "Minor Study Review" - $750 Fee (Includes one sufficiency review) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: optional field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, distribution, and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of off-site improvements within the right-of-way, review of site access and circulation, and preparation and review of "sufficiency" comments/questions. "Malor Study Review'' - $1,500 Fee (Includes two Intersection analysis and two sufficiency reviews) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, special trip generation and/or trip length study, distribution and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of traffic growth analysis, review ofoff-site roadway operations and capacity analysis, review of site access and circulation, neighborhood traffic intrusion issues, any necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates, and preparation and review of up to two rounds of "sufficiency" comments/questions and/or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional Intersection Review'' - $500 Fee The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the "Major Study Review" and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the "Major Study Review" "Additional Sufficiency Reviews" - $500 Fee Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. Pag.: 10 of 12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P age I 42 Page 525 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 NOTE: SITE PLAN IS CONCEPTIJAL-SUBJECTTO CHANGE AND REFINEMENT Page 11 of 12 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 43 Page 526 of 4116 11) :;i.... 2: ;:;- 0 n .,,,.. (") 0 :::, V, C a:: :::, OQ V, 0 [ s Year 2048 :::,o· lndurt- Com- -"' Employ• r1•I merdal Service -0 V, )> ees per Employ- Employ• Employ- land Use 3001 3002 3003 3004 3005 3006 3009 3010 3011 Total Sito Units KSF SF MF Students ... ... ... Q Siegle Familv .... 325 823 733 966 48S 2.363 S.69S DUs 5695 Detached (DUs) ::,- -5· Single F•mily 100 206 240 238 215 S69 1.568 DUs 1568 "'nached (DUsJ Multi Family [ 150 60 150 135 345 lS0 990 DUs 990 IDUsJ CQ5· )::,. Afforcable 200 175 375 750 DUs 750 llousiog (DUsJ Q --- :::j Civic (SF) 20,000 5.000 40,000 5,000 60,000 10,000 140,000 SF 4 560 V, " Retail (SF) 5,000 273.500 5,000 273,500 10,000 567,000 SF 3 1701 g. ....::, Total 644S 2SS8 0 1701 560 0 I Guidance or, ratios ano employee type: FOOT 2023 Multimodal Transportation Site Jmpocr Handbook Table 9 QS' Q. Sinr,le FamIlv Detached (DUsJ S,69, 3 /1) Single Family Attached (DUsj 1,568 ...:, Multi Family (DUsJ 990 )::,. ::, Q Affordable !lousing (DUsj 750 .,, Tot•I Dwelllog Units 9,003 i;;· 6 (10;p Civic (SF) 140,000 r. .... Retail (SF) 567.000 3 N c,- /1) 8, .... -i... "' -0 ""OJ 11) .;:. .;:. Page 527 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Appendix C: Project Trip Generation Calculations Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 45 Page 528 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 AM Internal Capture - FSUTMS Based Internal Capture Rate Unconstrained Internal Trip Capture Rates for Origins Unconstrained Internal Trip Capture Rates for Destinations C: .......5 C ..... .E I! .. .. I! - u Et:'. ... "O ., U C ,i ·; !! E i ] ; ii: i Use i : : -=:s ; : Use i5 : : s .s : Office 28 63 0 1 0 Office 32 23 0 0 0 Retail 29 13 0 14 0 Retail 4 so 0 2 0 Restaurant 31 14 0 4 3 Restaurant 14 8 0 s 4 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain- 0 0 0 0 Entertain- 0 0 0 0 ment ment Residential 2 1 20 0 0 Residential 3 17 20 0 0 Hotel 75 14 9 0 0 Hotel 3 4 6 0 0 Source: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Ed. Table 6.1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Ed. Table 6.2 Internal Exiting Trips Internal Entering Trips C: Total - .S ; '! "ii Exiting .. e., .. C '! ::; C - .. Use 2 Trips Use ,1! "' u r: :; Office 8.5 19.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 19 Office 616.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Retail 372.6 167.0 0.0 179.9 0.0 803 Retail 10.0 0.0 0.0 43.1 0.0 Restaurant 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Restaurant 34.9 154.1 0.0 107.7 0.0 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Entertain• 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ment ment Residential 119.8 59.9 1198.1 0.0 0.0 3744 Residential 7.5 327.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Hotel 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Hotel 7.5 77.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Entering 156 1204 0 0 1346 0 To<-• Constrained Internal Trips ........5 Total Internal Internal e., t., _C Enter• Total Enter• Internal Cap-turE Use .5 1 ! Use ing biting ing Exiting Rate Office 0 0 0 0 8 Office 156 19 16 8 13.7 Retail 0 43 0 52 Retail 1204 803 67 52 5.9 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0.0 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain- 0 0 0 0 Entertain• 0 0 0 0 0.0 ment ment Residential 59 0 0 0 66 Residential 1346 3744 43 66 2.1 Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hotel 0 0 0 0 0.0 Internal 16 67 0 0 43 0 126 Total 2706 4566 126 126 3.5 Entering Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 47 Page 530 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Raad Segment Analysis -December 2025 PM Internal Capture - FSUTMS Based Internal Capture Rate Unconstrained Internal Trip Capture Rates for Origins Unconstrained Internal Trip Capture Rates for Destinations 'c "ii 'c .. I! .......E I! ...... .5 :, :, E.. t:.. - .. E.... t: - ! !l .... C: .. .... C: -;; '3 ; C: - .. ]l "! t: C: - .. Use : : ·- i5 E : Use : : ·- E : Office 20 4 0 2 0 Office 8 2 1 4 0 Retail 2 29 4 26 s Retail 31 29 26 46 17 Restaurant 3 41 8 18 7 Restaurant 30 50 32 16 71 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain• 2 21 31 8 2 Entertain• 6 4 3 4 1 ment ment Residential 4 42 21 0 3 Residential 57 10 14 0 12 Hotel 0 16 68 0 2 Hotel 0 2 s 0 0 Source: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Ed. Table 6.1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Ed. Table 6.2 Internal Exiting Trips Internal Entering Trips 'c "ii 'c "ii I! ........ 5 Total I! .......E :, i :, ....t: - i !l E - .. Exiting E '3 ; .... C: ]l .. "! t:.. .... C: i ! Use " :e :e .s .F :! :e $ Trips Use i :e :e .E ! :e $ Office 19.3 3.9 0.0 1.9 0.0 144 Office 343.3 0.0 0.0 218.6 0.0 Retail 89.3 1295.S 178.7 1161.5 223.4 2667 Retail 5.2 0.0 0.0 2514.1 0.0 Restaurant 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Restaurant 5.0 2145.7 0.0 874.5 0.0 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain• 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Entertain- 1.0 171.7 0.0 218.6 0.0 ment ment Residential 138.8 1457.7 728.8 0.0 104.1 2072 Residential 9.5 429.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Hotel 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Hotel 0.0 85.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Entering 25 2562 0 0 3263 0 T.; • Constrained Internal Trips ........E Total Internal Internal ....t: - ....E C: Enter- Total Enter- Internal Cap-ture Use Use ing Exiting ing Exiting Rate ·= ! Office 19 0 0 0 20 Office 25 144 14 20 20.1 Retail 0 0 1161 0 1166 Retail 2562 2667 448 1166 30.9 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0.0 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain• 0 0 0 0 0 0 Entertain- 0 0 0 0 0.0 ment ment Residential 9 429 0 0 0 438 Residential 3263 2072 1162 438 30.0 Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 Hotel 0 0 0 0 0.0 Internal 14 448 0 0 1162 0 1624 Total 5850 4883 1624 1624 30.3 Entering Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 148 Page 531 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 AM Internal Capture - ITE Based Internal Capture Rate Unconstrained Internal Trip Capture Rates for Origins Unconstrained Internal Trip Capture Rates for Destinations ]i I! ...... .5 I! ....... .5 .. :, E.. t:.. - ; ....Et: - U U C ·;. :!! ; C - U :;; i ; IE ·- .5 i - ! Use i5 : : F : 1 Use \!; : iS s:: "' :,: Office 28 63 0 1 0 Office 32 23 0 0 0 Retail 29 13 0 14 0 Retail 4 50 0 2 0 Restaurant 31 14 0 4 3 Restaurant 14 8 0 5 4 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain- 0 0 0 0 0 Entertain• 0 0 0 0 0 ment ment Residential 2 1 20 0 0 Residential 3 17 20 0 0 Hotel 75 14 9 0 0 Hotel 3 4 6 0 0 Source: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Ed. Table 6.1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Ed. Table 6.2 Internal Exiting Trips Internal Entering Trips ]i I! .......5 Total I! ....... .E .. :, ..E t:.. - :, ....E t: 1 Exiting oi ; U U C :!! ! ; U U -C :!! Use -= Trips Use : :Ii .5 - ! i Office S.3 12.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 19 Office 38S.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Retail 232.9 104.4 0.0 112.4 0.0 803 Retail 6.2 0.0 0.0 26.9 0.0 Restaurant 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Restaurant 21.8 96.3 0.0 67.3 0.0 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain• 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Entertain- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ment ment Residential 74.9 37.4 748.8 0.0 0.0 3744 Residential 4.7 204.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Hotel 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Hotel 4.7 48.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Entering 156 1204 0 0 1346 0 T••-• Constrained Internal Trips Total Internal Internal Enter- Total Enter- Internal Cap-ture Use Use ing Exiting Ing Exiting Rate Office 0 0 0 0 Office 1S6 19 10 s 8.6 Retail 0 0 26 0 32 Retail 1204 803 42 32 3.7 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0.0 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain• 0 0 0 0 Entertain- 0 0 0 0 0.0 ment ment Residential 37 0 0 0 41 Residential 1346 3744 26 41 1.3 Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 Hotel 0 0 0 0 0.0 Internal 10 42 0 26 0 78 Total 2706 4S66 78 78 2.1 Entering Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page ISO Page 533 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 PM Internal Capture - ITE Based Internal Capture Rate Unconstrained Internal Trip Capture Rates for Origins Unconstrained Internal Trip Capture Rates for Destinations l: .. l: :! ...... .5 l: :! ....... .5 :, ....E t: " :, " " C "i E G> C I G> - 7i G> ....;; ]l ! ; C - G> ; ·-C - G> Use 0 :! :! ·- S E :! Use : :! .5 E :! Office 20 4 0 2 0 Office 8 2 1 4 0 Retail 2 29 4 26 5 Retail 31 29 26 46 17 Restaurant 3 41 8 18 7 Restaurant 30 50 32 16 71 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain• 2 21 31 8 2 Entertain• 6 4 3 4 1 ment ment Residential 4 42 21 0 3 Residential 57 10 14 0 12 Hotel 0 16 68 0 2 Hotel 0 2 5 0 0 Source: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Ed. Table 6.1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Ed. Table 6.2 Internal Exiting Trips Internal Entering Trips l: 7i l: :! ........ 5 Total :! ........ 5 :, i :, E " Exiting E ! ! ; G> G> -C l "i 'ii ; G> G> -C ]l Use i J/J J/J .5 Po ;! J/J $ Trips Use :0 :ii J/J .5 : J/J $ Office 28.8 5.8 0.0 2.9 0.0 144 Office 205.0 0.0 0.0 130.S 0.0 Retail 53.3 773.4 106.7 693.4 133.4 2667 Retail 7.8 0.0 0.0 1501.0 0.0 Restaurant 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Restaurant 7.5 1281.0 0.0 522.1 0.0 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Entertain- 1.5 102.5 0.0 130.5 0.0 ment ment Residential 82.9 870.2 435.1 0.0 62.2 2072 Residential 14.3 256.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Hotel 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 Hotel 0.0 51.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Enterint 25 2562 0 0 3263 0 r,;n, Constrained Internal Trips l: 7i :! - ii Total Internal Internal " :, E t: - " i .. G> G> C "i .., .E Enter• Total Enter• Internal Cap-tun ! t; C - G> Use /!; /!; ·- .5 f# /!; $ I! Use ing Exiting ing Exiting Rate Office 28 0 0 2 0 30 Office 25 144 21 30 30.2 Retail 7 0 0 693 0 700 Retail 2562 2667 284 700 18.8 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0.0 Cinema/ Cinema/ Entertain• 0 0 0 0 0 0 Entertain· 0 0 0 0 0.0 ment ment Residential 14 256 0 0 0 270 Residential 3263 2072 695 270 18.1 Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hotel 0 0 0 0 0.0 Internal 21 284 0 0 695 0 1000 Total 5850 4883 1000 1000 18.6 Entering Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 51 Page 534 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Land Use: 210 Single-Family Detached Housing Description A single-family detached housing site includes any s1ngle-famIly detached home on an individual lot A typical site surveyed Is a suburban subd1vIsIon. Specialized Land Use Data have been submitted for several single-family detached housing developments with homes that are commonly referred to as patio homes. A patio home is a detached housing unit that Is located on a small lot with little (or no) front or back yard. In some subdivisions, communal maintenance of outside grounds Is provided for the patio homes. The three patio home sites total 299 dwelling units with overall weighted average trip generation rates of 5 35 vehicle trips per dwelling unit for weekday, 0 26 for the AM adjacent street peak hour, and 0.47 for the PM adjacent street peak hour. These patio home rates, based on a small sample of sites, are lower than those for single-family detached housing (Land Use 210), lower than those for single-family attached housing (Land Use 215), and higher than those for senior adult hous1ng-single- family (Land Use 251) (Source 1008) Additional Data The sites were surveyed in the 1990s, the 2000s, the 2010s, and the 2020s in Alabama, Arizona, British Columbia (CAN), California, Delaware, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ontario (CAN), Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, and West Virginia. Source Numbers 356,357,367,384,387,407,435,522,550,552,579,598,601,603,614,637,711,716,720,728,735, 868,869,903,925,936, 1005, 1007, 1008, 1010. 1033, 1066, 1077, 1078, 1079, 1204, 1221, 1225, 1236, 1251, 1265, 1267 230 Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition • Volume 3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 53 Page 536 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Single-Family Detached Housing (210) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 153 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 239 Directional Distribution: 27% entering, 73% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.70 0.22-2.27 0.26 Data Plot and Equation 2000 X X " 1000 I- 1000 2000 3000 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site --- Fitted Curve ----- Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.67(X) + 5.59 R'= 0.89 232 Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition• Volume 3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 55 Page 538 of 4116Corkscrew Groves Eost Vi/loge- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Single-Family Detached Housing (210) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 166 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 266 Directional Distribution: 62% entering, 38% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.93 0.35 - 2.98 0.33 Data Plot and Equation 3000 X 2000 X ·c 1000 X X 1000 2000 3000 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site --- Fitted Curve ----- Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.92 Ln(X) + 0.33 R'=0.90 General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000--399) 233 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 56 Page 539 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Land Use: 215 Single-Family Attached Housing Description Single-family attached housing includes any single-family housing unit that shares a wall with an adjoining dwelling unit, whether the walls are for living space, a vehicle garage, or storage space. This land use includes duplexes (defined as a single structure with two distinct dwelling units, typically Joined side-by-side and each with at least one outside entrance) and townhouses/rowhouses (defined as a single structure with three or more distinct dwelling units, joined side-by-side in a row and each with an outside entrance) Additional Data The sites were surveyed in the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s rn British Columbia (CAN), California, Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ontario (CAN), Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Utah, and Wisconsin Source Numbers 357,390,418,525,571,583,638,868,869,870 896,912,959, 1009, 1046, 1056, 1058, 1077 General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 249 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 57 Page 540 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Single-Family Attached Housing (215) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 11 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 84 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 6.57 4.80 - 8.45 1.28 Data Plot and Equation ·c 1000 X = Number or Dwelling Units X Study Site --- Fitted curve ----- Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 6.53(X) • 3.25 250 Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition• Volume 3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 58 Page 541 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Single-Family Attached Housing (215) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 26 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 129 Directional Distribution: 25% entering, 75% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.47 0.12- 0.74 0.16 Data Plot and Equation 500 X 400 ; ....... ; .g 300 II 200 X 100 200 400 600 800 X = Number or Dwelling Units x Study sne --- Fitted Curve ----- Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.59(X) -15.25 R2=0.94 General Urban/Suburban and Rural (land Uses 000-399) 251 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e I 59 Page 542 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Single-Family Attached Housing (215) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 31 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 131 Directional Distribution: 57% entering, 43% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.51 0.17 • 1.25 0.16 Data Plot and Equation 500 X 4()Q -fl 300 f- 11 f- 200 100 200 400 600 800 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site --- Fitted Curve ----- Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.57jX). 7.84 R'=0.92 252 Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition• Volume 3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 160 Page 543 of 4116Corkscrew Groves Eost Village- Stewardship Receiving Areo - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Land Use: 220 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) Description Low-nse multifamily housing Is a res1der,t1aI building with two or three floors (levels) of residences. Vanous configurations fit this description. including the following • Walk-up apartment or multiplex-access to the 111chv1dual dWelling units 1s typically internal to the structure and provided through a shared entry stairway and hallway • Mansion apartment with several owe111ng units within what appears from the Ot;tside to be a s1ng1e- famlly dwelling unit • Stacked townhouse designed to match the external appearance of a townho1Jse but which has dwelling units that share both floors and walls and with access through a central entry and stairway Land Use Subcategory Data are presented for two subcategories for this land use: (1) not close to rail transit and (2) close to rail transit A site 1s considered close to rail transit if the walking distance between the residential site entrance and the closest rail trans,! station entrance ,s ½ mile or less Additional Data For the three sites for which both the number of residents and the number of occupied dwelling units were available, there was an average of 2 72 residents per occupied dwelling unit. For lhe two sites for which the numbers of both total dwelling units and occupied dwelling units were available an average of 96 2 percent of the total o.velhng units were occupied It is expected that the number of bedrooms and number of residents are likely correlated to the trips generated by a residential sne. To assist In future analysis, trfp generation studies of all multifamily housing should attempt to obtain information on occupancy rate and on the mix of residential unit sizes (i.e .. number of units by number of bedrooms at the site complex). The sites were surveyed ,n the 1990s, the 2000s, the 2010s, and the 2020s in Arizona, British Columbia (CAN), Cahforn1a. Delaware. Florida, 111Ino1s, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota. New Jersey, New York. Ontario (CAN) Oregon Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota Tennessee Utah and VVashington Source Numbers 357,390,412,525 530,579,583,638,864 866,896,901 903 904 936,939,944 946,947 948 963, 964,966,967, 1012, 1013, 1014 1036, 1047, 1056, 1071 1076 1219, 1236, 1265, 1267 General Urban/Subu1ban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 261 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P age I 61 Page 544 of 4116Corkscrew Groves East Village- Stewardship Receiving Area - TIS Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis -December 2025 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit (220) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 28 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 208 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 6.21 2.46 -12.50 1.87 Data Plot and Equation 4000 X 3000 C w 2000 II ,- 1000 X 100 300 400 500 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site --- Fitted curve --- - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 5.63(X) • 120.45 R'= 0.70 262 Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition• Volume 3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Pa g e I 62 Page 545 of 4116Page 546 of 4116Page 547 of 4116Page 548 of 4116Page 549 of 4116Page 550 of 4116Page 551 of 4116Page 552 of 4116Page 553 of 4116Page 554 of 4116Page 555 of 4116Page 556 of 4116Page 557 of 4116Page 558 of 4116Page 559 of 4116Page 560 of 4116Page 561 of 4116Page 562 of 4116Page 563 of 4116Page 564 of 4116Page 565 of 4116Page 566 of 4116Page 567 of 4116Page 568 of 4116Page 569 of 4116Page 570 of 4116Page 571 of 4116Page 572 of 4116Page 573 of 4116Page 574 of 4116Page 575 of 4116Page 576 of 4116Page 577 of 4116Page 578 of 4116Page 579 of 4116Page 580 of 4116Page 581 of 4116Page 582 of 4116Page 583 of 4116Page 584 of 4116Page 585 of 4116Page 586 of 4116Page 587 of 4116Page 588 of 4116Page 589 of 4116Page 590 of 4116Page 591 of 4116Page 592 of 4116Page 593 of 4116Page 594 of 4116Page 595 of 4116Page 596 of 4116Page 597 of 4116Page 598 of 4116Page 599 of 4116Page 600 of 4116Page 601 of 4116Page 602 of 4116Page 603 of 4116Page 604 of 4116Page 605 of 4116Page 606 of 4116Page 607 of 4116Page 608 of 4116Page 609 of 4116Page 610 of 4116Page 611 of 4116Page 612 of 4116Page 613 of 4116Page 614 of 4116Page 615 of 4116Page 616 of 4116Page 617 of 4116Page 618 of 4116Page 619 of 4116Page 620 of 4116Page 621 of 4116Page 622 of 4116Page 623 of 4116Page 624 of 4116Page 625 of 4116Page 626 of 4116Page 627 of 4116Page 628 of 4116Page 629 of 4116Page 630 of 4116Page 631 of 4116Page 632 of 4116Page 633 of 4116Page 634 of 4116Page 635 of 4116Page 636 of 4116Page 637 of 4116Page 638 of 4116Page 639 of 4116Page 640 of 4116Page 641 of 4116Page 642 of 4116Page 643 of 4116Page 644 of 4116Page 645 of 4116Page 646 of 4116Page 647 of 4116Page 648 of 4116Page 649 of 4116Page 650 of 4116Page 651 of 4116Page 652 of 4116Page 653 of 4116Page 654 of 4116Page 655 of 4116Page 656 of 4116Page 657 of 4116Page 658 of 4116Page 659 of 4116Page 660 of 4116Page 661 of 4116Page 662 of 4116Page 663 of 4116Page 664 of 4116Page 665 of 4116Page 666 of 4116Page 667 of 4116Page 668 of 4116Page 669 of 4116Page 670 of 4116Page 671 of 4116Page 672 of 4116Page 673 of 4116Page 674 of 4116Page 675 of 4116Page 676 of 4116Page 677 of 4116Page 678 of 4116Page 679 of 4116Page 680 of 4116Page 681 of 4116Page 682 of 4116Page 683 of 4116Page 684 of 4116Page 685 of 4116Page 686 of 4116Page 687 of 4116Page 688 of 4116Page 689 of 4116Page 690 of 4116Page 691 of 4116Page 692 of 4116Page 693 of 4116Page 694 of 4116Page 695 of 4116Page 696 of 4116Page 697 of 4116Page 698 of 4116Page 699 of 4116Page 700 of 4116Page 701 of 4116Page 702 of 4116Page 703 of 4116Page 704 of 4116Page 705 of 4116Page 706 of 4116Page 707 of 4116Page 708 of 4116Page 709 of 4116Page 710 of 4116Page 711 of 4116Page 712 of 4116Page 713 of 4116Page 714 of 4116Page 715 of 4116Page 716 of 4116Page 717 of 4116Page 718 of 4116Page 719 of 4116Page 720 of 4116Page 721 of 4116Page 722 of 4116Page 723 of 4116Page 724 of 4116Page 725 of 4116Page 726 of 4116Page 727 of 4116Page 728 of 4116Page 729 of 4116Page 730 of 4116Page 731 of 4116Page 732 of 4116Page 733 of 4116Page 734 of 4116Page 735 of 4116Page 736 of 4116Page 737 of 4116Page 738 of 4116Page 739 of 4116Page 740 of 4116Page 741 of 4116Page 742 of 4116Page 743 of 4116Page 744 of 4116Page 745 of 4116Page 746 of 4116Page 747 of 4116Page 748 of 4116Page 749 of 4116Page 750 of 4116Page 751 of 4116Page 752 of 4116Page 753 of 4116Page 754 of 4116Page 755 of 4116Page 756 of 4116Page 757 of 4116Page 758 of 4116Page 759 of 4116Page 760 of 4116Page 761 of 4116Page 762 of 4116Page 763 of 4116Page 764 of 4116Page 765 of 4116Page 766 of 4116Page 767 of 4116Page 768 of 4116Page 769 of 4116Page 770 of 4116Page 771 of 4116Page 772 of 4116Page 773 of 4116Page 774 of 4116Page 775 of 4116Page 776 of 4116Page 777 of 4116Page 778 of 4116Page 779 of 4116Page 780 of 4116Page 781 of 4116Page 782 of 4116Page 783 of 4116Page 784 of 4116Page 785 of 4116Page 786 of 4116Page 787 of 4116Page 788 of 4116Page 789 of 4116Page 790 of 4116Page 791 of 4116Page 792 of 4116Page 793 of 4116Page 794 of 4116Page 795 of 4116Page 796 of 4116Page 797 of 4116Page 798 of 4116Page 799 of 4116Page 800 of 4116Page 801 of 4116Page 802 of 4116Page 803 of 4116Page 804 of 4116Page 805 of 4116Page 806 of 4116Page 807 of 4116Page 808 of 4116Page 809 of 4116Page 810 of 4116Page 811 of 4116Page 812 of 4116Page 813 of 4116Page 814 of 4116Page 815 of 4116Page 816 of 4116Page 817 of 4116Page 818 of 4116Page 819 of 4116Page 820 of 4116Page 821 of 4116Page 822 of 4116Page 823 of 4116Page 824 of 4116Page 825 of 4116Page 826 of 4116Page 827 of 4116Page 828 of 4116Page 829 of 4116Page 830 of 4116Page 831 of 4116Page 832 of 4116Page 833 of 4116Page 834 of 4116Page 835 of 4116Page 836 of 4116Page 837 of 4116Page 838 of 4116Page 839 of 4116Page 840 of 4116Page 841 of 4116Page 842 of 4116Page 843 of 4116Page 844 of 4116Page 845 of 4116Page 846 of 4116Page 847 of 4116Page 848 of 4116Page 849 of 4116Page 850 of 4116Page 851 of 4116Page 852 of 4116Page 853 of 4116Page 854 of 4116Page 855 of 4116Page 856 of 4116Page 857 of 4116Page 858 of 4116Page 859 of 4116Page 860 of 4116Page 861 of 4116Page 862 of 4116Page 863 of 4116Page 864 of 4116Page 865 of 4116Page 866 of 4116Page 867 of 4116Page 868 of 4116Page 869 of 4116Page 870 of 4116Page 871 of 4116Page 872 of 4116Page 873 of 4116Page 874 of 4116Page 875 of 4116Page 876 of 4116Page 877 of 4116Page 878 of 4116Page 879 of 4116Page 880 of 4116Page 881 of 4116Page 882 of 4116Page 883 of 4116Page 884 of 4116Page 885 of 4116Page 886 of 4116Page 887 of 4116Page 888 of 4116Page 889 of 4116Page 890 of 4116Page 891 of 4116Page 892 of 4116Page 893 of 4116Page 894 of 4116Page 895 of 4116Page 896 of 4116Page 897 of 4116Page 898 of 4116Page 899 of 4116Page 900 of 4116Page 901 of 4116Page 902 of 4116Page 903 of 4116Page 904 of 4116Page 905 of 4116Page 906 of 4116Page 907 of 4116Page 908 of 4116Page 909 of 4116Page 910 of 4116Page 911 of 4116Page 912 of 4116Page 913 of 4116Page 914 of 4116Page 915 of 4116Page 916 of 4116Page 917 of 4116Page 918 of 4116Page 919 of 4116Page 920 of 4116Page 921 of 4116Page 922 of 4116Page 923 of 4116Page 924 of 4116Page 925 of 4116Page 926 of 4116Page 927 of 4116Page 928 of 4116Page 929 of 4116Page 930 of 4116Page 931 of 4116Page 932 of 4116Page 933 of 4116Page 934 of 4116Page 935 of 4116Page 936 of 4116Page 937 of 4116Page 938 of 4116Page 939 of 4116Page 940 of 4116Page 941 of 4116Page 942 of 4116Page 943 of 4116Page 944 of 4116Page 945 of 4116Page 946 of 4116Page 947 of 4116Page 948 of 4116Page 949 of 4116Page 950 of 4116Page 951 of 4116Page 952 of 4116Page 953 of 4116Page 954 of 4116Page 955 of 4116Page 956 of 4116Page 957 of 4116Page 958 of 4116Page 959 of 4116Page 960 of 4116Page 961 of 4116Page 962 of 4116Page 963 of 4116Page 964 of 4116Page 965 of 4116Page 966 of 4116Page 967 of 4116Page 968 of 4116Page 969 of 4116Page 970 of 4116Page 971 of 4116Page 972 of 4116Page 973 of 4116Page 974 of 4116Page 975 of 4116Page 976 of 4116Page 977 of 4116Page 978 of 4116Page 979 of 4116Page 980 of 4116Page 981 of 4116Page 982 of 4116Page 983 of 4116Page 984 of 4116Page 985 of 4116Page 986 of 4116Page 987 of 4116Page 988 of 4116Page 989 of 4116Page 990 of 4116Page 991 of 4116Page 992 of 4116Page 993 of 4116Page 994 of 4116Page 995 of 4116Page 996 of 4116Page 997 of 4116Page 998 of 4116Page 999 of 4116Page 1000 of 4116Page 1001 of 4116Page 1002 of 4116Page 1003 of 4116Page 1004 of 4116Page 1005 of 4116Page 1006 of 4116Page 1007 of 4116Page 1008 of 4116Page 1009 of 4116Page 1010 of 4116Page 1011 of 4116Page 1012 of 4116Page 1013 of 4116Page 1014 of 4116Page 1015 of 4116Page 1016 of 4116Page 1017 of 4116Page 1018 of 4116Page 1019 of 4116Page 1020 of 4116Page 1021 of 4116Page 1022 of 4116Page 1023 of 4116Page 1024 of 4116Page 1025 of 4116Page 1026 of 4116Page 1027 of 4116Page 1028 of 4116Page 1029 of 4116Page 1030 of 4116Page 1031 of 4116Page 1032 of 4116Page 1033 of 4116Page 1034 of 4116Page 1035 of 4116Page 1036 of 4116Page 1037 of 4116Page 1038 of 4116Page 1039 of 4116Page 1040 of 4116Page 1041 of 4116Page 1042 of 4116Page 1043 of 4116Page 1044 of 4116Page 1045 of 4116Page 1046 of 4116Page 1047 of 4116Page 1048 of 4116Page 1049 of 4116Page 1050 of 4116Page 1051 of 4116Page 1052 of 4116Page 1053 of 4116Page 1054 of 4116Page 1055 of 4116Page 1056 of 4116Page 1057 of 4116Page 1058 of 4116Page 1059 of 4116Page 1060 of 4116Page 1061 of 4116Page 1062 of 4116Page 1063 of 4116Page 1064 of 4116Page 1065 of 4116Page 1066 of 4116Page 1067 of 4116Page 1068 of 4116Page 1069 of 4116Page 1070 of 4116Page 1071 of 4116Page 1072 of 4116Page 1073 of 4116Page 1074 of 4116Page 1075 of 4116Page 1076 of 4116Page 1077 of 4116Page 1078 of 4116Page 1079 of 4116Page 1080 of 4116Page 1081 of 4116Page 1082 of 4116Page 1083 of 4116Page 1084 of 4116Page 1085 of 4116Page 1086 of 4116Page 1087 of 4116Page 1088 of 4116Page 1089 of 4116Page 1090 of 4116Page 1091 of 4116Page 1092 of 4116Page 1093 of 4116Page 1094 of 4116Page 1095 of 4116Page 1096 of 4116Page 1097 of 4116Page 1098 of 4116Page 1099 of 4116Page 1100 of 4116Page 1101 of 4116Page 1102 of 4116Page 1103 of 4116Page 1104 of 4116Page 1105 of 4116Page 1106 of 4116Page 1107 of 4116Page 1108 of 4116Page 1109 of 4116Page 1110 of 4116Page 1111 of 4116Page 1112 of 4116Page 1113 of 4116Page 1114 of 4116Page 1115 of 4116Page 1116 of 4116Page 1117 of 4116Page 1118 of 4116Page 1119 of 4116Page 1120 of 4116Page 1121 of 4116Page 1122 of 4116Page 1123 of 4116Page 1124 of 4116Page 1125 of 4116Page 1126 of 4116Page 1127 of 4116Page 1128 of 4116Page 1129 of 4116Page 1130 of 4116Page 1131 of 4116Page 1132 of 4116Page 1133 of 4116Page 1134 of 4116Page 1135 of 4116Page 1136 of 4116Page 1137 of 4116Page 1138 of 4116Page 1139 of 4116Page 1140 of 4116Page 1141 of 4116Page 1142 of 4116 ta couiet, 60: c I oClerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller - Crystal K. Kinzel a Collier County, Florida u x 3315 Tamiami Trail East, Ste. 102 - Naples, FL 34112- 5324 e, fir Phone: ( 239) 252- 2646 s COIN `' Publication Confirmation COLLIER COUNTY STATE OF FLORIDA The attached copy of advertisement, 4/ 28/ 26 BCC- Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA( SRA) PL20240010212) was published on the publicly accessible website https:// notices. collierclerk. com as designated by Collier County, Florida on 04/ 08/ 2026. THIS IS NOT AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION. Page 1143 of 4116 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners ( BCC) at 9: 00 A.M. on April 28, 2026, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, third floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL to consider: A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DESIGNATING 1, 446. 59 ACRES WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT AS A STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA, TO BE KNOWN AS THE CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA, WHICH WILL ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A MAXIMUM OF 4, 502 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, OF WHICH A MINIMUM OF 10% WILL BE MULTI- FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, A MINIMUM OF 10% WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, AND A MINIMUM OF 10% WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED OR VILLA; A MINIMUM AND A MAXIMUM OF 238, 606 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE; A MAXIMUM OF 100, 000 SQUARE FEET OF INDOOR SELF STORAGE IN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE; A MINIMUM OF 45,020 SQUARE FEET OF CIVIC, GOVERNMENTAL AND INSTITUTIONAL USES IN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE; SENIOR HOUSING INCLUDING ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES AND CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES LIMITED TO 300 UNITS IN THE SRA; 362 OF THE MAXIMUM 4, 502 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS IN THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTEXT ZONE; NO COMMERCIAL USES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL CONTEXT ZONE; AND 8. 50 ACRES OF AMENITY AREA IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL CONTEXT ZONE; ALL SUBJECT TO A MAXIMUM PM PEAK HOUR TRIP CAP; AND APPROVING THE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA AND ESTABLISHING THAT 11, 703 STEWARDSHIP CREDITS ARE BEING UTILIZED BY THE DESIGNATION OF THE CORKSCREW GROVE EAST VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION OF SR 82 AND CORKSCREW ROAD, AND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION OF SR 82 AND CORKSCREW ROAD, BOTH EAST AND WEST OF CORKSCREW ROAD IN SECTIONS 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 AND 10, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PL20240010212] Page 1144 of 4116 Project Location U SR 82 z noNz p H 0 Gte to t a re 7 co C E At CI) CO r o n o W C9 Experimental RD Copies of the proposed Resolution are on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three( 3) minutes on any item. The selection of any individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. If recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted ten( 10) minutes to speak on an item. Written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven( 7) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record. As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like to participate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/ meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www. collier. gov/ Calendar- Events- directory after the agenda is posted on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user' s risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252- 8369 or email to Geoffrey.Willig(a,collier.gov. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112- 5356,( 239) 252- 8380, at least two( 2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Page 1145 of 4116BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA DAN KOWAL, CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER Page 1146 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 9.B ID# 2026-788 Executive Summary Recommendation to adopt a Resolution designating 1,295.4 acres in the Rural Land Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District as a Stewardship Sending Area with a designation as "SSA 22”; pursuant to the terms set forth in the Escrow Agreement, Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for SSA 22, and Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for SSA 22; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22; approving an Escrow Agreement for SSA 22; and establishing the number of Stewardship credits generated by the designation of said Stewardship Sending Area. The subject property is located in Sections 3, 4, 9, 10, and 15; Township 46 South; Range 28 East. [PL20240010213] (This is a companion to Item 9A) OBJECTIVE: To approve the proposed SSA 22 boundary and to establish the twenty-second Stewardship Sending Area (SSA 22) in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSA), approve a Stewardship Sending Credit Agreement, Stewardship Easement Agreement, and Escrow Agreement, and establish the number of credits generated. CONSIDERATIONS: Collier County adopted the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay District as an innovative program designed to preserve natural resource areas, to protect agricultural lands, and to direct growth to suitable locations. The RLSA relies primarily on incentives to protect natural resource areas. As landowners within the RLSA voluntarily protect environmentally valuable land, this enables public benefits to be achieved with little or no public funding. The mechanism to achieve these public benefits is through the voluntary designation of Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA) in exchange for Stewardship Credits that can be used to entitle compact development. Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) 22 totals 1,295.4± acres and is located in Sections 3, 4, 9, 10, and 15; Township 46 South; Range 28 East; Collier County. More specifically, SSA 22 is located east of Corkscrew Road and is bisected by State Road 82 (Exhibit 3-1). SSA 22 will preserve approximately 1,295.4± acres of private land. SSA 22 includes habitat for the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) and the Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) and provides habitat for many other listed species, such as Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), crested caracara (Caracara cheriway), wood stork (Mycteria americana), little blue heron (Egretta caerulea), tri-colored heron (Egretta tricolor), Florida sandhill crane (Grus canadensis pratensis), and American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis). This SSA application establishes the boundaries of a new SSA within Collier County (i.e., SSA 22); documents the Natural Resource Index (NRI) values assigned to the SSA; proposes the elimination of certain land use layers; and calculates the resulting number of Credits being generated. This application contains the NRI Assessment, support documentation, SSA Credit Agreement, and Stewardship Easement Agreement as required by Section 4.08.06 C. of the Collier County Land Development Code. SSA 22 will remove residential uses, general conditional uses, earth mining and processing uses, recreational uses, Agriculture Group 1, and Agriculture Support uses from 1,294.3± acres, while retaining the use rights for Agriculture Group 2 uses and conservation, restoration, and natural resource uses. The remaining 1.1 acres will remove residential uses, while retaining the rights for general conditional uses, earth mining, and processing uses, recreational uses, Agricultural Group 1 uses, Agriculture Support uses, Agriculture Group 2 uses, and conservation, restoration, and natural resource uses. SSA 22 proposes restoring 1,185 acres of the panther corridor. The proposed wildlife corridor will be over 2.75 miles in length and 1.5 miles wide in the widest locations and over 0.5 miles wide at the narrowest locations. The proposed panther corridor will provide a critical link between existing conservation lands and proposed conservation lands to the north and south. The designation of 1,295.4± acres as SSA 22, along with the removal of Land Use Layers, generates 1,082.2 stewardship base credits. The restoration proposed in this application generates 11,853.0 stewardship credits, of which 2,370.6 credits will be granted for initial restoration designation (R I). The remaining 9,482.4 credits shall be authorized for restoration implementation (R II) at the time of this application, but will not be available for transfer until the Page 1147 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 9.B ID# 2026-788 restoration has been completed and all applicable success criteria have been met. This brings the total number of Credits generated for SSA 22 from all sources to 12,935.2. Credit Source Proposed Credits Base Credits 1,082.2 Restoration Designation 2,370.6 Credits (R I) Restoration Implementation 9,482.4 Credits (R II) Total 12,935.2 This petition supports the objective of the Community Development strategic focus area to implement prudent and inclusive policy development through effective planning for transportation, land use, and growth management. FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant has paid fees totaling $9,500 for the processing and review of the application, and the development and maintenance of a Stewardship Credit System Database for the purpose of tracking credits. There are no additional fiscal impacts associated with the application. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) established the process and requirements for establishing an SSA, which lands qualify for SSA designation, and the use limitations for lands once designated as SSAs. The Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay is implemented through the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District. The zoning overlay contains the same requirements and limitations as the FLUE Overlay. Therefore, staff’s analysis indicates this petition for designation of SSA is in compliance with the RLSA Zoning Overlay, it may also be found consistent with the FLUE. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval. -HFAC RECOMMENDATION(S): To adopt a Resolution amending Stewardship Sending Area 22 (SSA 22) in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSA), designating 1,295.4 acres as SSA 22, approving a Stewardship Credit Agreement, Stewardship Easement Agreement, and Escrow Agreement for SSA 22 and establishing the number of credits generated by the designation of said Stewardship Sending Area. Further, that the Board direct staff to prepare an SSA memorandum to be recorded in the public records together with the necessary portions or exhibits of the SSA Credit Agreement and Easement; provide said documents to the Collier County Property Appraiser and the applicant, and that within 30 days of adoption the applicant shall record same into the public records. PREPARED BY: Jessica Constantinescu, Planner II, Comprehensive Planning ATTACHMENTS: 1. SSA Application Form Nonwritable -4_11_25 (Received) 2. Resolution 4-14-2026 for BCC 3. Legal Ad Page 1148 of 4116Page 1149 of 4116Page 1150 of 4116Page 1151 of 4116Page 1152 of 4116Page 1153 of 4116Page 1154 of 4116Page 1155 of 4116Page 1156 of 4116 RESOLUTION 2026- A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DESIGNATING APPROXIMATELY 1,295.4 ACRES IN THE RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT AS A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA WITH A DESIGNATION AS “SSA 22”; PURSUANT TO THE TERMS SET FORTH IN THE ESCROW AGREEMENT, STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT, AND STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA EASEMENT AGREEMENT, ALL FOR SSA 22; APPROVING A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR SSA 22; APPROVING A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR SSA 22; APPROVING AN ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SSA 22; AND ESTABLISHING THE NUMBER OF STEWARDSHIP CREDITS GENERATED BY THE DESIGNATION OF SAID STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN SECTIONS 3, 4, 9, 10 AND 15, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST. [PL20240010213] WHEREAS, Alico, Inc., a Florida corporation, formerly known as Alico Land Development Company (“Alico” or “Owner”), owns approximately one thousand two hundred ninety-five and four-tenths (1,295.4) acres located within the boundaries of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (“RLSA” District”) located in Collier County, Florida; and WHEREAS, Owner has voluntarily requested that said land be designated as a Stewardship Sending Area (“SSA”) in accordance with, and pursuant to Section 4.08.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code (“LDC”) and the terms of the Escrow Agreement, Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement and Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22; and WHEREAS, Owner has submitted a SSA Designation Application (“Application”) for the SSA 22 land, which staff has reviewed, along with support documentation and information required by Section 4.08.06 of the LDC, and determined that the Application is sufficient; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (“Board”) has determined the Escrow Agreement, Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement, and Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22 are in compliance with, and meet the requirements of the LDC, and provide a substantial benefit to the general public. [25-CMP-01244/2009575/1]20 Page 1 of 3 SSA #22/PL20240010213 3-26-26 Page 1157 of 4116 NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board that: 1. SSA 22, as described in attached Exhibit 1, consisting of approximately - one thousand two hundred ninety-five and four-tenths (1,295.4) acres is hereby designated as a Stewardship Sending Area (“SSA”), and will be officially designated as “SSA 22” on the official Zoning Atlas Map pursuant to the terms of the Escrow Agreement, Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement and the Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22. 2. The Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for SSA 22 attached hereto as Exhibit 2, meets the requirements of Section 4.08.06 of the LDC, and the Board hereby approves the Stewardship Credit Agreement for SSA 22. 3. The Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22, attached hereto as Exhibit 3, meets the requirements of Section 4.08.06 of the LDC, and the Board hereby approves the Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22. 4. The Escrow Agreement for SSA 22, attached hereto as Exhibit 4, is hereby approved by the Board which provides for the delay of the recordation of the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for SSA 22 and the Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement until such time as the proposed Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area has received the necessary final and non-appealable local, state and federal permits other than plat, site development plan and building permits necessary to construct the Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area consistent with the provisions of Section 4.08.07 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 5. The Board hereby establishes, grants and assigns twelve thousand nine hundred thirty-five and two-tenths (12,935.2) Stewardship Credits to the Owners, which may be sold, transferred, or otherwise utilized by the Owner in accordance with Section 4.08.04 of the LDC and the terms of the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for SSA 22, the Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for SSA 22, and the Escrow Agreement for SSA 22 as follows: three thousand four hundred fifty-two and eight-tenths (3,452.8) credits are available to use immediately and nine thousand four hundred eighty-two and four-tenths (9,482.4) credits will be available upon completion of restoration improvements as set forth in the Restoration Plan. [25-CMP-01244/2009575/1]20 Page 2 of 3 SSA #22/PL20240010213 3-26-26 Page 1158 of 4116 6. The Board further approves and authorizes the acceptance of the Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for the SSA 22 lands. 7. By its designation of the lands described in Exhibit 1 as a Stewardship Sending Area, the County shall not hereafter grant or approve any increase in the density or additional uses beyond those uses specifically authorized in the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for SSA 22. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED this _____ day of ______________ 2026, after a Motion, seconded, and majority vote favoring same. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA __________________________ By: _______________________________ , Deputy Clerk Dan Kowal, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: ____________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Exhibits: Exhibit 1 – Legal Description of SSA 22 Exhibit 2 – Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement Exhibit 3 – Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement Exhibit 4 – Escrow Agreement [25-CMP-01244/2009575/1]20 Page 3 of 3 SSA #22/PL20240010213 3-26-26 Page 1159 of 4116Page 1 of 8 Page 1160 of 4116Page 2 of 8 Page 1161 of 4116Page 3 of 8 Page 1162 of 4116Page 4 of 8 Page 1163 of 4116Page 5 of 8 Page 1164 of 4116Page 6 of 8 Page 1165 of 4116Page 7 of 8 Page 1166 of 4116Page 8 of 8 Page 1167 of 4116 STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT (SSA 22) THIS STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”) is made and entered into this ____ day of __________, 2026 (“Effective Date”), by and between COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as “County,” whose mailing address is the Harmon Turner Building, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida 34112; and Alico, Inc. formerly known as (“FKA”) Alico Land Development Company, a Florida corporation (“ALD”), whose mailing address is 10070 Daniels Interstate Court, Suite 200, Fort Myers, Florida 33913, hereinafter referred to as “Owner”, for the purpose of designating a “Stewardship Sending Area” (“SSA”) on certain lands belonging to Owner, eliminating Land Use Layers from said lands, and assigning to Owner Stewardship Credits, all pursuant to Section 4.08.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code (“LDC”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, ALD are the owners of approximately one thousand two hundred ninety five and four tenths (1,295.4) acres of land within the boundaries of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (“RLSA District”), located in Collier County, Florida, which land is the subject of an SSA Application (Application No. PL20240010213) filed by Owner with Collier County, Florida; and WHEREAS, ALD has submitted an application to Collier County, the South Florida Water Management District, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for authorization to develop the East Village Stewardship Receiving Area (“SRA”) located within the RLSA District; and WHEREAS, ALD has advised Collier County that the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA will be developed consistent with the provisions of Section 4.08.07 of the Collier County LDC, which will include the submittal of an SRA application pursuant to Section 4.08.07 of the Collier County LDC; WHEREAS, in order to develop the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA in accordance with Section 4.08.07, Owner is required under Section 4.08.07 to exchange Stewardship Credits granted under Section 4.08.06 in order to receive additional residential or non-residential entitlements for the SRA; WHEREAS, Owner has requested that the one thousand two hundred ninety five and four tenths (1,295.4) acre parcel legally described in the attached Exhibit “A” (hereinafter referred to as “SSA 22”) and depicted on Exhibit “B” be designated as an SSA in accordance with Section 4.08.06 of the Collier County LDC in order to establish Stewardship Credits for Owner to develop the East Village SRA; and PL20240010213 1 Page 1168 of 4116 WHEREAS, Owner has submitted, and the County has reviewed, an SSA Designation Application filed with the County on March 10, 2025 for the SSA 22 land described in Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, Collier County has reviewed the SSA Application, along with all support documentation and information required by Section 4.08.06 of the Collier County LDC, and determined that the Owner’s application is sufficient and should be granted; and WHEREAS, the County and Owner have reached agreement concerning the number of Stewardship Credits that are to be generated by the designation of SSA 22, and the parties further intend to specify the land uses that are eliminated from, and those land uses that remain on, SSA 22; and WHEREAS, the County and Owner agree that this Agreement is in compliance with and fully meets the requirements of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and LDC and is of substantial benefit to the general public. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and in further consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Land Designated as SSA. SSA 22 as described in Exhibit “A”, consisting of one thousand two hundred ninety five and four tenths (1,295.4) acres, is hereby designated an SSA and officially designated as SSA 22 (“SSA 22”). 2. Land Use Layers. The following Land Use Layers as described in the Land Use Matrix in Section 4.08.06 B.4 of the Collier County LDC are hereby eliminated from and prohibited within SSA 22. a. Within SSA 22, Land Use Layer 1 as described in Section 4.08.06B.4 of the LDC is hereby eliminated on one and one tenths (1.1) acre of SSA 22 designated as GCU on Exhibit “C1” and described in Exhibit “C.” The area designated as GCU on Exhibit “C1” and Exhibit “C” may be utilized for the uses included within General Conditional Uses (Land Use Layer 2), Earth Mining and Processing Uses (Land Use Layer 3), Recreation Uses (Land Use Layer 4), Agriculture – Group 1 (Land Use Layer 5), Agriculture – Support Uses (Land Use Layer 6), Agriculture – Group 2 (Land Use Layer 7), and Conservation, Restoration, and Natural Resources (Land Use Layer 8). b. Within SSA 22, Land Use Layers 1–6, inclusive, are hereby eliminated on one thousand two hundred ninety four and three tenths (1,294.3) acres designated AG-2 on Exhibit “C1” and as described in Exhibit “C”. The remaining Land Use Layer, Agriculture – Group 2, on lands described in Exhibit “C”, cannot be converted to Agriculture – Group 1 from and after the designation of such land as a SSA. PL20240010213 2 Page 1169 of 4116 c. Within the one thousand two hundred ninety four and three tenths (1,294.3) acres of SSA 22 designated as AG-2 on Exhibit “C” wherein Land Use Layer 1-6, inclusive, are being eliminated, one thousand one hundred eighty five and three tenths (1,185.3) acres are hereby designated for restoration, and Owner has agreed to complete the restoration improvement thereon which will satisfy the eligibility requirement set forth in LDC Section 4.08.06.B.5. Within the areas designated for restoration, all natural areas shall be maintained in their existing conditions until such time as restoration activities occur. Those areas are depicted within the Restoration Plan included as Exhibit “E”. d. The Owner reserves the right pursuant to Section 4.08.06 of the LDC to amend this SSA in the future to remove one or more additional Land Use Layers and/or for restoration activities in return for additional Stewardship Credits. Nothing in this provision, Agreement, Easement Agreement, or the County LDC shall preclude the Owner’s right to conduct restoration activities for use as compensation, mitigation, or conservation measures under any program established by County, State, or Federal statute, regulation, or ordinance. e. The County agrees that the removal of Land Use Layers to generate Stewardship Credits under this Agreement does not preclude the use of such removal as compensation, mitigation, or conservation measures under any program established by County, State, or Federal statute, regulation, or ordinance for activities conducted in an SRA utilizing the Stewardship Credits generated through this Agreement. The County also agrees that nothing in this Agreement, Stewardship Easement, or County LDC precludes the Owner’s right to conduct restoration activities for use as compensation, mitigation, or conservation measures under any program established by County, State, or Federal statute, regulation, or ordinance. 3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. A Natural Resource Index Assessment Worksheet (“Worksheet”) for SSA 22 is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit “D.” The Worksheet quantifies the number of acres by index values, sets forth the level of conservation, identifies the land designated for restoration, sets forth the restoration potential, and establishes the number of Stewardship Credits generated. The Worksheet separately sets forth the number of stewardship credits authorized as a result of the owner agreeing to undertake restoration activities. However, the stewardship credits generated by said restoration improvements are not available for utilization by Owner until such time as the applicable success criteria have been satisfied. The total number of Stewardship Credits hereby generated and assigned the Owner by this Agreement for SSA 22 are twelve thousand nine hundred thirty five and two tenths (12,935.2) Stewardship Credits, of which three thousand four hundred fifty two and eight tenths (3,452.8) Stewardship Credits are immediately available and may be sold, transferred, or otherwise utilized by the Owner in accordance with Section 4.08.06 of the Collier County LDC. The remaining nine thousand four hundred eighty two and four tenths (9,482.4) Stewardship Credits will be available to Owner for use, sale, or transfer, all or in PL20240010213 3 Page 1170 of 4116 part, after the success criteria for restoration improvements are met as set forth in the SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan (“Restoration Plan”) attached to the Agreement as Exhibit “E” and upon Board of County Commissioners approval. 4. Exchange Rate. The Stewardship Credits generated and assigned for the establishment of the SSA on SSA 22 herein may be transferred to an SRA in exchange for the development of land at the rate of ten (10) Stewardship Credits for the development of one acre of land in a SRA. 5. Land Management Measures. Subject to Section 4.08.06A.4 of the LDC, on those lands within SSA 22 on which only Land Use Layer 1 is eliminated, land management measures may consist of one or more of the following: brush clearing, mechanical brush control (“chopping”), prescribed burning, other exotic and nuisance species control, fence construction and maintenance, silviculture management, and ditch and road maintenance, to maintain the land in its existing condition. In addition to the land management measures listed above, the following land management measures may be utilized: disking; irrigation, ditch, dike and pumping construction and maintenance; road construction and maintenance; storage of farming equipment; and other practices associated with the uses under Land Use Layers 2–8, inclusive. Subject to Section 4.08.06A.4 of the LDC, on lands within SSA 22 on which Land Use Layers 1–6 have been eliminated, land management measures will be those customarily utilized in preserve management in Southwest Florida and may also include cattle grazing. These customary measures may include prescribed burning, mechanical brush control (“chopping”) and other exotic and nuisance species control, fence construction and maintenance, and trail maintenance. On lands within SSA 22 on which Land Use Layers 1–6 have been eliminated and on which Owner has agreed to undertake restoration improvements, there are additional land management measures to be undertaken after the completion of said restoration improvements. Those land management measures are specifically set forth in the Restoration Plan and are incorporated herein by reference. 6. References. The references herein to the LDC provisions are those contained in Section 4.08.06 of the Collier County LDC existing as of the date this Agreement becomes effective, and those provisions of the LDC shall control as to the rights, obligations, implementation, or interpretations of this Agreement and rights of the Owner in the SSA 22, unless the Owner elects in writing that subsequently enacted LDC provisions may govern the provisions of this Agreement. 7. Layers Included. PL20240010213 4 Page 1171 of 4116 The retention of any Land Use Layer also includes the retention of all Land Use Layers that are less intensive in nature and that are listed below that Land Use Layer (higher numbered layers) in Section 4.08.06 B.4 of the LDC, including the retention of Conservation, Restoration, and Natural Resource uses as contained in the Land Use Matrix contained in Section 4.08.06 B.4.b of the LDC. 8. Restriction on Land Use Amendments. Upon designation of the land described in Exhibit “A” as an SSA, the Owner shall not seek or request, and the County shall not grant nor approve, any increase in the density or any additional uses beyond those specified in this Agreement. Twenty two (22.0) acres of Flow-Way Stewardship Areas, two hundred sixteen and three tenths (216.3) acres of Habitat Stewardship Areas, and one thousand fifty seven and one tenths (1,057.1) acres of Open Land are depicted on the RLSA Overlay map, officially entitled “Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment Stewardship Overlay Map.” Upon designation of these lands as an SSA, the Owner shall neither seek nor request, and the County shall not in violation of Sections 4.08.06 F, thereafter, grant or approve any expansion or conversion of agricultural land uses. Notwithstanding any condition herein to the contrary, this Agreement and the Stewardship Easement shall terminate on the fifth (5th) year anniversary of the Effective Date, unless the SSA 22 Stewardship Credits have been exchanged for the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA and the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA has received all necessary final and non-appealable local, State, and Federal permits, other than a plat, a site development plan, or building permits, necessary to construct the Corkscrew Grove East Village SRA. All affirmative obligations and negative covenants contained in this Agreement and the Stewardship Easement shall be null and void upon such termination without further action from the parties hereto. Upon such termination the land shall revert to its underlying zoning classification as of the date of this Agreement, free and clear of any encumbrance from the Stewardship Easement. If requested by the Owner, Collier County shall provide a written release and termination of this Agreement and the Stewardship Easement for recording in the public records within fifteen (15) days of the request from the Owner. Collier County shall update the overlay map to reflect the termination of SSA 22 or any SRA. 9. Effectiveness. This Agreement shall be effective upon its execution by both parties (“Effective Date”). The terms, conditions, and obligations hereunder shall constitute covenants that run with the land and may be enforceable by either party in the circuit courts for the 20th Judicial Circuit in Collier County. In the event that either party hereto shall institute legal proceedings in connection with or for the enforcement of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses, to be taxed by a court of competent jurisdiction, which are directly related to any court trial and appellate proceedings. 10. Easement Agreement. Attached hereto as Exhibit “F” is a copy of the Stewardship Easement Agreement (without Exhibits) that will be executed by Owner and recorded by the Escrow Agent in PL20240010213 5 Page 1172 of 4116 accordance with the terms of the Escrow Agreement executed simultaneously with this Agreement. The Stewardship Easement Agreement grants a perpetual easement in favor of Collier County and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, setting forth specific land management measures and the party responsible for such measures for the SSA 22 land described in Exhibit “A,” which is the subject of this Agreement. 11. Open Lands. One thousand fifty seven and one tenths (1,057.1) acres of SSA 22 are Open Land. The Open Land is depicted on Exhibit “G.” 12. Successors and Assigns. As used in this Agreement the term “Owner” shall include the owner, its successors, and assigns of any of the SSA 22 land described in Exhibit “A.” 13. Amendments. This Agreement may only be amended by written agreement of all parties hereto. PL20240010213 6 Page 1173 of 4116 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers or representatives and their official seals hereto affixed the day and year first written above. Attest: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ____________________________ By: _________________________________ , Deputy Clerk Dan Kowal, Chairman Approved as to form and sufficiency: ______________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney Page 7 of 73 Page 1174 of 4116Page 1175 of 4116 LIST OF EXHIBITS ALD SSA 22 CREDIT AGREEMENT Exhibit “A” ALD SSA 22 Legal Description Exhibit “B” ALD SSA 22 (1,295.4 acre parcel) depicted on Map of SSA Land Exhibit “C” Retained Land Uses – Depiction of Lands – Removal of Layer 1 – 1.1 acre, Removal of Layers 1–6 – 1,294.3 acres Exhibit “C1” Retained Uses – Retained Land Uses Legal Descriptions Exhibit “D” Natural Resource Index Assessment Worksheet Exhibit “E” SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan Exhibit “F” ALD SSA 22 Stewardship Easement Agreement (Without Exhibits) Exhibit “G” Aerial with Open Lands Page 9 of 73 Page 1176 of 4116EXHIBIT A TO CREDIT AGREEMENT ALD SSA 22 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Page 10 of 73 Page 1177 of 4116Exhibit A to Credit Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description Page 11 of 73 Page 1178 of 4116Exhibit A to Credit Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description Page 12 of 73 Page 1179 of 4116Exhibit A to Credit Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description Page 13 of 73 Page 1180 of 4116Exhibit A to Credit Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description Page 14 of 73 Page 1181 of 4116Exhibit A to Credit Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description PagePage 15 of 1182 73 of 4116 Exhibit A to Credit Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description PagePage 16 of 1183 73 of 4116Exhibit A to Credit Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description PagePage 17 of 1184 73 of 4116Exhibit A to Credit Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description PagePage 18 of1185 73 of 4116EXHIBIT B TO CREDIT AGREEMENT ALD SSA 22 (1,295.4 ACRE PARCEL) DEPICTED ON MAP OF SSA LAND Page 19 of 73 Page 1186 of 4116Exhibit B to Credit Agrement ALD SSA 22 (1,295.4 Acre Parcel) Depicted on Map of SSA Land Page 1187 of 4116 Page 20 of 73 EXHIBIT C TO CREDIT AGREEMENT RETAINED LAND USES – DEPICTION OF LANDS – REMOVAL OF LAYER 1 – 1.1 ACRE REMOVAL OF LAYERS 1–6 – 1,294.3 ACRES Page 21 of 73 Page 1188 of 4116Exhibit C to Credit Agreement Retained Land Uses - Depiction of Lands - Removal of Layer 1-1.1 Acre Removal of Layers 1-6 - 1,294.3 Acres Page 1189 of 4116 Page 22 of 73 EXHIBIT C1 TO CREDIT AGREEMENT RETAINED USES – RETAINED LAND USES LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS Page 23 of 73 Page 1190 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Description BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. 9001 HIGHLAND WOOD BLVD., SUITE. 6, BONITA SPRINGS, FLORIDA, 34135 TELEPHONE: (239) 597-1315 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CORKSCREW GROVE SSA 22-AG 2 AREAS A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTIONS 03, 04, 09, 10 AND 15 TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: AREA 1 BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE RUN S.00°35'20"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,629.09 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE RUN S.00°35'45"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,532.89 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 82 (A 200 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY), SAID POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT “A”; THENCE RUN N.73°57'58"W., ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 3,138.52 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°39'31"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 362.33 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 84°49'01", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 134.88 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.43°04'01"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 148.03 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVE OF A NON-TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 401.27 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48°40'04", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 330.69 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.62°53'53"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 340.85 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE;THENCE RUN, N.38°31'20"W., A DISTANCE OF 625.86 FEET; THENCE RUN N.58°10'15"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 866.20 FEET; THENCE RUN N.54°00'42"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 161.27 FEET; THENCE RUN N.89°00'03"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 165.04 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 91°06'04", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 71.39 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.43°27'02"W., FOR A SHEET 1 OF 8 \\nas\data\Projects\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\LEGAL & SKETCH AG-2 AREAS 02 12 26\23.48 LEGAL DESC SSA 22 AG AREAS.rtf Page 24 of 73 Page 1191 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Description DISTANCE OF 79.50 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.02°06'00"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 602.74 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°39'41", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 71.12 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.43°13'50"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 79.12 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.88°33'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 264.85 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 74°33'23", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 60.57 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.54°09'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.06 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S.16°52'57"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 136.11 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 74°33'23", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 60.57 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.54°09'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.06 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.88°33'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 703.74 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN WESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 37°37'38", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 32.25 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.69°44'52"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 32.84 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.50°56'03"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 169.38 FEET; THENCE RUN N.88°33'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,025.38 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°00'00", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 70.71 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.43°33'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 78.54 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.01°26'19"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 188.82 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 69°12'45", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 56.79 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.36°02'42"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 60.40 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.70°39'05"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 408.22 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°10'09"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 560.56 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE RUN N.88°49'18"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,508.39 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE RUN S.89°29'58"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QURTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,641.45 FEET TO THE SHEET 2 OF 8 \\nas\data\Projects\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\LEGAL & SKETCH AG-2 AREAS 02 12 26\23.48 LEGAL DESC SSA 22 AG AREAS.rtf Page 25 of 73 Page 1192 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Description NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE RUN S.89°29'58"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,641.44 FEET; TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 402.724 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. AND AREA 2 COMMENCE AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT “A”, THENCE RUN S.00°35'45"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 03, FOR A DISTANCE OF 208.73 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID STATE ROAD 82 (A 200 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY), THE SAME BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE S.00°35'45"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 887.38 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 10; THENCE RUN S.00°28'02"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,699.34 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE RUN S.00°28'13"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,699.02 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE RUN S.00°08'16"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER AND ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15, FOR A DISTANCE OF 4,277.12 FEET; THENCE RUN S.89°41'04"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,890.02 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°08'15"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 4,276.95 FEET; THENCE RUN N.55°11'37"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 4,023.70 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°08'20"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 707.83 FEET; THENCE RUN S.79°20'37"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,604.70 FEET; THENCE RUN N.41°31'31"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,675.17 FEET; THENCE RUN N.75°10'22"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 213.78 FEET; THENCE RUN S.14°49'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 726.00 FEET; THENCE RUN N.75°10'22"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 758.28 FEET; THENCE RUN N.55°37'02"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 989.88 FEET; THENCE RUN N.31°34'44"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.46 FEET; THENCE RUN N.58°00'12"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 959.28 FEET; THENCE RUN S.75°07'20"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 3,821.10 FEET; THENCE RUN N.14°52'39"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.55 FEET; THENCE RUN N.06°02'21"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 300.50 FEET; THENCE RUN N.75°01'20"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 885.99 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,725.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 57°00'46", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 1,646.54 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.46°30'57"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,716.48 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN SHEET 3 OF 8 \\nas\data\Projects\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\LEGAL & SKETCH AG-2 AREAS 02 12 26\23.48 LEGAL DESC SSA 22 AG AREAS.rtf Page 26 of 73 Page 1193 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Description N.18°00'34"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 269.47 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°00'47"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,149.10 FEET; THENCE RUN N.73°57'58"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,267.66 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVE OF A NON- TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, HAVING A RADIUS OF 497.96 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°24'27", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 20.92 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.29°47'47"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 20.92 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.31°00'01"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 361.08 FEET; THENCE RUN N.16°02'01"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 10.84 FEET TO SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 82 (A 200 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY); THENCE RUN S.73°57'58"E., ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 4,278.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 891.608 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THE TOTAL AREA OF PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN IS 1,294.332 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON REFER TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 03, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, HAVING A BEARING OF S.89°29'58"E. SOUTH 89° 23' 32 THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. Digitally signed by Stephen Berry Stephen DN: c=US, ou=LS 5296, o=BBLS Surveyors, inc., cn=Stephen Berry, email=sberry@bblsinc.net _____________________________02/14/2026Berry Date: 2026.02.16 15:25:48 -05'00' STEPHEN E. BERRY, STATE OF FLORIDA, (PLS #5296) BBLS SURVEYORS, INC., (LB #8033) SEE ATTACHED SKETCH (SHEETS 5 THROUGH 8) SHEET 4 OF 8 \\nas\data\Projects\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\LEGAL & SKETCH AG-2 AREAS 02 12 26\23.48 LEGAL DESC SSA 22 AG AREAS.rtf Page 27 of 73 Page 1194 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Description A PORTION OF SECTIONS 03, 04, 09, 10 AND 15 TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PagePage 28 1195 of 73 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Description A PORTION OF SECTIONS 03, 04, 09, 10 AND 15 TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Page 1196 of 4116 Page 29 of 73Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Description A PORTION OF SECTIONS 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 15 AND 18, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PagePage 30 1197of 73 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Description 03, 04, 09, 10 AND 15 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, A PORTION OF SECTIONS PagePage 31 1198 of 73 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Descriptions BBLS SURVEYORS, INC 9001 HIGHLAND WOOD BLVD., SUITE. 6, BONITA SPRINGS, FLORIDA, 34135 TELEPHONE: (239) 597-1315 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CORKSCREW GROVE SSA 22 “GENERAL CONDITIONAL USE AREA” A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 09, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN S.00°28'02"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2699.34 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 10; THENCE CONTINUE S.00°28'02"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 496.66 TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF AN 80 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 402, PAGE 29 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN N.77°05'20"E., ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 9325.59 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HERIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN S.58°00'12"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 959.28 FEET; THENCE RUN N.31°34'44"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF CORKSCREW ROAD (A 100 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY); THENCE RUN N.58°00'12"E., ALONG SOUTHERLY SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 912.09 FEET; THENCE RUN S.75°07'20"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 68.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 1.074 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON REFER TO THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, HAVING A BEARING OF S.00°28'02"E. 89° 2 Digitally signed by Stephen Berry Stephen DN: c=US, ou=LS 5296, o=BBLS Surveyors, inc., cn=Stephen Berry, email=sberry@bblsinc.net Date: 2025.11.07 14:01:43 -05'00' Berry_____________________________10/31/2025 STEPHEN E. BERRY, STATE OF FLORIDA, (PLS #5296) BBLS SURVEYORS, INC., (LB #8033) SEE ATTACHED SKETCH (SHEETS 2 THROUGH 3) SHEET 1 OF 3 .\\nas\data\Projects\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\SSA 22 GCUA\SSA 22 GCUA.rtf Page 32 of 73 Page 1199 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Descriptions A PORTION OF SECTION 09, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PagePage 33 of 1200 73 of 4116Exhibit C1 to Credit Agreement Retained Uses - Retained Land Uses Legal Descriptions A PORTION OF SECTION 09, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PagePage 34 of 1201 73 of 4116 EXHIBIT D TO CREDIT AGREEMENT NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Page 35 of 73 Page 1202 of 4116Exhibit D to Credit Agreement Natural Resource Index Assessment Worksheet Exhibit D1. SSA 22 BASE CREDIT CALCULATION TABLE1 (February 2026) Percent of HSA WRA Total SSA FSA Total Open Total Agriculture Agriculture Total Base Index Value Total SSA Total Total GCU Acres GCU Credits Acres Acres Acres Group 2 Acres Group 2 Credits Credits Acreage Acres Acres 0 0.2% 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8% 10.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.9 0.0 0.0 11.3 2.0 2.0 0.3 0.6% 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 0.4 0.0 7.4 2.0 2.0 0.4 0.5% 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 2.2 2.2 0.5 6.8% 87.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 87.6 0.3 0.0 81.4 36.6 36.6 0.6 1.5% 19.9 0.0 5.9 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 20.1 10.8 10.8 0.7 28.6% 370.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 370.1 0.3 0.0 373.3 235.2 235.2 0.8 2.7% 34.8 0.0 13.3 0.0 21.6 0.0 0.0 35.2 25.4 25.4 0.9 18.1% 234.8 0.0 27.3 0.0 207.5 0.0 0.0 239.3 193.8 193.8 1.0 7.6% 98.5 7.4 18.4 0.0 72.6 0.0 0.0 97.9 88.1 88.1 1.1 11.8% 152.2 0.2 7.9 0.0 144.1 0.0 0.0 152.5 151.0 151.0 1.2 4.0% 51.7 0.0 29.6 0.0 22.2 0.0 0.0 51.6 55.7 55.7 1.3 6.8% 88.5 1.3 21.7 0.0 65.5 0.0 0.0 87.7 102.6 102.6 1.4 3.8% 48.8 2.7 10.7 0.0 35.4 0.0 0.0 47.5 59.8 59.8 1.5 3.0% 38.8 1.8 28.1 0.0 8.8 0.0 0.0 38.7 52.2 52.2 1.6 0.7% 9.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 8.4 0.0 0.0 9.2 13.3 13.3 1.7 1.3% 16.9 1.1 14.5 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 16.8 25.8 25.8 1.8 0.4% 5.0 4.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 6.5 6.5 1.9 0.9% 11.9 0.0 10.9 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 12.3 21.0 21.0 2.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Totals 100.0% 1,295.4 22.0 216.3 0.0 1,057.1 1.1 0.1 1,294.3 1,084.2 1,084.2 Lands ˃ 1.2 16.9% 218.9 11.2 87.2 0.0 120.4 0.0 0.0 216.3 281.3 281.3 1 Base Credits are a factor of the Index Value, Retained Land Use acreage, and predetermined multipliers assigned to each Retained Land Use Layer. See Exhibit 3-2B. Stewardship Overlay areas by Index Value are provided for reference and are not used in determining the base credit amount. Note: Due to rounding, some totals may sum to 0.1± different than the true total. D1-1 Page 36 of 73 Page 1203 of 4116 Exhibit D to Credit Agreement Natural Resource Index Assessment Worksheet Exhibit D2. SSA 22 Base Credit Spreadsheet (Revised February 2026) Base Credits Stewardship NRI Value Land Use Layers Retained Acreage From Layers Base Credits Removed 0.0 Agriculture Group 2 1.9 0.90 0.0 0.0 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 0.1 Agriculture Group 2 0.0 0.90 0.0 0.1 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 0.2 Agriculture Group 2 11.3 0.90 2.0 0.2 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 0.3 Agriculture Group 2 7.4 0.90 2.0 0.3 General Conditional Use 0.4 0.20 0.0 0.4 Agriculture Group 2 6.1 0.90 2.2 0.4 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 0.5 Agriculture Group 2 81.4 0.90 36.6 0.5 General Conditional Use 0.3 0.20 0.0 0.6 Agriculture Group 2 20.1 0.90 10.9 0.6 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 0.7 Agriculture Group 2 373.3 0.90 235.2 0.7 General Conditional Use 0.3 0.20 0.0 0.8 Agriculture Group 2 35.2 0.90 25.3 0.8 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 0.9 Agriculture Group 2 239.3 0.90 193.8 0.9 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.0 Agriculture Group 2 97.9 0.90 88.1 1.0 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.1 Agriculture Group 2 152.5 0.90 151.0 1.1 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.2 Agriculture Group 2 51.6 0.90 55.7 1.2 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.3 Agriculture Group 2 87.7 0.90 102.6 1.3 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.4 Agriculture Group 2 47.5 0.90 59.9 1.4 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.5 Agriculture Group 2 38.7 0.90 52.2 1.5 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.6 Agriculture Group 2 9.2 0.90 13.2 1.6 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.7 Agriculture Group 2 16.8 0.90 25.7 1.7 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.8 Agriculture Group 2 4.0 0.90 6.5 D2-1 Page 37 of 73 Page 1204 of 4116Exhibit D to Credit Agreement Natural Resource Index Assessment Worksheet Base Credits Stewardship NRI Value Land Use Layers Retained Acreage From Layers Base Credits Removed 1.8 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 1.9 Agriculture Group 2 12.3 0.90 21.0 1.9 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 2.0 Agriculture Group 2 0.0 0.90 0.0 2.0 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 2.1 Agriculture Group 2 0.0 0.90 0.0 2.1 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 2.2 Agriculture Group 2 0.0 0.90 0.0 2.2 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 2.3 Agriculture Group 2 0.0 0.90 0.0 2.3 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 2.4 Agriculture Group 2 0.0 0.90 0.0 2.4 General Conditional Use 0.0 0.20 0.0 Total 1,084.2 Note: Due to rounding, some totals may sum to 0.1± different than the true total. NRI scores were determined by applicant and environmental staff using the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay Stewardship Credit Worksheet and verified though Geographic Information System analysis. D2-2 Page 38 of 73 Page 1205 of 4116 EXHIBIT E TO CREDIT AGREEMENT SSA 22 COLLIER COUNTY RESTORATION PLAN Page 39 of 73 Page 1206 of 4116 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA 22 COLLIER COUNTY RESTORATION PLAN February 2026 1.0 INTRODUCTION The following provides details of the restoration plan for Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) 22, located in Sections 3, 4, 9, 10, and 15; Township 46 South; Range 28 East; Collier County. This restoration plan and the accompanying Collier County Restoration Plans drawings (Sheets 1 through 23) (Plans) are provided in compliance with Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 4.08.06.C.5.j.(5) and contain the required elements per the LDC. SSA 22 totals 1,295.4± acres and the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) connects to the SSA’s southern boundary. The Florida Forever program currently lists a portion of the land included in SSA 22 as an essential parcel remaining for targeted acquisition, reflecting its high environmental value. The Florida Forever Five-Year Plan also describes cypress swamps and marsh areas of CREW as important habitat for the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) and Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus). A portion of SSA 22 is also listed as a priority 2 area by the Florida Ecological Greenways Network and is thereby designated as part of the Florida Wildlife Corridor under the 2021 Florida Wildlife Corridor Act. Proposed restoration within SSA 22 totals 1,185.3± acres and includes panther corridor restoration. The entity responsible for completing this restoration plan is Alico Land Development Company. 2.0 RESTORATION GOALS The goal of the restoration plan is to return natural and historical functions from currently degraded and altered habitats, which will provide regional benefits for wildlife. Restoration and protection of lands within SSA 22 provide continuity of habitat and foraging areas for fauna, including the federally endangered Florida panther, federally threatened crested caracara (Caracara cheriway) and wood stork (Mycteria americana), state-threatened gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), and state-listed wading birds. 2.1 Panther Corridor Restoration Panther corridor restoration is proposed on 1,185.3± acres of SSA 22. The 1,185.3± acres are composed of a combination of citrus groves and natural habitats. The natural habitats are primarily pine habitats with various degrees of exotic vegetation infestation. The panther corridor restoration will consist of exotic vegetation removal and agricultural field restoration. Together, these restoration activities will restore and enhance a significant portion of a regional wildlife corridor. Page 40 of 73 Page 1207 of 4116Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan The area of SSA 22 designated for panther corridor restoration is shown on Sheet 7 of the Plans. 2.1.1 Restoration Through Exotic Treatment A portion of the panther corridor restoration will be achieved through exotic treatment. Restoration through exotic treatment will include enhancing habitats that are infested with exotic and nuisance vegetation. Due to the infestation by exotic and nuisance vegetation, these areas have a reduced value to wildlife and potentially limit the effectiveness of serving as a large mammal wildlife corridor. The goal of exotic removal is to restore quality native wetland and upland habitats for use as a dispersal corridor for large mammals, including the Florida panther. The locations of these restoration areas are shown on Sheets 8 through 11 of the Plans. 2.1.2 Agricultural Field Restoration The goal of the agricultural field restoration is to create quality native habitats that can be utilized by large mammals, including the Florida panther, as a regional wildlife corridor. Target habitat types for the agricultural field restoration include a combination of native uplands, wet prairies, freshwater marshes, and scattered areas of open-water habitat. In addition to serving as a wildlife corridor for large mammals, the creation of native wetland habitats and areas of open water will result in additional foraging habitats for wading birds, including the wood stork. The creation of wet prairie habitats will provide additional foraging and nesting habitat for crested caracara. The locations of the agricultural field restoration are shown on Sheets 8 through 11 of the Plans. 2.1.3 Filter Marsh Creation A portion of the panther corridor restoration will include creation of a filter marsh along the southern border of SSA 22 and immediately north of CREW lands. The goal of the filter marsh is to improve the water quality of ongoing discharges to CREW lands, which are part of the overall regional wildlife corridor outside of SSA 22. The creation of the filter marsh will also provide foraging habitats for wading birds, including the wood stork. The locations of the filter marsh creation are shown on Sheets 8 through 11 of the Plans. 3.0 RESTORATION WORK The vegetation communities to be restored will consist of a combination of wetland and upland habitats. The wetland habitats to be restored consist primarily of hydric pine, mixed wetland hardwoods, wetlands shrub, wet prairie, and freshwater marsh. The upland habitats to be restored consist primarily of pine flatwoods, mixed hardwood, dry prairie, and palmetto prairie. Page 41 of 73 Page 1208 of 4116 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan The exotic vegetation species to be treated are those species identified as Categories I and II invasive exotic plant species, pursuant to the list established by the Florida Invasive Species Council. The exotic species to be treated include, but are not limited to, melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia), earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), torpedograss (Panicum repens), and Old World climbing fern (Lygodium microphyllum). 3.1 Agricultural Field Restoration The agricultural field restoration work conducted as part of the panther corridor restoration will involve backfilling ditches and grading/tilling the fields to wetland and upland elevations. The fields will be graded as shown on Sheets 12 through 15 of the Plans. The grading plan for these areas includes establishing a combination of native upland habitats, wet prairies, and freshwater marshes. An as-built survey of the graded/tilled site will be performed to ensure the desired elevations have been obtained. After surveying the final grades, the areas will either be seeded or planted with native species. Herbicide treatment of exotic and nuisance species may be conducted after grading/tilling to prepare the areas for planting or seeding with native vegetation. The species selected for planting or seeding will depend on site conditions and market availability at the time the seeding and/or plantings are to occur. Plantings for areas designated as Wetland Plantings on Sheets 16 through 19 of the Plans will include species listed in Table 1 or a native seed mix that includes species listed in Table 1. Table 1. Wetland Plantings Common Name Scientific Name Arrowhead Sagittaria lancifolia Dense flower knotweed Polygonum glabrum Fireflag Thalia geniculata Knotted spikerush Eleocharis interstincta Maidencane Hymenachne hemitomon Pickerelweed Pontederia cordata Sand cordgrass Spartina bakeri Sawgrass Cladium jamaicense Softstem bulrush Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani Spatterdock Nuphar luteum Plantings and/or seeds for areas designated as Upland Plantings and/or Native Seeding on Sheets 16 through 19 of the Plans will include species listed in Table 2 or a native seed mix that includes species listed in Table 2. Page 42 of 73 Page 1209 of 4116 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan Table 2. Upland Plantings and Seedings Common Name Scientific Name Broomsedge Andropogon virginicus Cabbage palm Sabal palmetto Dahoon holly Ilex cassine Fakahatchee grass Tripsacum dactyloides Gulfdune paspalum Paspalum monostachyum Laurel oak Quercus laurifolia Little blue maidencane Amphicarpum muehlenbergianum Live oak Quercus virginiana Muhly grass Muhlenbergia capillaris Purple lovegrass Eragrostis spectabilis Sand cordgrass Spartina bakeri Saw palmetto Serenoa repens Slash pine Pinus elliottii Wiregrass Aristida stricta 3.2 Exotic Treatment Exotic treatment will be conducted using one or more of the following methods: (1) cut exotic trees within 12 inches of ground elevation and treat the remaining stump with an approved herbicide; (2) girdle standing melaleuca with a diameter at breast height (DBH) greater than 4 inches and apply an approved herbicide to cambium; (3) foliar application of an approved herbicide to melaleuca saplings, Brazilian pepper, and earleaf acacia; (4) foliar application of an approved herbicide or hand pulling of exotic seedlings; and (5) direct application of an approved herbicide to exotic grasses, ground cover, and vines. Exotic trees greater than four inches DBH will be (1) girdled, treated with an approved herbicide, and left standing; or (2) the exotic vegetative debris will be cut and stacked in piles at approximately 100-foot intervals. If stacking of debris is utilized, smaller cuttings will be stacked butt end to the ground into a nearly vertical position (i.e., teepee method). Larger cuttings will be cut and stacked side by side into an area approximately 6 feet on a side. Cuttings will be stacked perpendicular to the previous layer up to a height of approximately 4 feet (i.e., log cabin method). 4.0 MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT Following the completion of the initial agricultural field restoration, and exotic treatment activities, semiannual maintenance events and inspections will be conducted in the restoration areas for the first two years. An ecologist will inspect the restoration areas and identify any areas in need of treatment. Locations of exotic species will be targeted for immediate treatment with an appropriate herbicide. Any additional potential problems will also be noted, and corrective actions will be taken. Once exotic species levels have been reduced to acceptable limits, inspections of the restoration areas will be conducted annually. Page 43 of 73 Page 1210 of 4116 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan 5.0 MONITORING The proposed monitoring of the restoration areas will consist of baseline, time-zero, and annual monitoring of vegetation, wildlife, rainfall, and wetland water levels. The baseline monitoring event and report will document the conditions of the restoration areas as they currently exist. The time-zero monitoring event and report will document conditions immediately following the completion of restoration activities. Annual monitoring and reporting will then be conducted for a total of five years. The annual reports will document the conditions of the restoration areas and the extent of the success of the restoration activities. If needed, the annual reports will identify specific actions to be taken to improve the conditions within the restoration areas. 5.1 Vegetation Monitoring Vegetation will be monitored prior to and following restoration activities. Sampling will involve canopy, sub-canopy, and ground cover strata along monitoring transects established within the restoration areas. Sampling transects and methodology for the baseline, time-zero, and annual reports will utilize identical data collection methods from identical sampling stations. See Sheets 20 through 23 of the Plans for the proposed monitoring transect locations within the agricultural field restoration areas. Additionally, two monitoring transects within the exotic treatment restoration areas and three transects within the road grade removal area will be installed and monitored. Forested habitats, canopy, and sub-canopy vegetation species will be monitored within 20 x 50-foot plots established along the monitoring transects. Species richness and visual estimates of percent cover will be calculated for canopy and sub-canopy strata. For forested and herbaceous habitats, ground cover will be monitored using the point frame method. Point frames will be sampled at approximately 50-foot intervals along each monitoring transect. Each point frame consists of a one-square-meter square wire grid with 25 cross-points. Any plant species directly below a cross-point will be recorded, including bare ground. Each cross-point represents four percent of the square meter. Water depths will also be recorded at each sampling station. For each sampling station, identified species will be listed and percent cover computed and discussed. 5.2 Wildlife Monitoring Regular observations of wildlife will be made during the monitoring event by qualified ecologists. Observations will consist of recording evidence and signs of wildlife (i.e., direct sightings, vocalizations, burrows, nests, tracks, droppings, etc.). 5.3 Fish and Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Qualitative sampling of fish and aquatic macroinvertebrates will be conducted using a standard D-frame aquatic dip net with a one-millimeter mesh size. Sampling will be conducted along vegetation monitoring transects with a minimum of two centimeters of standing water. The collector will work the net vigorously within the vegetation, open Page 44 of 73 Page 1211 of 4116Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan water, and surficial bottom sediments. Net contents will be placed in a white pan and sorted with forceps. Hard substrate, if any, will also be examined for the presence of aquatic macroinvertebrates. Sampling will continue until no new species are encountered for ten minutes. Sample size and collection times will not exceed 200 organisms or one hour, respectively. Samples will be preserved in alcohol, returned to the laboratory, and identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible. When possible, fish will be identified in the field and released. 5.4 Photographic Documentation Permanent fixed-point photograph stations will be established along each vegetation monitoring transect to provide physical documentation of the condition and appearance of the restoration area, as well as any changes taking place within it. Monitoring photographs will accompany vegetation data in each report. The locations of the photograph stations will remain the same throughout the duration of the monitoring program. 5.5 Monitoring Wells and Rainfall Data Hydrologic monitoring for the agricultural field restoration area will include the installation of two continuously recording monitoring wells. These monitoring wells will be set to record hydrologic data on a daily basis. Monitoring well data will be downloaded once every three months and will be summarized in the annual monitoring reports along with available rainfall data for the area. 6.0 MONITORING REPORTS Annual monitoring reports will be submitted to the County to document the success of the restoration program and the general condition of the restoration areas. The monitoring reports will include the following information: • A brief description of restoration and management activities performed since the previous report, along with a discussion of any modifications to the restoration or maintenance program; • A brief description of anticipated restoration and maintenance work to be conducted over the next year; • Results of quantitative vegetation monitoring; • A list of observed wildlife species; • A list of fish and aquatic macroinvertebrates collected; • Monitoring photographs taken at photograph stations; and • Monitoring well data for the agricultural field restoration areas and available local rainfall data. Page 45 of 73 Page 1212 of 4116Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan 7.0 WORK SCHEDULE The proposed restoration activities will be completed in phases in accordance with the work schedule outlined in Table 3. Table 3. Work Schedule Estimated Time to Phase Restoration Area Restoration Activity Complete Activity1 1 Panther Corridor Restoration through exotic treatment 8 to 12 months 2 Panther Corridor Agricultural field restoration 24 to 36 months 3 Panther Corridor Filter marsh creation 12 to 18 months 1Estimated time is for restoration activities listed and does not include semiannual and annual maintenance events. 8.0 SUCCESS CRITERIA The following section describes the success criteria for each of the proposed restoration activities. Upon the achievement of the success criteria as described for each restoration activity, the corresponding Restoration Implementation Stewardship Credits shall be available for the Owner’s use. 8.1 Restoration Through Exotic Treatment The following are the success criteria for restoration through exotic treatment: initial eradication of exotic and nuisance vegetation will be completed in treatment areas; and the treatment areas will consist of no more than five percent cover within the tree and shrub layers by exotic vegetation. A total of 3,068.8 Stewardship Credits shall be available upon the achievement of these success criteria. 8.2 Agricultural Field Restoration The following are the success criteria for restoration in agricultural fields: (1) Backfilling of ditches and grading/tilling of agricultural fields will be completed; (2) herbicide treatment of agricultural fields will be completed; (3) an as-built survey of graded elevations will be completed; and (4) planting and/or seeding of native vegetation within agricultural fields will be completed. A total of 6,124.8 Stewardship Credits shall be available upon the achievement of these success criteria. 8.3 Filter Marsh Creation The following are the success criteria for filter marsh creation: (1) Filter marshes will be graded to depths as indicated by engineering plans; (2) an as-built survey of graded elevations will be completed; (3) planting of wetland vegetation within the filter marshes will be completed. A total of 288.8 Stewardship Credits shall be available upon the achievement of these success criteria. Page 46 of 73 Page 1213 of 4116Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan Page 47 of 73 Page 1214 of 4116Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan Page 1215 of 4116 Page 48 of 73Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan Page 1216 of 4116 Page 49 of 73Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan Page 1217 of 4116 Page 50 of 73Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan Page 1218 of 4116 Page 51 of 73Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan Page 1219 of 4116 Page 52 of 73Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan Page 1220 of 4116 Page 53 of 73 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan SCALE: 1" = 450' LEGEND: WETLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS SHEET 8 WETLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS SHEET 9 OTHER SURFACE WATERS PRESERVE SHEET 10 SHEET 11 UPLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS UPLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS MAP KEY UPLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND SITE 8CR1673 TO SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS NOTES: BE PRESERVED EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELDS TO BE HIKING GRADED AND PLANTED WITH NATIVE PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. TRAIL EXISTING VEGETATION DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND STRUCTURE PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD TO REMAIN PROPOSED FILTER MARSH Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. * SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE SHEET 8 NOT IN RESTORATION AREA WETLAND LINES EM 06 12 24.DWG DATED JUNE 12, SHEET 9 2024. SURVEYED WETLAND LINE SURVEYED "OTHER SUFACE WATERS" LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE FINAL OSW LOCATION EM 08 27 PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING 24.DWG DATED AUGUST 27, 2024. REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - RESTORATION PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 8 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 8-11 Panther Corridor Restoration Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 8 Feb 17, 2026 - 2:59pm Plotted by: will Page 1221 of 4116 Page 54 of 73 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SHEET 8 SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan SHEET 9 LEGEND: WETLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL SCALE: 1" = 450' REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS OTHER SURFACE WATERS PRESERVE UPLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS UPLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS UPLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELDS TO BE GRADED AND PLANTED WITH NATIVE VEGETATION PROPOSED FILTER MARSH EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES NOT IN RESTORATION AREA SURVEYED WETLAND LINE HIKING TRAIL PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING SHEET 8 SHEET 9 SHEET 10 SHEET 11 SHEETSHEET 11 9 MAP KEY NOTES: PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE WETLAND LINES EM 06 12 24.DWG DATED JUNE 12, 2024. SURVEYED "OTHER SUFACE WATERS" LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE FINAL OSW LOCATION EM 08 27 24.DWG DATED AUGUST 27, SHEET 9 2024. SHEET 10 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - RESTORATION PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 9 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 8-11 Panther Corridor Restoration Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 9 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:00pm Plotted by: will Page 1222 of 4116 Page 55 of 73 SHEET 9 SHEET 10 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan SCALE: 1" = 450' LEGEND: WETLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS SHEET 8 WETLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS SHEET 9 OTHER SURFACE WATERS PRESERVE SHEET 10 SHEET 11 UPLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS UPLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS MAP KEY UPLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS NOTES: EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELDS TO BE GRADED AND PLANTED WITH NATIVE PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. VEGETATION DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD PROPOSED FILTER MARSH Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE NOT IN RESTORATION AREA WETLAND LINES EM 06 12 24.DWG DATED JUNE 12, 2024. SURVEYED WETLAND LINE SURVEYED "OTHER SUFACE WATERS" LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE FINAL OSW LOCATION EM 08 27 PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING 24.DWG DATED AUGUST 27, 2024. SHEET 10 SHEET 11 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - RESTORATION PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 10 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 8-11 Panther Corridor Restoration Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 10 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:00pm Plotted by: will Page 1223 of 4116 Page 56 of 73 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN SHEETSHEET 11 9 * SHEET 10 SHEET 11 LEGEND: WETLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS SHEET 8 WETLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL SHEET 9 REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND SHEET 10 SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS SHEET 11 OTHER SURFACE WATERS PRESERVE UPLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS MAP KEY UPLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS UPLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS NOTES: EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELDS TO BE GRADED AND PLANTED WITH NATIVE PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. VEGETATION DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD PROPOSED FILTER MARSH Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE NOT IN RESTORATION AREA WETLAND LINES EM 06 12 24.DWG DATED JUNE 12, 2024. SURVEYED WETLAND LINE SURVEYED "OTHER SUFACE WATERS" LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE FINAL OSW LOCATION EM 08 27 PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING 24.DWG DATED AUGUST 27, 2024. SCALE: 1" = 450' REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - RESTORATION PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 11 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 8-11 Panther Corridor Restoration Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 11 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:01pm Plotted by: will Page 1224 of 4116 Page 57 of 73 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan 24.0 25.2 25.1 32.4 32.1 33.5 34.7 33.5 23.2 24.8 26.2 26.3 33.9 26.9 26.426.0 24.8 26.0 29.5 29.5 28.7 30.8 25.6 18.3 16.9 30.9 30.7 31.9 23.7 14.0 23.4 32.6 31.8 25.6 25.1 27.4 28.5 31.4 23.2 25.3 29.7 30.1 25.4 30.3 30.2 29.8 30.1 25.4 25.4 24.6 25.4 24.2 27.1 28.7 25.6 26.0 27.4 25.6 24.6 26.9 25.425.2 25.625.925.325.4 26.7 23.6 26.3 24.1 29.9 26.226.6 25.6 30.6 25.6 24.3 26.0 23.1 28.0 23.2 25.4 25.7 23.7 27.4 27.0 27.5 23.2 26.9 24.8 26.8 23.7 23.2 23.9 25.2 26.6 24.1 22.0 25.0 24.3 28.9 23.0 30.8 27.1 23.3 28.0 27.0 26.0 31.1 30.9 26.9 25.2 31.0 24.5 26.0 26.7 25.7 23.8 24.8 25.0 24.0 26.4 25.7 25.7 25.0 24.3 25.2 25.2 23.0 23.5 24.0 24.9 25.1 24.5 23.9 9.3 26.1 ~ EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELD 25.8 24.9 25.3 26.0 25.1 23.6 24.8 26.0 24.2 23.9 23.9 23.3 27.0 27.2 TO BE CLEARED AND LEVELED. 23.8 25.025.2 25.3 25.0 25.5 23.1 26.3 22.3 24.1 28.7 22.9 27.1 28.6 EXISTING DITCHES TO BE 24.4 22.8 23.9 25.4 23.0 25.1 26.6 23.9 29.8 27.224.8 24.7 26.2 23.4 24.5 23.5 25.725.5 24.9 23.8 BACKFILLED USING MATERIAL 24.8 24.3 24.5 24.5 24.6 25.9 23.7 27.3 FROM ADJACENT BERM. ~ 24.8 27.3 24.8 26.3 26.7 25.7 23.2 23.827.3 28.2 25.1 24.1 28.8 27.624.624.3 23.8 27.6 27.627.5 29.0 27.0 24.9 29.6 27.4 13.4 30.9 26.6 26.8 23.2 27.5 29.1 30.5 31.0 26.8 27.4 23.123.024.6 24.4 25.0 23.7 25.2 23.3 25.3 28.0 25.3 23.0 27.0 23.6 26.427.429.121.627.8 26.0 24.3 24.324.124.524.324.424.524.925.5 25.0 27.326.525.925.225.024.924.8 24.0 29.2 24.426.7 27.1 29.9 26.7 24.1 22.1 25.0 23.9 24.9 26.4 24.2 25.3 25.1 22.2 25.0 24.3 23.3 24.9 22.2 25.3 25.4 23.9 25.3 29.4 29.3 26.0 24.1 22.5 29.2 SCALE: 1" = 450' 29.4 23.624.3 22.2 24.2 29.2 25.9 30.2 27.527.2 27.5 28.0 27.7 27.3 27.9 30.2 29.9 25.4 22.7 24.6 28.137.126.3 26.6 26.1 26.7 26.0 29.8 26.9 24.3 25.6 26.4 23.0 29.7 29.7 23.0 23.2 22.9 23.024.1 25.7 26.2 29.3 26.0 29.3 28.2 28.5 25.8 27.5 28.0 27.8 28.2 26.0 29.2 29.1 28.0 28.6 25.8 27.7 30.5 27.7 28.228.4 LEGEND: EXISTING 27.125.9 26.4 25.4 25.5 26.3 29.4 DITCH PERIMETER 26.8 29.5 BERM 25.8 26.3 26.3 26.8 25.2 27.325.6 26.3 25.4 32.0 EXISTING GROUND ELEVATION (TYP.) 27.9 28.3 27.3 29.4 26.6 27.0 26.0 29.7 25.0 15.5 PROPOSED CONTOUR (TYP.) 24.6 25.226.4 24.0 29.3 26.4 28.0 25.9 23.0 28.8 12.5 25.5 22.0 28.3 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION (TYP.) 25.3 31.5 26.1 25.3 25.8 21.5 LEGEND: 26.8 27.2 EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA BERM REMOVAL 25.2 26.5 21.0 DITCH BACKFILL 26.0 25.6 30.3 26.1 22.0 PROPOSED FILTER MARSH 28.6 23.0 30.2 26.1 24.0 AGRICULTURAL BERM AND DITCH TYPICAL SECTION 25.0 26.0 29.6 SCALE: NTS 27.0 ~ EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELD EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES 26.3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL 26.9 TO BE CLEARED AND LEVELED. NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA 31.2 SITE 8CR1673 TO 26.2 25.8 EXISTING DITCHES TO BE BE PRESERVED BACKFILLED USING MATERIAL HIKING FROM ADJACENT BERM. ~ PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING SHEET 12 23.4 TRAIL EXISTING 27.8 27.7 29.6 25.7 27.7 STRUCTURE 26.3 26.4 27.5 30.3 TO REMAIN 27.1 27.5 27.5 ~SR 82~ 25.9 26.5 27.6 25.2 28.6 SHEET 13 * 25.826.3 27.2 26.2 22.0 26.1 26.7 28.1 26.4 30.5 26.6 23.0 27.1 30.5 SHEET 14 24.0 26.5 28.1 26.9 SHEET 12 27.5 28.7 NOTES: 27.7 27.5 25.0 26.4 26.0 26.9 SHEET 13 28.4 SHEET 15 28.2 PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. 30.4 28.027.428.4 29.0 DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY 25.4 26.5 30.4 26.2 28.328.1 SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 28.8 29.5 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. 26.6 29.0 29.1 31.0 IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 28.7 30.0 MAP KEY 29.0 10, 2025. 29.1 23.2 23.5 27.5 29.2 29.0 29.5 29.3 29.630.3 29.3 29.6 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE 27.7 DRAWING No. 29.5 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - GRADING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 12 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 12-15 Panther Corridor Grading Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 12 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:02pm Plotted by: will Page 1225 of 4116 Page 58 of 73 26.6 23.0 27.1 30.5 24.0 26.5 28.1 26.9 SHEET 12 27.5 28.7 27.7 27.5 25.0 26.4 26.0 26.9 SHEET 13 28.4 28.2 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement 30.4 28.027.428.4 29.0 LEGEND: SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan 25.4 26.5 30.4 26.2 28.328.1 28.8 29.5 26.6 29.0 EXISTING GROUND ELEVATION (TYP.) 29.1 31.0 28.7 30.0 29.0 15.5 29.1 PROPOSED CONTOUR (TYP.) 23.2 23.5 27.5 29.2 29.0 29.5 29.3 29.630.3 12.5 29.3 29.6 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION (TYP.) 27.7 29.5 SCALE: 1" = 450' 30.3 28.6 EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA 20.0 21.0 28.4 33.6 22.0 27.5 28.7 27.9 28.1 28.8 29.228.5 23.0 PROPOSED FILTER MARSH 24.0 ~ EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELD TO BE CLEARED AND LEVELED. 25.0 EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES EXISTING DITCHES TO BE NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA 25.9 BACKFILLED USING MATERIAL FROM ADJACENT BERM. ~ PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING EXISTING 22.0 DITCH PERIMETER 27.4 27.4 28.1 BERM 23.024.0 25.026.0 25.7 27.0 24.7 25.8 25.2 25.9 LEGEND: 26.5 25.9 23.223.3 BERM REMOVAL 24.2 25.4 26.1 27.0 27.4 26.5 28.0 DITCH BACKFILL 25.6 17.6 SHEET 12 AGRICULTURAL BERM AND DITCH TYPICAL SECTION 23.5 23.1 24.7 SCALE: NTS 20.5 23.2 23.9 22.1 23.1 22.8 22.2 22.3 22.8 24.8 HIKING 22.7 SHEET 13 22.7 21.8 TRAIL 21.9 23.7 21.5 21.4 SHEET 14 21.9 21.7 23.3 21.7 26.3 26.5 27.4 25.1 26.2 21.0 18.0 27.3 26.4 27.3 21.1 22.7 26.0 27.1 26.6 SHEET 15 21.520.9 25.7 25.4 24.3 21.1 24.9 25.1 24.6 21.0 22.4 19.0 21.620.8 23.0 21.3 21.022.0 21.3 21.0 20.0 24.2 21.2 26.4 21.923.4 21.821.5 21.2 25.8 24.424.7 22.1 23.2 21.7 23.0 MAP KEY 22.1 22.6 24.7 25.421.0 20.5 21.2 22.022.2 23.7 22.0 21.1 20.7 22.2 21.7 21.8 22.5 24.1 26.3 21.4 21.7 25.4 24.4 20.9 21.8 21.2 21.4 21.7 22.5 22.8 20.8 20.3 20.3 21.3 22.2 27.5 21.0 20.2 23.2 SHEETSHEET 15 13 19.7 23.3 22.7 22.2 24.4 27.1 25.2 22.6 20.9 22.0 22.5 22.2 22.3 19.2 21.1 20.821.321.3 20.9 21.3 20.5 21.0 20.6 20.6 21.321.1 24.0 26.0 22.3 20.2 21.0 20.6 23.9 20.1 21.3 23.9 20.9 18.9 21.2 21.3 20.2 19.8 21.3 21.6 20.3 26.6 21.5 21.4 21.7 20.0 18.5 22.1 21.5 21.1 23.8 20.4 21.2 20.1 19.920.0 20.9 20.7 17.0 20.6 20.9 21.8 20.7 23.5 23.6 21.2 21.6 18.420.5 21.121.0 20.2 21.3 23.5 25.0 20.2 22.620.7 20.6 21.6 20.0 21.2 20.5 20.7 22.1 22.7 21.3 20.1 19.8 20.6 NOTES: 21.6 20.6 18.7 18.3 25.6 26.2 19.9 21.3 21.0 15.4 23.4 21.2 20.2 20.3 20.5 24.0 22.4 21.2 PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. 20.5 21.2 20.2 20.720.2 20.1 21.7 25.1 20.6 20.5 19.5 21.3 ~ EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELD DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY 21.4 20.0 20.5 20.8 20.0 20.1 20.220.1 22.8 TO BE CLEARED AND LEVELED. SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 20.9 19.4 20.5 21.0 21.2 20.3 20.9 22.321.3 20.4 16.0 21.2 EXISTING DITCHES TO BE AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. 20.5 20.1 22.3 22.8 20.3 23.2 BACKFILLED USING MATERIAL 20.1 21.5 20.3 21.8 IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 32.5 20.9 20.5 20.8 21.9 22.1 21.1 20.3 21.4 21.4 24.9 FROM ADJACENT BERM. ~ 10, 2025. 16.6 20.4 21.0 23.1 21.7 20.9 20.7 22.5 22.8 22.0 20.421.3 21.5 20.9 19.519.6 22.1 20.4 19.6 20.1 21.1 29.9 19.9 20.0 20.1 23.0 19.2 20.9 22.321.622.1 19.5 22.1 22.220.0 22.018.9 20.7 18.3 19.9 20.6 21.7 21.8 22.0 23.9 24.5 25.4 19.919.519.4 20.8 20.3 21.1 22.4 25.8 21.1 27.0 19.319.620.0 21.1 21.5 19.7 21.4 24.4 20.821.2 20.220.5 20.0 22.5 23.8 19.0 21.021.321.7 20.1 19.9 21.721.621.9 20.3 16.3 20.4 21.1 22.8 21.2 21.3 23.9 23.7 24.9 20.6 22.022.122.2 21.1 19.5 21.5 21.9 21.822.421.5 20.0 19.9 21.020.620.2 20.2 19.9 19.622.919.4 20.7 20.0 18.0 22.0 18.818.618.3 20.2 19.3 20.2 20.619.2 18.718.5 SHEET 13 20.6 20.5 20.3 18.418.918.718.5 22.3 24.5 20.0 20.6 SHEET 14 22.9 19.7 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE 22.923.5 DRAWING No. 19.8 21.9 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - GRADING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 13 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 12-15 Panther Corridor Grading Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 13 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:02pm Plotted by: will Page 1226 of 4116 Page 59 of 73 20.3 19.622.9 20.0 20.2 22.0 20.5 18.7 19.9 19.418.818.6 20.7 20.2 19.318.020.2 19.2 18.318.718.5 16.8 20.6 18.418.918.7 SHEET 13 15.9 20.6 20.5 20.3 18.5 22.3 21.3 20.5 20.0 22.9 24.5 20.3 20.6 SHEET 14 19.7 20.6 22.923.5 21.2 19.8 21.9 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement 20.3 20.2 20.0 20.7 19.7 20.0 20.8 22.8 24.4 24.7 SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan 15.8 20.1 19.6 19.7 22.9 24.425.2 21.3 21.4 21.4 24.7 19.6 21.6 20.5 19.6 19.4 20.0 22.1 19.8 26.5 20.0 21.0 21.9 20.7 21.9 18.9 24.8 19.9 20.6 19.9 21.3 25.0 21.6 22.0 23.8 23.3 24.8 19.720.1 19.2 20.2 21.5 20.1 24.4 19.9 20.7 24.1 17.520.0 21.8 19.7 20.4 20.5 23.8 18.7 19.7 20.6 21.6 23.6 23.8 19.3 20.6 20.8 26.7 20.8 24.9 19.7 19.6 20.4 19.9 22.6 22.0 19.5 20.7 19.4 15.6 20.1 21.0 22.3 19.9 19.7 20.3 19.9 20.4 22.4 20.5 21.7 19.6 19.5 19.7 20.1 20.9 23.7 22.3 23.2 19.7 24.9 20.3 20.0 20.2 19.8 19.6 20.0 20.9 20.5 20.1 18.7 22.9 25.4 18.5 22.8 23.0 22.6 22.8 19.8 20.7 21.4 20.4 19.7 11.1 18.7 23.2 22.6 SCALE: 1" = 450' 20.0 22.8 20.4 20.4 20.0 21.1 ~ EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELD 19.7 21.3 17.7 20.5 22.0 19.5 19.3 19.9 19.7 20.2 19.8 TO BE CLEARED AND LEVELED. 22.6 23.4 19.7 20.1 20.9 18.7 22.8 18.2 23.8 20.1 EXISTING DITCHES TO BE 24.8 23.8 25.0 20.4 19.5 19.6 19.5 22.0 24.323.9 19.7 20.1 BACKFILLED USING MATERIAL 23.7 24.2 21.8 21.0 22.7 20.3 20.0 21.5 23.6 21.0 FROM ADJACENT BERM. ~ 22.8 23.8 20.1 20.3 20.0 21.6 24.3 20.819.5 21.1 24.6 19.8 21.3 21.3 24.1 18.8 20.8 19.5 23.2 21.8 20.0 20.2 23.121.9 21.2 21.1 20.4 18.7 21.0 20.8 19.8 20.7 21.0 20.5 21.4 23.3 21.9 19.9 19.7 19.6 21.8 20.7 22.4 20.4 20.0 23.5 20.926.4 21.5 20.2 20.3 17.6 21.0 22.1 20.1 23.7 20.2 20.1 31.2 19.3 21.1 21.0 19.7 20.9 18.7 20.6 21.1 20.5 19.3 24.9 21.3 19.7 20.9 19.8 21.4 25.3 19.4 20.0 19.8 19.6 19.8 15.7 20.320.1 20.4 19.1 21.1 21.6 21.0 20.1 20.0 17.0 19.219.6 15.3 20.6 20.4 20.019.8 23.9 24.4 19.7 21.0 20.2 19.0 21.2 18.0 19.4 19.9 20.0 20.4 20.0 20.6 21.0 19.0 19.4 20.1 20.0 20.0 20.7 19.5 21.1 19.4 19.7 21.0 20.2 19.9 21.0 19.8 19.7 19.3 23.6 19.6 20.0 20.521.0 20.0 5.8 22.0 19.6 20.8 18.9 20.7 20.0 19.3 20.6 20.3 20.5 20.2 21.0 20.1 20.4 20.2 20.5 20.2 20.4 LEGEND: 22.3 24.021.8 23.7 24.524.2 EXISTING GROUND ELEVATION (TYP.) 22.9 21.3 15.5 PROPOSED CONTOUR (TYP.) 22.4 12.5 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION (TYP.) 22.622.5 22.8 ~ EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELD 20.9 TO BE CLEARED AND LEVELED. 21.2 22.3 EXISTING DITCHES TO BE EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA 20.8 21.922.7 BACKFILLED USING MATERIAL 20.3 20.6 20.8 FROM ADJACENT BERM. ~ 21.4 24.7 PROPOSED FILTER MARSH 21.4 20.2 EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES 21.4 NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA SHEET 12 19.1 20.0 21.4 20.5 23.822.323.923.424.1 21.1 20.3 20.8 PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING EXISTING 20.9 DITCH PERIMETER 24.4 25.0 24.6 BERM 20.0 21.3 19.0 SHEET 13 20.0 20.2 21.0 SHEET 14 20.5 22.0 18.3 SHEET 15 22.2 NOTES: LEGEND: 21.5 BERM REMOVAL PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. 20.7 DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY MAP KEY DITCH BACKFILL 24.1 SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 20.8 20.1 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. 19.5 20.2 AGRICULTURAL BERM AND DITCH TYPICAL SECTION IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 20.0 SCALE: NTS 10, 2025. 19.5 SHEET 14 21.8 21.4 21.8 SHEET 15 23.6 22.6 25.5 24.7 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE 6.6 DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - GRADING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 14 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 12-15 Panther Corridor Grading Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 14 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:03pm Plotted by: will Page 1227 of 4116 Page 60 of 73 21.4 20.5 23.822.323.923.424.1 21.1 20.3 20.8 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement 20.9 24.4 25.0 SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan 24.6 20.0 21.3 19.0 20.0 20.2 21.0 20.5 22.0 23.9 23.523.923.8 18.3 21.0 23.3 22.0 23.2 20.9 20.620.720.8 21.1 22.2 23.4 22.6 20.9 20.8 23.4 22.9 20.1 23.3 21.5 22.0 23.1 21.8 20.8 19.9 21.5 23.1 21.2 22.7 19.8 21.0 22.8 22.2 22.4 20.4 20.2 22.5 23.4 19.3 20.0 20.7 21.7 20.5 19.7 21.0 24.1 EXISTING 22.6 22.7 20.4 20.8 20.1 20.3 22.6 20.2 STRUCTURE 20.1 22.4 19.5 22.422.5 20.2 SHEETSHEET 15 13 TO REMAIN 19.0 20.0 23.0 20.9 23.3 22.9 19.5 SHEET 14 20.9 * 20.8 20.8 24.0 26.0 21.8 SEE J.R. EVANS 25.1 22.5 22.7 21.5 25.2 21.3 21.4 23.621.8 SHEET 15 GRADING PLANS FOR 22.8 22.6 22.6 25.5 24.7 22.3 20.3 21.4 6.6 21.6 21.1 22.9 22.9 23.8 FILTER MARSH 22.0 21.5 23.0 21.2 21.0 21.3 20.5 18.0 17.4 21.5 20.1 23.2 20.4 21.8 20.4 18.9 20.6 21.324.3 21.220.7 23.3 21.3 21.9 22.6 20.8 20.2 19.9 19.9 25.5 23.2 21.2 20.6 21.220.4 22.7 23.722.3 23.9 20.5 20.0 20.0 22.8 18.6 22.6 21.2 20.8 22.7 20.4 21.6 20.6 20.4 22.2 19.3 18.9 21.7 19.8 22.520.3 27.3 18.4 20.1 20.2 ~ EXISTING AGRICULTURE FIELD 21.1 21.2 23.0 18.3 21.1 21.6 21.0 21.7 20.5 TO BE CLEARED AND LEVELED. 20.9 25.1 20.3 22.1 19.7 22.0 EXISTING DITCHES TO BE 20.2 20.8 20.1 21.3 21.5 20.2 20.9 21.0 BACKFILLED USING MATERIAL 22.3 18.0 19.3 22.1 FROM ADJACENT BERM. ~ 20.1 20.7 SEE J.R. EVANS 32.5 20.3 20.8 GRADING PLANS FOR 20.3 16.6 20.2 22.0 22.5 26.2 SCALE: 1" = 450' 19.6 21.1 17.3 FILTER MARSH 29.9 25.0 19.8 20.2 21.5 21.4 23.4 25.1 17.3 21.3 22.0 21.9 19.4 21.2 21.1 19.2 22.8 21.3 21.8 21.5 19.3 15.5 25.4 20.6 19.3 20.3 21.1 20.5 18.7 16.8 15.9 21.3 20.5 20.3 20.6 21.2 25.4 20.7 LEGEND: EXISTING GROUND ELEVATION (TYP.) 15.5 PROPOSED CONTOUR (TYP.) 25.2 12.5 24.0 26.1 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION (TYP.) 21.3 16.5 20.6 EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA PROPOSED FILTER MARSH 17.0 18.0 19.0 20.0 21.0 24.6 EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA SHEET 12 21.3 21.4 PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING EXISTING 22.4 DITCH PERIMETER 21.5 BERM 21.7 21.7 SHEET 13 21.4 22.6 18.3 SHEET 14 23.4 23.3 22.3 21.4 22.6 19.9 23.9 23.8 20.0 SHEET 15 19.3 23.2 21.6 21.2 22.0 20.2 18.8 22.4 22.4 25.7 NOTES: LEGEND: BERM REMOVAL PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY MAP KEY DITCH BACKFILL SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. AGRICULTURAL BERM AND DITCH TYPICAL SECTION IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE SCALE: NTS 10, 2025. REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - GRADING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 15 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 12-15 Panther Corridor Grading Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 15 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:03pm Plotted by: will Page 1228 of 4116 Page 61 of 73 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan LEGEND: WETLAND PLANTINGS UPLAND PLANTINGS AND/OR NATIVE SEEDING EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA SCALE: 1" = 450' PROPOSED FILTER MARSH EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING SHEET 16 SHEET 17 SHEET 18 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SHEET 19 SITE 8CR1673 TO BE PRESERVED HIKING TRAIL EXISTING MAP KEY STRUCTURE TO REMAIN * ~SR 82~ NOTES: SHEET 16 SHEET 17 PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - PLANTING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 16 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 16-19 Panther Corridor Planting Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 16 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:04pm Plotted by: will Page 1229 of 4116 Page 62 of 73 SHEET 16 SHEET 17 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement LEGEND: SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan WETLAND PLANTINGS UPLAND PLANTINGS AND/OR NATIVE SEEDING SCALE: 1" = 450' EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA PROPOSED FILTER MARSH EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA SHEET 16 PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING SHEET 17 SHEET 18 SHEET 19 MAP KEY HIKING TRAIL SHEETSHEET 19 17 NOTES: PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE SHEET 17 10, 2025. SHEET 18 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - PLANTING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 17 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 16-19 Panther Corridor Planting Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 17 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:05pm Plotted by: will Page 1230 of 4116 Page 63 of 73 SHEET 17 SHEET 18 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan SCALE: 1" = 450' LEGEND: WETLAND PLANTINGS UPLAND PLANTINGS AND/OR NATIVE SEEDING EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA PROPOSED FILTER MARSH EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING SHEET 16 SHEET 17 SHEET 18 SHEET 19 MAP KEY NOTES: PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. SHEET 18 SHEET 19 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - PLANTING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 18 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 16-19 Panther Corridor Planting Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 18 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:05pm Plotted by: will Page 1231 of 4116 Page 64 of 73 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN SHEETSHEET 19 17 * SHEET 18 SHEET 19 LEGEND: WETLAND PLANTINGS UPLAND PLANTINGS AND/OR NATIVE SEEDING SCALE: 1" = 450' EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA PROPOSED FILTER MARSH EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING SHEET 16 SHEET 17 SHEET 18 SHEET 19 MAP KEY NOTES: PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - PLANTING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 19 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 16-19 Panther Corridor Planting Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 19 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:05pm Plotted by: will Page 1232 of 4116 Page 65 of 73 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan * T-29 T-34 * * * * T-28 * T-27 * T-53 T-54 * T-55 * * * * MW-14 * * MW-11 LEGEND: WETLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS MW-12 WETLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS * * WETLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS * T-56 * T-30 T-31 OTHER SURFACE WATERS PRESERVE * * UPLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS SCALE: 1" = 450' T-35 UPLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL * OF EXOTICS T-33 * UPLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL SHEET 20 T-32* OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS * * WETLAND PLANTINGS * SHEET 21 * T-57 UPLAND PLANTINGS AND/OR NATIVE SEEDING SHEET 22 * SHEET 23 EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA * T-58 T-59 PROPOSED FILTER MARSH MAP KEY * * * EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA T-60 SURVEYED WETLAND LINE NOTES: HIKING * TRAIL * PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY * SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD T-61 MONITORING TRANSECT Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. SHEET 20 * SHEET 21 TREE/SHRUB PLOT SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE T-3 TRANSECT NUMBER (typ.) WETLAND LINES EM 06 12 24.DWG DATED JUNE 12, * 2024. PHOTO STATION SURVEYED "OTHER SUFACE WATERS" LINES PER MW-6 MONITORING WELL NUMBER (typ.) BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE FINAL OSW LOCATION EM 08 27 MONITORING WELL 24.DWG DATED AUGUST 27, 2024. T-62 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE * DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue * H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - MONITORING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 20 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 20-23 Panther Corridor Monitoring Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 20 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:06pm Plotted by: will Page 1233 of 4116 Page 66 of 73 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement T-61 SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan SHEET 20 * SHEET 21 LEGEND: WETLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL SCALE: 1" = 450' T-62 * OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS * OTHER SURFACE WATERS PRESERVE MW-15 UPLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS UPLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS T-63 T-64 UPLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL SHEET 20 * OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS * * * MW-16 WETLAND PLANTINGS SHEET 21 T-65 UPLAND PLANTINGS AND/OR NATIVE SEEDING SHEET 22 SHEET 23 * * EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA PROPOSED FILTER MARSH MAP KEY EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES HIKING NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA * TRAIL T-67 T-66 * * SURVEYED WETLAND LINE MW-13 * * PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING T-36* MONITORING TRANSECT TREE/SHRUB PLOT T-68 T-3 * TRANSECT NUMBER (typ.) * * PHOTO STATION MW-6 MONITORING WELL NUMBER (typ.) SHEETSHEET 23 21 * * MONITORING WELL T-39 T-37 * NOTES: PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING T-69 No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG * DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, * DRAWING No. IWSD Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE T-38 * * * 10, 2025. SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE WETLAND LINES EM 06 12 24.DWG DATED JUNE 12, 2024. SURVEYED "OTHER SUFACE WATERS" LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE MW-3 FINAL OSW LOCATION EM 08 27 24.DWG DATED AUGUST 27, SHEET 21 2024. SHEET 22 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - MONITORING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 21 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 20-23 Panther Corridor Monitoring Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 21 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:07pm Plotted by: will Page 1234 of 4116 Page 67 of 73 MW-3 SHEET 21 SHEET 22 Exhibit E to Credit Agreement T-70 SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan T-42 * * * * * SCALE: 1" = 450' T-43 * T-71 * * LEGEND: * * WETLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL T-44 OF EXOTICS T-72 WETLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL * * OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL * OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS * T-73 * * OTHER SURFACE WATERS PRESERVE * T-46 MW-17 UPLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL * OF EXOTICS T-45 UPLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL OF EXOTICS UPLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL SHEET 20 OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WETLAND PLANTINGS T-74 SHEET 21 T-47 UPLAND PLANTINGS AND/OR NATIVE SEEDING SHEET 22 * * SHEET 23 * EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA * PROPOSED FILTER MARSH MAP KEY EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA SURVEYED WETLAND LINE NOTES: *T-48 * MW-2 PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD MONITORING TRANSECT Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. TREE/SHRUB PLOT SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE T-75 T-3 TRANSECT NUMBER (typ.) WETLAND LINES EM 06 12 24.DWG DATED JUNE 12, * 2024. * * PHOTO STATION SURVEYED "OTHER SUFACE WATERS" LINES PER MW-6 MONITORING WELL NUMBER (typ.) BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE FINAL OSW LOCATION EM 08 27 MONITORING WELL 24.DWG DATED AUGUST 27, 2024. SHEET 22 SHEET 23 REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - MONITORING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 22 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 20-23 Panther Corridor Monitoring Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 22 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:07pm Plotted by: will Page 1235 of 4116 Page 68 of 73 *T-48 * Exhibit E to Credit Agreement MW-2 SSA 22 Collier County Restoration Plan T-75 * * SHEETSHEET 23 21 SHEET 22 * SHEET 23 MW-4 T-49 * * * T-76 T-41* * * SHEET 20 * T-40 * SHEET 21 SHEET 22 SHEET 23 MAP KEY T-77 * * * LEGEND: WETLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL EXOTIC REMOVAL AREA MW-18 T-50 OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL PROPOSED FILTER MARSH * OF EXOTICS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL EXISTING EASEMENTS OR STRUCTURES OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS NOT WITHIN RESTORATION AREA OTHER SURFACE WATERS PRESERVE SURVEYED WETLAND LINE NOTES: T-78 PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. * * UPLAND PRESERVE HAND REMOVAL PROPOSED PANTHER CROSSING DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE BNDY OF EXOTICS SURVEY EM 07 31 24.DWG DATED JULY 31, 2024 AND PER J.R. EVANS ENGINEERING, DRAWING No. IWSD UPLAND ENHANCEMENT HAND REMOVAL MONITORING TRANSECT Tract Bndy (2025-06-10).DWG DATED JUNE 10, 2025. T-51 OF EXOTICS TREE/SHRUB PLOT SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER BBLS SURVEYORS, UPLAND ENHANCEMENT MECHANICAL REMOVAL * * INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE MW-1 OF EXOTICS AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS T-3 TRANSECT NUMBER (typ.) WETLAND LINES EM 06 12 24.DWG DATED JUNE 12, * 2024. PHOTO STATION WETLAND PLANTINGS SURVEYED "OTHER SUFACE WATERS" LINES PER MW-6 MONITORING WELL NUMBER (typ.) BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. DRAWING No. 23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE FINAL OSW LOCATION EM 08 27 UPLAND PLANTINGS AND/OR NATIVE SEEDING MONITORING WELL 24.DWG DATED AUGUST 27, 2024. SCALE: 1" = 450' REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE DRAWING No. 11/20/25 13620 Metropolis Avenue H.H. 23AII4051 DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 SSA 22 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 K.P. 11/20/25 PASSARELLA SHEET No. Phone (239) 274-0067 PANTHER CORRIDOR - MONITORING PLAN REVIEWED BY DATE INC Fax (239) 274-0069 & ASSOCIATES SHEET 23 J:\2023\23aii4051\County\SSA_22\SSA_Credit_Application\Restoration_Plans_062325\Restoration_Plans_111125\SheetK.P. 11/20/25 20-23 Panther Corridor Monitoring Plan.dwg Tab: Sheet 23 Feb 17, 2026 - 3:07pm Plotted by: will Page 1236 of 4116 Page 69 of 73 EXHIBIT F TO CREDIT AGREEMENT ALD SSA 22 STEWARDSHIP EASEMENT AGREEMENT (WITHOUT EXHIBITS) Page 70 of 73 Page 1237 of 4116Page 1238 of 4116 E. The purposes of this Stewardship Easement are (1) to designate the allowed uses of the Property consistent with the terms of the SSA Agreement; (2) to identify specific land management measures and the party responsible for land management; (3) to provide for the enforcement of the Stewardship Easement; and (4) in the areas to be restored by Grantor, to provide the restoration improvements and success criteria. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the designation of the Property as an SSA, together with other good and valuable consideration, the adequacy and receipt of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby grants, creates, conveys, and establishes a perpetual non-exclusive Stewardship Easement for and in favor of the Grantees upon the property described in Exhibit “A,” which shall run with the land and be binding upon the Grantor and their successors and assigns and shall remain in full force and effect forever. It is agreed as follows: 1. The recitals and exhibits are incorporated by reference as if repeated verbatim herein. 2. Exhibit “C” describes and Exhibit “D” depicts this one thousand two hundred ninety four and three tenths (1,294.3) acres within the SSA 22 which are designated Agriculture – Group 2 (“AG2”) where the following six Land Use Layers are hereby eliminated from the Property and the Property is henceforth prohibited from being utilized for the following land uses, as defined in Section 4.08.06.B.4 of the LDC: a. Residential Land Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 1. b. General Conditional Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 2. c. Earth Mining and Processing Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 3. d. Recreational Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 4. e. Agriculture – Group 1, also described as Land Use Layer 5. f. Agriculture – Support Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 6. 3. As to those lands within Exhibit “C,” all of which is designated AG2, Grantor reserves all rights as owner of the Property, including the right to engage in uses of the Property that are not inconsistent with the SSA Agreement or the intent and purposes of this Stewardship Easement. Grantor may use the SSA 22 only for the following land uses: a. Conservation, Restoration, and Natural Resources Uses (Land Use Layer 8) are allowed on all of the Property, including the specifics thereof set forth in Section 4.08.06.B.4.b of the LDC. b. Those lands in SSA 22 depicted on Exhibit “C,” having had the first six (6) Land Use Layers eliminated, may also be used for AG2 (Land Use Layer 7) Page 1239 of 4116 as defined in Section 4.08.06.B.4 of the LDC. AG2 uses cannot be converted to Agriculture – Group 1 from and after the designation of such lands as a SSA. c. Pursuant to Section 4.08.06 of the LDC, Grantor retains the right to amend this SSA in the future to add additional restoration activities in return for additional Stewardship Credits. Nothing in this provision, Stewardship Easement, or the County LDC shall preclude Grantor’s right to conduct restoration activities for use as compensation, mitigation, or conservation measure under any program established by County, State, or Federal statute, regulation, or ordinance. d. Grantor retains the right to engage in cattle grazing and maintaining access trails to access its lands within SSA 22 for the purposes retained herein. e. Grantor retains the right to maintain facilities within SSA 22 for the purposes of environmental education and outreach and/or housing for a Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission officer, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services or Collier County Agriculture Deputy, and/or environmental researchers f. Grantor retains the right to engage in traditional activities on the Property, such as, but not limited to, hiking, hunting, nature observatory and other eco- observation excursions, and other such occasional non-destructive activities. 4. On those lands within SSA 22 designated AG2 on which Land Use Layers 1 through 6 are eliminated, which are not designated for restoration, land management measures by Grantor will those customarily utilized in ranching operations in southwest Florida. These customary measures may include, prescribed burning, mechanical brush control (“Chopping”) and other exotic and nuisance species control, fence construction and maintenance, ditch and ranch road maintenance. 5. On lands within SSA 22 designated AG2 on which Land Use Layers 1-6 have been eliminated and on which Grantor has agreed to undertake restoration improvements, there are additional land management measures to be undertaken by Grantor after the completion of said restoration improvements. Those land management measures are specifically set forth in the Restoration Plan attached as Exhibit “E” are incorporated herein by reference. All natural areas shall be maintained by Grantors in their existing conditions until such time as restoration activities occur. 6. Exhibit “F” describes and Exhibit “G” depicts the one and one tenth (1.1) acre within SSA 22 designated as General Conditional Use (“GCU”) where the following Land Use Layer is hereby eliminated from the Property and the Property is henceforth prohibited from being utilized for the following land uses, as defined in Section 4.08.06.B.4 of the LDC: a. Residential Land Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 1. Page 1240 of 4116 7. As to those lands within Exhibit “G,” designated GCU, Grantors reserve all rights as owner of the Property, including the right to engage in uses of the Property that are not inconsistent with SSA Agreement, Land Use Layers 2–8, or the intent and purposes of this Stewardship Easement. 8. Grantees shall not be responsible for any costs or liabilities related to the operation of or land management measures for the Property, except for damage or alteration of the Property caused in whole or in part by Grantee’s negligent or intentionally wrongful acts or omissions (subject to 768.28, Florida Statues, and any other applicable laws). 9. Grantor shall pay any and all real property taxes and assessments levied by competent authority on the Property. 10. References to the LDC are to those provisions of Section 4.08.06 of the LDC in existence as of the date of this Stewardship Easement Agreement, and those LDC provisions shall control as to all rights, obligations, implementations, entitlements, land uses eliminated and permitted and interpretations, requirements, or issues relating thereto, notwithstanding any future amendments thereto. 11. Enforcement of the terms and provisions of the Stewardship Easement shall be at the reasonable discretion of Grantees, or either Grantee individually, and any forbearance on behalf of Grantees, or either of them, to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any breach hereof by Grantor, shall not be deemed or construed to be a waiver of Grantees’ rights hereunder. All costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in enforcing, judicially or otherwise, the terms and restrictions of this Stewardship Easement shall be borne by and recoverable against the non-prevailing party in such proceedings. 12. Grantees will hold this Stewardship Easement for the purposes set forth herein and to ensure compliance with the terms hereof. Grantees will not assign their rights and obligations under this Stewardship Easement except to another organization qualified to hold such interests under the applicable state laws. 13. Either Grantee may enter upon the Property on an annual basis, and more often if Grantee determines that such entry is warranted, at reasonable times in order to inspect the Property and monitor compliance with the terms of this Stewardship Easement; provided, however, that (i) such entry is made after giving Grantors at least seven days advance written notice (except in the event of an emergency requiring immediate access) and (ii) such entry does not unreasonably interfere with Grantors’ use and quiet enjoyment of the Property. 14. If any provision of this Stewardship Easement or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is found to be invalid, the remainder of the provisions of this Stewardship Easement shall not be affected thereby, so long as the purpose of the Stewardship Easement is preserved. Page 1241 of 4116 15. All notices, consents, approvals, or other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed properly given if sent by United States certified mail, return receipt requested, and addressed to the appropriate party or successor-in- interest. 16. This Stewardship Easement may be amended, altered, released, or revoked only by written agreement of both Grantor and Grantees, which shall be filed in the Public Records of Collier County or as provided for in the Escrow Agreement between Grantor and the County dated ____________________, 20__. 17. Grantee acknowledges that the removal of Land Use Layers to generate Stewardship Credits under the Stewardship Easement does not preclude the use of such removal as compensation, mitigation, or conservation measure under any program established by County, State, or Federal statute, regulation, or ordinance for activities conducted in a Stewardship Receiving Area utilizing the Stewardship Credits generated by the Stewardship Easement. Grantee also acknowledges that nothing in this Stewardship Easement or County LDC precludes Grantor’s right to conduct restoration activities for use as compensation, mitigation, or conservation measures under any program established by County, State, or Federal statute, regulation, or ordinance either concurrent with or independent of the generation of additional Stewardship Credits. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantees and their successors and assigns forever. These covenants, terms, conditions, restrictions, and purposes imposed with this Stewardship Easement shall not only be binding upon Grantor, but also its successors and assigns, and shall continue as a servitude running in perpetuity with the Property. Grantor hereby covenants with Grantees that Grantor is lawfully seized of the Property in fee simple; that the Property is free and clear of all encumbrances; that Grantor has good right and lawful authority to convey this Stewardship Easement; and that Grantor hereby fully warrants title to the Stewardship Easement hereby conveyed and will defend same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. Page 1242 of 4116 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set its hand and seal the _____ day of 20__. WITNESSES: ALICO INC. FKA ALICO LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY A Florida corporation By: John Kiernan, President and CEO (Signature) Alico Land Development Company A Florida corporation (Print full name) By: (Address) Printed Name: ______ Title: Address: (Signature) (Print full name) (Address) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing Stewardship Easement Agreement was acknowledged before me, by means of ( ) physical presence or ( ) online notarization, on this ____ day of _________, 20___, by _______________, as _________________ of Alico Inc. FKA Alico Land Development Company who is ( ) personally known to me or ( ) has produced ________________________ as identification. Notary Public Name_______________________________ Certificate No.________________________ My Commission Expires________________ Page 1243 of 4116Page 1244 of 4116My Commission expires __________ ATTESTED TO BY: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: _______________________________ CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK Dan Kowal, Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL LEGALITY: _____________________________ By: HEIDI ASHTON-CICKO MANAGING ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY Page 1245 of 4116 STEWARDSHIP EASEMENT AGREEMENT Exhibit “A” SSA 22 Legal Description Exhibit “B” Depiction of SSA Lands – 1,295.4 Acres Exhibit “C” Legal description of SSA Lands – 1,294.3 Acres – Removal of Layers 1–6 Exhibit “D” Depiction of Lands – Removal of Layers 1–6 Exhibit “E” Restoration Plan Exhibit “F” Legal description of SSA Lands – 1.1 Acre – Removal of Layer 1 Exhibit “G” Depiction of Lands – Removal of Layer 1 Page 1246 of 4116EXHIBIT G TO CREDIT AGREEMENT AERIAL WITH OPEN LANDS Page 72 of 73 Page 1247 of 4116Exhibit G to Credit Agreement Aerial with Open Lands Page 1248 of 4116 Page 73 of 73Page 1249 of 4116 E. The purposes of this Stewardship Easement are (1) to designate the allowed uses of the Property consistent with the terms of the SSA Agreement; (2) to identify specific land management measures and the party responsible for land management; (3) to provide for the enforcement of the Stewardship Easement; and (4) in the areas to be restored by Grantor, to provide the restoration improvements and success criteria. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the designation of the Property as an SSA, together with other good and valuable consideration, the adequacy and receipt of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby grants, creates, conveys, and establishes a perpetual non-exclusive Stewardship Easement for and in favor of the Grantees upon the property described in Exhibit “A,” which shall run with the land and be binding upon the Grantor and their successors and assigns and shall remain in full force and effect forever. It is agreed as follows: 1. The recitals and exhibits are incorporated by reference as if repeated verbatim herein. 2. Exhibit “C” describes and Exhibit “D” depicts this one thousand two hundred ninety four and three tenths (1,294.3) acres within the SSA 22 which are designated Agriculture – Group 2 (“AG2”) where the following six Land Use Layers are hereby eliminated from the Property and the Property is henceforth prohibited from being utilized for the following land uses, as defined in Section 4.08.06.B.4 of the LDC: a. Residential Land Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 1. b. General Conditional Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 2. c. Earth Mining and Processing Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 3. d. Recreational Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 4. e. Agriculture – Group 1, also described as Land Use Layer 5. f. Agriculture – Support Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 6. 3. As to those lands within Exhibit “C,” all of which is designated AG2, Grantor reserves all rights as owner of the Property, including the right to engage in uses of the Property that are not inconsistent with the SSA Agreement or the intent and purposes of this Stewardship Easement. Grantor may use the SSA 22 only for the following land uses: a. Conservation, Restoration, and Natural Resources Uses (Land Use Layer 8) are allowed on all of the Property, including the specifics thereof set forth in Section 4.08.06.B.4.b of the LDC. b. Those lands in SSA 22 depicted on Exhibit “C,” having had the first six (6) Land Use Layers eliminated, may also be used for AG2 (Land Use Layer 7) PL20240010213 Page 2 of Page 1250 of 4116 as defined in Section 4.08.06.B.4 of the LDC. AG2 uses cannot be converted to Agriculture – Group 1 from and after the designation of such lands as a SSA. c. Pursuant to Section 4.08.06 of the LDC, Grantor retains the right to amend this SSA in the future to add additional restoration activities in return for additional Stewardship Credits. Nothing in this provision, Stewardship Easement, or the County LDC shall preclude Grantor’s right to conduct restoration activities for use as compensation, mitigation, or conservation measure under any program established by County, State, or Federal statute, regulation, or ordinance. d. Grantor retains the right to engage in cattle grazing and maintaining access trails to access its lands within SSA 22 for the purposes retained herein. e. Grantor retains the right to maintain facilities within SSA 22 for the purposes of environmental education and outreach and/or housing for a Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission officer, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services or Collier County Agriculture Deputy, and/or environmental researchers f. Grantor retains the right to engage in traditional activities on the Property, such as, but not limited to, hiking, hunting, nature observatory and other eco- observation excursions, and other such occasional non-destructive activities. 4. On those lands within SSA 22 designated AG2 on which Land Use Layers 1 through 6 are eliminated, which are not designated for restoration, land management measures by Grantor will those customarily utilized in ranching operations in southwest Florida. These customary measures may include, prescribed burning, mechanical brush control (“Chopping”) and other exotic and nuisance species control, fence construction and maintenance, ditch and ranch road maintenance. 5. On lands within SSA 22 designated AG2 on which Land Use Layers 1-6 have been eliminated and on which Grantor has agreed to undertake restoration improvements, there are additional land management measures to be undertaken by Grantor after the completion of said restoration improvements. Those land management measures are specifically set forth in the Restoration Plan attached as Exhibit “E” are incorporated herein by reference. All natural areas shall be maintained by Grantors in their existing conditions until such time as restoration activities occur. 6. Exhibit “F” describes and Exhibit “G” depicts the one and one tenth (1.1) acre within SSA 22 designated as General Conditional Use (“GCU”) where the following Land Use Layer is hereby eliminated from the Property and the Property is henceforth prohibited from being utilized for the following land uses, as defined in Section 4.08.06.B.4 of the LDC: a. Residential Land Uses, also described as Land Use Layer 1. PL20240010213 Page 3 of Page 1251 of 4116 7. As to those lands within Exhibit “G,” designated GCU, Grantors reserve all rights as owner of the Property, including the right to engage in uses of the Property that are not inconsistent with SSA Agreement, Land Use Layers 2–8, or the intent and purposes of this Stewardship Easement. 8. Grantees shall not be responsible for any costs or liabilities related to the operation of or land management measures for the Property, except for damage or alteration of the Property caused in whole or in part by Grantee’s negligent or intentionally wrongful acts or omissions (subject to 768.28, Florida Statues, and any other applicable laws). 9. Grantor shall pay any and all real property taxes and assessments levied by competent authority on the Property. 10. References to the LDC are to those provisions of Section 4.08.06 of the LDC in existence as of the date of this Stewardship Easement Agreement, and those LDC provisions shall control as to all rights, obligations, implementations, entitlements, land uses eliminated and permitted and interpretations, requirements, or issues relating thereto, notwithstanding any future amendments thereto. 11. Enforcement of the terms and provisions of the Stewardship Easement shall be at the reasonable discretion of Grantees, or either Grantee individually, and any forbearance on behalf of Grantees, or either of them, to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any breach hereof by Grantor, shall not be deemed or construed to be a waiver of Grantees’ rights hereunder. All costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in enforcing, judicially or otherwise, the terms and restrictions of this Stewardship Easement shall be borne by and recoverable against the non-prevailing party in such proceedings. 12. Grantees will hold this Stewardship Easement for the purposes set forth herein and to ensure compliance with the terms hereof. Grantees will not assign their rights and obligations under this Stewardship Easement except to another organization qualified to hold such interests under the applicable state laws. 13. Either Grantee may enter upon the Property on an annual basis, and more often if Grantee determines that such entry is warranted, at reasonable times in order to inspect the Property and monitor compliance with the terms of this Stewardship Easement; provided, however, that (i) such entry is made after giving Grantors at least seven days advance written notice (except in the event of an emergency requiring immediate access) and (ii) such entry does not unreasonably interfere with Grantors’ use and quiet enjoyment of the Property. 14. If any provision of this Stewardship Easement or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is found to be invalid, the remainder of the provisions of this Stewardship Easement shall not be affected thereby, so long as the purpose of the Stewardship Easement is preserved. PL20240010213 Page 4 of Page 1252 of 4116 15. All notices, consents, approvals, or other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed properly given if sent by United States certified mail, return receipt requested, and addressed to the appropriate party or successor-in- interest. 16. This Stewardship Easement may be amended, altered, released, or revoked only by written agreement of both Grantor and Grantees, which shall be filed in the Public Records of Collier County or as provided for in the Escrow Agreement between Grantor and the County dated ____________________, 20__. 17. Grantee acknowledges that the removal of Land Use Layers to generate Stewardship Credits under the Stewardship Easement does not preclude the use of such removal as compensation, mitigation, or conservation measure under any program established by County, State, or Federal statute, regulation, or ordinance for activities conducted in a Stewardship Receiving Area utilizing the Stewardship Credits generated by the Stewardship Easement. Grantee also acknowledges that nothing in this Stewardship Easement or County LDC precludes Grantor’s right to conduct restoration activities for use as compensation, mitigation, or conservation measures under any program established by County, State, or Federal statute, regulation, or ordinance either concurrent with or independent of the generation of additional Stewardship Credits. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantees and their successors and assigns forever. These covenants, terms, conditions, restrictions, and purposes imposed with this Stewardship Easement shall not only be binding upon Grantor, but also its successors and assigns, and shall continue as a servitude running in perpetuity with the Property. Grantor hereby covenants with Grantees that Grantor is lawfully seized of the Property in fee simple; that the Property is free and clear of all encumbrances; that Grantor has good right and lawful authority to convey this Stewardship Easement; and that Grantor hereby fully warrants title to the Stewardship Easement hereby conveyed and will defend same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. PL20240010213 Page 5 of Page 1253 of 4116 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set its hand and seal the _____ day of 20__. WITNESSES: ALICO INC. FKA ALICO LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY A Florida corporation By: John Kiernan, President and CEO (Signature) Alico Land Development Company A Florida corporation (Print full name) By: (Address) Printed Name: ______ Title: Address: (Signature) (Print full name) (Address) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing Stewardship Easement Agreement was acknowledged before me, by means of ( ) physical presence or ( ) online notarization, on this ____ day of _________, 20___, by _______________, as _________________ of Alico Inc. FKA Alico Land Development Company who is ( ) personally known to me or ( ) has produced ________________________ as identification. Notary Public Name_______________________________ Certificate No.________________________ My Commission Expires________________ PL20240010213 Page 6 of Page 1254 of 4116Page 1255 of 4116Page 1256 of 4116 STEWARDSHIP EASEMENT AGREEMENT Exhibit “A” SSA 22 Legal Description Exhibit “B” Depiction of SSA Lands – 1,295.4 Acres Exhibit “C” Legal description of SSA Lands – 1,294.3 Acres – Removal of Layers 1–6 Exhibit “D” Depiction of Lands – Removal of Layers 1–6 Exhibit “E” Restoration Plan Exhibit “F” Legal description of SSA Lands – 1.1 Acre – Removal of Layer 1 Exhibit “G” Depiction of Lands – Removal of Layer 1 PL20240010213 Page 9 of Page 1257 of 4116EXHIBIT A TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT ALD SSA 22 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Page 10 of 30 Page 1258 of 4116Exhibit A to Easement Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description BBLS SURVEYORS, INC. 9001 HIGHLAND WOOD BLVD., SUITE. 6, BONITA SPRINGS, FLORIDA, 34135 TELEPHONE: (239) 597-1315 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CORKSCREW GROVE SSA 22 PANTHER CROSSING A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTIONS 03, 04, 09, 10 AND 15 TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: AREA 1 BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE RUN S.00°35'20"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,629.09 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE RUN S.00°35'45"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,532.89 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 82 (A 200 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY), SAID POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT “A”; THENCE RUN N.73°57'58"W., ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 3,138.52 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°39'31"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 362.33 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 84°49'01", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 134.88 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.43°04'01"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF148.03 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVE OF A NON-TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 401.27 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48°40'04", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 330.69 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.62°53'53"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 340.85 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE;THENCE RUN, N.38°31'20"W., A DISTANCE OF 625.86 FEET; THENCE RUN N.58°10'15"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 866.20 FEET; THENCE RUN N.54°00'42"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 161.27 FEET; THENCE RUN N.89°00'03"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 165.04 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 91°06'04", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 71.39 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.43°27'02"W., FOR A SHEET 1 OF 8 \\10.0.0.10\data\PROJECTS\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\LEGAL AND SKETCH SSA 22 PANTHER CORRIDOR\23.48 SSA 22 PANTHER CROSSING.rtf Page 11 of 30 Page 1259 of 4116Exhibit A to Easement Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description DISTANCE OF 79.50 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.02°06'00"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 602.74 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°39'41", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 71.12 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.43°13'50"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 79.12 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.88°33'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 264.85 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 74°33'23", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 60.57 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.54°09'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.06 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S.16°52'57"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 136.11 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 74°33'23", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 60.57 FEET, AT A BEARING OF S.54°09'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 65.06 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.88°33'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 703.74 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN WESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 37°37'38", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 32.25 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.69°44'52"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 32.84 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.50°56'03"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 169.38 FEET; THENCE RUN N.88°33'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,025.38 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°00'00", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 70.71 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.43°33'41"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 78.54 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.01°26'19"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 188.82 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 69°12'45", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 56.79 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.36°02'42"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 60.40 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.70°39'05"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 408.22 FEET; THENCE RUN N.01°10'09"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 560.56 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE RUN N.88°49'18"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,508.39 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE RUN S.89°29'58"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QURTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,641.45 FEET TO THE SHEET 2 OF 8 \\10.0.0.10\data\PROJECTS\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\LEGAL AND SKETCH SSA 22 PANTHER CORRIDOR\23.48 SSA 22 PANTHER CROSSING.rtf Page 12 of 30 Page 1260 of 4116Exhibit A to Easement Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE RUN S.89°29'58"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QURTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,641.44 FEET; TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 402.724 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. AND AREA 2 COMMENCE AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT “A”, THENCE RUN S.00°35'45"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 03, FOR A DISTANCE OF 208.73 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID STATE ROAD 82 (A 200 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY), THE SAME BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE S.00°35'45"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 887.38 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 10; THENCE RUN S.00°28'02"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,699.34 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE RUN S.00°28'13"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2,699.02 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE RUN S.00°08'16"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER AND ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15, FOR A DISTANCE OF 4,277.12 FEET; THENCE RUN S.89°41'04"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,890.02 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°08'15"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 4,276.95 FEET; THENCE RUN N.55°11'37"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 4,023.70 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°08'20"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 707.83 FEET; THENCE RUN S.79°20'37"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,604.70 FEET; THENCE RUN N.41°31'31"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,675.17 FEET; THENCE RUN N.75°10'22"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 213.78 FEET; THENCE RUN S.14°49'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 726.00 FEET; THENCE RUN N.75°10'22"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 758.28 FEET; THENCE RUN N.55°37'02"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 989.88 FEET; THENCE RUN N.31°34'44"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 86.46 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF CORKSCREW ROAD (A 100 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY); THENCE RUN N.58°00'12"E., ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 912.09 FEET; THENCE RUN S.75°07'20"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 3,889.60 FEET; THENCE RUN N.14°52'39"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.55 FEET; THENCE RUN N.06°02'21"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 300.50 FEET; THENCE RUN N.75°01'20"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 885.99 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,725.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 57°00'46", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD SHEET 3 OF 8 \\10.0.0.10\data\PROJECTS\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\LEGAL AND SKETCH SSA 22 PANTHER CORRIDOR\23.48 SSA 22 PANTHER CROSSING.rtf Page 13 of 30 Page 1261 of 4116Exhibit A to Easement Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description DISTANCE OF 1,646.54 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.46°30'57"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,716.48 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.18°00'34"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 269.47 FEET; THENCE RUN N.00°00'47"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,149.10 FEET; THENCE RUN N.73°57'58"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,267.66 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVE OF A NON- TANGENTIAL CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, HAVING A RADIUS OF 497.96 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°24'27", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD DISTANCE OF 20.92 FEET, AT A BEARING OF N.29°47'47"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 20.92 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN N.31°00'01"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 361.08 FEET; THENCE RUN N.16°02'01"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 10.84 FEET TO SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 82 (A 200 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY); THENCE RUN S.73°57'58"E., ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 4,278.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 892.682 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THE TOTAL AREA OF PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN IS 1,295.406 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON REFER TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 03, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, HAVING A BEARING OF S.89°29'58"E. SOUTH 89° 23' 32 THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. Digitally signed by Stephen Berry Stephen DN: c=US, ou=LS 5296, o=BBLS Surveyors, inc., cn=Stephen Berry, email=sberry@bblsinc.net Berry_____________________________01/14/2025Date: 2025.01.24 14:17:22 -05'00' STEPHEN E. BERRY, STATE OF FLORIDA, (PLS #5296) BBLS SURVEYORS, INC., (LB #8033) SEE ATTACHED SKETCH (SHEETS 5 THROUGH 8) SHEET 4 OF 8 \\10.0.0.10\data\PROJECTS\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\LEGAL AND SKETCH SSA 22 PANTHER CORRIDOR\23.48 SSA 22 PANTHER CROSSING.rtf Page 14 of 30 Page 1262 of 4116Exhibit A to Easement Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description A PORTION OF SECTIONS 03, 04, 09, 10 AND 15 TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PagePage 151263 of 30 of 4116Exhibit A to Easement Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description A PORTION OF SECTIONS 03, 04, 09, 10 AND 15 TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PagePage 1264 16 of of 30 4116Exhibit A to Easement Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description A PORTION OF SECTIONS 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 15 AND 18, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PagePage 1265 17 of of 30 4116 Exhibit A to Easement Agreement ALD SSA 22 Legal Description 03, 04, 09, 10 AND 15 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, A PORTION OF SECTIONS PagePage 1266 18 of of30 4116 EXHIBIT B TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT DEPICTION OF SSA LANDS – 1,295.4 ACRES Page 19 of 30 Page 1267 of 4116Exhibit B to Easement Agreement Depiction of SSA Lands - 1,295.4 Acres Page 1268 of 4116 Page 20 of 30 EXHIBIT C TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTON OF SSA LANDS – 1,294.3 ACRES – REMOVAL OF LAYERS 1–6 Page 21 of 30 Page 1269 of 4116Page 1270 of 4116Page 1271 of 4116Page 1272 of 4116Page 1273 of 4116Page 1274 of 4116Page 1275 of 4116Page 1276 of 4116Page 1277 of 4116 EXHIBIT D TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT DEPICTION OF LANDS – REMOVAL OF LAYERS 1–6 Page 23 of 30 Page 1278 of 4116Exhibit D to Easement Agreement Depiction of Lands - Removal of Layers 1-6 Page 1279 of 4116 Page 24 of 30 EXHIBIT E TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTON OF SSA LANDS – 1.1 ACRE – REMOVAL OF LAYER 1 Page 25 of 30 Page 1280 of 4116Exhibit E to Easement Agreement Legal Description of SSA Lands - 1.1 Acre - Removal of Layer 1 BBLS SURVEYORS, INC 9001 HIGHLAND WOOD BLVD., SUITE. 6, BONITA SPRINGS, FLORIDA, 34135 TELEPHONE: (239) 597-1315 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CORKSCREW GROVE SSA 22 “GENERAL CONDITIONAL USE AREA” A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 09, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN S.00°28'02"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2699.34 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 10; THENCE CONTINUE S.00°28'02"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, FOR A DISTANCE OF 496.66 TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF AN 80 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 402, PAGE 29 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN N.77°05'20"E., ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 9325.59 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HERIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN S.58°00'12"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 959.28 FEET; THENCE RUN N.31°34'44"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF CORKSCREW ROAD (A 100 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY); THENCE RUN N.58°00'12"E., ALONG SOUTHERLY SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 912.09 FEET; THENCE RUN S.75°07'20"E., FOR A DISTANCE OF 68.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 1.074 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON REFER TO THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, HAVING A BEARING OF S.00°28'02"E. 89° 2 Digitally signed by Stephen Berry Stephen DN: c=US, ou=LS 5296, o=BBLS Surveyors, inc., cn=Stephen Berry, email=sberry@bblsinc.net Date: 2025.11.07 14:01:43 -05'00' Berry_____________________________10/31/2025 STEPHEN E. BERRY, STATE OF FLORIDA, (PLS #5296) BBLS SURVEYORS, INC., (LB #8033) SEE ATTACHED SKETCH (SHEETS 2 THROUGH 3) SHEET 1 OF 3 .\\nas\data\Projects\2023\23.48 CORKSCREW GROVE\SSA 22 GCUA\SSA 22 GCUA.rtf Page 26 of 30 Page 1281 of 4116Exhibit E to Easement Agreement Legal Description of SSA Lands - 1.1 Acre - Removal of Layer 1 A PORTION OF SECTION 09, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PagePage 1282 27 of of 30 4116Exhibit E to Easement Agreement Legal Description of SSA Lands - 1.1 Acre - Removal of Layer 1 A PORTION OF SECTION 09, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PagePage 1283 28 of of 30 4116 EXHIBIT F TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT DEPICTION OF LANDS – REMOVAL OF LAYER 1 Page 29 of 30 Page 1284 of 4116Exhibit F to Easement Agreement Depiction of Lands - Removal of Layer 1 Page 1285 of 4116 Page 30 of 30 ESCROW AGREEMENT (SSA 22) This ESCROW AGREEMENT is made as of the _____ day of ___________, 2026 (“Effective Date”) by and between Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (“County”), Alico Inc., a Florida Corporation, formerly known as (“FKA”) Alico Land Development Company (“ALD”), hereinafter referred to as (“Owner”), and COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A., (the “Escrow Agent”). The County, ALD, and Escrow Agent are collectively referred to herein as the “Parties.” RECITALS WHEREAS, ALD is the owner of approximately one thousand two hundred ninety five and four tenths (1,295.4) acres of land within the boundaries of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (“RLSA District”), located in Collier County, Florida, which land is the subject of Stewardship Sending Area Application No. PL20240010213 (“SSA Designation Application”) filed by Owner with Collier County, Florida; and WHEREAS, ALD has submitted applications to Collier County, the South Florida Water Management District, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for authorization to develop the Corkscrew Grove East Village Stewardship Receiving Area (“East Village SRA”) located within the RLSA District consistent with the provisions of Sections 4.08.06 and 4.08.07 of the Collier County Land Development Code (“LDC”); and WHEREAS, ALD has advised Collier County that the East Village SRA will be developed consistent with the provisions of Section 4.08.07 of the Collier County LDC, which will include the submittal of a Stewardship Receiving Area (“SRA”) application pursuant to Section 4.08.07 of the Collier County LDC; and WHEREAS, in order to develop the East Village SRA in accordance with Section 4.08.07, Owner is required under Section 4.08.07 to exchange Stewardship Credits granted under Section 4.08.06 for the additional residential or non-residential entitlements necessary to develop the project as an SRA; and WHEREAS, the Owner submitted an SSA Designation Application requesting that a one thousand two hundred ninety five and four tenths (1,295.4) acre parcel (hereinafter referred to as “SSA 22”) be designated as a Stewardship Sending Area in accordance with and pursuant to Section 4.08.06 of the Collier County LDC and to establish Stewardship Credits that would be available for Owner to develop the East Village SRA; and WHEREAS, Collier County reviewed the SSA Designation Application and determined that the application was sufficient and would generate twelve thousand nine hundred thirty five and two tenths (12,935.2) Stewardship Credits under the provisions of Section 4.08.06; and WHEREAS, the County and ALD acknowledge and agree that the issuance of final, non- appealable governmental authorizations, including County approvals, necessary to develop the East Page 1 of 7 Page 1286 of 4116Village SRA consistent with the provisions of Section 4.08.07 will be issued subsequent to the County approval of SSA 22 and the East Village SRA; and WHEREAS, the County and Owner agree that SSA 22 is approved and generates twelve thousand nine hundred thirty five and two tenths (12,935.2) Stewardship Credits subject to the terms and conditions of this Escrow Agreement; and WHEREAS, Owner agrees to interim land use limitations on SSA 22 as set forth in this Escrow Agreement until the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement and Stewardship Easement Agreement are recorded or terminated pursuant to the terms of this Escrow Agreement. AGREEMENTS NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. 2. Tender of Documents. Owner and County shall execute and deliver to the Escrow Agent the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement – SSA 22 Credit Agreement and Stewardship Easement Agreement SSA 22 (“Documents”). 3. The Escrow Agent shall deliver the original Documents to the County for recording in the public records of Collier County upon presentment of the following by ALD: a. An approved SRA for the East Village SRA, which requires the exchange of Stewardship Credits from SSA 22 for the additional residential and non-residential entitlements; and b. All necessary final and non-appealable development orders, permits, or other discretionary approvals necessary to construct the East Village SRA consistent with the provisions of Section 4.08.07 of the Collier County LDC. In the event the approvals referenced above in this Section are not delivered to the Escrow Agent on or before the fifth (5th) anniversary of the Effective Date of this Escrow Agreement, this Escrow Agreement shall terminate and the original Documents shall be returned to ALD. If a challenge and/or appeal of a necessary development order, permit, or other discretionary approval are filed, ALD and County may elect to extend the Escrow Agreement by written agreement until the challenge or appeal is finally resolved. If the challenge or appeal is not resolved such that the construction may commence under terms acceptable to ALD, ALD may within 180 days of the final disposition of the challenge or appeal terminate this Escrow Agreement. 4. In the event the Escrow Agreement is terminated as noted above, all affirmative obligations and negative covenants contained in the Documents shall be null and void without further Page 2 of 7 Page 1287 of 4116 action from the parties hereto, the land shall revert to its underlying zoning classification prior to the effective date of the Documents, and the East Village SRA shall be terminated. If requested by ALD, Collier County shall provide a written release and termination of this Agreement and the Documents for recording in the public records within fifteen (15) days of the request from ALD. Collier County shall update the overlay map to reflect the termination of SSA 22 or any SRA. 5. Interim Land Use Limitations. Owner agrees to the elimination of land use layers and the land management measures set forth in the Documents during the term of this Escrow Agreement. Within 30 days of approval of the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement, Owner shall record in the public records of Collier County a notice of these interim land use restrictions in a form acceptable to the County. 6. Escrow Agent Obligations and Indemnity. The County and Owner shall hold the Escrow Agent harmless of and from the release or failure to release the documents by the Escrow Agent for any reason whatsoever as a result of this Escrow Agreement, except for as a result of the willful misconduct or gross negligence of the Escrow Agent. The Escrow Agent is authorized to rely on any document believed by the Escrow Agent to be authentic in making delivery of documents hereunder. 7. Amendment. This Escrow Agreement may not be modified, amended, or altered in any way except by an amendment signed by the County and ALD and acknowledged by the Escrow Agent. 8. Governing Law. This Escrow Agreement and all matters pertaining hereto shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. 9. Attorneys’ Fees. In connection with any litigation concerning this Escrow Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees, paralegal fees, and costs, including such that may be incurred at the appellate level. 10. Representation. The County acknowledges and agrees that COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. represents ALD and may continue to do so while serving as Escrow Agent and notwithstanding any present or future dispute arising under this Agreement. The parties do not object to such services by COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. as Escrow Agent and such representation of ALD by COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. in this and other matters and agree that such service and such representation does not adversely affect the independent professional judgment of COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. on behalf of any such party or the ability of COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. to adequately represent the interest of any such party. 11. Binding Agreement. This Escrow Agreement shall bind all successors and shall inure to the benefit of heirs, executors, administrators, or other successors in interest of the parties hereto. Page 3 of 7 Page 1288 of 411612. Interpleader. Notwithstanding any other provision herein to the contrary, if there is any dispute between the County and Owner as to the documents held hereunder, the Escrow Agent may, in the Escrow Agent’s sole discretion, interplead the documents with the Circuit Court of Collier County and be relieved of any further responsibility to the County and Owner pursuant to this Agreement. 13. Counterparts and Execution. Executed counterpart copies of the original of this document shall be treated as if the originals were so executed and shall bind the executing party and shall have the same force and effect as the original. Execution of this Agreement by facsimile shall be treated as an original. Page 4 of 7 Page 1289 of 4116IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment Escrow Agreement by their duly authorized officers or representatives and their official seals hereto affixed the day and year first written above. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA COLLIER COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS By: By: Dan Kowal, Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL LEGALITY: By: ____________________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Page 5 of 7 Page 1290 of 4116WITNESSES: ALICO INC. FKA ALICO LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY A Florida corporation By: John Kiernan, President and CEO (Signature) Alico Land Development Company A Florida corporation (Print full name) By: (Address) Printed Name: ______ Title: Address: (Signature) (Print full name) (Address) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing Escrow Agreement was acknowledged before me, by means of ( ) physical presence or ( ) online notarization, on this ____ day of _________, 20___, by _______________, as _________________ of Alico Inc. FKA Alico Land Development Company who is ( ) personally known to me or ( ) has produced ________________________ as identification. Notary Public Name: Certificate No. My Commission expires: Page 6 of 7 Page 1291 of 4116Page 1292 of 4116 44. itc Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller - Crystal K. Kinzel ce c Collier County, Florida II 3315 Tamiami Trail East, Ste. 102 - Naples, FL 34112- 5324 Phone: ( 239) 252- 2646 cot NINA Publication Confirmation COLLIER COUNTY STATE OF FLORIDA The attached copy of advertisement, 4/ 28/ 26 BCC- Alico SSA 22 ( SSA) ( PL20240010213) was published on the publicly accessible website https:// notices.collierclerk.com as designated by Collier County, Florida on 04/ 08/ 2026. THIS IS NOT AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION. Page 1293 of 4116 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners ( BCC) at 9: 00 A.M. on April 28, 2026, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, third floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL to consider: A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DESIGNATING APPROXIMATELY 1, 295. 4 ACRES IN THE RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT AS A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA WITH A DESIGNATION AS " SSA 22"; PURSUANT TO THE TERMS SET FORTH IN THE ESCROW AGREEMENT, STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT, AND STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA EASEMENT AGREEMENT, ALL FOR SSA 22; APPROVING A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR SSA 22; APPROVING A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR SSA 22; APPROVING AN ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SSA 22; AND ESTABLISHING THE NUMBER OF STEWARDSHIP CREDITS GENERATED BY THE DESIGNATION OF SAID STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN SECTIONS 3, 4, 9, 10 AND 15, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST. [ PL202400102131 0 v L Z L U co 0wiO V) 0 ce a 0) 0 0 C N4,- ce 00 c E Project E Location u) 0 Copies of the proposed Resolution are on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. Page 1294 of 4116All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three( 3) minutes on any item. The selection of any individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. If recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted ten( 10) minutes to speak on an item. Written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven( 7) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record. As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like to participate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/ meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www. collier. gov/ Calendar- Events- directory after the agenda is posted on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user' s risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252- 8369 or email to Geoffrey. Willig@collier. gov. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112- 5356,( 239) 252- 8380, at least two( 2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA DAN KOWAL, CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER Page 1295 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 9.C ID# 2026-720 Executive Summary Recommendation to approve Petition VAC-PL20260000213, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 60-foot roadway easement, as recorded in Official Record Book 238, page 913 and Official Record Book 1365, page 1357 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located approximately one half mile south of Veterans Memorial Boulevard, in Section 15, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (This item is a companion to Item 9D) OBJECTIVE: To adopt a Resolution to vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the roadway easement, as recorded in Official Record Book 238, page 913 and Official Record Book 1365, page 1357 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 15, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, being more specifically shown in Exhibit “A." CONSIDERATIONS: The property owner, NA Realty Trust, Inc., submitted Petition VAC-PL20260000213 with a request is to vacate a portion of the 60-foot roadway easement, as recorded in Official Record Book 238, page 913, and Official Record Book 1365, page 1357 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 15, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. Specifically, this is a request to vacate the 30-foot roadway easement along the south line of the northeast quarter of Section 1,5, and is a portion of a sixty (60) foot wide roadway easement. The roadway easement encumbers the southern thirty (30) feet of the subject property. The Easement is granted in favor of multiple parties, including the grantor and grantee, their respective heirs, successors, and assigns, all owners of abutting lands at the time, and the public. This Easement has not been utilized and will not be utilized; however, it is on Petitioner’s Title Opinion of the property. As a result of a companion PUD amendment to development the property (PL20250006588, Item #9.A), the petitioner wishes to vacate this easement. Three properties abut the southern, eastern, and western boundaries of the NA Realty Trust, Inc. parcel. The three properties are: 1. Imperial Golf Club, Inc. The full Easement is 60-foot wide and 30-foot wide on the north property line of this golf course. 2. Castlewood at Imperial HOA. The Lake on the Castlewood parcel abuts the east end of the Easement. 3. Comex Construction Materials FL. This is the location of a concrete plant which abuts the west end of this Easement, and just to the north of the Comex parcel is the south end of the Seminole Gulf Railway parcel. The 1967 Deed (the “Deed”) recorded at Official Records 238, Page 913 of the Public Record of Collier County, established the 60-foot Easement. The Deed is the exception (i.e., no grant of Easement) across the Seminole Gulf Railway parcel. If a road were constructed across this 60-foot roadway easement, it would go no further west than the Railway parcel and no further east of the Lake on the Castlewood parcel. In addition, if constructed, it would also bisect the Cemex parcel. Therefore, there is no reason for this roadway easement to exist and not be vacated. Statement of Public Benefit: 1. There is no present necessity or reasonably foreseeable necessity for the current roadway easement. 2. The vacation of the roadway easement allows for development to occur consistent with the County’s Growth Management Plan. 3. The vacation of the roadway easement will eliminate any potential public liability created by the roadway easement. 4. The developer has agreed to advance a portion of the Veterans Memorial Boulevard extension, assuming responsibility for design, permitting, and construction. The Development Review Division has reviewed this petition and found no reason for objection. Page 1296 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 9.C ID# 2026-720 This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to operate an efficient and customer focused permitting process. FISCAL IMPACT: Growth Management Department, Development Review Division staff has collected a $2,000 “Petition to Vacate” fee from the petitioner which covers the County’s cost of recording and processing the Petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management plan impact associated with this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval. – CLD RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve the attached Resolution, relating to Petition VAC-PL20260000213, which will vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 60-foot roadway easement, as recorded in Official Record Book 238, page 913 and Official Record Book 1365, page 1357 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 15, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, being more specifically shown in Exhibit “A” of the Resolution, and direct the Clerk to the Board to record a certified copy of the Resolution in the public records of Collier County, Florida. PREPARED BY: Marcus L. Berman, P.S.M., County Land Surveyor, Development Review Division. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 4.13.26 2. Application-signed 3. Property Ownership Disclosure Form 4. Affidavit of Authorization 5. LONO - Imperial Golf Club 6. LONO - North Collier Fire District SIGNED 7. LONO - Sheriff 8. LONO - Century Link - Lumen 9. LONO - Comcast 10. LONO - TECO Gas 11. LONO Email - FPL 12. Deed OR 238 page 913 13. Deed OR 1365 page 1357 14. Imperial Lakes RPUD Master Plan 15. Agreement_Castlewood~NA_Realty_Trust_w~Exs_(002) 16. 2025-Annual-bill paid 17. Resolution 2021-243 18. legal ad - VAC-PL20260000213 Imperial Lakes Page 1297 of 4116 RESOI,UTION NO.2026. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLOIIIDA, 'TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE ANI) VACATE THE COUNTY AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE 6O.FOOT ROADWAY EASEMENT, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 238, PAGE 9I3 AND OFFICIAL RtrCORD BOOK 1365, PAGE 1357 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLOzuDA, LOCATED APPROXIMATLY ONE HALF MILE SOTITH OF VBTERANS MEMORIAL BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 48 souTH, RANGE 25 trAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. IPL202600002 l3l WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2021-243, Petitioner, Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., on behalf of NA Realty Trust, Inc., has requested the vacation of the County and the Public interest in a portion of the 60-foot roadway easement, as recorded in Official Record Book 238, page 913 and '1357 Official Record Book 1365, page of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 15, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, being more specifically shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and WHEREAS, at its March 24, 2026 regular meeting, the Board of County Commissioners (Board), via Resolution 2026-62, approved the scheduling ol a public hearing on April 28, 2026, or as soon thereafter as practical, pursuant to Resolution 2021 - 243; and WHEREAS, the Board. on this day, held a public hearing to consider the Petitioner's request and notice ofsaid public hearing was given as required by law; and WHEREAS, the granting of the Petitioner's request will not affect the ownership or right of convenient access of persons owning other parts of the subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Of COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the County and public interest in a portion of the 60-foot roadway easement, as recorded in Official Record Book 238, page 913 and Official Record Book 1365, page 1357 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. located in Section 15, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, being more specifically shown in Exhibit A, is hereby vacated, extinguished, renounced and disclaimed. and this action is declared to be in the public interest and lor the public benefit. [26-E l S-05 2971200 8112t1]29 I ofz Lho Page 1298 of 4116 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Clerk to the Board is hereby directed to record a certilled copy of the Resolution in the Public Records of Collier County. Florida. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote favoring same, this the _ day of _,2026. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By' Deputy Clerk Dan Kowal, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: By, Courtney L. DaSilva A,D 4l13lzo Assistant County Attomey Prepared By: Marcus L. Berman, P.S.M., County Land Surveyor, Development Review Division. Attachments: l) Exhibit "A" Sketch and Legal Description 2) Exhibit "B" Location-Site Map [26 -EtS -0 5297 t 2008 I 7 2 I I )29 2of2 CAO Page 1299 of 4116 S IWT ts. ot a Exhibit A a5'nM0Ar ffik B tr (4-i P8 E re 8t-& _8 E l qNPvAlOt / ffilar EASW{r q o ,J66, re t$7 g, qt-e L a o a P8 ft tr o i ,a ct8'o8" w s ctJ'JJ' F) 30.00' J0.00' A xz O) s t 268.26' \ P : (5 c\ o -f-- \ w t268.22' I ----1 __ry!9J?_!:: r) *!t \ V) $'awff ! PG i q'fl8 HE$ u: fr l$1 4fi FArf ffia I{ P sEDOt t*-E UJ R J655, rc 612 il t I tl ! I R I sBi $ R E E $ E s i Lrr h l^Y NOTES: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION \q ,. w6 cilN t&N tff as@ u te snE HAt€ wtttE A PRIIO'I G A & FOf NE tr'ITY FXWTT ruWP N O'IWL s ftffiE m( 24 Pe grJ AEIC ftffiE tr ALR ANY flNv lE U) zuf, tg, ulw ,m ail AorSDoI 6ilt@ unEt0 Rtx 6 W nE fif fl.JIH A ftIr 6 tE ESI ilf G IE tfrllfAsl qtflER tr gfim E ru6rP Q g,IH iltof 6 rl9r, MtA mNY fufrl { I,1 tfritftsT qtRra c *xtot t5 tw6tP 18 flnl HfiE b Flsr, fr6NEffitpt &f N@r'sRtlffi -nr u MLR @lU fl.ARA $ fr6 N $Ag't J gj'l,a/ gJN EeN Ar tE ElSt MR|R MA tr t5 WNlp 0 ! 2 D,€dtfl{s 9&N tfi&il ffi N US C.RtEf FEr $0 aECilfltS HIr;r 6 O5'T, &J.ffi &,NIY ftW TIEtr IWIH g2'fi. Ef, s tw. llfr,E ltt g.llH ItE 6 ltE F)Sl l*f C llf ,frllclsr qlfiw r W k gaan t5 fcR Lfr,z ftE n tE gilfiEt ctfrrn 6 x) rilcw il u I n6 .9(E70H AtO IERgAn 6 nT tUO fitil.Jr tf Cffi,t trtc tfrtH otrt Br afrG tE Br lN t w Factw fu *{Iltft *0 *A I tE MrL xr//.nft to 06fiL vL 6 A A.0 FEr: fiotr gm ggg'ifr, ffi ,"z8,fr rEr tO t€ FtSt = IffiGTD C,,VEIR ATO IO IIITIDE HS o ft&'I R INEfrE N IN T 9IO |Drlm|t. I}ffi flIIH OIIJJ' EB'T LN W FA'T IJE o PTNIID'IFTR TfiflJT APffiD WTIOI o ffIU tr$trlw M IE fw n{n fEt n w F6fi 0F &Tt$rs r lE ma lrstEID lmt m6ilr 'IOE ftE S001/6 ffitY. I q Mtar{6 a,u7 gaE fEt cR 487 lffi, rfrr tr lfss P ,NOTASURVEY o oN r)I LEGEND a\ 0 125' 150' 500' m nfi 6 Ee,l,l{6 r) fr ffFU. W MK SCA-LE: 1" 150' oN H RITW = N THIS PLAN MAY HAVE EEEN ENL'NGED OR PC ,,4s) REDUCEO FROM INTENDED DISPLAY SCALE FOR REPRODUCTION REASONS \ l/)s SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION 0. Crady Mlnor and Asmclates. Ll,C uE ca@ Gradyllinor 3800 Vla Del Ley Digitally 5igned a Pape-Dawson company Bonlta Sprlng6, Florlda 34134 IMPERIAL LAKES by Todd 8. Short @ Date:2025, l2.l I Civi I Flngineers . l,an Sent: Monday, December 15, 2025 4:03 PM To: LauraDeJohnVEN ; Craig Brown ; Chris Hall ; Louise Jarvis Subject: RPUD PL20250006588 EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. SORRY ABOUT THE EARLIER EMAIL AS IT WAS SENT ACCCIDENTALLY Dear Ms. DeJohn and Mr. Brown In this recent PUD modification and reference to your zoning review comment 14. I and all of Castlewood are very concerned about the proposed layout. 1.This brings their development much closer to Castlewood, the only residential neighborhood adjacent to their proposed development. We like the original Proposed PUD much better and its corresponding setbacks 2. It also appears that in the revised PUD Documents (18 RPUD Exhibits A-fv.pdf) They are attempting to revise all the setbacks in a table. These modifications are not welcomed by the Castlewood community. Please keep the setbacks per the original PUD. 3. Environmental Review Comment 2 Bear Activity The Bear Report is inaccurate as it is over two years old and does not account for the construction of the High School. In addition, there have been 3 Bear sightings in Castlewood in the last year. In Addition There is nothing in the wildlife report about cougars. There have been numerous reports on the golf course of cougar sightings along with sightings in Castlewood. Deviations 1. In the original PUD the distance from Castlewood had a 60ft access easement then a 50 ft set back from the road to the property line and then a 50” road ROW then a Building setback of 50 ft from the road. Or 310 ft from Castlewood property line. 2. There were 3 deviations requested a. Deviation 1 Relief from street system requirements of a 60 ROW to 50 ROW We do not recommend this deviation as it will have adverse effects on visibility from Castlewood. In an area with already difficult traffic flow. 1 Page 1649 of 4116 b. Deviation 2 Sidewalk, Bike Lane and Pathways Requirements Too many deviations have been given in the past and this has led to poorly planned areas and pedestrian transportation i. There are also requirements for sidewalks and bikeways for access to the high school c. Deviation 3 Preservation standards This needs to be enforced as the wild life continues to be forced into smaller and smaller areas. With the construction of the High School the wildlife has moved everywhere else. They need to have continuous preserves for migration. Thank you for taking this into consideration Jim Reichart 1766 Supreme Ct Naples, FL. 34110 312-339-4402 2 Page 1650 of 4116LauraDeJohnVEN From: LauraDeJohnVEN Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2025 3:56 PM To: Jim Reichart Cc: Chris Hall; Living Waters Canoe; Ron Anderson; Trevor Calhoun Subject: RE: The other morning at about 3:30am — Nextdoor Bear in the neighborhood (PL20250006588 - Imperial Lakes (PUDA)) Mr. Reichart, Security settings do not allow me to access the Nextdoor post you linked in your email. If you would like information or images to be included as public correspondence for the pending Imperial Lakes PUD Amendment, please send in the body of an email or as a still image. Thank you, Laura Laura DeJohn Planner, Sr. Development Review Office:(239)252-5587 Laura.DeJohn@collier.gov My email address has changed. Effective immediately, please update your contact list to use this new address: Laura.DeJohn@collier.gov -----Original Message----- From: Jim Reichart Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2025 11:21 AM To: Chris Hall ; LauraDeJohnVEN ; Living Waters Canoe ; Ron Anderson ; Trevor Calhoun Subject: The other morning at about 3:30am — Nextdoor Bear in the neighborhood EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Check out this post on Nextdoor: https://nextdoor.com/p/cx9Hf7- P7KYL?utm_source=share&extras=NjkxOTA2NzM%3D&share_platform=6&utm_campaign=1766506707362&share_action_id =19d3a9f0-15da-4439-a26d-e1e1a3c64dc6 Jim Reichart Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 Page 1651 of 4116LauraDeJohnVEN From: Ailyn Padron Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2026 2:31 PM To: LauraDeJohnVEN; Ray Bellows Cc: Michael Bosi Subject: FW: [Spam] Proposed development PL20250006588- Imperial Lakes (PUDA) Hi Laura and Ray, Please read below. Thank you. Ailyn Padron Management Analyst I Zoning Office:239-252-5187 2800 Horseshoe Dr. Naples, Florida 34104 Ailyn.Padron@collier.gov My email address has changed. Effective immediately, please update your contact list to use this new address: Ailyn.Padron@collier.gov From: Jim Reichart Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2026 2:28 PM To: Chris Hall ; Ailyn Padron ; Amy Patterson Cc: Living Waters Canoe ; linhampton@aol.com; Ron Anderson ; Julie Ewing ; Thomas and Norine Petruzelli ; LauraDeJohnVEN ; bill@murlick.com; SMurlick02@gmail.com Subject: [Spam] Proposed development PL20250006588 EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Preview attachment FullSizeRender.heicPreview attachment FullSizeRender.heic 1 Page 1652 of 4116 FullSizeRender.heic 1.8 MB Commissioner Hall and Ms.Patterson I recently received a letter about a revision to the Imperial Lakes PUD circa 1960. I have difficulty how the applicant can request a revision to the PUD without providing a layout plan other than a generic layout that does not show what or where they plan to build. How could the county even entertain this proposal? The new proposed layout will adversely impact the only residential community that is adjacent to this proposed PUD revision. With the generic layout that was submitted with the revised PUD it will move their proposed development even closer to Castlewood at Imperial Golf. I look forward to hearing back from you. Thanks Jim Jim Reichart 1766 Supreme Ct Naples, FL. 34110 312-339-4402 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 Page 1653 of 4116Page 1654 of 4116 Page 1655 of 4116 II Ccw, vp, eTte o Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller - Crystal K. Kinzel Collier County, Florida u x 3315 Tamiami Trail East, Ste. 102 - Naples, FL 34112- 5324 Phone: ( 239) 252- 2646 Publication Confirmation COLLIER COUNTY STATE OF FLORIDA The attached copy of advertisement, 4/ 28/ 26 BCC- Imperial Lakes( PUDA) ( PL20250006588) was published on the publicly accessible website https:// notices. collierclerk. com as designated by Collier County, Florida on 04/ 08/ 2026. THIS IS NOT AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION. Page 1656 of 4116 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at 9: 00 A.M. on April 28, 2026, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, third floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004- 41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ( PUD) ZONING DISTRICT AND SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY ( ST) TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ( RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS IMPERIAL LAKES RPUD TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 430 MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS OR AN ALTERNATIVE OF 313 DWELLING UNITS INCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY, TWO FAMILY, TOWNHOUSE AND MULTIFAMILY SUBJECT TO A TRIP CAP; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 82- 81. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF VETERANS MEMORIAL BOULEVARD, NORTH OF IMPERIAL GOLF CLUB, WEST OF CASTLEWOOD AT IMPERIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, CONSISTING OF 78. 28± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [ PL202500065881 t rat Se' e C V J l Project Sun Century RDA. j sl Location L tz o i Veterans Memorial C, 4. t B LVD , ok. , i, v 7 ! 00 C S Sun D oJCTL 1 G. Wig s RD L 1 Duke Ro toes DR 1 DR n Imperial Go f_._,t p 7 : P core`- : Course BLV c' tjj?' WAY ,— N _.0 _ Page 1657 of 4116Copies of the proposed Ordinance are on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three( 3) minutes on any item. The selection of any individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. If recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted ten( 10) minutes to speak on an item. Written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven( 7) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record. As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like to participate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/ meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www. collier. gov/ Calendar- Events- directory after the agenda is posted on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user' s risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252- 8369 or email to Geoffrey. Willignacollier. gov. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112- 5356,( 239) 252- 8380, at least two( 2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA DAN KOWAL, CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER Page 1658 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 11.A ID# 2026-870 Executive Summary Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid No. 25-8421, “Big Cypress Golf Estates & Country Club of Naples – Secondary Drainage and Water Main Replacement,” to Wright Construction Group, Inc., in the total amount of $5,785,747.47, with a total Owner’s Allowance of $578,574.75; and approve the County’s portion for payment in the amount of $3,282,544.68 with an Owner’s Allowance of $328,254.47, and the City of Naples’ portion for payment in the amount of $2,503,202.79 with an Owner’s Allowance of $250,320.28, in accordance with the terms of an existing Interlocal Agreement, and authorize the Chair to sign the attached Agreement. (Project No. 60102) OBJECTIVE: To deliver a reliable, resilient stormwater system that restores flow connectivity, reduces flood risk, and meets regulatory requirements. CONSIDERATIONS: On February 27, 2024 (Agenda Item 16.B.7), the Board approved an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Naples for a joint project to design and construct stormwater improvements and public water collection system facilities in the Big Cypress Golf and Country Club Estates community area. The Big Cypress Golf Estates & Country Club of Naples (“BCG&CC”) – Secondary Drainage and Water Main Replacement project addresses long-standing drainage issues within the BCG&CC residential area and the adjacent Country Club of Naples (“CCN”) golf course. This construction project retrofits the roadside swale and culvert system within the BCG&CC roadways of Burning Tree Drive, Cypress Pointe Drive, and Mel Jen Drive, and includes the replacement of the existing water main. On August 22, 2025, the Procurement Services Division issued a Construction Invitation to Bid No. 25-8421, Big Cypress Golf & Country Club Estates of Naples Secondary Drainage Improvements & Water Main Replacement. The County originally advertised the solicitation for forty-five days (45) and extended it an additional sixteen (16) days to conduct vendor outreach to promote competition. On September 11, 2025, the County held a pre-bid meeting for interested bidders. The County received seven bids by the October 23, 2025, submission deadline, as summarized below. Bidders: Company Name City County ST Bid Amount Responsive/ Responsible Wright Construction Group, Inc. Fort Myers Lee FL $5,785,747.47 Yes/Yes Douglas N. Higgins, Inc. Naples Collier FL $6,143,341.60 Yes/Yes ITG Communications, LLC Pembroke Park Broward FL $6,495,773.10 Yes/Yes Coastal Concrete Products, LLC dba Fort Myers Lee FL $7,162,690.74 Yes/Yes Coastal Site Development Quality Enterprises USA, Inc. Naples Collier FL $7,335,184.87 Yes/Yes Andrew Sitework, LLC Fort Myers Lee FL $7,808,483.00 Yes/Yes Ferreira Construction Company, Inc. Hobe Sound Martin FL $7,996,472.47 Yes/Yes The County reviewed the bids and determined that Wright Construction Group, Inc. (“Wright”) is the lowest, responsive, and responsible bidder with a bid amount of $5,785,747.47. The Engineer of Record, Bowman Gulf Coast LLC, evaluated Wright’s references and found them acceptable to determine Wright’s experience on work of a similar magnitude judged within the last two years, to evaluate their skill, business standing, and ability to conduct the work as completely and timely as required under the Agreement. In addition to the total bid amount, staff is allocating $578,574.75 as Owners’ Allowance for unforeseen conditions encountered during construction that will be included in Page 1659 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 11.A ID# 2026-870 the purchase order. The allowance will only be used as allocated above and as directed by the County, if necessary, with proper supporting documentation to be submitted by the Contractor for any additional work that is authorized and performed. Staff recommends that Wright be awarded the attached Agreement as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in the amount of $5,785,747.47, and approve the total Owner’s Allowance in the amount of $578,574.75. The Procurement Services Division concluded bidding was competitive and representative of market conditions. The bid tabulation, Engineer’s Letter of Recommended Award, the Notice of Recommended Award, and proposed agreement are all attached. In accordance with the Interlocal Agreement, the County and City are to enter into the attached three-party construction agreement with the contractor awarded the bid. The County is responsible for payment of construction costs set forth in Category 4: Signage and Pavement Markings, 75% of Category 1: Common Items, 98% of Category 2: Drainage, and 80% of Category 3: Restoration, of the Contractor’s Bid Schedule, in its purchase order with the contractor. The City of Naples is responsible for payment of construction costs for Category 5: Water Main Replacement, 25% of Category 1: Common Items, 2% of Category 2: Drainage, and 20% of Category 3: Restoration, of the Contractor’s Bid Schedule, with its purchase order with the contractor. This item is consistent with the Infrastructure and Asset Management Element of Collier County’s Strategic Plan by preparing for the impacts of natural disasters on our critical infrastructure and natural resources. FISCAL IMPACT: Funding to award the contract is available in the Stormwater Capital Fund (3050), Project 60102. The source of funding is general funds and unincorporated general funds. Fiscal responsibilities are as follows: County Responsibility City Responsibility Total Bid Amount $3,282,544.68 $2,503,202.79 Owner’s Allowance $328,254.47 $250,320.28 Totals: $3,610,799.15 $2,753,523.07 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This project is in accordance with the goals and objectives of the Stormwater Element of the Growth Management Plan. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality and requires majority vote for Board approval. —SRT RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve the award of Invitation to bid No. 25-8421, “Big Cypress Golf Estates & Country Club of Naples – Secondary Drainage and Water Main Replacement,” to Wright Construction Group, Inc., in the total amount of $5,785,747.47, with a total Owner’s Allowance of $578,574.75; and approve the County’s portion for payment in the amount of $3,282,544.68 with an Owner’s Allowance of $328,254.47, and the City of Naples’ portion for payment in the amount of $2,503,202.79 with an Owner’s Allowance of $250,320.28, and authorize the Chair to sign the attached agreement. PREPARED BY: Isabel Soto, PM II, Stormwater Management, Transportation Engineering Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Fully executed Interlocal agreement_ 02_27_2024 Item #16B 7 2. 25-8421 NORA Page 1660 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 11.A ID# 2026-870 3. 25-8421 Bid Tabulation 4. 25-8421 DELORA 5. 25-8421 Wright Contract and City VS 6. 25-8421 Wright COI exp 1.1.27 GL,ALWC,EL,POL 7. BCGCC LOCATION MAP Page 1661 of 4116 ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS CHECKLIST & ROUTING SLIP 1 6 B 7 TO ACCOMPANY ALL ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS SENT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OFFICE FOR SIGNATURE Print on pink paper. Attach to original document. The completed routing slip and original documents are to be forwarded to the County Attorney Office at the time the item is placed on the agenda. All completed routing slips and original documents must be received in the County Attorney Office no later than Monday preceding the Board meeting. ROUTING SLIP** Complete routing lines# 1 through# 2 as appropriate for additional signatures, dates, and/ or information needed. If the document is already complete with the exception of the Chairman' s signature, draw a line through routing lines# 1 through# 2, complete the checklist, and forward to the County Attorney Office. Initials Date Route to Addressee( s) ( List in routing order) Office 1. 2. ( Enter your Dept here) 3. County Attorney Office County Attorney Office JAK/ mb 2/ 27/ 24 4. BCC Office Board of County CH by MB 2/ 28/ 24 Commissioners s] of s Office 5. Minutes and Records Clerk Court' CVO q,5; PRIMARY CONTACT INFORMATION Normally the primary contact is the person who created/ pre red the Executive Summary. Primary contact information is needed in the event one of the addressees above may need to contact staff for additional missing information. Name of Primary Staff Madison Bird Phone Number 2939 Contact/ Department Agenda Date Item was 2/ 27/ 24 Agenda Item Number 16B7 Approved by the BCC Type of Document( s) Interlocal Agreement Number of Original 1 Attached Documents Attached PO number or account number if document is to be recorded INSTRUCTIONS & CHECKLIST Initial the Yes column or mark" N/ A" in the Not Applicable column, whichever is Yes N/ A( Not appropriate. Initial) Applicable) 1. Does the document require the chairman' s signature? ( stamped unless otherwise stated) MB 2. Does the document need to be sent to another agency for additional signatures? If yes, N/ A provide the Contact Information ( Name; Agency; Address; Phone) on an attached sheet. 3. Original document has been signed/ initialed for legality. ( All documents to be signed by MB the Chairman, with the exception of most letters, must be reviewed and signed by the Office of the County Attorney.) 4. All handwritten strike- through and revisions have been initialed by the County Attorney MB Office and all other parties except the BCC Chairman and the Clerk to the Board. 5. The Chairman' s signature line date has been entered as the date of BCC approval of the MB document or the final negotiated contract date whichever is applicable. 6. " Sign here" tabs are placed on the appropriate pages indicating where the Chairman' s MB signature and initials are required. 7. In most cases( some contracts are an exception), the original document and this routing slip N/ A should be provided to the County Attorney Office at the time the item is uploaded to the agenda. Some documents are time sensitive and require forwarding to Tallahassee within a certain time frame or the BCC' s actions are nullified. Be aware of your deadlines! 8. The document was approved by the BCC on_ 2/ 27/ 24 and all changes made JAK/ mb during the meeting have been incorporated in the attached document. The County T4i4i4fOrP16 Attorney Office has reviewed the changes, if applicable. 140411 9. Initials of attorney verifying that the attached document is the version approved by the JAK/ mb BCC, all changes directed by the BCC have been made, and the document is ready for the Chairman' s signature. Please email a completed copy to Madison. Bird@Colliercountyfl. gov I: Forms/ County Forms/ BCC 26. 05; 2. 24. 05; 11/ 30/ 12; 4/ 22/ 16; 9/ 10/ 21 Page 1662 of 4116 16B7 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT PROJECT: Joint Stormwater and Utility Improvement Project for the Big Cypress Golf and Country Club Estates Community THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, made and entered into this to day of r 23, by and between Collier County a political subdivision of the State of Florida, ( the " COUNTY") and the City of Naples, Florida, a Florida municipal corporation( the" CITY")( collectively, the" Parties"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the COUNTY has identified a need to undertake the design and construction of roadside stormwater improvements on Cypress Point Drive, Burning Tree Drive, and Mel- Jen Drive situated within the Big Cypress Golf and Country Club Estates community ( hereinafter referred to as the " Area"), to address aging infrastructure serving the stormwater system and flooding concerns; and WHEREAS, the various streets within the Area identified as needing roadside stormwater improvements( the" stormwater improvements') are within the boundaries of the COUNTY; and WHEREAS, the CITY owns certain potable water systems( the" Utility") within, adjacent to, and in the vicinity of the road easements and/ or rights-of-way of the streets identified as needing stormwater improvements; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the COUNTY' S Procurement Ordinance and its purchasing policies it has secured a design engineering firm to perform the design for the improvements; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and CITY have determined and mutually agree that it is economically advantageous and in the best interest of the public to enter into this Agreement to undertake a joint project the" Project") to construct roadside stormwater improvements and public water collection system facilities; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and CITY both agree that the COUNTY will manage the Project' s design, permitting and construction phases; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and CITY both agree that the COUNTY is responsible for funding the storrwater improvement cost portions of the Project, and the CITY is responsible for funding the Utility cost portions of the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises, and the mutual covenants, terms, and provisions contained herein, the COUNTY and CITY agree as follows. SECTION I: COUNTY' S RESPONSIBILITIES 1. 0 The COUNTY will serve as project manager for the design, permitting and construction phases of the PROJECT. The COUNTY' s assigned staff project manager shall be under the supervision of the COUNTY' s contract manager as identified in Section 3. 4 below. 1. 1 The COUNTY shall maintain open communication with the CITY' s assigned project manager and provide periodic progress reports and documentation about the PROJECT as requested by the CITY. 1 Page 1663 of 41161. 2 The COUNTY shall procure comprehensive Utility-related construction and construction administrative services for the CITY' S Utility portions of the PROJECT, which work shall be jointly and concurrently procured along with the COUNTY' s design, construction, and construction administrative services for its stormwater improvements portions of the PROJECT. 1. 3 The following specific services, duties and responsibilities will be the obligation of the COUNTY regarding the design coordination, construction, and contract administration of the Utility work on behalf of the CITY. A. The COUNTY' s and CITY' s assigned project managers shall maintain open communication with each other and provide periodic progress reports and documentation about the PROJECT as requested by the COUNTY and CITY. Throughout the design, permitting and construction phases of the PROJECT, both project managers shall mutually schedule periodic progress meetings as deemed necessary. B. During the design portion of the PROJECT the COUNTY is responsible for providing requested information to the engineering consultant and timely reviews of draft plan sets. The COUNTY' s review will focus on the design of the stormwater improvements and roadway portions of the PROJECT, with only cursory review( primarily dealing with conflicts) provided for the Utility portions of the PROJECT. The COUNTY will rely upon the CITY to provide the COUNTY with timely detailed reviews and comments for the Utility portions of the PROJECT. C. The COUNTY will be responsible for conducting the public bid and award of the construction contract, culminating with the CITY and COUNTY entering into a three-party agreement with the selected construction contractor. The contractor selected shall be based upon the overall lowest ( for both the aggregate stormwater improvements and utility work), responsive and responsible bid received. Before such an agreement is presented for approval to either the County Commission or the City Council, either Party may decide whether it wishes to proceed with the PROJECT. If a Party decides not to proceed, that Party shall notify the other Party that it no longer wishes to proceed with the PROJECT, in which case the objecting Party will only be responsible for its portion of costs incurred through the date of notification. D. Funding for the construction of the stormwater improvements and roadway portions of the designed and permitted PROJECT will be provided by the COUNTY. The COUNTY is only responsible for paying the contractor selected for the PROJECT for that portion of the work pertaining to its stormwater improvements( as well as shared PROJECT expenses as specified below). E. The COUNTY is responsible to acquire all land rights ( road rights- of-way and drainage easements) needed to successfully construct the stormwater improvements and roadway portions of the PROJECT. These land rights shall be obtained prior to issuance of a Notice to Proceed letter to the construction contractor. F. The COUNTY shall conduct a formal preconstruction conference prior to commencing with the PROJECT. The COUNTY will provide the CITY notice of the preconstruction conference at least five( 5) working days prior to the conference. The CITY' s assigned project manager will attend this conference, and other CITY representatives may attend at the CITY' s discretion. A copy of the minutes of said conference shall be submitted to the CITY' s project manager. 2 Page 1664 of 4116 16B7 G. The Utility work shall be coordinated with the CITY' s project manager with respect to keeping the CITY advised of technical, cost, and schedule impacts upon the Utility work. H. The COUNTY shall confer with the CITY' s project manager as deemed necessary by the COUNTY in order to coordinate work stages between the Utility, stormwater improvements, and roadway improvements from a public interest viewpoint. The COUNTY shall administer design changes, clarifications, supplements, and other contract amendments that may be necessary during the design and construction of the Utility improvements. These contract directives to the consultant and contractor may be in the form of plans, memoranda, reports, change orders, and supplemental agreements and shall be subject to written approval by the CITY' s project manager and/ or contract authority, which approval shall not be reasonably withheld. The above notwithstanding, upon notification to CITY, the CITY herein authorizes the COUNTY to prepare, execute, and implement minor change orders for contract amendments necessitated by actual field conditions at the Utility project site so as not to delay the contractor' s performance and so as to meet the intent of the approved design for the Utility improvements. Said change orders shall be issued by the COUNTY in compliance with current County Procurement Policy and Administrative procedures, either using existing contract unit prices or negotiated unit prices for work adjustments within the physical limit of the Utility work as shown in the construction plans. In no event shall the value of the total change orders exceed the Utility allowance to be included in the low hid approved by both the COUNTY and CITY. Additional or extra work that exceeds the change order authority of the COUNTY shall be submitted for prior review, approval, and execution by the CITY. J. COUNTY shall submit a final Certificate of Completion letter to the CITY along with an appropriate number ofplans detailing the Utility and roadway improvements as constructed by the Parties' contractor (" As- built record drawings"). A one- year warranty requirement for work completed by the contractor shall be included in the Parties' construction agreement. The final Certification of Completion shall be submitted by the engineer of record to the FDEP and other local and State agencies that govern the Utility improvements. K. All contracts entered into by the Parties' for the design and/ or construction of the PROJECT shall require the party contracting with the Parties' to hold harmless, indemnify and defend the CITY and COUNTY and its consultants, agents, officers and employees from any and all claims, losses, penalties, fees, or any expense, damage, or liability incurred by any of them, whether for personal injury, property damage, direct or consequential damages, or economic loss arising directly or indirectly on account of or in connection with the work done by the Parties' consultant or contractor pertaining to the design and construction of the Utility. stormwater improvements and/ or roadway or by any person, firm or corporation to whom any portion of the Utility, stormwater improvements or roadway work is subcontracted by the Parties' consultant or contractor. L. Monthly stormwater field measurements and quantity calculations shall be made by the engineer ofrecord of stormwater improvements work accomplished for processing ofmonthly progress payments to the Parties' contractor. The COUNTY' S project manager shall verify and approve these measurements and calculations in writing prior to the COUNTY' S issuance of monthly progress payments to the contractor. 3 Page 1665 of 4116 16B7 M. The COUNTY shall open a Purchase Order to the selected construction contractor so that it can make payment for the stormwater improvements work performed and provided under the terms of the Parties' construction agreement with the contractor, including the COUNTY' s portion of shared expenses. SECTION II: CITY' S RESPONSIBILITY 2. 0 The CITY shall procure comprehensive Utility- related design services for the CITY' S Utility portions of the PROJECT, which work shall be jointly and concurrently procured along with the COUNTY' s design, construction, and construction administrative services for its stormwater improvements portions of the PROJECT. 2. 1 The CITY and COUNTY staff shall cooperate and agree on the complete contents of the final construction Invitation to Bid(" ITB") solicitation prior to issuance. The CITY and COUNTY will enter into a three- way agreement with the winning bidder resulting from the ITB. The CITY shall provide and perform project support duties as defined below to ensure that the design, construction, and contract administration services meet the mutual satisfaction of the CITY and COUNTY, and other governing agencies that have jurisdictional control over the Utility improvements. 2. 2 The specific project support duties and responsibilities enumerated below shall be the obligation of the CITY. A. The CITY' s Public Works Director will serve as the CITY' s assigned contract authority and point of contact for the COUNTY' s contract manager as identified in Section 3. 4 below. The CITY' s Public Works Director shall designate in writing an assigned CITY project manager to work with the COUNTY' s assigned project manager in typical day to day coordination of PROJECT design, permitting, and construction. The CITY' s Public Works Director shall assign in writing a Utility project coordinator ( if that person is someone different from the assigned project manager) for the purpose of coordinating, resolving, and communicating construction issues at the field level with COUNTY' s project manager. The CITY' s project manager and/ or project coordinator shall attend periodic construction progress meetings with the COUNTY and their contractor, subcontractors, and utility companies with direct or indirect interest in the provisions of the Interlocal Agreement. B. The Parties' assigned project managers shall maintain open communication with each other and provide periodic progress reports and documentation about the PROJECT to one another upon request. Throughout the design, permitting and construction phases of the PROJECT, both project managers shall mutually schedule periodic progress meetings as deemed necessary. The Parties shall provide each other written notice of all regularly scheduled progress meetings at least five( 5) working days prior to the meeting. C. The CITY shall obtain all necessary land rights ( rights- of-way, utility easements, temporary construction easements, etc.) required for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Utility facilities portion of the PROJECT. The land rights shall be obtained, recorded, and made available to the COUNTY prior to the CITY' s issuance of a Notice to Proceed letter to the construction contractor. D. At the time of construction contract bid preparation, those Utility items identified for which the CITY is financially responsible shall be subject to the CITY' s review and approval by the CITY' s assigned project manager. The COUNTY will include the Utility work in the PROJECT ITB to receive the bid price for the CITY' s construction Utility work. Prior to the 4 Page 1666 of 4116 16B7 COUNTY' s issuance of the Notice to Proceed letter to the construction contractor the CITY shall provide a Purchase Order to the successful contractor for the CITY' s portion of the construction of the Utility improvements. Funding for additional approved cost increases for Utility construction work( e.g., quantity changes, change orders, etc.) will be provided by the CITY. E. The CITY shall review the design documents, approve the Utility design, inspect the work as necessary, and review and approve the" As- built record drawings," which will represent and depict the Utility as constructed by the Parties' contractor. F. During the design portion of the PROJECT the CITY is responsible for providing requested information to the consultant and timely reviews of draft plan sets. The CITY' s review will focus on the design of the Utility portions of the PROJECT, with only cursory review( primarily dealing with conflicts) provided for the stormwater improvements and roadway portions of the PROJECT. The CITY will provide the COUNTY with timely detailed reviews and comments for the Utility portions of the PROJECT, so that the COUNTY can submit the CITY' s comments to the design consultant. G. Monthly Utility field measurements and quantity calculations shall be made by the engineer of record of Utility work accomplished for processing of monthly progress payments to the Parties' contractor. The CITY' s project manager shall verify and approve these measurements and calculations in writing prior to the CITY' s issuance of monthly progress payments directly to the contractor. H. The CITY shall open a Purchase Order to the selected construction contractor so that it can make payment for the Utility work performed and provided under the terms of the Parties' construction agreement with the contractor, including the CITY' s portion of shared expenses. SECTION III: MUTUAL COVENANTS 3. 0 The location of the PROJECT is within The Big Cypress Golf and Country Club Estates. The specific streets under consideration for the PROJECT may include some or all of the following streets: Cypress Point Drive Burning Tree Drive Mel- Jen Drive 3. 1 The Parties shall not be responsible for construction means, methods, techniques, skills, sequences, or procedures of construction relating to the PROJECT' s improvements. The above responsibilities during construction shall remain with the Parties' contractor and/ or the contractor' s subcontractors subject to the conditions and responsibilities set forth in this Interlocal Agreement. 3. 2 The CITY shall be responsible for providing review services and guidance to ensure that design and construction of the Utility components of the PROJECT comply with or exceed the CITY' s Utility design and construction minimum standards. 3. 3 Neither Party shall be responsible to the other should its contractor fail to comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration ( OSHA) Safety and Health Standards ( 29 C. F.R. 1926) as authorized by the U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA; said responsibilities to be that of the Parties' contractor and/ or their contractor' s subcontractor. 5 Page 1667 of 4116 16B7 3. 4 The COUNTY' s Capital Project, Impact Fees and Program Management Division Director, shall act as the COUNTY' s contract manager under this Interlocal Agreement. As the COUNTY' s contract manager under this Interlocal Agreement, the Capital Project, Impact Fees and Program Management Division Director shall also have the authority with prior written approval of the CITY to extend the limits and/ or scope of Utility construction work; subject to the COUNTY' s Purchasing Policy and approval as required by the Collier County Board of Commissioners. 3. 5 During the construction phase of the PROJECT, construction engineering inspection services will be provided by CITY staff, COUNTY staff, a separately solicited engineering consultant firm, and/ or any combination thereof. Periodic on- site inspections and construction reviews will be conducted by the COUNTY( or its designee) and the CITY( or its designee) to assess the contractor' s compliance with the construction plans and contract documents. 3. 7 The Parties shall each be provided with four( 4) sets of the approved construction plans and contract documents for the PROJECT prior to commencement of construction activities. 3. 8 Upon completion of any portion of the PROJECT, either the Utility or stormwater improvements portions, including work authorized under change orders and supplemental agreements, the CITY and COUNTY shall conduct a joint final inspection of the work with the CITY' s and COUNTY' s project managers and/or inspectors and/ or engineer of record prior to the Parties' issuing final payment to the contractor. 3. 9 The Parties shall properly dispose of all removed materials from the Project. 3. 10 Payments to contracted firms for completed and accepted work, including design, permitting, and construction will follow the procedures identified in the Parties' relevant contract documents. The PROJECT expenses more specifically set forth in the construction ITB' s Bid Schedule at Section 1: General, or as later added to this Agreement by a separate amendment in writing, shall be shared equally by the Parties( the" shared expenses"). The PROJECT expenses are apportioned as follows: 1. COUNTY: That portion of the expenses required for the funding for the design, permitting and construction of the stormwater improvement portions of the PROJECT; and 2. CITY: That portion of the expenses required for the funding for the design, permitting and construction of the Utility improvement portions of the PROJECT; and 3. Those portions identified as shared expenses( e. g., roadway, mobilization, maintenance of traffic, landscaping, etc.) on the ITB Bid Schedule to be agreed upon by the Parties or as later added to this Agreement through a written amendment by the Parties. 3. 1 I The COUNTY is responsible for the development and implementation of a public relations program for the PROJECT to address needed public support for the PROJECT. The COUNTY will coordinate with the CITY regarding the scheduling of any public meetings, workshops, information distribution, etc. deemed viable and necessary to inform the affected public about the planned stormwater and Utility improvements and the expectations they can have regarding fiscal, physical, and timing impacts related to the PROJECT. The COUNTY shall provide the CITY written notice of all public relations public meetings, workshops, and information distribution efforts at least five ( 5) working days prior to the meetings, workshops, or information distribution. SECTION IV: AGREEMENT TERMS 6 Page 1668 of 4116 4. 0 This Interlocal Agreement shall remain in full force and effect from the date first above written and shall terminate upon the completion of all services and responsibilities mutually performed by the COUNTY and by the CITY to the written satisfaction of each to the other. It is understood that the actual termination date herein may occur on or about the date of final approval and acceptance of all Roadway, Stormwater improvements and Utility improvements by the Parties and subject to construction contract warranty provisions. This date is contemplated to be subsequent to the actual date of final approval and acceptance of the Utility improvements by the CITY and following any outstanding payments owed by the CITY to the COUNTY. 4. 1 Within the COUNTY public easements and/or rights-of-way of the Area impacted by this Project, the Roadway and Stormwater improvements shall be maintained by the COUNTY or its assigns, and the Utilities improvements shall be maintained by the CITY or its assigns. 4. 2 The COUNTY or the CITY may terminate this Interlocal Agreement prior to the completion of the Utility work upon thirty ( 30) days prior written notice each to the other. In the event of such termination by either party, the COUNTY shall be entitled to receive due compensation for the value of services rendered, construction performed, and termination costs as actually incurred. SECTION V: INSURANCE 5. 0 The COUNTY and the CITY shall maintain insurance in at least the minimum amounts and types as required by Florida Statutes. 5. 1 The COUNTY and the CITY agree that both parties are partially self-insured. Each shall provide to the other evidence of insurance in excess of the self-insured retention. 5. 2 Nothing in this Interlocal Agreement shall operate as a waiver of the sovereign immunity afforded to the parties as provided in Section 768. 28, Florida Statutes. 5. 3 Insurance for the Parties' contractor and design engineer consultant will be addressed in the separate agreements entered into with those service providers. SECTION VI: MISCELLANEOUS 6. 0 This Interlocal Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of Florida. In the event any litigation is instituted by way of construction or enforcement of this Interlocal Agreement, the party prevailing in said litigation shall be entitled to collect and recover from the opposite all court costs and party other expenses excluding attorney' s fees. Venue is in Collier County, Florida. 6. 1 It is understood that this Interlocal Agreement must be executed by both parties prior to the COUNTY and the CITY commencing with the work, services, duties, and responsibilities described heretofore. 6. 2 This Interlocal Agreement shall be modified or amended only by written agreement of both the COUNTY and the CITY through authorized representatives. 6. 3 The County shall record this Interlocal Agreement at its sole cost in the Public Records of Collier County. SECTION VII: DISPUTE RESOLUTION 7 I Page 1669 of 4116 16B7 7. 1 The parties recognize that they are entities subject to dispute resolution procedures set out in Chapter 164, Florida Statutes. 7. 2 In the event of a dispute between the Parties concerning this Interlocal Agreement, the COUNTY and the CITY agree to attempt to resolve the dispute as expeditiously and inexpensively as feasible. Specifically, their respective staff will meet within ten( 10) days of provision of notice of the dispute and attempt in good faith to resolve the dispute. They may jointly agree to a mediator to expedite and effectuate a resolution. If they are unable to agree upon a mediator, within ten ( 10) days thereafter, they shall jointly request the Chief Judge of the 20" Judicial Circuit to appoint a mediator qualified in construction law to mediate the dispute in accordance with the court' s pre- suit mediation procedures. The mediation shall occur within ten( 10) days after the mediator is appointed. If the dispute cannot be resolved at this level, the Chapter 164 remedies shall be available. Each Party shall pay equally in the cost of the mediation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Interlocal Agreement to be executed by their appropriate officials, as of the date first above written. AS TO THE COUNTY: ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Crystal K.' Kinzel,•Clerk- of the Circuit Court COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA And Ciiiinptroller By --„! By: Attu; as t ChaliFna C eputy CIerk ClAid,kak s at rle oply Chris Hall, chairman Approved s 1 fi riri Jeffrey A. ' atzko , County Attorney I; 8 . Page 1670 of 4116 1 6 B 7 AS TO THE ciwx oF NAPLES: jf s"'''''•- 7/., CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA bt* s• ON1. 11 By 8?""):-/. 7.„., skj ity:-Clerk Teresa Heitmann, Mayor i•" " Jr** - 4,. 04 Approve7s m, 600 and legal suffiefdESt Ralf Brookes,' Interim City Attorney 9 , Page 1671 of 4116 16B7 Book 150 Page Agenda Item 7. B Meeting of 12/ 6/23 RESOLUTION 2023- 15260 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE CITY OF NAPLES TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CITY- OWNED WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND COUNTY- OWNED STORMWATER SYSTEM LOCATED WITHIN THE BIG CYPRESS GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES COMMUNITY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, portions of the City' s water service area are located in unincorporated Collier County; and WHEREAS, the City of Naples owns and operates a water distribution system; and- WHEREAS, Collier County has identified a need to upgrade The-roadside stom water system on Cypress Point Drive, Burning Tree Drive, "and- Mel- Jen Drive, located within the Big Cypress Golf and Country CIub.Estafeecom•m inity, to address aging infrastructure and flooding concerns;' and:• ,.•• WHEREAS, the City desires to upgrade the watemiains on Cypress Point Drive, Burning Tree Drive, and Mel- Jen Drive, as part of the overall construction project, to address pipe age and to meet current standards for minimum pipe size; and WHEREAS, the City and County mutually agree that it is economically advantageous and in the best interest of the public to undertake a joint project; and WHEREAS, the City is responsible for funding the water system improvements portion of the joint project, and the County is responsible for funding the stormwater improvements portion of the joint project, as outlined in the interlocal agreement; and WHEREAS, a three-party construction agreement will be utilized that will allow the City and County to issue independent purchase orders to the awarded contractor in order for each entity to account and pay for construction services that are specific to each entity; and WHEREAS, funding to pay for the water system improvements is available within the FY 2023- 24 adopted budget ( Water Sewer Fund) approved by City Council; and WHEREAS, it is in the City's best interest to enter into this Interlocal Agreement with Collier County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA: Page 1672 of 4116 16B7 Book 150 Page Resolution 2023- 15260 Page 2 Section 1. That the above " WHEREAS" clauses are incorporated herein by reference. Section 2. That the Interlocal Agreement between Collier County and the City of Naples, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk's Office, is hereby accepted and approved. Section 3. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the Interlocal Agreement. Section 4. That this resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASS D.;UL OP 1' AND REGULAR SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF: CES; f U:$* 4, THIS 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023. Altesf: ON THE JJ) yf . rl ia t.• sk, G'ity Citfk Teresa Lee Heitmann, Mayor Approved as to form and legality: Ralf Brookes, Interim City Attorney Date filed with City Clerk: / o? -/ 3- 23 9 Page 1673 of 4116Docusign Envelope ID: 0F97D7B1-105D-45AD-A539-8BC06605B8B1 Notice of Recommended Award Solicitation: 25-8421 Title: Big Cypress Golf & Country Club Estates of Naples Secondary Drainage Improvements & Water Main Replacement Due Date and Time: October 23, 2025, at 3:00 PM Bidders: Company Name City County State Total Bid Responsive/Responsible Amount: Wright Construction Group, Inc. Fort Myers Lee FL $5,785,747.47 Yes/Yes Douglas N. Higgins Inc. Naples Collier FL $6,143,341.60 Yes/Yes ITG Communications Pembroke Park Broward FL $6,495,773.10 Yes/Yes Coastal Concrete Products, LLC Fort Myers Lee FL $7,162,690.74 Yes/Yes dba Coastal Site Development Quality Enterprises USA, Inc. Naples Collier FL $7,335,184.87 Yes/Yes Andrew Site Work, LLC Fort Myers Lee FL $7,808,483.00 Yes/Yes Ferreira Construction Company, Hobe Sound Martin FL $7,996,472.47 Yes/Yes Inc. Utilized Local Vendor Preference: Yes No N/A Recommended Bidder For Award: On August 22, 2025, the Procurement Services Division issued a Construction Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 25-8421, Big Cypress Golf & Country Club Estates of Naples Secondary Drainage Improvements & Water Main Replacement to three thousand five hundred and ninety (3,590) vendors. One thousand seven hundred and fifty-one (1,751) viewed the bid package. On September 11th, 2025, the County held a pre-bid meeting for interested Bidders. The solicitation was originally advertised for forty-five days (45) and was extended for a total of sixteen (16) days, during which time staff conducted additional vendor outreach. The County received seven (7) bids by October 23rd, 2025, the submission deadline. Staff reviewed the bids received and determined all bidders were deemed responsive and responsible, with minor irregularities. Staff determined that Wright Construction Group, Inc., is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Staff recommend the contract be awarded to Wright Construction Group, Inc., the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, based on the award of the Total Bid Amount for a total of $5,785,747.47. In addition to the total bid amount, County staff has allocated $328,254.47 and City staff has allocated $250,320.28 in Owner’s Allowance, for Owner’s use as directed. Contract Driven Purchase Order Driven Required Signatures Project Manager: 12/22/2025 Page 1674 of 4116Docusign Envelope ID: 0F97D7B1-105D-45AD-A539-8BC06605B8B1 Procurement Strategist: 12/22/2025 Procurement Services Director: 12/22/2025 __________________________________ _________________ Sandra Srnka Date Page 1675 of 4116 Project Manager: Isabel Soto Notifications Sent: 3,590 Procurement Strategist: Rita Iglesias Viewed: 1,711 Bids Received: 7 Construction ITB #25-8421 - Big Cypress Golf & Country Club Estates and Country Club of Naples Secondary Drainage System Improvements and Water Main Replacement BID TABULATION WRIGHT CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC. DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS INC. ITG COMMUNICATIONS COASTAL CONCRETE PRODUCTS, LLC dba COASTAL SITE DEVELOPMENT QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC. ANDREW SITE WORK, LLC FERREIRA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. ENGINEER Item No. Description Unit QTY Unit Price Total Price % Cost % Cost Unit Price Total Price % Cost % Cost Unit Price Total Price % Cost % Cost Unit Price Total Price % Cost % Cost Unit Price Total Price % Cost % Cost Unit Price Total Price % Cost % Cost Unit Price Total Price % Cost % Cost Unit Price Total Price % Cost % Cost CATEGORY NO. 1 - COMMON ITEMS Collier County Share City of Naples Share Collier County Share City of Naples Share Collier County Share City of Naples Share Collier County Share City of Naples Share Collier County Share City of Naples Share Collier County Share City of Naples Share Collier County Share City of Naples Share Collier County Share City of Naples Share 101-1 Mobilization/Demobilization LS 1 $ 477,626.01 $ 477,626.01 75%$ 358,219.51 25%$ 119,406.50 $ 340,000.00 $ 340,000.00 75%$ 255,000.00 25%$ 85,000.00 $ 249,848.58 $ 249,848.58 75%$ 187,386.44 25%$ 62,462.15 $ 265,000.00 $ 265,000.00 75%$ 198,750.00 25%$ 66,250.00 $ 845,668.00 $ 845,668.00 75%$ 634,251.00 25%$ 211,417.00 $ 343,900.00 $ 343,900.00 75%$ 257,925.00 25%$ 85,975.00 $ 474,100.00 $ 474,100.00 75%$ 355,575.00 25%$ 118,525.00 $ 566,880.00 $ 566,880.00 75%$ 425,160.00 25%$ 141,720.00 102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $ 141,545.59 $ 141,545.59 75%$ 106,159.19 25%$ 35,386.40 $ 340,000.00 $ 340,000.00 75%$ 255,000.00 25%$ 85,000.00 $ 207,830.70 $ 207,830.70 75%$ 155,873.03 25%$ 51,957.68 $ 55,000.00 $ 55,000.00 75%$ 41,250.00 25%$ 13,750.00 $ 79,683.00 $ 79,683.00 75%$ 59,762.25 25%$ 19,920.75 $ 138,860.00 $ 138,860.00 75%$ 104,145.00 25%$ 34,715.00 $ 95,015.00 $ 95,015.00 75%$ 71,261.25 25%$ 23,753.75 $ 141,600.00 $ 141,600.00 75%$ 106,200.00 25%$ 35,400.00 102-99 Portable Changeable Message Sign EA 2 $ 2,275.00 $ 4,550.00 75%$ 3,412.50 25%$ 1,137.50 $ 12,000.00 $ 24,000.00 75%$ 18,000.00 25%$ 6,000.00 $ 5,807.79 $ 11,615.58 75%$ 8,711.69 25%$ 2,903.90 $ 6,500.00 $ 13,000.00 75%$ 9,750.00 25%$ 3,250.00 $ 9,360.00 $ 18,720.00 75%$ 14,040.00 25%$ 4,680.00 $ 6,930.00 $ 13,860.00 75%$ 10,395.00 25%$ 3,465.00 $ 4,040.00 $ 8,080.00 75%$ 6,060.00 25%$ 2,020.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 9,000.00 75%$ 6,750.00 25%$ 2,250.00 104-10-3 Sedimentation Barrier LF 1,200 $ 0.92 $ 1,104.00 88%$ 971.52 12%$ 132.48 $ 6.00 $ 7,200.00 88%$ 6,336.00 12%$ 864.00 $ 5.88 $ 7,056.00 88%$ 6,209.28 12%$ 846.72 $ 5.00 $ 6,000.00 88%$ 5,280.00 12%$ 720.00 $ 3.00 $ 3,600.00 88%$ 3,168.00 12%$ 432.00 $ 2.00 $ 2,400.00 88%$ 2,112.00 12%$ 288.00 $ 4.45 $ 5,340.00 88%$ 4,699.20 12%$ 640.80 $ 6.25 $ 7,500.00 88%$ 6,600.00 12%$ 900.00 104-18 Inlet Protection System EA 26 $ 138.00 $ 3,588.00 95%$ 3,408.60 5%$ 179.40 $ 300.00 $ 7,800.00 95%$ 7,410.00 5%$ 390.00 $ 251.75 $ 6,545.50 95%$ 6,218.23 5%$ 327.28 $ 125.00 $ 3,250.00 95%$ 3,087.50 5%$ 162.50 $ 181.00 $ 4,706.00 95%$ 4,470.70 5%$ 235.30 $ 280.00 $ 7,280.00 95%$ 6,916.00 5%$ 364.00 $ 313.00 $ 8,138.00 95%$ 7,731.10 5%$ 406.90 $ 350.00 $ 9,100.00 95%$ 8,645.00 5%$ 455.00 110-1-1 Clearing & Grubbing AC 7.73 $ 78,812.74 $ 609,222.48 75%$ 456,916.86 25%$ 152,305.62 $ 30,000.00 $ 231,900.00 75%$ 173,925.00 25%$ 57,975.00 $ 22,385.51 $ 173,039.99 75%$ 129,779.99 25%$ 43,260.00 $ 17,500.00 $ 135,275.00 75%$ 101,456.25 25%$ 33,818.75 $ 53,444.00 $ 413,122.12 75%$ 309,841.59 25%$ 103,280.53 $ 88,900.00 $ 687,197.00 75%$ 515,397.75 25%$ 171,799.25 $ 60,760.00 $ 469,674.80 75%$ 352,256.10 25%$ 117,418.70 $ 4,500.00 $ 34,785.00 75%$ 26,088.75 25%$ 8,696.25 110-4-10 Removal of Existing Concrete SY 3,169 $ 20.24 $ 64,140.56 75%$ 48,105.42 25%$ 16,035.14 $ 20.00 $ 63,380.00 75%$ 47,535.00 25%$ 15,845.00 $ 43.06 $ 136,457.14 75%$ 102,342.86 25%$ 34,114.29 $ 25.00 $ 79,225.00 75%$ 59,418.75 25%$ 19,806.25 $ 26.00 $ 82,394.00 75%$ 61,795.50 25%$ 20,598.50 $ 15.75 $ 49,911.75 75%$ 37,433.81 25%$ 12,477.94 $ 29.00 $ 91,901.00 75%$ 68,925.75 25%$ 22,975.25 $ 54.00 $ 171,126.00 75%$ 128,344.50 25%$ 42,781.50 SP-1 Pre and Post Construction Video LS 1 $ 1,837.65 $ 1,837.65 75%$ 1,378.24 25%$ 459.41 $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 75%$ 6,000.00 25%$ 2,000.00 $ 10,965.41 $ 10,965.41 75%$ 8,224.06 25%$ 2,741.35 $ 9,500.00 $ 9,500.00 75%$ 7,125.00 25%$ 2,375.00 $ 3,623.00 $ 3,623.00 75%$ 2,717.25 25%$ 905.75 $ 6,725.25 $ 6,725.25 75%$ 5,043.94 25%$ 1,681.31 $ 13,015.00 $ 13,015.00 75%$ 9,761.25 25%$ 3,253.75 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 75%$ 15,000.00 25%$ 5,000.00 SP-2 Project Sign EA 2 $ 478.87 $ 957.74 75%$ 718.31 25%$ 239.44 $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 75%$ 3,750.00 25%$ 1,250.00 $ 4,008.73 $ 8,017.46 75%$ 6,013.10 25%$ 2,004.37 $ 5,500.00 $ 11,000.00 75%$ 8,250.00 25%$ 2,750.00 $ 1,812.00 $ 3,624.00 75%$ 2,718.00 25%$ 906.00 $ 1,315.00 $ 2,630.00 75%$ 1,972.50 25%$ 657.50 $ 3,495.00 $ 6,990.00 75%$ 5,242.50 25%$ 1,747.50 $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 75%$ 3,750.00 25%$ 1,250.00 SP-3 Record Survey LS 1 $ 80,268.75 $ 80,268.75 75%$ 60,201.56 25%$ 20,067.19 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 75%$ 30,000.00 25%$ 10,000.00 $ 58,326.32 $ 58,326.32 75%$ 43,744.74 25%$ 14,581.58 $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 75%$ 56,250.00 25%$ 18,750.00 $ 46,497.00 $ 46,497.00 75%$ 34,872.75 25%$ 11,624.25 $ 107,962.00 $ 107,962.00 75%$ 80,971.50 25%$ 26,990.50 $ 144,640.00 $ 144,640.00 75%$ 108,480.00 25%$ 36,160.00 $ 54,000.00 $ 54,000.00 75%$ 40,500.00 25%$ 13,500.00 Category No. 1 - Common Items Subtotal: $ 1,384,840.78 $ 1,039,491.71 $ 345,349.08 $ 1,067,280.00 $ 802,956.00 $ 264,324.00 $ 869,702.68 $ 654,503.39 $ 215,199.29 $ 652,250.00 $ 490,617.50 $ 161,632.50 $ 1,501,637.12 $ 1,127,637.04 $ 374,000.08 $ 1,360,726.00 $ 1,022,312.50 $ 338,413.50 $ 1,316,893.80 $ 989,992.15 $ 326,901.65 $ 1,018,991.00 $ 767,038.25 $ 251,952.75 CATEGORY NO. 2 - DRAINAGE Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share 425-1-521 FDOT Type C Inlet, <10' EA 4 $ 5,546.57 $ 22,186.28 100%$ 22,186.28 0%$ - $ 6,200.00 $ 24,800.00 100%$ 24,800.00 0%$ - $ 4,326.16 $ 17,304.64 100%$ 17,304.64 0%$ - $ 13,500.00 $ 54,000.00 100%$ 54,000.00 0%$ - $ 3,506.00 $ 14,024.00 100%$ 14,024.00 0%$ - $ 7,449.00 $ 29,796.00 100%$ 29,796.00 0%$ - $ 4,290.00 $ 17,160.00 100%$ 17,160.00 0%$ - $ 7,500.00 $ 30,000.00 100%$ 30,000.00 0%$ - 425-1-551 FDOT Type E Inlet, <10' EA 12 $ 7,149.86 $ 85,798.32 100%$ 85,798.32 0%$ - $ 6,200.00 $ 74,400.00 100%$ 74,400.00 0%$ - $ 5,582.16 $ 66,985.92 100%$ 66,985.92 0%$ - $ 11,500.00 $ 138,000.00 100%$ 138,000.00 0%$ - $ 5,304.00 $ 63,648.00 100%$ 63,648.00 0%$ - $ 6,050.00 $ 72,600.00 100%$ 72,600.00 0%$ - $ 5,550.00 $ 66,600.00 100%$ 66,600.00 0%$ - $ 11,250.00 $ 135,000.00 100%$ 135,000.00 0%$ - 425-3-61 Junction Box, J-7, <10' EA 5 $ 5,515.73 $ 27,578.65 100%$ 27,578.65 0%$ - $ 6,200.00 $ 31,000.00 100%$ 31,000.00 0%$ - $ 7,082.60 $ 35,413.00 100%$ 35,413.00 0%$ - $ 14,500.00 $ 72,500.00 100%$ 72,500.00 0%$ - $ 8,726.00 $ 43,630.00 100%$ 43,630.00 0%$ - $ 8,757.00 $ 43,785.00 100%$ 43,785.00 0%$ - $ 10,785.00 $ 53,925.00 100%$ 53,925.00 0%$ - $ 16,000.00 $ 80,000.00 100%$ 80,000.00 0%$ - 430-175-124 Pipe Culvert, Optional Material, Round (24" RCP) LF 98 $ 184.60 $ 18,090.80 100%$ 18,090.80 0%$ - $ 140.00 $ 13,720.00 100%$ 13,720.00 0%$ - $ 229.26 $ 22,467.48 100%$ 22,467.48 0%$ - $ 275.00 $ 26,950.00 100%$ 26,950.00 0%$ - $ 188.00 $ 18,424.00 100%$ 18,424.00 0%$ - $ 135.00 $ 13,230.00 100%$ 13,230.00 0%$ - $ 330.00 $ 32,340.00 100%$ 32,340.00 0%$ - $ 185.00 $ 18,130.00 100%$ 18,130.00 0%$ - 430-175-136 Pipe Culvert, Optional Material, Round (36" RCP) LF 38 $ 293.66 $ 11,159.08 100%$ 11,159.08 0%$ - $ 240.00 $ 9,120.00 100%$ 9,120.00 0%$ - $ 339.64 $ 12,906.32 100%$ 12,906.32 0%$ - $ 465.00 $ 17,670.00 100%$ 17,670.00 0%$ - $ 363.00 $ 13,794.00 100%$ 13,794.00 0%$ - $ 261.00 $ 9,918.00 100%$ 9,918.00 0%$ - $ 365.00 $ 13,870.00 100%$ 13,870.00 0%$ - $ 285.00 $ 10,830.00 100%$ 10,830.00 0%$ - 430-175-136APipe Culvert, Optional Material, Round (36" HDPE) LF 330 $ 143.60 $ 47,388.00 100%$ 47,388.00 0%$ - $ 360.00 $ 118,800.00 100%$ 118,800.00 0%$ - $ 223.59 $ 73,784.70 100%$ 73,784.70 0%$ - $ 415.00 $ 136,950.00 100%$ 136,950.00 0%$ - $ 262.00 $ 86,460.00 100%$ 86,460.00 0%$ - $ 348.00 $ 114,840.00 100%$ 114,840.00 0%$ - $ 210.00 $ 69,300.00 100%$ 69,300.00 0%$ - $ 165.00 $ 54,450.00 100%$ 54,450.00 0%$ - 430-175-215 Pipe Culvert, Optional Material, Ellip. (15" ERCP) 12x18 LF 2,710 $ 105.82 $ 286,772.20 100%$ 286,772.20 0%$ - $ 151.00 $ 409,210.00 100%$ 409,210.00 0%$ - $ 180.35 $ 488,748.50 100%$ 488,748.50 0%$ - $ 245.00 $ 663,950.00 100%$ 663,950.00 0%$ - $ 173.00 $ 468,830.00 100%$ 468,830.00 0%$ - $ 150.00 $ 406,500.00 100%$ 406,500.00 0%$ - $ 200.00 $ 542,000.00 100%$ 542,000.00 0%$ - $ 125.00 $ 338,750.00 100%$ 338,750.00 0%$ - 430-175-218 Pipe Culvert, Optional Material, Ellip. (18" ERCP) 14x23 LF 854 $ 120.90 $ 103,248.60 100%$ 103,248.60 0%$ - $ 144.00 $ 122,976.00 100%$ 122,976.00 0%$ - $ 276.08 $ 235,772.32 100%$ 235,772.32 0%$ - $ 265.00 $ 226,310.00 100%$ 226,310.00 0%$ - $ 193.00 $ 164,822.00 100%$ 164,822.00 0%$ - $ 153.00 $ 130,662.00 100%$ 130,662.00 0%$ - $ 220.00 $ 187,880.00 100%$ 187,880.00 0%$ - $ 185.00 $ 157,990.00 100%$ 157,990.00 0%$ - 430-175-224 Pipe Culvert,Optional Material, Ellip. (24" ERCP) 19x30 LF 1,182 $ 167.98 $ 198,552.36 100%$ 198,552.36 0%$ - $ 268.00 $ 316,776.00 100%$ 316,776.00 0%$ - $ 280.73 $ 331,822.86 100%$ 331,822.86 0%$ - $ 310.00 $ 366,420.00 100%$ 366,420.00 0%$ - $ 225.00 $ 265,950.00 100%$ 265,950.00 0%$ - $ 208.00 $ 245,856.00 100%$ 245,856.00 0%$ - $ 260.00 $ 307,320.00 100%$ 307,320.00 0%$ - $ 285.00 $ 336,870.00 100%$ 336,870.00 0%$ - 430-175-236 Pipe Culvert, Optional Material, Ellip. (36" ECP) 29x45 LF 64 $ 296.36 $ 18,967.04 100%$ 18,967.04 0%$ - $ 490.00 $ 31,360.00 100%$ 31,360.00 0%$ - $ 509.86 $ 32,631.04 100%$ 32,631.04 0%$ - $ 410.00 $ 26,240.00 100%$ 26,240.00 0%$ - $ 306.00 $ 19,584.00 100%$ 19,584.00 0%$ - $ 350.00 $ 22,400.00 100%$ 22,400.00 0%$ - $ 400.00 $ 25,600.00 100%$ 25,600.00 0%$ - $ 425.00 $ 27,200.00 100%$ 27,200.00 0%$ - 430-536-100 Straight Concrete Endwall, 36" Single, 0 Deg. Round EA 1 $ 9,723.41 $ 9,723.41 100%$ 9,723.41 0%$ - $ 18,000.00 $ 18,000.00 100%$ 18,000.00 0%$ - $ 11,332.36 $ 11,332.36 100%$ 11,332.36 0%$ - $ 11,500.00 $ 11,500.00 100%$ 11,500.00 0%$ - $ 8,599.00 $ 8,599.00 100%$ 8,599.00 0%$ - $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 100%$ 8,000.00 0%$ - $ 4,510.00 $ 4,510.00 100%$ 4,510.00 0%$ - $ 13,500.00 $ 13,500.00 100%$ 13,500.00 0%$ - 430-536-202 Straight Concrete Endwall, 36" Double, 0 Deg. Ellip. EA 2 $ 7,216.56 $ 14,433.12 100%$ 14,433.12 0%$ - $ 22,000.00 $ 44,000.00 100%$ 44,000.00 0%$ - $ 9,988.45 $ 19,976.90 100%$ 19,976.90 0%$ - $ 17,500.00 $ 35,000.00 100%$ 35,000.00 0%$ - $ 9,333.00 $ 18,666.00 100%$ 18,666.00 0%$ - $ 12,525.00 $ 25,050.00 100%$ 25,050.00 0%$ - $ 5,860.00 $ 11,720.00 100%$ 11,720.00 0%$ - $ 42,000.00 $ 84,000.00 100%$ 84,000.00 0%$ - 430-601-123 U-Type Concrete Endwall (12"x18") EA 179 $ 1,828.53 $ 327,306.87 100%$ 327,306.87 0%$ - $ 1,800.00 $ 322,200.00 100%$ 322,200.00 0%$ - $ 2,215.54 $ 396,581.66 100%$ 396,581.66 0%$ - $ 3,800.00 $ 680,200.00 100%$ 680,200.00 0%$ - $ 3,106.00 $ 555,974.00 100%$ 555,974.00 0%$ - $ 5,071.00 $ 907,709.00 100%$ 907,709.00 0%$ - $ 2,020.00 $ 361,580.00 100%$ 361,580.00 0%$ - $ 3,500.00 $ 626,500.00 100%$ 626,500.00 0%$ - 430-601-125 U-Type Concrete Endwall (14"x23") EA 50 $ 2,339.64 $ 116,982.00 100%$ 116,982.00 0%$ - $ 2,400.00 $ 120,000.00 100%$ 120,000.00 0%$ - $ 2,720.05 $ 136,002.50 100%$ 136,002.50 0%$ - $ 4,500.00 $ 225,000.00 100%$ 225,000.00 0%$ - $ 3,518.00 $ 175,900.00 100%$ 175,900.00 0%$ - $ 5,230.00 $ 261,500.00 100%$ 261,500.00 0%$ - $ 2,560.00 $ 128,000.00 100%$ 128,000.00 0%$ - $ 4,200.00 $ 210,000.00 100%$ 210,000.00 0%$ - 430-601-129 U-Type Concrete Endwall (19"x30") EA 66 $ 2,658.42 $ 175,455.72 100%$ 175,455.72 0%$ - $ 2,900.00 $ 191,400.00 100%$ 191,400.00 0%$ - $ 3,252.61 $ 214,672.26 100%$ 214,672.26 0%$ - $ 4,750.00 $ 313,500.00 100%$ 313,500.00 0%$ - $ 4,002.00 $ 264,132.00 100%$ 264,132.00 0%$ - $ 5,550.00 $ 366,300.00 100%$ 366,300.00 0%$ - $ 3,580.00 $ 236,280.00 100%$ 236,280.00 0%$ - $ 6,250.00 $ 412,500.00 100%$ 412,500.00 0%$ - SP-4 Swale Regrading (Inclduing Cut & Fill) SY 23,600 $ 6.11 $ 144,196.00 75%$ 108,147.00 25%$ 36,049.00 $ 8.00 $ 188,800.00 75%$ 141,600.00 25%$ 47,200.00 $ 4.77 $ 112,572.00 75%$ 84,429.00 25%$ 28,143.00 $ 5.00 $ 118,000.00 75%$ 88,500.00 25%$ 29,500.00 $ 6.00 $ 141,600.00 75%$ 106,200.00 25%$ 35,400.00 $ 19.00 $ 448,400.00 75%$ 336,300.00 25%$ 112,100.00 $ 34.50 $ 814,200.00 75%$ 610,650.00 25%$ 203,550.00 $ 12.50 $ 295,000.00 75%$ 221,250.00 25%$ 73,750.00 SP-5 Golf Course Interconnect, Site Work (Sheet 13) LS 1 $ 36,721.02 $ 36,721.02 100%$ 36,721.02 0%$ - $ 68,000.00 $ 68,000.00 100%$ 68,000.00 0%$ - $ 77,368.99 $ 77,368.99 100%$ 77,368.99 0%$ - $ 85,000.00 $ 85,000.00 100%$ 85,000.00 0%$ - $ 27,889.00 $ 27,889.00 100%$ 27,889.00 0%$ - $ 148,110.00 $ 148,110.00 100%$ 148,110.00 0%$ - $ 20,490.00 $ 20,490.00 100%$ 20,490.00 0%$ - $ 65,000.00 $ 65,000.00 100%$ 65,000.00 0%$ - SP-6 Golf Course Interconnect, Site Work (Sheet 13A) LS 1 $ 36,721.03 $ 36,721.03 100%$ 36,721.03 0%$ - $ 68,000.00 $ 68,000.00 100%$ 68,000.00 0%$ - $ 100,102.04 $ 100,102.04 100%$ 100,102.04 0%$ - $ 85,000.00 $ 85,000.00 100%$ 85,000.00 0%$ - $ 34,001.00 $ 34,001.00 100%$ 34,001.00 0%$ - $ 151,562.00 $ 151,562.00 100%$ 151,562.00 0%$ - $ 19,250.00 $ 19,250.00 100%$ 19,250.00 0%$ - $ 65,000.00 $ 65,000.00 100%$ 65,000.00 0%$ - Category No. 2 - Drainage Subtotal: $ 1,681,280.50 $ 1,645,231.50 $ 36,049.00 $ 2,172,562.00 $ 2,125,362.00 $ 47,200.00 $ 2,386,445.49 $ 2,358,302.49 $ 28,143.00 $ 3,282,190.00 $ 3,252,690.00 $ 29,500.00 $ 2,385,927.00 $ 2,350,527.00 $ 35,400.00 $ 3,406,218.00 $ 3,294,118.00 $ 112,100.00 $ 2,912,025.00 $ 2,708,475.00 $ 203,550.00 $ 2,960,720.00 $ 2,886,970.00 $ 73,750.00 CATEGORY NO. 3 - RESTORATION Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share 110-7-1 Mailbox, F&I Single EA 127 $ 500.00 $ 63,500.00 100%$ 63,500.00 0%$ - $ 380.00 $ 48,260.00 100%$ 48,260.00 0%$ - $ 322.63 $ 40,974.01 100%$ 40,974.01 0%$ - $ 425.00 $ 53,975.00 100%$ 53,975.00 0%$ - $ 368.00 $ 46,736.00 100%$ 46,736.00 0%$ - $ 733.30 $ 93,129.10 100%$ 93,129.10 0%$ - $ 843.00 $ 107,061.00 100%$ 107,061.00 0%$ - $ 450.00 $ 57,150.00 100%$ 57,150.00 0%$ - 121-70 Flowable Fill CY 56 $ 257.00 $ 14,392.00 75%$ 10,794.00 25%$ 3,598.00 $ 400.00 $ 22,400.00 75%$ 16,800.00 25%$ 5,600.00 $ 381.69 $ 21,374.64 75%$ 16,030.98 25%$ 5,343.66 $ 400.00 $ 22,400.00 75%$ 16,800.00 25%$ 5,600.00 $ 306.00 $ 17,136.00 75%$ 12,852.00 25%$ 4,284.00 $ 311.70 $ 17,455.20 75%$ 13,091.40 25%$ 4,363.80 $ 312.00 $ 17,472.00 75%$ 13,104.00 25%$ 4,368.00 $ 450.00 $ 25,200.00 75%$ 18,900.00 25%$ 6,300.00 210-2 Limerock, New Material for Reworking Base (18") SY 360 $ 40.95 $ 14,742.00 75%$ 11,056.50 25%$ 3,685.50 $ 50.00 $ 18,000.00 75%$ 13,500.00 25%$ 4,500.00 $ 111.93 $ 40,294.80 75%$ 30,221.10 25%$ 10,073.70 $ 75.00 $ 27,000.00 75%$ 20,250.00 25%$ 6,750.00 $ 60.00 $ 21,600.00 75%$ 16,200.00 25%$ 5,400.00 $ 123.80 $ 44,568.00 75%$ 33,426.00 25%$ 11,142.00 $ 130.00 $ 46,800.00 75%$ 35,100.00 25%$ 11,700.00 $ 25.00 $ 9,000.00 75%$ 6,750.00 25%$ 2,250.00 334-1-12 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete (SP-9.5) TN 1,030 $ 150.29 $ 154,798.70 90%$ 139,318.83 10%$ 15,479.87 $ 320.00 $ 329,600.00 90%$ 296,640.00 10%$ 32,960.00 $ 241.65 $ 248,899.50 90%$ 224,009.55 10%$ 24,889.95 $ 225.00 $ 231,750.00 90%$ 208,575.00 10%$ 23,175.00 $ 242.00 $ 249,260.00 90%$ 224,334.00 10%$ 24,926.00 $ 201.40 $ 207,442.00 90%$ 186,697.80 10%$ 20,744.20 $ 240.00 $ 247,200.00 90%$ 222,480.00 10%$ 24,720.00 $ 265.00 $ 272,950.00 90%$ 245,655.00 10%$ 27,295.00 334-1-13 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete (SP-12.5) TN 40 $ 340.00 $ 13,600.00 75%$ 10,200.00 25%$ 3,400.00 $ 690.00 $ 27,600.00 75%$ 20,700.00 25%$ 6,900.00 $ 260.84 $ 10,433.60 75%$ 7,825.20 25%$ 2,608.40 $ 250.00 $ 10,000.00 75%$ 7,500.00 25%$ 2,500.00 $ 616.00 $ 24,640.00 75%$ 18,480.00 25%$ 6,160.00 $ 207.90 $ 8,316.00 75%$ 6,237.00 25%$ 2,079.00 $ 248.00 $ 9,920.00 75%$ 7,440.00 25%$ 2,480.00 $ 300.00 $ 12,000.00 75%$ 9,000.00 25%$ 3,000.00 522-2 Concrete Sidewalk & Driveway, 6" Thick SY 3,169 $ 64.09 $ 203,101.21 75%$ 152,325.91 25%$ 50,775.30 $ 110.00 $ 348,590.00 75%$ 261,442.50 25%$ 87,147.50 $ 143.67 $ 455,290.23 75%$ 341,467.67 25%$ 113,822.56 $ 105.00 $ 332,745.00 75%$ 249,558.75 25%$ 83,186.25 $ 75.00 $ 237,675.00 75%$ 178,256.25 25%$ 59,418.75 $ 57.70 $ 182,851.30 75%$ 137,138.48 25%$ 45,712.83 $ 78.90 $ 250,034.10 75%$ 187,525.58 25%$ 62,508.53 $ 125.00 $ 396,125.00 75%$ 297,093.75 25%$ 99,031.25 530-3-4 Riprap, Rubble, F&I, Ditch Lining TN 54 $ 52.55 $ 2,837.70 100%$ 2,837.70 0%$ - $ 400.00 $ 21,600.00 100%$ 21,600.00 0%$ - $ 258.50 $ 13,959.00 100%$ 13,959.00 0%$ - $ 225.00 $ 12,150.00 100%$ 12,150.00 0%$ - $ 233.00 $ 12,582.00 100%$ 12,582.00 0%$ - $ 151.00 $ 8,154.00 100%$ 8,154.00 0%$ - $ 206.00 $ 11,124.00 100%$ 11,124.00 0%$ - $ 210.00 $ 11,340.00 100%$ 11,340.00 0%$ - 570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 23,426 $ 3.44 $ 80,585.44 75%$ 60,439.08 25%$ 20,146.36 $ 9.00 $ 210,834.00 75%$ 158,125.50 25%$ 52,708.50 $ 10.91 $ 255,577.66 75%$ 191,683.25 25%$ 63,894.42 $ 10.50 $ 245,973.00 75%$ 184,479.75 25%$ 61,493.25 $ 5.00 $ 117,130.00 75%$ 87,847.50 25%$ 29,282.50 $ 8.50 $ 199,121.00 75%$ 149,340.75 25%$ 49,780.25 $ 8.80 $ 206,148.80 75%$ 154,611.60 25%$ 51,537.20 $ 5.25 $ 122,986.50 75%$ 92,239.88 25%$ 30,746.63 SP-7 Remove and Reset Paver Driveway SY 3,379 $ 56.48 $ 190,845.92 75%$ 143,134.44 25%$ 47,711.48 $ 60.00 $ 202,740.00 75%$ 152,055.00 25%$ 50,685.00 $ 119.81 $ 404,837.99 75%$ 303,628.49 25%$ 101,209.50 $ 55.00 $ 185,845.00 75%$ 139,383.75 25%$ 46,461.25 $ 124.00 $ 418,996.00 75%$ 314,247.00 25%$ 104,749.00 $ 65.10 $ 219,972.90 75%$ 164,979.68 25%$ 54,993.23 $ 170.20 $ 575,105.80 75%$ 431,329.35 25%$ 143,776.45 $ 180.00 $ 608,220.00 75%$ 456,165.00 25%$ 152,055.00 Category No. 3 - Restoration Subtotal: $ 738,402.97 $ 593,606.46 $ 144,796.51 $ 1,229,624.00 $ 989,123.00 $ 240,501.00 $ 1,491,641.43 $ 1,169,799.25 $ 321,842.18 $ 1,121,838.00 $ 892,672.25 $ 229,165.75 $ 1,145,755.00 $ 911,534.75 $ 234,220.25 $ 981,009.50 $ 792,194.20 $ 188,815.30 $ 1,470,865.70 $ 1,169,775.53 $ 301,090.18 $ 1,514,971.50 $ 1,194,293.63 $ 320,677.88 CATEGORY NO. 4 - SIGNAGE AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share 700-1-500 Single Column Ground Sign Assembly, Relocate EA 9 $ 200.00 $ 1,800.00 100%$ 1,800.00 0%$ - $ 300.00 $ 2,700.00 100%$ 2,700.00 0%$ - $ 157.48 $ 1,417.32 100%$ 1,417.32 0%$ - $ 350.00 $ 3,150.00 100%$ 3,150.00 0%$ - $ 121.00 $ 1,089.00 100%$ 1,089.00 0%$ - $ 145.00 $ 1,305.00 100%$ 1,305.00 0%$ - $ 562.00 $ 5,058.00 100%$ 5,058.00 0%$ - $ 450.00 $ 4,050.00 100%$ 4,050.00 0%$ - 711-11-125 Thermoplactic, STD, White, Solid, 24" LF 208 $ 6.00 $ 1,248.00 100%$ 1,248.00 0%$ - $ 11.00 $ 2,288.00 100%$ 2,288.00 0%$ - $ 13.85 $ 2,880.80 100%$ 2,880.80 0%$ - $ 50.00 $ 10,400.00 100%$ 10,400.00 0%$ - $ 7.00 $ 1,456.00 100%$ 1,456.00 0%$ - $ 11.50 $ 2,392.00 100%$ 2,392.00 0%$ - $ 22.65 $ 4,711.20 100%$ 4,711.20 0%$ - $ 12.50 $ 2,600.00 100%$ 2,600.00 0%$ - 711-11-123 Thermoplactic, STD, White, Solid, 12" LF 148 $ 4.00 $ 592.00 100%$ 592.00 0%$ - $ 9.00 $ 1,332.00 100%$ 1,332.00 0%$ - $ 6.92 $ 1,024.16 100%$ 1,024.16 0%$ - $ 50.00 $ 7,400.00 100%$ 7,400.00 0%$ - $ 5.00 $ 740.00 100%$ 740.00 0%$ - $ 5.75 $ 851.00 100%$ 851.00 0%$ - $ 12.55 $ 1,857.40 100%$ 1,857.40 0%$ - $ 10.50 $ 1,554.00 100%$ 1,554.00 0%$ - 711-15-201 Thermoplactic, STD, Yellow, Solid 6" LF 0.0947 $ 6,072.00 $ 575.02 100%$ 575.02 0%$ - $ 6,000.00 $ 568.20 100%$ 568.20 0%$ - $ 5.29 $ 0.50 100%$ 0.50 0%$ - $ 50.00 $ 4.74 100%$ 4.74 0%$ - $ 7,801.00 $ 738.75 100%$ 738.75 0%$ - $ 15,245.00 $ 1,443.70 100%$ 1,443.70 0%$ - $ 27,600.00 $ 2,613.72 100%$ 2,613.72 0%$ - $ 20,000.00 $ 1,894.00 100%$ 1,894.00 0%$ - Category No. 4 - Signage and Pavement Markings Subtotal: $ 4,215.02 $ 4,215.02 $ - $ 6,888.20 $ 6,888.20 $ - $ 5,322.78 $ 5,322.78 $ - $ 20,954.74 $ 20,954.74 $ - $ 4,023.75 $ 4,023.75 $ - $ 5,991.70 $ 5,991.70 $ - $ 14,240.32 $ 14,240.32 $ - $ 10,098.00 $ 10,098.00 $ - WRIGHT CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC. DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS INC. ITG COMMUNICATIONS COASTAL CONCRETE PRODUCTS, LLC dba COASTAL SITE DEVELOPMENT QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC. ANDREW SITE WORK, LLC FERREIRA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. ENGINEER CATEGORY NO. 5 - WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share Unit Price Total Price Collier County Share City of Naples Share 1 6" PVC, DR-18, C900 LF 58 $ 82.66 $ 4,794.28 0%$ - 100%$ 4,794.28 $ 80.00 $ 4,640.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,640.00 $ 128.30 $ 7,441.40 0%$ - 100%$ 7,441.40 $ 95.00 $ 5,510.00 0%$ - 100%$ 5,510.00 $ 169.00 $ 9,802.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,802.00 $ 123.00 $ 7,134.00 0%$ - 100%$ 7,134.00 $ 109.00 $ 6,322.00 0%$ - 100%$ 6,322.00 $ 80.00 $ 4,640.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,640.00 2 8" PVC, DR-14, C900 LF 146 $ 84.88 $ 12,392.48 0%$ - 100%$ 12,392.48 $ 78.00 $ 11,388.00 0%$ - 100%$ 11,388.00 $ 94.41 $ 13,783.86 0%$ - 100%$ 13,783.86 $ 120.00 $ 17,520.00 0%$ - 100%$ 17,520.00 $ 120.00 $ 17,520.00 0%$ - 100%$ 17,520.00 $ 106.50 $ 15,549.00 0%$ - 100%$ 15,549.00 $ 153.15 $ 22,359.90 0%$ - 100%$ 22,359.90 $ 125.00 $ 18,250.00 0%$ - 100%$ 18,250.00 3 8" PVC, DR-18, C900 LF 2,848 $ 86.78 $ 247,149.44 0%$ - 100%$ 247,149.44 $ 70.00 $ 199,360.00 0%$ - 100%$ 199,360.00 $ 58.41 $ 166,351.68 0%$ - 100%$ 166,351.68 $ 105.00 $ 299,040.00 0%$ - 100%$ 299,040.00 $ 89.00 $ 253,472.00 0%$ - 100%$ 253,472.00 $ 107.00 $ 304,736.00 0%$ - 100%$ 304,736.00 $ 139.00 $ 395,872.00 0%$ - 100%$ 395,872.00 $ 100.00 $ 284,800.00 0%$ - 100%$ 284,800.00 4 10" PVC, DR-14, C900 LF 84 $ 124.60 $ 10,466.40 0%$ - 100%$ 10,466.40 $ 120.00 $ 10,080.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,080.00 $ 111.86 $ 9,396.24 0%$ - 100%$ 9,396.24 $ 140.00 $ 11,760.00 0%$ - 100%$ 11,760.00 $ 166.00 $ 13,944.00 0%$ - 100%$ 13,944.00 $ 160.00 $ 13,440.00 0%$ - 100%$ 13,440.00 $ 193.00 $ 16,212.00 0%$ - 100%$ 16,212.00 $ 140.00 $ 11,760.00 0%$ - 100%$ 11,760.00 5 10" PVC, DR-18, C900 LF 5,132 $ 102.61 $ 526,594.52 0%$ - 100%$ 526,594.52 $ 98.00 $ 502,936.00 0%$ - 100%$ 502,936.00 $ 65.13 $ 334,247.16 0%$ - 100%$ 334,247.16 $ 115.00 $ 590,180.00 0%$ - 100%$ 590,180.00 $ 114.00 $ 585,048.00 0%$ - 100%$ 585,048.00 $ 124.00 $ 636,368.00 0%$ - 100%$ 636,368.00 $ 155.00 $ 795,460.00 0%$ - 100%$ 795,460.00 $ 120.00 $ 615,840.00 0%$ - 100%$ 615,840.00 6 6" Gate Valve w/Box EA 2 $ 2,037.04 $ 4,074.08 0%$ - 100%$ 4,074.08 $ 2,700.00 $ 5,400.00 0%$ - 100%$ 5,400.00 $ 3,566.19 $ 7,132.38 0%$ - 100%$ 7,132.38 $ 3,150.00 $ 6,300.00 0%$ - 100%$ 6,300.00 $ 3,525.00 $ 7,050.00 0%$ - 100%$ 7,050.00 $ 2,771.00 $ 5,542.00 0%$ - 100%$ 5,542.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 5,600.00 0%$ - 100%$ 5,600.00 $ 4,250.00 $ 8,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,500.00 7 8" Gate Valve w/Box EA 12 $ 2,871.98 $ 34,463.76 0%$ - 100%$ 34,463.76 $ 3,900.00 $ 46,800.00 0%$ - 100%$ 46,800.00 $ 3,513.56 $ 42,162.72 0%$ - 100%$ 42,162.72 $ 3,650.00 $ 43,800.00 0%$ - 100%$ 43,800.00 $ 4,350.00 $ 52,200.00 0%$ - 100%$ 52,200.00 $ 3,822.00 $ 45,864.00 0%$ - 100%$ 45,864.00 $ 3,683.50 $ 44,202.00 0%$ - 100%$ 44,202.00 $ 5,250.00 $ 63,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 63,000.00 8 10" Gate Valve w/Box EA 9 $ 4,257.84 $ 38,320.56 0%$ - 100%$ 38,320.56 $ 5,600.00 $ 50,400.00 0%$ - 100%$ 50,400.00 $ 5,157.15 $ 46,414.35 0%$ - 100%$ 46,414.35 $ 4,900.00 $ 44,100.00 0%$ - 100%$ 44,100.00 $ 6,335.00 $ 57,015.00 0%$ - 100%$ 57,015.00 $ 5,390.00 $ 48,510.00 0%$ - 100%$ 48,510.00 $ 5,465.75 $ 49,191.75 0%$ - 100%$ 49,191.75 $ 7,500.00 $ 67,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 67,500.00 9 8x8x8 Cut In Tee w/Reducers EA 2 $ 7,703.90 $ 15,407.80 0%$ - 100%$ 15,407.80 $ 6,400.00 $ 12,800.00 0%$ - 100%$ 12,800.00 $ 4,155.88 $ 8,311.76 0%$ - 100%$ 8,311.76 $ 3,750.00 $ 7,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 7,500.00 $ 4,496.00 $ 8,992.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,992.00 $ 9,214.00 $ 18,428.00 0%$ - 100%$ 18,428.00 $ 9,150.00 $ 18,300.00 0%$ - 100%$ 18,300.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 30,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 30,000.00 10 Fire Hydrant Assembly w/6" Gate Valve EA 15 $ 6,917.88 $ 103,768.20 0%$ - 100%$ 103,768.20 $ 9,500.00 $ 142,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 142,500.00 $ 9,727.97 $ 145,919.55 0%$ - 100%$ 145,919.55 $ 8,900.00 $ 133,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 133,500.00 $ 11,970.00 $ 179,550.00 0%$ - 100%$ 179,550.00 $ 9,671.00 $ 145,065.00 0%$ - 100%$ 145,065.00 $ 9,563.00 $ 143,445.00 0%$ - 100%$ 143,445.00 $ 13,000.00 $ 195,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 195,000.00 11 Water Main ARV EA 7 $ 5,028.65 $ 35,200.55 0%$ - 100%$ 35,200.55 $ 6,900.00 $ 48,300.00 0%$ - 100%$ 48,300.00 $ 5,938.10 $ 41,566.70 0%$ - 100%$ 41,566.70 $ 3,900.00 $ 27,300.00 0%$ - 100%$ 27,300.00 $ 8,306.00 $ 58,142.00 0%$ - 100%$ 58,142.00 $ 6,278.00 $ 43,946.00 0%$ - 100%$ 43,946.00 $ 4,610.00 $ 32,270.00 0%$ - 100%$ 32,270.00 $ 6,500.00 $ 45,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 45,500.00 12 6" & 8" Pipe Removal LF 765 $ 56.19 $ 42,985.35 0%$ - 100%$ 42,985.35 $ 22.00 $ 16,830.00 0%$ - 100%$ 16,830.00 $ 49.36 $ 37,760.40 0%$ - 100%$ 37,760.40 $ 35.00 $ 26,775.00 0%$ - 100%$ 26,775.00 $ 31.00 $ 23,715.00 0%$ - 100%$ 23,715.00 $ 26.00 $ 19,890.00 0%$ - 100%$ 19,890.00 $ 76.80 $ 58,752.00 0%$ - 100%$ 58,752.00 $ 34.25 $ 26,201.25 0%$ - 100%$ 26,201.25 13 6" & 8" Pipe Grout and Abandonment LF 7,503 $ 11.92 $ 89,435.76 0%$ - 100%$ 89,435.76 $ 7.00 $ 52,521.00 0%$ - 100%$ 52,521.00 $ 5.61 $ 42,091.83 0%$ - 100%$ 42,091.83 $ 16.00 $ 120,048.00 0%$ - 100%$ 120,048.00 $ 17.00 $ 127,551.00 0%$ - 100%$ 127,551.00 $ 8.85 $ 66,401.55 0%$ - 100%$ 66,401.55 $ 27.00 $ 202,581.00 0%$ - 100%$ 202,581.00 $ 17.00 $ 127,551.00 0%$ - 100%$ 127,551.00 14 Miscellaneous Water Main Abandonment LS 1 $ 16,909.53 $ 16,909.53 0%$ - 100%$ 16,909.53 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,000.00 $ 90,264.23 $ 90,264.23 0%$ - 100%$ 90,264.23 $ 12,500.00 $ 12,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 12,500.00 $ 39,555.00 $ 39,555.00 0%$ - 100%$ 39,555.00 $ 3,900.00 $ 3,900.00 0%$ - 100%$ 3,900.00 $ 26,520.00 $ 26,520.00 0%$ - 100%$ 26,520.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,000.00 15 Temporary Water Main Jumper/Final Connection a. Burning Tree/Solana (Ph. 1) EA 1 $ 1,159.80 $ 1,159.80 0%$ - 100%$ 1,159.80 $ 4,700.00 $ 4,700.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,700.00 $ 12,783.27 $ 12,783.27 0%$ - 100%$ 12,783.27 $ 9,500.00 $ 9,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,500.00 $ 9,404.00 $ 9,404.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,404.00 $ 4,450.00 $ 4,450.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,450.00 $ 9,860.00 $ 9,860.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,860.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,000.00 b. Burning Tree/Cypress Point (Ph. 2) EA 1 $ 1,159.80 $ 1,159.80 0%$ - 100%$ 1,159.80 $ 4,700.00 $ 4,700.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,700.00 $ 12,783.27 $ 12,783.27 0%$ - 100%$ 12,783.27 $ 9,500.00 $ 9,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,500.00 $ 9,404.00 $ 9,404.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,404.00 $ 4,450.00 $ 4,450.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,450.00 $ 9,210.00 $ 9,210.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,210.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,000.00 c. Burning Tree/Cypress Point (Ph. 3) EA 1 $ 1,159.80 $ 1,159.80 0%$ - 100%$ 1,159.80 $ 4,700.00 $ 4,700.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,700.00 $ 12,783.27 $ 12,783.27 0%$ - 100%$ 12,783.27 $ 9,500.00 $ 9,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,500.00 $ 9,404.00 $ 9,404.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,404.00 $ 4,450.00 $ 4,450.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,450.00 $ 9,860.00 $ 9,860.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,860.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,000.00 d. North Gate/Mel Jen (Ph. 4) EA 1 $ 1,159.80 $ 1,159.80 0%$ - 100%$ 1,159.80 $ 4,700.00 $ 4,700.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,700.00 $ 12,783.27 $ 12,783.27 0%$ - 100%$ 12,783.27 $ 9,500.00 $ 9,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,500.00 $ 9,404.00 $ 9,404.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,404.00 $ 4,450.00 $ 4,450.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,450.00 $ 9,210.00 $ 9,210.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,210.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,000.00 16 Flushing Port/TBSV/Final Connection a. Burning Tree/Cypress Point (Ph. 1) EA 1 $ 7,223.21 $ 7,223.21 0%$ - 100%$ 7,223.21 $ 6,732.40 $ 6,732.40 0%$ - 100%$ 6,732.40 $ 8,607.73 $ 8,607.73 0%$ - 100%$ 8,607.73 $ 8,500.00 $ 8,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,500.00 $ 9,563.00 $ 9,563.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,563.00 $ 5,200.00 $ 5,200.00 0%$ - 100%$ 5,200.00 $ 9,365.00 $ 9,365.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,365.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,000.00 b. Burning Tree/Cypress Point (Ph. 2) EA 1 $ 5,330.11 $ 5,330.11 0%$ - 100%$ 5,330.11 $ 6,100.00 $ 6,100.00 0%$ - 100%$ 6,100.00 $ 8,607.73 $ 8,607.73 0%$ - 100%$ 8,607.73 $ 8,500.00 $ 8,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,500.00 $ 8,871.00 $ 8,871.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,871.00 $ 4,150.00 $ 4,150.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,150.00 $ 8,850.00 $ 8,850.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,850.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,000.00 c. North Gate/Burning Tree (Ph. 3) EA 1 $ 7,223.21 $ 7,223.21 0%$ - 100%$ 7,223.21 $ 6,800.00 $ 6,800.00 0%$ - 100%$ 6,800.00 $ 8,607.73 $ 8,607.73 0%$ - 100%$ 8,607.73 $ 8,500.00 $ 8,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,500.00 $ 9,563.00 $ 9,563.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,563.00 $ 5,200.00 $ 5,200.00 0%$ - 100%$ 5,200.00 $ 9,365.00 $ 9,365.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,365.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,000.00 d. Burning Tree/Mel Jen (Ph. 4) EA 1 $ 6,598.96 $ 6,598.96 0%$ - 100%$ 6,598.96 $ 6,100.00 $ 6,100.00 0%$ - 100%$ 6,100.00 $ 8,607.73 $ 8,607.73 0%$ - 100%$ 8,607.73 $ 8,500.00 $ 8,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,500.00 $ 8,871.00 $ 8,871.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,871.00 $ 4,151.00 $ 4,151.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,151.00 $ 8,850.00 $ 8,850.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,850.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,000.00 17 Single Water Service (Short) EA 55 $ 2,011.83 $ 110,650.65 0%$ - 100%$ 110,650.65 $ 2,400.00 $ 132,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 132,000.00 $ 2,333.49 $ 128,341.95 0%$ - 100%$ 128,341.95 $ 2,800.00 $ 154,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 154,000.00 $ 3,272.00 $ 179,960.00 0%$ - 100%$ 179,960.00 $ 2,330.00 $ 128,150.00 0%$ - 100%$ 128,150.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 71,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 71,500.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 165,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 165,000.00 18 Single Water Service (Long) EA 52 $ 3,959.81 $ 205,910.12 0%$ - 100%$ 205,910.12 $ 2,900.00 $ 150,800.00 0%$ - 100%$ 150,800.00 $ 3,860.08 $ 200,724.16 0%$ - 100%$ 200,724.16 $ 4,500.00 $ 234,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 234,000.00 $ 4,268.00 $ 221,936.00 0%$ - 100%$ 221,936.00 $ 4,274.00 $ 222,248.00 0%$ - 100%$ 222,248.00 $ 1,655.00 $ 86,060.00 0%$ - 100%$ 86,060.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 208,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 208,000.00 19 Double Water Service (Short) EA 14 $ 2,661.18 $ 37,256.52 0%$ - 100%$ 37,256.52 $ 2,900.00 $ 40,600.00 0%$ - 100%$ 40,600.00 $ 3,805.92 $ 53,282.88 0%$ - 100%$ 53,282.88 $ 3,000.00 $ 42,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 42,000.00 $ 3,271.00 $ 45,794.00 0%$ - 100%$ 45,794.00 $ 2,630.00 $ 36,820.00 0%$ - 100%$ 36,820.00 $ 2,750.00 $ 38,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 38,500.00 $ 3,200.00 $ 44,800.00 0%$ - 100%$ 44,800.00 20 Double Water Service (Long) EA 16 $ 3,844.02 $ 61,504.32 0%$ - 100%$ 61,504.32 $ 2,600.00 $ 41,600.00 0%$ - 100%$ 41,600.00 $ 5,568.12 $ 89,089.92 0%$ - 100%$ 89,089.92 $ 4,750.00 $ 76,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 76,000.00 $ 4,345.00 $ 69,520.00 0%$ - 100%$ 69,520.00 $ 4,351.00 $ 69,616.00 0%$ - 100%$ 69,616.00 $ 3,133.00 $ 50,128.00 0%$ - 100%$ 50,128.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 72,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 72,000.00 21 Meter Boxes EA 137 $ 398.08 $ 54,536.96 0%$ - 100%$ 54,536.96 $ 600.00 $ 82,200.00 0%$ - 100%$ 82,200.00 $ 649.21 $ 88,941.77 0%$ - 100%$ 88,941.77 $ 425.00 $ 58,225.00 0%$ - 100%$ 58,225.00 $ 1,106.00 $ 151,522.00 0%$ - 100%$ 151,522.00 $ 767.60 $ 105,161.20 0%$ - 100%$ 105,161.20 $ 450.00 $ 61,650.00 0%$ - 100%$ 61,650.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 205,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 205,500.00 22 Additional 8" Water Main Deflection EA 4 $ 7,216.89 $ 28,867.56 0%$ - 100%$ 28,867.56 $ 4,500.00 $ 18,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 18,000.00 $ 2,778.56 $ 11,114.24 0%$ - 100%$ 11,114.24 $ 8,500.00 $ 34,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 34,000.00 $ 9,514.00 $ 38,056.00 0%$ - 100%$ 38,056.00 $ 5,571.00 $ 22,284.00 0%$ - 100%$ 22,284.00 $ 5,370.00 $ 21,480.00 0%$ - 100%$ 21,480.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 60,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 60,000.00 23 Additional 10" Water Main Deflection EA 4 $ 8,315.91 $ 33,263.64 0%$ - 100%$ 33,263.64 $ 6,200.00 $ 24,800.00 0%$ - 100%$ 24,800.00 $ 3,744.86 $ 14,979.44 0%$ - 100%$ 14,979.44 $ 10,500.00 $ 42,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 42,000.00 $ 10,732.00 $ 42,928.00 0%$ - 100%$ 42,928.00 $ 6,735.00 $ 26,940.00 0%$ - 100%$ 26,940.00 $ 7,110.00 $ 28,440.00 0%$ - 100%$ 28,440.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 80,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 80,000.00 24 Relocate Existing Sewer Lateral LS 1 $ 3,740.12 $ 3,740.12 0%$ - 100%$ 3,740.12 $ 2,100.00 $ 2,100.00 0%$ - 100%$ 2,100.00 $ 16,423.38 $ 16,423.38 0%$ - 100%$ 16,423.38 $ 3,550.00 $ 3,550.00 0%$ - 100%$ 3,550.00 $ 8,303.00 $ 8,303.00 0%$ - 100%$ 8,303.00 $ 5,529.05 $ 5,529.05 0%$ - 100%$ 5,529.05 $ 5,822.00 $ 5,822.00 0%$ - 100%$ 5,822.00 $ 9,500.00 $ 9,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,500.00 25 Exist. Sewer Service Adjustments EA 6 $ 3,687.90 $ 22,127.40 0%$ - 100%$ 22,127.40 $ 1,800.00 $ 10,800.00 0%$ - 100%$ 10,800.00 $ 6,862.39 $ 41,174.34 0%$ - 100%$ 41,174.34 $ 2,550.00 $ 15,300.00 0%$ - 100%$ 15,300.00 $ 2,649.00 $ 15,894.00 0%$ - 100%$ 15,894.00 $ 2,322.00 $ 13,932.00 0%$ - 100%$ 13,932.00 $ 2,560.00 $ 15,360.00 0%$ - 100%$ 15,360.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 36,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 36,000.00 26 Additional Sewer Clean Out Assembly EA 3 $ 2,449.17 $ 7,347.51 0%$ - 100%$ 7,347.51 $ 1,400.00 $ 4,200.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,200.00 $ 3,591.46 $ 10,774.38 0%$ - 100%$ 10,774.38 $ 1,350.00 $ 4,050.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,050.00 $ 1,263.00 $ 3,789.00 0%$ - 100%$ 3,789.00 $ 2,161.00 $ 6,483.00 0%$ - 100%$ 6,483.00 $ 950.00 $ 2,850.00 0%$ - 100%$ 2,850.00 $ 500.00 $ 1,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 1,500.00 27 Additional Sewer Lateral Piping LF 100 $ 1,988.26 $ 198,826.00 0%$ - 100%$ 198,826.00 $ 74.00 $ 7,400.00 0%$ - 100%$ 7,400.00 $ 94.06 $ 9,406.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,406.00 $ 45.00 $ 4,500.00 0%$ - 100%$ 4,500.00 $ 121.00 $ 12,100.00 0%$ - 100%$ 12,100.00 $ 61.00 $ 6,100.00 0%$ - 100%$ 6,100.00 $ 90.00 $ 9,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 9,000.00 $ 50.00 $ 5,000.00 0%$ - 100%$ 5,000.00 Category No. 5 - Water Main Replacement Subtotal: $ 1,977,008.20 $ - $ 1,977,008.20 $ 1,666,987.40 $ - $ 1,666,987.40 $ 1,742,660.72 $ - $ 1,742,660.72 $ 2,085,458.00 $ - $ 2,085,458.00 $ 2,297,842.00 $ - $ 2,297,842.00 $ 2,054,537.80 $ - $ 2,054,537.80 $ 2,282,447.65 $ - $ 2,282,447.65 $ 2,475,842.25 $ - $ 2,475,842.25 BID SUMMARY Category No. 1 - Common Items Subtotal $ 1,384,840.78 $ 1,039,491.71 $ 345,349.08 $ 1,067,280.00 $ 802,956.00 $ 264,324.00 $ 869,702.68 $ 654,503.39 $ 215,199.29 $ 652,250.00 $ 490,617.50 $ 161,632.50 $ 1,501,637.12 $ 1,127,637.04 $ 374,000.08 $ 1,360,726.00 $ 1,022,312.50 $ 338,413.50 $ 1,316,893.80 $ 989,992.15 $ 326,901.65 $ 1,018,991.00 $ 767,038.25 $ 251,952.75 Category No. 2 - Drainage Subtotal $ 1,681,280.50 $ 1,645,231.50 $ 36,049.00 $ 2,172,562.00 $ 2,125,362.00 $ 47,200.00 $ 2,386,445.49 $ 2,358,302.49 $ 28,143.00 $ 3,282,190.00 $ 3,252,690.00 $ 29,500.00 $ 2,385,927.00 $ 2,350,527.00 $ 35,400.00 $ 3,406,218.00 $ 3,294,118.00 $ 112,100.00 $ 2,912,025.00 $ 2,708,475.00 $ 203,550.00 $ 2,960,720.00 $ 2,886,970.00 $ 73,750.00 Category No. 3 - Restoration Subtotal $ 738,402.97 $ 593,606.46 $ 144,796.51 $ 1,229,624.00 $ 989,123.00 $ 240,501.00 $ 1,491,641.43 $ 1,169,799.25 $ 321,842.18 $ 1,121,838.00 $ 892,672.25 $ 229,165.75 $ 1,145,755.00 $ 911,534.75 $ 234,220.25 $ 981,009.50 $ 792,194.20 $ 188,815.30 $ 1,470,865.70 $ 1,169,775.53 $ 301,090.18 $ 1,514,971.50 $ 1,194,293.63 $ 320,677.88 Category No. 4 - Signage and Pavement Markings Subtotal $ 4,215.02 $ 4,215.02 $ - $ 6,888.20 $ 6,888.20 $ - $ 5,322.78 $ 5,322.78 $ - $ 20,954.74 $ 20,954.74 $ - $ 4,023.75 $ 4,023.75 $ - $ 5,991.70 $ 5,991.70 $ - $ 14,240.32 $ 14,240.32 $ - $ 10,098.00 $ 10,098.00 $ - Category No. 5 - Water Main Replacement Subtotal $ 1,977,008.20 $ - $ 1,977,008.20 $ 1,666,987.40 $ - $ 1,666,987.40 $ 1,742,660.72 $ - $ 1,742,660.72 $ 2,085,458.00 $ - $ 2,085,458.00 $ 2,297,842.00 $ - $ 2,297,842.00 $ 2,054,537.80 $ - $ 2,054,537.80 $ 2,282,447.65 $ - $ 2,282,447.65 $ 2,475,842.25 $ - $ 2,475,842.25 Total Bid Amount: $ 5,785,747.47 $ 3,282,544.68 $ 2,503,202.79 $ 6,143,341.60 $ 3,924,329.20 $ 2,219,012.40 $ 6,495,773.10 $ 4,187,927.91 $ 2,307,845.19 $ 7,162,690.74 $ 4,656,934.49 $ 2,505,756.25 $ 7,335,184.87 $ 4,393,722.54 $ 2,941,462.33 $ 7,808,483.00 $ 5,114,616.40 $ 2,693,866.60 $ 7,996,472.47 $ 4,882,483.00 $ 3,113,989.48 $ 7,980,622.75 $ 4,858,399.88 $ 3,122,222.88 * County Staff has allocated a total of 10% in Owner's Allowance from the County’s total bid amount for Owner's Use as Directed. This Allowance will be used only at the Owner's direction to accomplish work due to unforeseen conditions and/or as directed by the Owner. Inclusion of the Allowance as part of the Contract Price is not a guarantee that the Contractor will be paid any portion or the full amount of the Allowance. Expenditures of Owner's Allowance will be made through Change Order with proper documentation of Time and Materials supporting the change. **City Staff has allocated a total of 10% in Owner's Allowance for Owner's Use as Directed. This Allowance will be used only at the City’s direction to accomplish work due to unforeseen conditions and/or as directed by the City. Inclusion of the Allowance as part of the Contract Price is not a guarantee that the Contractor will be paid any portion or the full amount of the Allowance. Expenditures of Owner's Allowance will be made through Change Order with proper documentation of Time and Materials supporting the change. WRIGHT CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC. DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS INC. ITG COMMUNICATIONS COASTAL CONCRETE PRODUCTS, LLC dba COASTAL SITE DEVELOPMENT QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC. ANDREW SITE WORK, LLC FERREIRA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. YES/NO YES/NO YES/NO YES/NO YES/NO YES/NO YES/NO Bid Schedule YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Bid Response Form (Form 1) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Contractors Key Personnel Assigned to Project - (Form 2) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Material Manufacturers (Form 3) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES List of Major Subcontractors (Form 4) YES YES YES YES YES YES *YES Statement of Experience of Bidder (Form 5) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Trench Safety Act Acknowledgement (Form 6) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Bid Bond (Form 7) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Insurance and Bonding Requirements (Form 8) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Conflict of Interest Affidavit (Form 9) YES YES YES YES YES YES *YES Vendor Declaration Statement (Form 10) YES YES YES YES YES YES *YES Immigration Affidavit Certification (Form 11) YES YES YES YES YES YES *YES Addendums (4) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES E-Verify YES YES YES YES YES YES YES W-9 YES YES YES YES YES YES YES SunBiz YES YES YES YES YES YES YES State of Florida Underground Utility & Excavation Contractor License, State of Florida Contractor License, OSHA Class II Asbestos Worker Certification and *YES *YES *YES *YES *YES YES *YES OSHA Class II Asbestos Supervision Course Opened By: Rita Iglesias OSHA Class II Asbestos Worker Certification and OSHA Class II Asbestos Supervision Course not No Underground Utility & Excavation but did provide FDOT certificate of qualification that includes: Forms 1-6 have digital signatures. Digital signatures for all 4 addenda. OSHA Class II Asbestos Worker No Underground Utility & Excavation No GC license but provided Building Contractor license AND Underground Utility & Excavation license as well as Digital Signature on Forms 4, 9, 10, 11, W9, and addenda. No Underground Utility & Excavation license. Witnessed By: Emily Jackson received. Drainage, Grading, Minor Bridges, R&R Minor Bridges, and Underground Utilities Certification and OSHA Class II Asbestos Supervision Course not received. Asbestos certifications. Date: October 23, 2025, 3:00 PM EST Page 1676 of 4116Page 1677 of 4116Page 1678 of 4116Page 1679 of 4116Page 1680 of 4116Page 1681 of 4116Page 1682 of 4116Page 1683 of 4116Page 1684 of 4116Page 1685 of 4116Page 1686 of 4116Page 1687 of 4116Page 1688 of 4116Page 1689 of 4116Page 1690 of 4116Page 1691 of 4116Page 1692 of 4116Page 1693 of 4116Page 1694 of 4116Page 1695 of 4116Page 1696 of 4116Page 1697 of 4116Page 1698 of 4116Page 1699 of 4116Page 1700 of 4116Page 1701 of 4116Page 1702 of 4116Page 1703 of 4116Page 1704 of 4116Page 1705 of 4116Page 1706 of 4116Page 1707 of 4116Page 1708 of 4116Page 1709 of 4116Page 1710 of 4116Page 1711 of 4116Page 1712 of 4116Page 1713 of 4116Page 1714 of 4116Page 1715 of 4116Page 1716 of 4116Page 1717 of 4116Page 1718 of 4116Page 1719 of 4116Page 1720 of 4116Page 1721 of 4116Page 1722 of 4116Page 1723 of 4116Page 1724 of 4116Page 1725 of 4116Page 1726 of 4116Page 1727 of 4116Page 1728 of 4116Page 1729 of 4116Page 1730 of 4116Page 1731 of 4116Page 1732 of 4116 FORM 8 - INSURANCE AND BONDING REQUIREMENTS Collier County Florida Insurance and Bonding Requirements Insurance / Bond Type Required Limits 1. Worker’s Statutory Limits of Florida Statutes, Chapter 440 and all Federal Government Compensation Statutory Limits and Requirements Evidence of Workers’ Compensation coverage or a Certificate of Exemption issued by the State of Florida is required. Entities that are formed as Sole Proprietorships shall not be required to provide a proof of exemption. An application for exemption can be obtained online at https://apps.fldfs.com/bocexempt/ 2. Employer’s Liability $_1,000,000____ single limit per occurrence 3. Commercial General Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability (Occurrence Form) patterned after the $__1,000,000_____single limit per occurrence, $_2,000,000___ aggregate for current ISO form Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. The General Aggregate Limit shall include Premises and Operations; Independent Contractors; Products and Completed Operations, and Contractual Liability. For construction projects the aggregate limit shall be endorsed to apply “Per Project. 4. Indemnification To the maximum extent permitted by Florida law, the Contractor/Vendor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless Collier County, its officers and employees from any and all liabilities, damages, losses and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees and paralegals’ fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally wrongful conduct of the Contractor/ Vendor or anyone employed or utilized by the Contractor/Vendor in the performance of this Agreement. 5. Automobile Liability $__1,000,000________ Each Occurrence; Bodily Injury & Property Damage, Owned/Non-owned/Hired; Automobile Included Page 1733 of 4116 6. Other insurance as Watercraft $____________ Per noted: Occurrence United States Longshoreman's and Harborworker's Act coverage shall be maintained where applicable to the completion of the work. $____________ Per Occurrence Maritime Coverage (Jones Act) shall be maintained where applicable to the completion of the work. $____________ Per Occurrence Aircraft Liability coverage shall be carried in limits of not less than $____________ each occurrence if applicable to the completion of the Services under this Agreement. Pollution $_1,000,000___ Per Occurrence Professional Liability $____________ Per claim & aggregate Crime/ Employee Dishonesty $____________ Per Occurrence Cyber Liability $__________ Per Occurrence Technology Errors & Omissions $____________ Per Occurrence Other: Cargo Insurance $____________Per Occurrence Other: ___________________________ $____________Per Occurrence 7. Bid Bond Shall be submitted with proposal response in the form of certified funds, cashiers’ check or an irrevocable letter of credit, a cash bond posted with the County Clerk, or proposal bond in a sum equal to 5% of the cost proposal. All checks shall be made payable to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners on a bank or trust company located in the State of Florida and insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 8. Performance and For projects in excess of $200,000, bonds shall be submitted with the executed Payment Bonds contract by Proposers receiving award, and written for 100% of the Contract award amount, the cost borne by the Proposer receiving an award. The Performance and Payment Bonds shall be underwritten by a surety authorized to do business in the State of Florida and otherwise acceptable to Owner; provided, however, the surety shall be rated as “A-“ or better as to general policy holders rating and Class V or higher rating as to financial size category and the amount required shall not exceed 5% of the reported policy holders’ surplus, all as reported in the most current Best Key Rating Guide, published by A.M. Best Company, Inc. of 75 Fulton Street, New York, New York 10038. 9. Vendor shall ensure that all subcontractors comply with the same insurance requirements that he is required to meet. The same Vendor shall provide County with certificates of insurance meeting the required insurance provisions. Page 1734 of 4116 10. Collier County must be named as "ADDITIONAL INSURED" on the Insurance Certificate for Commercial General Liability where required. This insurance shall be primary and non-contributory with respect to any other insurance maintained by, or available for the benefit of, the Additional Insured and the Vendor’s policy shall be endorsed accordingly. 11. The Certificate Holder shall be named as Collier County Board of County Commissioners, OR, Board of County Commissioners in Collier County, OR Collier County Government, OR Collier County. The Certificates of Insurance must state the Contract Number, or Project Number, or specific Project description, or must read: For any and all work performed on behalf of Collier County. 12. On all certificates, the Certificate Holder must read: Collier County Board of County Commissioners, 3295 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112 13. Thirty (30) Days Cancellation Notice required. 14. Collier County shall procure and maintain Builders Risk Insurance on all construction projects where it is deemed necessary. Such coverage shall be endorsed to cover the interests of Collier County as well as the Contractor. Premiums shall be billed to the project and the Contractor shall not include Builders Risk premiums in its project proposal or project billings. All questions regarding Builder’s Risk Insurance will be addressed by the Collier County Risk Management Division. ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor’s Insurance Acceptance By submission of the bid, the Vendor accepts and understands the insurance requirements of these specifications, agrees to maintain these coverages through the duration of the agreement and/or work performance period, and that the evidence of insurability may be required within five (5) days of notification of recommended award of this solicitation. GG – 7/22/2025 Page 1735 of 4116Page 1736 of 4116Page 1737 of 4116Page 1738 of 4116Page 1739 of 4116Page 1740 of 4116Page 1741 of 4116Page 1742 of 4116Page 1743 of 4116Page 1744 of 4116Page 1745 of 4116Page 1746 of 4116Page 1747 of 4116Page 1748 of 4116Page 1749 of 4116Page 1750 of 4116Page 1751 of 4116Page 1752 of 4116Page 1753 of 4116Page 1754 of 4116Page 1755 of 4116Page 1756 of 4116Page 1757 of 4116Page 1758 of 4116Page 1759 of 4116Page 1760 of 4116Page 1761 of 4116Page 1762 of 4116Page 1763 of 4116Page 1764 of 4116Page 1765 of 4116Page 1766 of 4116Page 1767 of 4116Page 1768 of 4116Page 1769 of 4116Page 1770 of 4116Page 1771 of 4116Page 1772 of 4116Page 1773 of 4116Page 1774 of 4116Page 1775 of 4116Page 1776 of 4116Page 1777 of 4116Page 1778 of 4116Page 1779 of 4116Page 1780 of 4116Page 1781 of 4116Page 1782 of 4116Page 1783 of 4116Page 1784 of 4116Page 1785 of 4116Page 1786 of 4116Page 1787 of 4116Page 1788 of 4116Page 1789 of 4116Page 1790 of 4116Page 1791 of 4116Page 1792 of 4116Page 1793 of 4116Page 1794 of 4116Page 1795 of 4116Page 1796 of 4116 EXHIBIT 1-2: AFFIDAVIT REGARDING LABOR AND SERVICES AND CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES OF FOREIGN COUNTRIES OF CONCERN PROHIBITED (FollowingThis Page) 66 Tri-Party Construction Services Agreement: [2025_ver.3) Page 1797 of 4116Page 1798 of 4116Page 1800 of 4116Page 1801 of 4116Page 1802 of 4116Page 1803 of 4116Page 1804 of 4116Page 1805 of 4116Page 1806 of 4116Page 1807 of 4116Page 1808 of 4116Page 1809 of 4116Page 1810 of 4116 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS COVERSHEET Project Name 25-8421 Vendor Name Big Cypress Gold Estated & Country Club of Naples-Secondary Drainage and Water Main Replacement Solicitation/Contract No. Wright Construction Inc Attachments ✔ Risk Approved Insurance Requirements ✔ Risk Approved Insurance Certificate(s) Comments Attachments Approved by Risk Management Division Digitally signed by Approval: GonzalezGre GonzalezGreily Date: 2026.03.19 ily 12:35:33 -04'00' Page 1811 of 4116 FORM 8 - INSURANCE AND BONDING REQUIREMENTS Collier County Florida Insurance and Bonding Requirements Insurance / Bond Type Required Limits 1. Worker’s Statutory Limits of Florida Statutes, Chapter 440 and all Federal Government Compensation Statutory Limits and Requirements Evidence of Workers’ Compensation coverage or a Certificate of Exemption issued by the State of Florida is required. Entities that are formed as Sole Proprietorships shall not be required to provide a proof of exemption. An application for exemption can be obtained online at https://apps.fldfs.com/bocexempt/ 2. Employer’s Liability $_1,000,000____ single limit per occurrence 3. Commercial General Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability (Occurrence Form) patterned after the $__1,000,000_____single limit per occurrence, $_2,000,000___ aggregate for current ISO form Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. The General Aggregate Limit shall include Premises and Operations; Independent Contractors; Products and Completed Operations, and Contractual Liability. For construction projects the aggregate limit shall be endorsed to apply “Per Project. 4. Indemnification To the maximum extent permitted by Florida law, the Contractor/Vendor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless Collier County, its officers and employees from any and all liabilities, damages, losses and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees and paralegals’ fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally wrongful conduct of the Contractor/ Vendor or anyone employed or utilized by the Contractor/Vendor in the performance of this Agreement. 5. Automobile Liability $__1,000,000________ Each Occurrence; Bodily Injury & Property Damage, Owned/Non-owned/Hired; Automobile Included Page 1812 of 4116 6. Other insurance as Watercraft $____________ Per noted: Occurrence United States Longshoreman's and Harborworker's Act coverage shall be maintained where applicable to the completion of the work. $____________ Per Occurrence Maritime Coverage (Jones Act) shall be maintained where applicable to the completion of the work. $____________ Per Occurrence Aircraft Liability coverage shall be carried in limits of not less than $____________ each occurrence if applicable to the completion of the Services under this Agreement. Pollution $_1,000,000___ Per Occurrence Professional Liability $____________ Per claim & aggregate Crime/ Employee Dishonesty $____________ Per Occurrence Cyber Liability $__________ Per Occurrence Technology Errors & Omissions $____________ Per Occurrence Other: Cargo Insurance $____________Per Occurrence Other: ___________________________ $____________Per Occurrence 7. Bid Bond Shall be submitted with proposal response in the form of certified funds, cashiers’ check or an irrevocable letter of credit, a cash bond posted with the County Clerk, or proposal bond in a sum equal to 5% of the cost proposal. All checks shall be made payable to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners on a bank or trust company located in the State of Florida and insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 8. Performance and For projects in excess of $200,000, bonds shall be submitted with the executed Payment Bonds contract by Proposers receiving award, and written for 100% of the Contract award amount, the cost borne by the Proposer receiving an award. The Performance and Payment Bonds shall be underwritten by a surety authorized to do business in the State of Florida and otherwise acceptable to Owner; provided, however, the surety shall be rated as “A-“ or better as to general policy holders rating and Class V or higher rating as to financial size category and the amount required shall not exceed 5% of the reported policy holders’ surplus, all as reported in the most current Best Key Rating Guide, published by A.M. Best Company, Inc. of 75 Fulton Street, New York, New York 10038. 9. Vendor shall ensure that all subcontractors comply with the same insurance requirements that he is required to meet. The same Vendor shall provide County with certificates of insurance meeting the required insurance provisions. Page 1813 of 4116 10. Collier County must be named as "ADDITIONAL INSURED" on the Insurance Certificate for Commercial General Liability where required. This insurance shall be primary and non-contributory with respect to any other insurance maintained by, or available for the benefit of, the Additional Insured and the Vendor’s policy shall be endorsed accordingly. 11. The Certificate Holder shall be named as Collier County Board of County Commissioners, OR, Board of County Commissioners in Collier County, OR Collier County Government, OR Collier County. The Certificates of Insurance must state the Contract Number, or Project Number, or specific Project description, or must read: For any and all work performed on behalf of Collier County. 12. On all certificates, the Certificate Holder must read: Collier County Board of County Commissioners, 3295 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112 13. Thirty (30) Days Cancellation Notice required. 14. Collier County shall procure and maintain Builders Risk Insurance on all construction projects where it is deemed necessary. Such coverage shall be endorsed to cover the interests of Collier County as well as the Contractor. Premiums shall be billed to the project and the Contractor shall not include Builders Risk premiums in its project proposal or project billings. All questions regarding Builder’s Risk Insurance will be addressed by the Collier County Risk Management Division. ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor’s Insurance Acceptance By submission of the bid, the Vendor accepts and understands the insurance requirements of these specifications, agrees to maintain these coverages through the duration of the agreement and/or work performance period, and that the evidence of insurability may be required within five (5) days of notification of recommended award of this solicitation. GG – 7/22/2025 Page 1814 of 4116Page 1815 of 4116Page 1816 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 11.B ID# 2026-864 Executive Summary Recommendation to provide a final ranking for the 166.63-acre Smits property, located south of Sabal Palm Rd., approximately 1.5 miles east of Collier Blvd, and to direct staff to pursue the property with funds from the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund if ranked on the "A" list, as the property was ranked "C-List" by County staff and "A-list" by the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee. OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners (Board) to rank the 166.63-acre Smits property, located south of Sabal Palm Rd., approximately 1.5 miles east of Collier Blvd, for acquisition. CONSIDERATIONS: On January 13, 2026, the Board heard a request for a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) and Planned Unit Development Rezone (PUDZ) to rezone this property for a residential development. There was public opposition due to the property being surrounded by existing conservation easements and the Picayune Strand State Forest. Due to concerns from the Board and the public, the hearing was put on hold. At the request of Commissioner Locastro, the property owner applied to the Conservation Collier program to determine if the property met the criteria of the program and was appropriate for acquisition. Pursuant to Section 10 of Conservation Collier Ordinance No. 2002-63, as amended, the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (CCLAAC) recommends qualified acquisition proposals for the Active Acquisition List (AAL) to the Board for approval. Staff presented the 166.63-acre Smits property to the CCLAAC on April 1, 2026. Staff recommended that the property be ranked C-category because much of the property (63%, or 107.30 acres) is comprised of citrus groves, and only 13%, or 22.09 acres, is comprised of native plant communities. Additionally, invasive, exotic vegetation comprises about 75% of the site's native plant communities; full restoration of the site would not be economically feasible for the Conservation Collier Program, and environmental cleanup of the soil would most likely be necessary prior to restoration. During the CCLAAC meeting, the Smits property ranking occurred after staff presented the property summary and after public comments. Staff prepared and presented a property report, called an Initial Criteria Screening Report (ICSR), to aid the CCLAAC in evaluating this property. The ICSR includes a scoring matrix based on researched and observed data. The ICSR and a detailed summary of the property are attached to this item. Should the Board rank the Smits as an A-Category property, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) will be completed by Collier County’s Pollution Control Section prior to the drafting of a Purchase Agreement. However, because further environmental testing will be costly, if warranted by the Phase I ESA, Conservation Collier will not proceed with further testing until after the Board executes a Purchase Agreement. Language will be included in the Purchase Agreement requiring the Seller to either remediate any identified environmental contamination or reduce the selling price by the cost of any environmental remediation as a stipulation of sale. CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: On April 1, 2026, the CCLAAC held a public meeting, and the CCLAAC recommended the 166.63-acre Smits property for the A-Category for Board consideration. The reasons noted for this ranking included the property’s location surrounded by sensitive conservation land on all sides, listed species use, and the prospect of restoration. The CCLAAC further recommended that the acquisition of the Smits property include direction to explore partnerships to restore the flowway, and they expressed concerns about whether the acquisition would affect the overall Program budget and whether management of such a large restoration project would strain current Program staff. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objectives to preserve and enhance the character of our community and to protect our natural resources. Page 1817 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 11.B ID# 2026-864 FISCAL IMPACT: If the Board approves the Smits property within the A-category it will be appraised by a third party, independent appraiser to determine its fair market value. A subsequent purchase agreement for the Smits property will be brought before the Board for approval if the Seller and the County agree on a purchase price. In the FY26 budget, $34,254,400 is available for land acquisitions within the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund (1061). Properties pending acquisition in Cycles 12B, 2024, 2025, and 2026 total approximately $21,605,400. Funding for managing any lands acquired by the program is budgeted in the separate Conservation Collier Maintenance Fund (1062), supported by a funds transfer from Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund (1061). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Fee-simple acquisition of conservation lands is consistent with and supports Policy 1.3.1(e) in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved for form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board action. - SAA RECOMMENDATION(S): That the Board of County Commissioners hears recommendations from County staff and the Conservation Collier Land Advisory Acquisition Committee to rank the Smits property, provides a final ranking, and authorizes the funds necessary for appraisals and a Phase I Environmental Assessment, should the property be ranked on the "A" list for acquisition. PREPARED BY: Melissa Hennig, Environmental Specialist I, Conservation Collier, Development Review Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Smits - Initial Criteria Screening Report 2. Smits Summary 3. SabalPalmAList Page 1818 of 4116Conservation Collier Initial Criteria Screening Report Smits Owner: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Acreage: 166.63 ac Folio: 00438400007 Staff Report Date: April 1, 2026 Total Score: 205/400 180 160 160 140 120 96 100 80 80 80 80 60 43 42 40 23 20 0 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and 4 - Vulnerability Management Awarded Points Possible Points Page 1819 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... 2 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Summary of Property ............................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 1 - Parcel Location Overview ...........................................................................................5 Figure 2 – Surrounding Lands .....................................................................................................6 Figure 3 - Parcel Close-up ...........................................................................................................7 2.1 Summary of Property Information ....................................................................................................8 Table 1 – Summary of Property Information .....................................................................................8 Figure 4 - Secondary Criteria Score ............................................................................................9 Table 2 - Secondary Criteria Score Summary .....................................................................................9 2.2 Summary of Initial Screening Criteria Satisfaction (Ord. 2002-63, as amended, Sec. 12) ........... 10 3. Initial Screening Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Ecological Values ............................................................................................................................. 12 3.1.1 Vegetative Communities ....................................................................................................... 12 Figure 5 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities ........................................................................ 13 Figure 6 - Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System ............................................ 14 Figure 7 – Cypress community with melaleuca ....................................................................... 15 Figure 8 – Hydric Pine Flatwoods ............................................................................................ 15 3.1.2 Wildlife Communities ............................................................................................................ 16 Table 3 – Listed Wildlife Detected .................................................................................................. 16 Figure 9 - Wildlife Spatial Data (i.e., telemetry, roosts, etc) .................................................... 17 Figure 10 - CLIP4 Potential Habitat Richness ........................................................................... 18 3.1.3 Water Resources ................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 11 - CLIP Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones ............................ 20 Figure 12 - Collier County Soil Survey ...................................................................................... 21 Figure 13 LIDAR Elevation Map ............................................................................................... 22 3.1.4 Ecosystem Connectivity ........................................................................................................ 23 Figure 14 - Conservation Lands ............................................................................................... 24 3.2 Human Values ................................................................................................................................. 25 3.2.1 Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 25 3.2.2 Accessibility ........................................................................................................................... 25 3.2.3 Aesthetic/Cultural Enhancement ......................................................................................... 25 2 Page 1820 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 3.2 Restoration and Management ....................................................................................................... 26 3.3.1 Vegetation Management ...................................................................................................... 26 3.3.1.1 Invasive Vegetation ..................................................................................................... 26 3.3.1.2 Prescribed Fire ............................................................................................................ 26 3.3.2 Remediation and Site Security .............................................................................................. 26 3.3.3 Assistance .............................................................................................................................. 26 3.4 Vulnerability .................................................................................................................................... 26 3.4.1 Zoning and Land Use ............................................................................................................. 26 Figure 15 - Zoning .................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 16 - Zoning Overlays ..................................................................................................... 29 Figure 17 – Future Land Use ................................................................................................... 30 3.4.2 Development Plans ............................................................................................................... 31 4. Acquisition Considerations .................................................................................................................. 31 5. Management Needs and Costs .............................................................................................................. 31 Table 4 - Estimated Costs of Site Remediation, Improvements, and Management ....................... 31 6. Potential for Matching Funds .............................................................................................................. 31 7. Secondary Criteria Scoring Form ......................................................................................................... 32 8. Additional Site Photos ......................................................................................................................... 37 ................................................................................................................................................ 37 APPENDIX 1 – Critical Lands and Water Identification Maps (CLIP) Definitions ...................................... 55 APPENDIX 2 – Turell, Hall & Associates, Inc. Environmental Supplement (found as separate document associated with this report) ........................................................................................................................ 57 3 Page 1821 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 1. Introduction The Conservation Collier Program (Program) is an environmentally sensitive land acquisition and management program approved by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Board) in 2002 and by Collier County Voters in 2002 and 2006. The Program was active in acquisition between 2003 and 2011, under the terms of the referendum. Between 2011 and 2016, the Program was in management mode. In 2017, the Collier County Board reauthorized Conservation Collier to seek additional lands (2/14/17, Agenda Item 11B). On November 3, 2020, the Collier County electors approved the Conservation Collier Re-establishment referendum with a 76.5% majority. This Initial Criteria Screening Report (ICSR) has been prepared for the Conservation Collier Program to meet requirements specified in the Conservation Collier Implementation Ordinance, 2002-63, as amended, and for purposes of the Conservation Collier Program. The sole purpose of this report is to provide objective data to demonstrate how properties meet the criteria defined by the ordinance. The following sections characterize the property location, elaborate on the initial and secondary screening criteria scoring, and describe potential funding sources, appropriate use, site improvements, and estimated management costs. Much of the information about natural communities and on-site conditions in this report was provided by the Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. Environmental Supplement for the property dated August 2024 (APPENDIX 2). 4 Page 1822 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 2. Summary of Property Figure 1 - Parcel Location Overview 5 Page 1823 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 2 – Surrounding Lands 6 Page 1824 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 3 - Parcel Close-up 7 Page 1825 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 2.1 Summary of Property Information Table 1 – Summary of Property Information Characteristic Value Comments Name Smits Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number 00438400007 Target Protection Area RFMUD-Sending Not within a TPMA 22.09 acres of native plant communities and 107.30 Size 166.63 acres acres of citrus groves Section, Township, and S25, Twn 50, R26 Range Base Zoning is Agricultural; Sending Lands within Rural A – RFMUD-NRPA- Zoning Category/TDRs Fringe Mixed Use District within a Natural Resource Sending Protection Area; 1 residential dwelling per 40 acres 2 large pole barns, 2 smaller pole barns, a shed, a residence being used as an office, and a small, roofed structure covering a pump station and 2 above ground Existing structures Multiple fuel storage tanks; all structures except the small, roofed structure are within the northwest corner of the property Private Conservation Easement to the north, west and Adjoining properties Conservation, south; Picayune Strand State Forest and undeveloped and their Uses undeveloped property with first 2 TDRs stripped to east Owners have petitioned the Board to change property to Development Plans Rezone RFMUD – Receiving so that property can be developed Submitted with homes. Known Property Citrus grove and Citrus with swales and ditches between rows of trees Irregularities ditches within 107.30 acres of the property Other County Dept None known Interest 8 Page 1826 of 4116 Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Total Score: 205/400 180 160 160 140 120 96 100 80 80 80 80 60 43 42 40 23 20 0 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and 4 - Vulnerability Management Awarded Points Possible Points Figure 4 - Secondary Criteria Score Table 2 - Secondary Criteria Score Summary Awarded Weighted Possible Weighted Awarded/Possible Criteria Points Points Points 1 - Ecological Value 96 160 60% 1.1 - Vegetative Communities 24 53 45% 1.2 - Wildlife Communities 24 27 90% 1.3 - Water Resources 8 27 30% 1.4 - Ecosystem Connectivity 40 53 75% 2 - Human Values 43 80 54% 2.1 - Recreation 17 34 50% 2.2 - Accessibility 26 34 75% 2.3 - Aesthetics/Cultural Enhancement 0 11 0% 3 - Restoration and Management 23 80 29% 3.1 - Vegetation Management 21 55 38% 3.2 - Remediation and Site Security 2 23 10% 3.3 - Assistance 0 2 0% 4 - Vulnerability 42 80 53% 4.1 - Zoning and Land Use 24 58 42% 4.2 - Development Plans 18 22 80% Total 204 400 51% 9 Page 1827 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 2.2 Summary of Initial Screening Criteria Satisfaction (Ord. 2002-63, as amended, Sec. 12) Criteria 1: CLIP Priority 1 Natural Community Does the property contain Upland Hardwood Forest, Scrub, Coastal Upland, Dry Prairie, or Upland Pine? NO Property does not contain CLIP Priority 1 Natural Community. Criteria 2: CLIP Priority 2 Natural Community Does the property contain Pine Flatwoods or Coastal Wetlands? YES Property contains Hydric Pine Flatwoods. Criteria 3: Other Native, Natural Communities Does the property contain other native, natural communities? N/A Property contains Cypress, but already contains Priority 2 Natural Community. Criteria 4: Human Social Values Does the property offer cultural values, appropriate access for natural resource-based recreation, and the enhancement of the aesthetic setting of Collier County? YES The property is visible and readily accessible from a public roadway. Hiking and bike trails could be incorporated into the existing orange grove rows. Criteria 5: Water Resources Does the property offer opportunities for protection of water resource values, including aquifer recharge, water quality enhancement, protection of wetland dependent species habitat, wildfire risk reduction, storm surge protection, and flood control? YES The property is mapped as containing a majority of hydric soils. Water collects within the non- orange grove areas of the property and the ditches and swales within the orange groves provide wetland species habitat. Criteria 6: Biological and Ecological Value Does the property offer significant biological values, including biodiversity and listed species habitat? YES The parcel provides FL panther, Big Cypress fox squirrel, American alligator, and American Kestrel habitat, and is adjacent to conservation lands on all sides. 10 Page 1828 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Criteria 7: Enhancement of Current Conservation Lands Does the property enhance and/or protect the environmental value of current conservation lands through function as a buffer, ecological link or habitat corridor? YES This property is adjacent to a private conservation easement to the north, west and south and Picayune Strand State Forest. Criteria 8: Target Area Is the property within a Board-approved target protection mailing area? YES The Smits property met 6 out of the 8 Initial Screening Criteria. 11 Page 1829 of 4116 Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 3. Initial Screening Criteria 3.1 Ecological Values 3.1.1 Vegetative Communities Native vegetative communities found on the Smits parcel cover approximately 13% of the parcel (22.09 acres) and include Cypress and Hydric Pine Flatwoods. The primary land use on the property is Citrus Groves, covering approximately 63% of the parcel (107.30 acres). The primary native canopy species within the Cypress community are bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), pop ash (Fraxinus caroliniana), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), and strangler fig (Ficus aurea). Mid-story natives consist of cabbage palm, strangler fig, swamp bay (Persea palustris), and coco plum (Chrysobalanus icaco). Groundcover natives consist of pop ash, swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum), false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), giant leather fern (Acrostichum danaeifolium), and American burnweed (Erechtites hieraciifolius). The primary native canopy species within the Hydric Pine Flatwoods are slash pine (Pinus elliottii), bald cypress, and cabbage palm. Mid-story natives consist of bald cypress, cabbage palm, coco plum, and myrsine (Myrsine cubana). Groundcover natives consist of bald cypress, coco plum, and swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum) Invasive plants within the native plant communities cover approximately 75% in varying densities. Invasive plants encountered include primarily melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia), and climbing fern (Lygodium spp.), with Caesar weed (Urena lobata), java plum (Syzygium cumini) and shrubby false buttonwood (Spermacoce verticillata) also observed. No listed plant species were observed on the property. More detailed descriptions of the plant communities and invasive plant coverage can be found in APPENDIX 2. 12 Page 1830 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 5 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities 13 Page 1831 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 6 - Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System 14 Page 1832 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 7 – Cypress community with melaleuca Figure 8 – Hydric Pine Flatwoods 15 Page 1833 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 3.1.2 Wildlife Communities Panther telemetry from 1986-2024 shows consistent utilization of the surrounding area and occasional use of the Smits parcel by radio-collared individuals. Although not ideal habitat for wildlife, orange groves do provide some forage and hunting uses for wildlife present within adjacent conservation lands. Additionally, the hydric disturbed land within the parcel provides habitat for turkey, sandhill crane, and killdeer. Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. (THA) staff also observed two Big Cypress fox squirrel nests within the Cypress community. Table 3 – Listed Wildlife Detected Federal Common Name Scientific Name State Status Mode of Detection Status Florida Panther Puma concolar coryi Endangered Endangered FWC Telemetry Alligator American alligator Threatened Not Listed Observed by THA staff mississippiensis Big Cypress fox Sciurus niger Threatened Not Listed Observed by THA staff squirrel avicennia Little blue heron Egretta caerulea Threatened Observed by THA staff THA staff also observed an American kestrel foraging from citrus trees. Per THA staff, “although it could be possible, it is unlikely that the kestrel that was seen was a southeastern American kestrel (Falco sparverius paulus)”. 16 Page 1834 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 9 - Wildlife Spatial Data (i.e., telemetry, roosts, etc) 17 Page 1835 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 10 - CLIP4 Potential Habitat Richness 18 Page 1836 of 4116 Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 3.1.3 Water Resources The natural areas and hydric disturbed land within the property hold water during the wet season; however, ditches and swales within the citrus grove facilitate the draining of this portion of the property. The majority of the property is mapped as containing hydric soils including: “Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum” (nearly level, poorly drained soil associated with sloughs and broad poorly defined drainage ways), “Boca fine sand” (nearly level, poorly drained soil associated with flatwoods), and “Boca, Riviera, limestone substratum and Copeland fine sands, depressional” (level, very poorly drained soils associated with depressions, cypress swamps and marshes). This parcel does not provide significant aquifer recharge capacity. 19 Page 1837 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 11 - CLIP Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones 20 Page 1838 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 12 - Collier County Soil Survey 21 Page 1839 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 13 LIDAR Elevation Map 22 Page 1840 of 4116 Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 3.1.4 Ecosystem Connectivity This parcel directly connects to a conservation easement to the north, west, and south and to Picayune Strand State Forest to the east. The conservation easement is held by the US Fish and Wildlife Service for preservation related to Hacienda Lakes of Naples, LLC. Additionally, the privately-owned 40-acre parcel, directly east of the Smits property and north of Picayune Strand State Forest, has entered into an agreement with Collier County stripping the first Transfer of Development Rights credits from the parcel, which limits allowable uses. 23 Page 1841 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 14 - Conservation Lands 24 Page 1842 of 4116 Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 3.2 Human Values 3.2.1 Recreation This parcel could provide year-round access for recreational activities including but not limited to horseback riding, hiking, and bicycling. 3.2.2 Accessibility The property is accessed from Sabal Palm Rd., and has an existing parking area. 3.2.3 Aesthetic/Cultural Enhancement This parcel does not provide any significant aesthetic or cultural enhancements. 25 Page 1843 of 4116 Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 3.2 Restoration and Management 3.3.1 Vegetation Management 3.3.1.1 Invasive Vegetation Invasive vegetation infestation is approximately 75% within the natural communities on this parcel, in varying densities. Large melaleuca and Brazilan pepper exist within the communities, along with areas of thick climbing-fern. Other invasives present include Java plum, Caesar weed, and shrubby false buttonwood. 3.3.1.2 Prescribed Fire Prescribed fire would be feasible in the natural communities once invasive, exotic removal has been completed. Burning mature melaleuca would result in catastrophic fire that would destroy native canopy trees. If the citrus grove were converted to pasture, prescribed fire could be used in conjunction with mowing to manage the grassland. 3.3.2 Remediation and Site Security Invasive species will need to be controlled within the native plant communities. Full restoration may not be feasible within the citrus grove. Conversion to pasture through cattle leasing or restoration through grant funding could be options. 3.3.3 Assistance Assistance is not predicted. 3.4 Vulnerability 3.4.1 Zoning and Land Use This parcel is designated as Sending Land in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay (RFMUO) within a Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA), with a North Belle Meade Overlay. RFMUO Sending Lands designation allows for 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres, or 1 dwelling unit per parcel if the parcel is under 40 acres. Therefore, one dwelling unit could be developed on the North Naples Church parcel. LDC section 2.03.08.A provide the description of Sending Lands: RFMU sending lands are those lands that have the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitat for listed species. RFMU sending lands are the principal target for preservation and conservation. Density may be transferred from RFMU sending lands as provided in section 2.03.07 D.4.c. All NRPAs within the RFMU district are also RFMU sending lands. LDC section 2.03.08.B provide the description of NRPAs: The purpose and intent of the Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay District (NRPA) is to: protect endangered or potentially endangered species by directing incompatible land uses away from their habitats; to identify large, connected, intact, and relatively unfragmented habitats, which may be important for these listed species; and to support State and Federal agencies' efforts to protect endangered or potentially endangered species and their habitats. NRPAs may 26 Page 1844 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 include major wetland systems and regional flow-ways. These lands generally should be the focus of any federal, state, County, or private acquisition efforts. Accordingly, allowable land uses, vegetation preservation standards, development standards, and listed species protection criteria within NRPAs set forth herein are more restrictive than would otherwise be permitted in the underlying zoning district and shall to be applicable in addition to any standards that apply tin the underlying zoning district. 27 Page 1845 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 15 - Zoning 28 Page 1846 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 16 - Zoning Overlays 29 Page 1847 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 17 – Future Land Use 30 Page 1848 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 3.4.2 Development Plans Although the zoning of the property currently favors agricultural use and low-density residential dwellings, the property owners have petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to re-classify the parcel as RFMUD Receiving, which would allow for development. 4. Acquisition Considerations Staff would like to bring the following items to the attention of the Advisory Committee during the review of this property. The following does not affect the scoring. The following are items that will be addressed in the Executive Summary to the Board of County Commissioners if this property moves forward for ranking. Several buildings exist on the property – 2 large pole barns, 2 smaller pole barns, a shed, a residence being used as an office, and a small, roofed structure covering a pump station and 2 above ground fuel storage tanks. Most of the buildings could be utilized by Conservation Collier for equipment storage; however, the smaller pole barns may need to be demolished. The residence could potentially be converted to staff offices or housing for a Sheriff or Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission officer. Because of the historic agricultural uses on the property, a Phase I and potentially a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment is recommended prior to acquisition. 5. Management Needs and Costs Table 4 - Estimated Costs of Site Remediation, Improvements, and Management Annual Management Initial Recurring Comments Element Cost Cost Invasive Vegetation $22,000 $4,400 $1,000/acre initial, $200/acre recurring - 22-acres Removal Mowing $4,000 $4,000 Quarterly @ $25/acre – approx. 40 acres Citrus Grove TBD Clearing Total $26,000 $8,400 6. Potential for Matching Funds There are no known matching funds or partnership opportunities for acquisition in this area. 31 Page 1849 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 7. Secondary Criteria Scoring Form Property Name: Smitts Target Protection Mailing Area: N/A Folio(s): 00438400007 Possible Awarded Secondary Criteria Scoring Percentage Points Points 1 - Ecological Value 160 96 60 2 - Human Value 80 43 54 3 - Restoration and Management 80 23 29 4 - Vulnerability 80 42 53 TOTAL SCORE 400 204 51 Possible Awarded 1 - ECOLOGICAL VALUES (40% of total) Comments Points Points 1.1 VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES 200 90 1.1.1 - Priority natural communities (Select highest score) a. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 1 communities (1130 - Rockland Hammock, 1210 - Scrub, 1213 - Sand Pine Scrub, 1214 - Coastal Scrub, 1312 - Scrubby Flatwoods, 1610 - Beach Dune, 1620 - Coastal Berm, 100 1630 - Coastal Grasslands, 1640 - Coastal Strand, or 1650 - Maritime Hammock) b. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 2 communities (22211 - Hydric Pine Hydric Pine 60 60 Flatwoods, 2221 - Wet Flatwoods, or 1311 - Mesic Flatwoods) Flatwoods c. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 3 communities (5250 - Mangrove 50 Swamp, or 5240 - Salt Marsh) d. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 4 communities (5250 - Mangrove 25 Swamp) 1.1.2 - Plant community diversity (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has ≥ 3 CLC native plant communities (Florida Cooperative 20 Land Cover Classification System native plant communities) Cypress, b. Parcel has ≤ 2 CLC native plant communities 10 10 Hydric Pine Flatwoods c. Parcel has 0 CLC native plant communities 0 1.1.3 - Listed plant species (excluding commercially exploited species) (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has ≥5 CLC listed plant species 30 b. Parcel has 3-4 CLC listed plant species 20 c. Parcel has ≤ 2 CLC listed plant species 10 None d. Parcel has 0 CLC listed plant species 0 0 observed 1.1.4 - Invasive Plant Infestation (Select highest score) a. 0 - 10% infestation 50 b. 10 - 25% infestation 40 32 Page 1850 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 c. 25 - 50% infestation 30 d. 50 - 75% infestation 20 20 e. ≥75% infestation 10 1.2 - WILDLIFE COMMUNITIES 100 90 1.2.1 - Listed wildlife species (Select the highest score) a. Listed wildlife species documented on the parcel 80 80 multiple b. Listed wildlife species documented on adjacent property 60 c CLIP Potential Habitat Richness ≥5 species 40 d. No listed wildlife documented near parcel 0 1.2.2 - Significant wildlife habitat (Rookeries, roosts, denning sites, nesting grounds, high population densities, etc) (Select highest score) a. Parcel protects significant wildlife habitat (Please describe) 20 b. Parcel enhances adjacent to significant wildlife habitat (Please 10 10 describe) c. Parcel does not enhance significant wildlife habitat 0 1.3 - WATER RESOURCES 100 30 1.3.1 - Aquifer recharge (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is located within a wellfield protection zone or within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 1 area 40 b. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 2 or 3 area 30 c. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 4 or 5 area 20 d. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 6 area 0 0 1.3.2 - Surface Water Protection (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for an Outstanding Florida Waterbody 30 b. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for a creek, river, lake, canal or other surface water body 20 c. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for an identified flowway 15 10 d. Wetlands exist on site 10 e. Parcel does not provide opportunities for surface water quality enhancement 0 1.3.3 - Floodplain Management (Select all that apply) a. Parcel has depressional or slough soils 10 10 b. Parcel has known history of flooding and is likely to provide onsite water attenuation 10 10 c. Parcel provides storm surge buffering 10 d. Parcel does not provide floodplain management benefits 0 1.4 - ECOSYSTEM CONNECTIVITY 200 150 1.4.1 - Acreage (Select Highest Score) a. Parcel is ≥ 300 acres 150 33 Page 1851 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 b. Parcel is ≥ 100 acres 100 100 b. Parcel is ≥ 50 acres 75 c. Parcel is ≥ 25 acres 25 d. Parcel is ≥ 10 acres 15 e. Parcel is < 10 acres 0 1.4.2 - Connectivity (Select highest score) a. Parcel is immediately contiguous with conservation lands 50 50 b. Parcel is not immediately contiguous, but parcels between it and nearby conservation lands are undeveloped 25 c. Parcel is isolated from conservation land 0 ECOLOGICAL VALUES TOTAL POINTS 600 360 ECOLOGICAL VALUES WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*160) 160 96 Possible Awarded 2 - HUMAN VALUES (20%) Comments Points Points 2.1 - RECREATION 120 60 2.1.1 - Compatible recreation activities (Select all that apply) a. Hunting 20 b. Fishing 20 c. Water-based recreation (paddling, swimming, etc) 20 d. Biking 20 20 e. Equestrian 20 20 f. Passive natural-resource based recreation (Hiking, photography, 20 20 wildlife watching, environmental education, etc) g. Parcel is incompatible with nature-based recreation 0 2.2 - ACCESSIBILITY 120 90 2.2.1 - Seasonality (Select the highest score) a. Parcel accessible for land-based recreation year round 20 20 b. Parcel accessible for land-based recreation seasonally 10 c. Parcel is inaccessible for land-based recreation 0 2.2.2 - Vehicle access (Select the highest score) a. Public access via paved road 50 b. Public access via unpaved road 30 30 c. Public access via private road 20 d. No public access 0 2.2.3 - Parking Availability (Select the highest score) a. Minor improvements necessary to provide on-site parking 40 40 b. Major improvements necessary to provide on-site parking 25 (Requires site development plan) b. Public parking available nearby or on adjacent preserve 20 c. Street parking available 10 d. No public parking available 0 34 Page 1852 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 2.2.4 - Pedestrian access (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is easily accessible to pedestrians (within walking distance of 10 housing development) b. Parcel is not easily accessible to pedestrians 0 0 2.3 - AESTHETICS/CULTURAL ENHANCEMENT 40 0 2.3.1 - Aesthetic/cultural value (Choose all that apply) a. Mature/outstanding native vegetation 5 b. Scenic vistas 5 c. Frontage enhances aesthetics of public thoroughfare 10 d. Archaeological/historical structures present 15 e. Other (Please describe) 5 f. None 0 0 HUMAN VALUES TOTAL SCORE 280 150 HUMAN VALUES WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible 80 43 Points*80) Possible Awarded 3 - RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT (20%) Comments Points Points 3.1 - VEGETATION MANAGEMENT 120 45 3.1.1 - Invasive plant management needs (Select the highest score) a. Minimal invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore 100 and maintain native plant communities (<30%) b. Moderate invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to 75 restore and maintain native plant communities (30-65%) c. Major invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore 50 and maintain native plant communities (>65%) d. Major invasive/nuisance plant management and replanting 25 25 necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (>65%) e. Restoration of native plant community not feasible 0 3.1.2 - Prescribed fire necessity and compatibility (Select the highest score) a. Parcel contains fire dependent plant communities and is compatible with prescribed fire or parcel does not contain fire 20 20 dependent plant communities b. Parcel contains fire dependent plant communities and is 0 incompatible with prescribed fire 3.2 - REMEDIATION AND SITE SECURITY 50 5 3.2.1 - Site remediation and human conflict potential (Dumping, contamination, trespassing, vandalism, other) (Select the highest score) a. Minimal site remediation or human conflict issues predicted 50 b. Moderate site remediation or human conflict issues predicted 20 (Please describe) 35 Page 1853 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 restoration c. Major site remediation or human conflict issues predicted (Please 5 5 of citrus describe) groves d. Resolving site remediation or human conflict issues not feasible 0 3.3 - ASSISTANCE 5 0 3.4.1 - Management assistance by other entity a. Management assistance by other entity likely 5 b. Management assistance by other entity unlikely 0 0 0 RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT TOTAL SCORE 175 50 RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded 80 23 Points/Possible Points*80) Possible Awarded 4 - VULNERABILITY (20%) Comments Points Points 4.1 - ZONING AND LAND USE 130 55 4.1.1 - Zoning and land use designation (Select the highest score) a. Zoning allows for Single Family, Multifamily, industrial or 100 commercial b. Zoning allows for density of no greater than 1 unit per 5 acres 75 c. Zoning allows for agricultural use /density of no greater than 1 unit 50 50 per 40 acres d. Zoning favors stewardship or conservation 0 4.1.2 - Future Land Use Type (Select the highest score) a. Parcel designated Urban 30 b. Parcel designated Estates, Rural Fringe Receiving and Neutral, 25 Agriculture c. Parcel designated Rural Fringe Sending, Rural Lands Stewardship 5 5 Area d. Parcel is designated Conservation 0 4.2 - DEVELOPMENT PLANS 50 40 4.2.1 - Development plans (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has been approved for development 20 b. SFWMD and/or USACOE permit has been applied for or SDP 15 15 application has been submitted c. Parcel has no current development plans 0 4.2.2 - Site characteristics amenable to development (Select all that apply) a. Parcel is primarily upland 10 10 b. Parcel is along a major roadway 10 c. Parcel is >10 acres 5 10 d. Parcel is within 1 mile of a current or planned commercial or multi- 5 5 unit residential development VULNERABILITY TOTAL SCORE 180 95 VULNERABILITY WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible 80 42 Points*80) 36 Page 1854 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 8. Additional Site Photos Cypress on west side of parcel Cypress and trail between cypress on west side of parcel 37 Page 1855 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Hydric Disturbed Land on west side of parcel Cypress 38 Page 1856 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Cypress Cypress 39 Page 1857 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Climbing fern Cleared Citrus Grove 40 Page 1858 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Ditch in Citrus Grove Edge of Hydric Pine Flatwoods 41 Page 1859 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Edge of Hydric Pine Flatwoods Pile of dead citrus trees 42 Page 1860 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Citrus in foreground, Hydric Pine Flatwoods in background Ditch in Citrus Grove 43 Page 1861 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Citrus Grove Ditch in Citrus Grove 44 Page 1862 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Roofed structure covering a pump station and 2 above ground fuel storage tanks Large pole barn market area 45 Page 1863 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 2nd large pole barn behind market area Small pole barn 46 Page 1864 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 2nd small pole barn Shed 47 Page 1865 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Area between the 2 large pole barns Residence built in 1987 48 Page 1866 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Aerial view looking southwest Aerial view looking east 49 Page 1867 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Aerial view looking west Aerial view looking east 50 Page 1868 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Aerial view looking south Aerial view looking north 51 Page 1869 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Southwest side of Smits parcel to the left, adjacent parcel restored cypress to the right Aerial view of cypress on west side of parcel 52 Page 1870 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Aerial view of Hydric Pine Flatwoods behind cypress in middle of parcel Aerial view of Cypress with climbing fern in middle of parcel 53 Page 1871 of 4116Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Aerial view of Hydric Pine Flatwoods in middle of parcel 54 Page 1872 of 4116 Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 APPENDIX 1 – Critical Lands and Water Identification Maps (CLIP) Definitions This report makes use of data layers from the Florida Natural Areas Inventory and University of Florida Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP4). CLIP4 is a collection of spatial data that identify statewide priorities for a broad range of natural resources in Florida. It was developed through a collaborative effort between the Florida Areas Natural Inventory (FNAI), the University of Florida GeoPlan Center and Center for Landscape Conservation Planning, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). It is used in the Florida Forever Program to evaluate properties for acquisition. CLIP4 is organized into a set of core natural resource data layers which are representative of 5 resource categories: biodiversity, landscapes, surface water, groundwater and marine. The first 3 categories have also been combined into the Aggregated layer, which identifies 5 priority levels for natural resource conservation. Below is a description of each of the three CLIP4 data layers used in this report. Figure 5 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities Consists of 12 priority natural community types: upland glades, pine rocklands, seepage slopes, scrub, sandhill, sandhill upland lakes, rockland hammock, coastal uplands, imperiled coastal lakes, dry prairie, upland pine, pine flatwoods, upland hardwood forest, or coastal wetlands. These natural communities are prioritized by a combination of their heritage global status rank (G-rank) and landscape context, based on the Land Use Intensity Index (subset of CLIP Landscape Integrity Index) and FNAI Potential Natural Areas. Priority 1 includes G1-G3 communities with Very High or High landscape context. Priority 2 includes G1-G3 Medium and G4 Very High/High. Priority 3 includes G4 Medium and G5 Very High/High. Priority 5 is G5 Medium. This data layer was created by FNAI originally to inform the Florida Forever environmental land acquisition program. The natural communities were mapped primarily based on the FNAI/FWC Cooperative Land Cover (CLC) data layer, which is a compilation of best-available land cover data for the entire state. The CLC is based on both remote-sensed (from aerial photography, primarily from water management district FLUCCS data) and ground-truthed (from field surveys on many conservation lands) data. Figure 10 - Potential Habitat Richness CLIP4 Map This CLIP version 4.0 data layer is unchanged from CLIP v3.0. FWC Potential Habitat Richness. Because SHCAs do not address species richness, FWC also developed the potential habitat richness layer to identify areas of overlapping vertebrate species habitat. FWC created a statewide potential habitat model for each species included in their analysis. In some cases, only a portion of the potential habitat was ultimately designated as SHCA for each species. The Potential Habitat Richness layer includes the entire potential habitat model for each species and provides a count of the number of species habitat models occurring at each location. The highest number of focal species co-occurring at any location in the model is 13. 55 Page 1873 of 4116 Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 Figure 11 - CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones High priorities indicate high potential for recharge to an underlying aquifer system (typically the Floridan aquifer but could be intermediate or surficial aquifers in some portions of the state). The highest priorities indicate high potential for recharge to springs or public water supplies. This figure also includes Wellfield Protection Zones. Collier County Wellfield Protection Zones are referenced in the Land Development Code and updated in 2010 by Pollution Control and Prevention Department Staff. The public water supply wellfields, identified in section 3.06.06 and permitted by the SFWMD for potable water to withdraw a minimum of 100,000 average gallons per day (GPD), are identified as protected wellfields, around which specific land use and activity (regulated development) shall be regulated under this section. 56 Page 1874 of 4116 Initial Criteria Screening Report – Smits Date: April 1, 2026 Owner Name: Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Folio Number: 00438400007 APPENDIX 2 – Turell, Hall & Associates, Inc. Environmental Supplement (found as separate document associated with this report) 57 Page 1875 of 4116BCC Conservation Collier Property Summary April 2026 Smits CCLACC Recommendation: A-list Property Name: Smits Owner(s): Jerry J, Robert J, and Pamela Smits et al. Target Protection Area: RFMUD – Sending (Not within a TPMA) Acreage: 166.63 acres Highlights: • Location: South off Sabal Palm Rd., approximately 1.5 miles east of Collier Blvd. • Met 5 out of 8 Initial Screening Criteria: Native plant communities; human social values; water resources; biological and ecological, conservation land enhancement • Habitat: Citrus Grove (63% of property), Hydric Pine Flatwoods, Cypress, • Listed Plants: None observed • Listed Wildlife: FL panther telemetry on parcel, American alligator, Big Cypress fox squirrel nests on parcel, little blue heron; within FL Wildlife Corridor • Water Resource Values: Mapped as containing primarily hydric soils; Natural areas and disturbed hydric land holds water, citrus grove drains water; Very little contribution to aquifer recharge. • Connectivity: Directly connected to Hacienda Lakes Conservation Easement to the north, west and south and Picayune Strand State Forest to the east. • Management Issues / Estimated Costs: Initial Exotic Removal estimated at $22,000 and ongoing annual estimated at $4,400; Mowing estimated at $4,000 Total Score: 205/400 annually; Environmental Restoration of citrus grove TBD – would not occur 180 160 without grant funding 160 140 • Partnership Opportunities: Potential for state funding assistance to treat 120 96 100 80 80 80 exotic plants; grants would be sought to restore citrus grove or a cattle lease to 80 create pasture our of citrus grove 60 43 42 40 23 • Zoning/Overlays: Agricultural – RFMUD-Sending-NRPA; 1 unit per 40 acres 20 • Surrounding land uses: Conservation and undeveloped with first 2 TDR’s 0 stripped 1 - Ecological 2 - Human 3 - 4 - Value Value Restoration Vulnerability • All Criteria Score: 205 out of 400; relatively high ecological value score and • Other Division Interest: None known Management • Acquisition Considerations: Restoration of citrus grove would not be feasible Awarded Points Possible Points without extensive grant funding or cattle lease requiring leassee to create pasture out of grove land. Phase I ESA recommended because of historic agricultural use. Several buildings exist in NW corner of property. Page 1876 of 4116BCC Conservation Collier Property Summary April 2026 Smits Page 1877 of 4116BCC Conservation Collier Property Summary April 2026 Smits Page 1878 of 4116 April 17, 2026 Commissioner Rick LoCastro, Rick.LoCastro@collier.gov sent via email Commissioner Chris Hall, Chris.Hall@collier.gov Commissioner Burt Saunders, Burt.Saunders@collier.gov Commissioner Dan Kowal, Dan.Kowal@collier.gov Commissioner William McDaniel, Bill.McDaniel@collier.gov RE: Conservation Collier – Smits Property aka Sabal Palm Dear Collier County Commissioners: On behalf of our more than 3,800 supporting families, the Conservancy of Southwest Florida is providing comment on the Smits Property aka Sabal Palm. The property is recommended for the A list. We support this recommendation. The Conservancy would like to acknowledge Collier County staff and the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (CCLAAC) for their dedication to the Conservation Collier program and for successfully protecting thousands of environmentally significant acres throughout Collier County. The property contains hydric wetlands, and is mapped as containing a majority of hydric soils. Water collects on the non-orange grove portions of the property and the ditches and swales within the orange groves provide habitat for wetland dependent species. The parcel also provides habitat for the endangered Florida Panther, the Big Cypress Fox Squirrel, American Alligator and American Kestral. Additionally, the property is adjacent to a private conservation easement to the north, west and south as well as the Picayune Strand State Forest. Finally, the property is visible and accessible from a public roadway which provides an opportunity to incorporate hiking and bike trails into the property. We do recommend that the County consider coordinating or partnering with state agencies interested in helping manage this property which is adjacent to Picayune Strand State Forest. While, as noted, the property will meet the criteria to be on the Conservation Collier A list, it Page 1879 of 4116 Conservancy of Southwest Florida 2 Smits Property aka Sabal Palm may be most appropriate for this parcel to be managed in conjunction with Picayune Strand State Forest. For all of these reasons, we recommend this property be ranked as an ‘A-list’ property. Sincerely, Julianne Thomas Senior Environmental Planning Specialist Page 1880 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.1 ID# 2026-601 Executive Summary Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) in the amount of $36,726.45 to the Project Engineer or Developer’s designated agent for Perry Hotel. [PL20240012794] OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County commissioners, as Ex-Officio Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, authorize the County Manager, or designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) in the amount of $36,726.45, in accordance with the Collier County Utility Standards and Procedures, Ordinance No. 2004-31, as amended. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. On February 25, 2025, the Board of County Commissioners granted final acceptance of utilities at the Perry Hotel. 2. Per Utility Ordinance 2004-31, when the actual cost of constructing the utilities being conveyed to the County exceeds $100,000, a 10% Utilities Performance Security (UPS) must be posted by the developer for the duration of the one-year warranty period, which begins on the BCC approval date. 3. The one-year warranty period expired on February 25, 2026, and the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) in the amount of $36,726.45 can be released. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to operate an efficient and customer-focused permitting process. FISCAL IMPACT: Performance bond securities are held as a development guarantee and released after work is performed. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. - SAA RECOMMENDATION(S): To authorize the County Manager, or designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) in the amount of $36,726.45. Development Review staff will issue a Memorandum to the Clerk of Courts upon approval of this item by the Board of County Commissioners, advising the Clerk of this action. PREPARED BY: Lucia S. Martin, Project Manager I, Development Review Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Bond Basis Page 1881 of 4116 PERRY HOTEL LOCATION MAP Page 1882 of 4116 Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 Horseshoe Drive N. Naples, FL 34104 239-252-2400 RECEIPT OF PAYMENT Receipt Number: 20241269231 Transaction Number: 2024-110901 Date Paid: 12/09/2024 Amount Due: $36,726.45 Payment Details: Payment Method Amount Paid Check Number Check $36,726.45 1249 Amount Paid: $36,726.45 Change / Overage: $0.00 Contact: FOD PERRY NAPLES LLC 7009 SHRIMP RD STE 4 KEY WEST, FL 33040 FEE DETAILS: Fee Description Reference Number Original Amount GL Account Fee Paid Refundable Bonds PL20240012794 $36,726.45 $36,726.45 131-000000-220113 Cashier Name: Vanessa.McHenry Batch Number: 13635 Entered By: LuciaMartin Page 1883 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.2 ID# 2026-743 Executive Summary Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a Performance Bond in the amount of $71,140 which was posted as a development guaranty for an Early Work Authorization (EWA) for work associated with Rivergrass North – Phase 1A. [PL20230001447] OBJECTIVE: To release a security which was posted as a development guaranty. CONSIDERATIONS: The Growth Management Division routinely accepts securities administratively as guaranties for early work improvements pursuant to Section 10.01.02 B of the LDC. The work associated with this security has been inspected, and the developer has fulfilled his commitments with respect to this security. The performance security was posted as security for clearing and site filling associated with an Early Work Authorization (EWA) for Rivergrass North – Phase 1A (PPL PL20220007569). The PPL was approved by the Board of County Commissioners on February 27, 2024, and the EWA bond is no longer required. A recent inspection confirmed that the developer has fulfilled the commitments of the EWA. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objectives to operate an efficient and customer-focused permitting process. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this Executive Summary. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Performance Bond securities are held as a development guaranty and released after work is performed. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. - CLD RECOMMENDATION(S): To authorize the Clerk of Courts to release the Performance Bond in the amount of $71,140. Development Review will issue a Memorandum to the Clerk of Courts upon approval of this item by the Board of County Commissioners, advising the Clerk of this action. PREPARED BY: Lucia S. Martin, Project Manager I, Development Review Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Bond Basis Page 1884 of 4116RIVERGRASS NORTH – PHASE 1A LOCATION MAP Page 1885 of 4116 EARLY WORK PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT lS EARLY WORK PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT entered into this 5t day of llol,t , 2023, between LENNAR HOMES, LLC hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, hereinafter referred to as the "Board". WHEREAS, Developer has applied for an early work authorization in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code including but not limited to Section 10.01.02.8 (collectively, the "Early Work Regulations"); and WHEREAS, the Early Work Regulations require Developer to post appropriate performance guarantees to ensure compliance with the Early Work Regulations and Early Work Authorization Permit No. PL20230001447 (the "Early Work Permit"). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and mutual covenants hereinafter set forlh, Developer and the Board do hereby covenant and agree as follows: '1. Developer agrees to comply with the Early Work Regulations and the Early Work Permit (the "Early Work"). 2 Developer herewith tenders its early work performance security (attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof) in the amount of $71.'140.00. 3 ln the event of default by Developer or failure of Developer to complete the Early Work within the time required by the Early Work Regulations and Early Work Permit, Collier County, may call upon the early work performance security to insure satisfactory completion of the Early Work. 4. The Early Work shall not be considered complete until Developer notifies the County that the Early Work is complete and the final Early Work is reviewed and approved by the County Manager or designee for compliance with the Early Work Regulations. The County Manager or designee shall, within sixty (60) days of receipt of notification by Developer in writing that the Early Work is complete, either: a) notify Developer in writing of his approval of the Early Work; or b) notify Developer in writing of his refusal to approve the Early Work, therewith specifying those conditions which Developer must fulfill in order to obtain the County Manager's approval of the Early Work. b ln the event Developer shall fail or neglect to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, upon certification of such failure, the County Manager or designee may call upon the early performance security to secure satisfactory completion, repair and maintenance of the Early Work. The Board shall have the right to construct and maintain, or cause to be constructed or maintained, pursuant to public advertisement and receipt and acceptance of bids, the Early Work. The Developer, as principat under the early performance security, shall be liable to pay and to indemnify the Board, upon completion of such construction, the final total cost to the Board thereof, including, but not limited to, engineering, legal and Page 1886 of 4116 contingent costs, together with any damages, either direct or consequential, which the Board may sustain on account of the failure of Developer to fulfill all of the provisions of this Agreement. 7 All of the terms, covenants and conditions herein contained are and shall be binding upon Developer and the respective successors and assigns of Developer. caused to be executJl#'il:rffi flTfiff ="I::;,,33j1[;x:ff f ',"]Te"" day of ffialryment 2023. SIGNED PRESENCE OF: (Name nar Homes, LLC Sign: a lity company By: Scott Edwards, Vice President Printed Name Sign D"J ( $ari/ (os or.ic> Printed Name BOARD OF COLINTY COMMISSIONERS OF , FLORIDA By: #FFES;P Jaime Cook, Director Development Review Division as designee of the County Manager pursuant to Resolution No. 201 5- I 62 ffi Derek D. Perry Assistant County Attorney Page 1887 of 4116EXHIBIT II A'' Performance Security Page 1888 of 4116 FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP 5505 BLUE LAGOON DRIVE, 7TH FLOOR WEST MIAMI, FLORIDA 33126 I )Ft PHONE (305)553-8724 II]EI-II Y GUAT]AN TY ANI] ACCI ln UUHY I ITJLLII Y bUI\HANI Y ANU IiUULHt, )F],r RP T IDI TANC[: OORP rlDrLlTY GUARANTY AND Al ':lt)rr tD! LI ARANTY AND ACCI CORP FIOELITY GUANANTY AND ACCEPT I'Y GUAFANTY ANI )EPTANCI . IRREVOCABLE STAIIDBY LETTER OF CREDIT NO. FGAC.23I15 ItDl AHANTY AND ACC' '1Cr OOn' il)r,l fiY OI.,AI'IANTY Ar ISSUER: FIDELTTY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP. (HEREINAFTER "ISSUER") lDi JUARANiTY ANI 5505 BLUE LAGOON DRM,7TH FLOOR WEST MIAMI, FL 33t26 :LiTY GUARAN YAN EPTAN( PHONE (30s) ss3S724 \ND A tDr ;L ANI 'AFANTY DATE OF ISSUE: APRIL 10,2023 )t IDILI PLACE OF EXPIRY: AT ISSUER'S COUNTERS LOCATED AT 5505 BLUE LAGOON DRIVE, TTH FLOOR WEST, MIAMI, L{TY GUARANry AND ACCEPTANCI FL 33126 I I)t UABANTY AND ACCEP]ANCE CORT DATE OF EXPIRY: THIS CREDIT SHALL BE VALID UNTIL APRIL IA,2024, AND SHALL THEREAFTER BE ANCI )HP AUTOMATICALLY RENEWED FOR SUCCESSIVE ONE-YEAR PERIODS ON THE ANNIVERSARY FI'JELI.] OF THE ISSUE UNLESS AT LEAST SIXTY (60) DAYS PRIOR TO ANY SUCH ANNIVERSARY EPTAI DATE, THE ISSUER NOTIFIES THE BENEFICIARY IN WRITING BY REGISTERE.D MAIL THAT )FI I tDt-l ARAN )A{ CE C( THE ISSUER ELECTS NOT TO RENEW THIS CREDIT APPLICANT: LENNAR HOMES, LLC (HEREINAFTER "DEVELOPER") lt iI]ARANTY AND ACC'PTANCE C IO48T SIX MILE CYPRESS PARKWAY CE CO] DLLII'T GI :LITY GUARANTY ANO ACCFPTA FORT MYERS, Ft 33966 PPI'Ahr )Fp ir.])Ft ANCT BENEFICIARY: THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (HEREI NAFTER'BENEFICIARY') GUABA AND A ANCE C/O GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT \Nry AI COSP 2EOO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GUABA NAPLES. FL 34I04 DEL \NryAI )ottF AMOUNT: UP TO AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF $.7I,I4O.OO (SEVENTY-ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED \NCE CORP FORTY AND OO/1OO US DOLLARS) )ORP RE: INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION PTANCE COHP FIDFI ITY GUARAN] \NCF COHP IDE AAANTY AI PROJECT NAME: RIVERGRASS NORTH. PHASE IA EWA IE CORP FIDELiTY GUARANTY AND tnRp TY GUARA )ORP I GUAF )ELITY CUABANry AND ACCEPT/TNCE CORP FiDEI CREDITAVAILABLE )l lt tDEr,rl GUARAN]Y AND ACCEI'IANCT COHIs TIDFI,.IlY Gl AN}Y WITH: ISSUER AI PIANCE COHP I-IDELI] Y GUAIIAN I Y AN )ELI TY GUAHAN IY ANIf ACCEI] IANCE CORP FIDEI GI]ARA BY: PAYME,NT AGAINST DOCUMENTS DETAILED HEREIN AND BENEFICIARY'S DRAFTS AT SIGHT DRAWN ON THE ISSUER OEP DOCUMENTS REQUIRED: AVAILABLE BY BENEFICIARY'S DRAFT(S) AT SIGHT DRAWI{ ON THE ISSUER A-II{D PRESENTED AT PLACE OF EXPIRY ACCOMPAI\IED BY BENEFICIARY'S STATEMENT PURPORTEDLY MANUALLY SIGNID AND E COR []rLl DATED BY THE COUNTY MANAGE& OR HIS DESIGNEE" CERTIFYING THAT: "(I) DEVELOPER HAS FAILED TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR MAINTAIN THE IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT rANCE COR' IOELITY GUARA CERTAIN PLAT OF A SUBDryISION KNOWN AS RIVERGRASS NORTH . PHASE IA EWA AS REQUIRf,D BY COLLIER CORP DELITY CUAI COUNTY ORDINANCES AI\D RESOLUTIONS (THE "LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS"); (II) DEVELOPER HAs IANCE 6ONI ABAI BEEN GIVEN WRITTEN NOTICE DESCRIBING THE EVENT OR CONDITION OF SUCH DEFAULT IN REASONABLE DETAIL BY CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED; AND (IID THE DEFAULT HAS NOT BEEN CURED CORP WITHIN THE CURE PERIOD PROVIDED FOR THEREIN, IF ANY.''; rANCE CORI ut c()Rp OR B. *A FrNAL TNSPECTTON OF THE TMPROVEMENTS FOR RTVERGRASS NORTH - PHASE lA EWA AS REQUTRED By )B CoLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS (THE *L.AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS") SATISFACTORY TO COLLIER COUNTY HAS NOT BEEN PERFORMED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF EXPIRY, AND A SATISFACTORY ALTERNATIVE PERFORMANCE SECURITY HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED TO AND ACCEPTED BY THE BENEFICIARY." lt)r: Page 1889 of 4116 FIDLI ITY GLJARANTY FII]ELI]Y E CORP 5505 BLUE LAGOON DRI EST MIAMI, FLOR PHONE (305 AND ACCEPIANCE F AND ACCEPTANCE CORP THIS IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF LETTER OF CREDIT NO. FGAC.23I T5 PAGE 2 DRAFT(S) DRAWN UNDER THIS LETTER OF CREDIT SHALL BE MARKED: *DRAWN UNDER FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP. CREDIT NO. FGAC-23I I5, DATED APRIL I(), 2023" AND MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY THIS ORIGINAL LETTER OF CREDIT AND ALLORIGINAL AMENDMENTS, IF ANY, FOR PROPER ENDORSEMENT, FIDELIry GUABANW AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELIry AND SUCH FIDELITY BY CORP DOCUMENT, INSTRUMENT, OR AGREEMENT REFERENCED TO HEREIN OR IN WHICH THIS LETTER OF CREDIT RELATES, AND ANY SUCH REFERENCE SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO INCORPORATE HEREIN BY REFERENCE ANY DOCUMENT, INSTRUMENT OR AGREEMENT. ISSUER HEREBY ENGAGES WITH BENEFICIARY THAT DRAFT(S) DRAWN UNDER AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS AI{D CONDITIONS OF TIIIS CREDIT WILL BE DULY HONORED BY ISSUER IF PRESENTED WITHIN THE VALIDITY FIOEL{IY CORP FIOEL!}Y coHP COMPANY. FIDELITY OUANANIY COT]P FIDTLITY CONP AND FIDELI IY AND AOOEP]ANCT CCNP FIDELIry AND OORP TIDFI" ITY GUABAN'Y AND ACCEPTANCE COAP FTDFLIW GUABANTY AND ACCEPTANCI, CORP FIDFI IIY GUASANTY AND ACCEPTANCI., COF]P FII.}EI.'I'Y GIJAFIANTY AIIT) ACCFPTANCF CORP FIDELITY CORP FIDELITY GUABANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP F;DELITY GUAFAN]'Y AI.JL] ACCEPTANC'E CORP FIDELl'Y iUARAN GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE COBP FIDTLITY GUAFANTY AND ACCEPTANCE COBP FIDELITY GUANANTY AND ACCEP'ANCE CORP F'DFL'ry AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUABANTY AND ACCFPTANC€ CORP FIDELITY GUAFiANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP f r0Et...llY ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCFPTANCE CORP FIDEI IIY GUARANIY AND ACCTPIANCE CORP TIDELI IY AND COBP GUAHANlY AND ACCEPTANCE COBP FIDELI1Y GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE COFP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCTPTANCE CORP TIDELITY GUABANry AND ACCIPTANCE CORP FIDELIry CUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE OORP FIO€LIry GUABANry AND ACCEPIANCE CORP FIDELIry GUABANIY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELIry GUABANry AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUANANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELIry GUABANry AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUABANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANOE CORP FIDELITY GUARANTY ANO ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELIry GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUABANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDEL!TY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUAI]ANTY AND ACCEPTANCE COI]P FIDELITY GUAFiANTY AND ACCEPTANCE COFP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUARANry AND ACCEPTANCE CONP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUARAN I Y AND ACCEPTANCE COHP FIDELITY GIJARANTY AND ACCEPTANOI CORP TIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANC€ CORP TIDTLITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCT CORP T!DTLITY GT]ARANTY AND ACCIPTANCF CORP IlIOEI."ITY Gt,,ABANTY AND ACCTPTANCE CORP F'DFI-ITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCT CORP FIDFL.ITY GIJARANTY AND ACCFPTANCE OORP FIDELIry G(JARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIOELITY GUANANTY AND ACCEPTANCE OORP FIDELIry GUANANry AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIOELITY GUARANryAND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELIry GUANANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP TIDELITY GUAFANIY ANO ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELI'Y GUARANTY AND ACCEPMNCE COBP FIDELITY GUANANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDFI,.IIY GI.JABANTY AND ACCEPTANCF CORP FIDFLITY GUABANry AND ACCFPTANCF COHP FIDFIIry GUABANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDEL'TY GUARANTY AND ACCFPTANCE CORP FIDFI.ITY GUARANTY AND ACCFPTANCF COBP FIDEL,ITY GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE COBP FIDFL,,ITY GUARANTY AND ACCFPTANCE CORP FIDETITY GUARANIY AND ACCEPIANCF COBP FIDELiTY GUANANTY AND ACCEPTANOE CORP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCTP]ANCE CORP FIDELI1Y GUARANTY ANO ACCEPTANOE CORP FIDELITY GUAFANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP TIDELITY GI,]ARAN-!Y AND ACCEPIANCE CORP FIDELITY GUARANry AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIOELITY GUABANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELIry GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIOELITY GUABANry AND ACCEPTANCE OORP FIDELIry GUARANry AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIOELIIY GUABANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCTPIANCE CORP FIDELITY GUAHANTY AND ACCIPTANCE COBP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCEP"IANCE CORP FIDELITY GI]ARANIY AND ACCEPMNCE CORP FIDELITY GUARANIY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP l-IDELITY GIJARANTY AND ACCTpTANOE CORP FIDELITY GUARANTY AND ACCIPTANOe CORP l:lDILtTy GtjARANTy AND ACCEPTANOT CORp FtDELITY Gt]ARANTy AND ACCtPTANCf COFp TIDELITY GI,ARANTY AND ACCTPTANCI CORP FIDELIry G[iABANry AND ACCIPTANCE OORP TIOELIry Gi]ABANTY AND ACCIPTANCT CORP FID[LIry Gi]ABANTY AND AOCIPTANCE CORP TIDTLITY OUABANTY AI]t] ACCEPTANCE OORP TIDTL''Y OUAIIANIY ANO ACCEPTANCE COTIP FIDFLI IY GUANANTY AND ACCTP LOBP FIDELITY CUAHAN I Y ANO ACCEPTANCE COHP 'ANCK FIDTLITY CIJABANTY AND ACCTPTANCT OORP FIDELiTY G|JARANTY AND ACCEPTANCT OORP FIDIiL Iry GUARANTY AND ACCEPTANC[ CORP FIDEL'TY GI]ARANTY AND ACCIPTANCE CORP FIDELITY OUANANTV AND ACCFPTANCE F'DELiTY CORP GUAfIANTY AND ACCEPTANCE CORP FiDELITY GUANANTY AND ACCEPTANOE CONP FIDTLJTY 1.;UAIIAI.JIY ANTJ ACCEPTANCE CORP Page 1890 of 4116EXH!BIT ,B" Signing Authority Page 1891 of 4116DocuSign Envelope lD: 0A23C500-F270-451 9-9896-70FD8848594F WRITTEN CONSENT TO COMPANY ACTION BY SOLE MEMBER OF LENNAR HOMES, LLC DECEMBER2t,2022 The undersigned, being the sole member of Lennar Homes, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (the "Company"), does hereby waive any and all requirements for notice of the time, place and purpose of the special meeting of the member of the Company and does hereby agree and consent to the adoption of, and does hereby adopt, the following resolutions and the actions specified therein: RESOLVED, that SCOTT EDWARDS be, and hereby is, elected to the office of Vice President of the Company, to serve the Company in such capacity until the next annual meeting of the Member of the Company, or until a successor is duly elected and qualified or until his earlier resignation or removal from office; and further RESOLVED, that the authorities hereby conferred shall be deemed retroactive, and any and all acts taken by Scott Edwards as Vice President of the Company be, and they hereby are, approved, ratified and confirmed in all respects. A facsimile or PDF of a signature to this Written Consent shall be deemed and treated for allpurposes of execution to be as valid as an original signature thereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Written Consent in order to give their consent thereto effective as of the date first above written. SOLE MEMBER: U.S. HOME,LLC, a Delaware limited liability company by: llarL By Srstarna. Mark lce President Page 1892 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.3 ID# 2026-746 Executive Summary Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the potable water facilities and appurtenant utility easement for Fiori Apartments – Phase 2. [PL20250010930] OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve final acceptance of the potable water utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion the potable water utility facilities and appurtenant utility easement, in accordance with the Collier County Utility Standards and Procedures, Ordinance No. 2004-31, as amended. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The Developer has constructed the potable water utility facilities for Fiori Apartments – Phase 2, within dedicated easements to serve this development (see attached location map). A portion of the potable water utility facilities was offered for conveyance to the County, as described in Official Records (O.R.) Book 6551, Page (PG) 3705, and is located within County utility easements recorded in O.R. Book 6551, PG 3691, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. The value of these potable water utility facilities (assets) was $372,606.33. 2. Staff recorded all final acceptance documents associated with the potable water utility facilities conveyed to the County in the public records of Collier County, which were reviewed and approved by the County Attorney’s office as to form and legality. The County acquired its interest in a portion of the potable water utility facilities by Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale recorded in O.R. Book 6551, PG 3705 (“the Utilities Facilities Deed”). 3. A final inspection to identify defects in materials and workmanship was conducted by staff on November 24, 2025, in coordination with Public Utilities, and the facilities were found satisfactory and acceptable. 4. Staff recommends final acceptance of the subject potable water utility facilities in the amount of $372,606.33. Staff also recommends acceptance of the Utilities Facilities Deed and the facilities described therein. 5. This final acceptance is in accordance with Collier County, Ordinance No. 2004-31, as amended. 6. Staff is unaware of any issues that would serve to negate the recommendation to approve this final acceptance. This item is consistent with the Collier Count strategic plan objective to operate an efficient and customer-focused permitting process. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this Executive Summary will have no specific financial impact. However, approval of this Executive Summary will result in the Collier County Water-Sewer District receiving title to a portion of the potable water utility facilities, which has a total gross value of $372,606.33 (no depreciation applied). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. – SAA RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve final acceptance of the potable water utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the potable water utility facilities for Fiori Apartments – Phase 2, PL20250010930. PREPARED BY: Lucia S. Martin, Project Manager I, Development Review Division Page 1893 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.3 ID# 2026-746 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Assets Sheet 3. Verification of Final Cost 4. Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale 5. Deed of Utility Easement Page 1894 of 4116FIORI APARTMENTS – PHASE 2 LOCATION MAP Page 1895 of 4116Page 1896 of 4116Page 1897 of 4116Page 1898 of 4116Page 1899 of 4116Page 1900 of 4116Page 1901 of 4116Page 1902 of 4116Page 1903 of 4116Page 1904 of 4116Page 1905 of 4116Page 1906 of 4116Page 1907 of 4116Page 1908 of 4116Page 1909 of 4116Page 1910 of 4116Page 1911 of 4116Page 1912 of 4116Page 1913 of 4116Page 1914 of 4116Page 1915 of 4116Page 1916 of 4116Page 1917 of 4116Page 1918 of 4116Page 1919 of 4116Page 1920 of 4116Page 1921 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.4 ID# 2026-749 Executive Summary Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the private roadway and drainage improvements, and acceptance of the plat dedications, for the final plat of Orange Blossom Ranch Outparcels, Application Number PL20220004173, and authorize the release of the maintenance securities in the amount of $1,238,425.20. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) grant final acceptance of the infrastructure improvements associated with the subdivision, and authorize the release of the maintenance security. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The Shoppes will maintain the roadway and drainage improvements at Orange Blossom Association, Inc. 2. The required improvements have been constructed in accordance with the Land Development Code. The Growth Management Department inspected the improvements on February 11, 2026, and recommends final acceptance. 3. A resolution for final acceptance has been prepared by staff and approved by the County Attorney's Office. The resolution is required by Section 10.02.05 C of the Land Development Code. A copy of the document is attached. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to operate an efficient and customer-focused permitting process. FISCAL IMPACT: The Shoppes will maintain the roadway and drainage improvements at Orange Blossom Association, Inc. The existing security in the amount of $1,238,425.20 will be released upon Board approval, based on the work performed and completed pursuant to the terms of the Construction and Maintenance Agreement dated July 7, 2024. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. - CLD RECOMMENDATION(S): To grant final acceptance of the roadway and drainage improvements in Orange Blossom Ranch Outparcels, Application Number PL20220004173, and authorize: 1. The Chairman to execute the attached resolution authorizing final acceptance of the improvements and plat dedications. 2. The Clerk of Courts to release the maintenance securities. PREPARED BY: Lucia S. Martin, Project Manager I, Development Review ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Resolution 3. Bond Basis 4. Plat Map Page 1922 of 4116ORANGE BLOSSOM RANCH OUTPARCELS LOCATION MAP Page 1923 of 4116 RESOLUTION NO. 26-____ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF CERTAIN ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS AND PLAT DEDICATIONS IN ORANGE BLOSSOM RANCH OUTPARCELS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 75, PAGES 52 THROUGH 53, AND RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, on May 28th, 2024, approved the plat of Orange Blossom Ranch Outparcels for recording; and WHEREAS, the Developer has constructed and maintained the roadway and drainage improvements in accordance with the approved plans and specifications as required by the Land Development Code (Collier County Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended); and WHEREAS, the Developer is requesting final acceptance of the roadway and drainage improvements and release of the maintenance security; and WHEREAS, the Development Review Division has inspected the roadway and drainage improvements, and is recommending acceptance of said facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that final acceptance is hereby granted for those roadway and drainage improvements and plat dedications in Orange Blossom Ranch Outparcels, pursuant to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 75, pages 52 through 53, and the Clerk is hereby authorized to release the maintenance security. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the roadway and drainage improvements within Orange Blossom Ranch Outparcels will be maintained privately in the future and will not be the responsibility of Collier County. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote favoring same, this ______ day of ______________, 2026. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK __________________________ By:_________________________________ Deputy Clerk Dan Kowal, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: __________________________ Courtney L. DaSilva CLD Assistant County Attorney 2/23/26 [26-EIS-05313/2003127/1]9 Page 1924 of 4116EXHIBIT "A" Performance Security Page 1927 of 4116 PERFORMANCE BOND BOND NO. 100221936 KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: that Shoppes at Orange Blossom, LLC (Name of Owner) 270 West Plant Street, Suite 210 (Address of Owner) Winter Garden, FL 34787 (Address of Owner) (Hereinafter referred to a "Owner") and Merchants National Bonding, Inc. (Name of Surety) P.O. Box 14498 (Address of Surety) Des Moines, IA 50306-3498 (Address of Surety) 515-243-8171 (Telephone Number) (hereinafter referred to as "Surety") are held and firmly bound unto Collier County, Florida, (hereinafter referred to as "County") in the total aggregate sum of OneMillionTwoHundredThlrtyElghtoosandFourHundredTwentyFlveand201100 Dollars ($1, 238,425.20 ) in lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. Owner and Surety are used for singular or plural, as the context requires. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Owner has submitted for approval by the Board of a certain subdivision plat named Orange Blossom Ranch Outparcels and that certain subdivision shall include specific improvements which are required by Collier County Ordinances and Resolutions (hereinafter "Land Development Regulations"). This obligation of the Surety shall commence on the date this Bond is executed and shall continue until the date of final acceptance by the Board of County Commissioners of the specific improvements described in the Land Development Regulations (hereinafter the "Guaranty Period"). NOW THEREFORE, if the Owner shall well, truly and faithfully perform its obligations and duties in accordance with the Land Development Regulations during the guaranty period established by the County, and the Owner shall satisfy all claims and demands incurred and shall fully indemnify and save harmless the County from and against all costs and damages which it may suffer by reason of owner's failure to do so, and shall reimburse and repay the County all outlay and expense which the County may incur in making good any default, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. PROVIDED, FURTHER, that the said Surety, for value received hereby, stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, addition or deletion to the proposed specific improvements shall in any way affect its obligation on this Bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, addition or deletion to the proposed specific improvements. PROVIDED, FURTHER, that it is expressly agreed that the Bond shall be deemed amended automatically and immediately, without formal and separate amendments hereto, so as to bind the Page 1928 of 4116EXHIBIT "B" Signing Authority Page 1932 of 4116 16A7 EXHIBIT " C" Opinion of Probable Cost Page 1934 of 4116 16A7 1 111‘., h. ENGINEERING Git>1. sie. r; al Er, r,.,..-•, FI d; r.. rrs& Lard Sjrvw i. PRELIMINARY ENGINEER' S OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ORANGE BLOSSOM OUTPARCELS 03/ 2024 ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE A. EARTHWORK 1 Clearing and Grubbing 9. 5 AC 1, 000. 00 9, 500. 00 2 Final Grading 1 LS 10, 000. 00 10, 000. 00 3 Sod 15, 750 SF 0. 25 3, 937. 50 Sub Total 23, 437. 50 B. PAVEMENT 1 Type" A" Curb 140 LF 14. 00 1, 960. 00 2 Type" F" Curb 3, 099 LF 15. 00 46,485. 00 3 Concrete Sidewalk 15, 083 SF 4. 50 67, 873. 50 4 2" Asphalt( Type SP 9. 5)( 2- 1" lifts) 4, 793 SY 10. 00 47, 930. 00 5 8" Limerock Base 4, 793 SY 9. 00 43, 137. 00 6 12" Stabilized Subgrade( Labor) 5, 751 SY 3. 00 17, 253. 00 7 Signing& Pavement Markings 1 LS 15, 000. 00 15, 000. 00 Sub Total 237, 678. 50 C. DRAINAGE 1 18" RCP 433 LF 60. 00 25, 980. 00 2 30" RCP 37 LF 105. 00 3, 885. 00 3 48" RCP 33 LF 130. 00 4, 290. 00 4 Catch Basin 8 EA 3, 500. 00 28, 000. 00 5 Throat Inlet 10 EA 4, 800. 00 48, 000. 00 Sub Total 110, 155. 00 D. POTABLE WATER CONSTRUCTION 1 10" PVC Water Main 1, 280 LF 80. 00 102, 400. 00 2 10" Gate Valve 2 EA 3, 200. 00 6, 400. 00 3 Fire Hydrant( Complete Assembly) 4 EA 4, 500. 00 18, 000. 00 4 Connect to Existing WM 2 EA 2, 500. 00 5, 000. 00 Sub Total 131, 800. 00 E. SANITARY SEWER CONSTRUCTION 1 8" PVC Sanitary Sewer( 0- 6' Cut) 289 LF 75. 00 21, 675. 00 2 8" PVC Sanitary Sewer( 6- 8' Cut) 400 LF 95. 00 38,000. 00 3 8" PVC Sanitary Sewer( 8- 10' Cut) 175 LF 110. 00 19, 250. 00 4 8" PVC Sanitary Sewer( 10- 12' Cut) 185 LF 125. 00 23, 125. 00 5 8" PVC Sanitary Sewer( 12- 14' Cut) 52 LF 140. 00 7, 280. 00 6 Manhole 4' Diameter( 0- 6') 2 EA 5, 200. 00 10, 400. 00 7 Manhole 4' Diameter( 6- 8') 1 EA 6, 500. 00 6, 500. 00 8 Manhole 4' Diameter( 10- 12') 1 EA 8, 000. 00 8, 000. 00 9 Lift Station 1 EA 300, 000. 00 300, 000. 00 10 6" DR- 11 PVC Forcemain 1, 276 LF 50. 00 63, 800. 00 11 6" DR- 14 PVC Forcemain 129 LF 60. 00 7, 740. 00 12 12" Steel Casing 70 LF 140. 00 9, 800. 00 13 Connect to Existing FM 1 EA 2, 500. 00 2, 500. 00 Sub Total 518, 070. 00 S:\ Jobs\ 87xx\ 8731\ Documents\ County\ PPL\ Orange Blossom Outparcels OPC 3- 81- 24. xlsx Page 1935 of 4116 16A7 t ENGINEERING Professional Engineers, Mariners 3s Land 5+lrveyors F. OFFSITE 1 Concrete Sidewalk 2, 157 SF 5. 60 12, 079. 20 2 Type" F' Curb 415 LF 15. 00 6, 225. 00 3 1" Asphalt( Type SP 9. 5) FL 726 SY 10. 00 7, 260. 00 4 3" Asphalt( Type SP 12. 5)( 2- 1. 5" lifts) 726 SY 18. 00 13, 068. 00 5 10" Limerock Base( compacted and primed) 726 SY 9. 00 6, 534. 00 6 12" Stabilized Subgrade 871 SY 3. 00 2, 613. 00 7 Singing and Striping 1 LS 5, 000. 00 5, 000. 00 8 Catch Basin 1 EA 3, 500. 00 3, 500. 00 9 Type 6 Throat Inlet 1 EA 6, 000. 00 6, 000. 00 10 18" RCP 146 LF 60. 00 8, 760. 00 Sub Total 71, 039. 20 G. Misc. 1 Trees 95 EA 250. 00 23, 750. 00 2 Shrubs 1, 077 EA 75. 00 80, 775. 00 3 Mulching 295 CY 50. 00 14, 750. 00 4 Irrigation 17, 700 SF 0. 25 4,425. 00 5 Single Light Pole 11 EA 750. 00 8, 250. 00 6 Double Light Pole 1 EA 1, 000. 00 1, 000. 00 Sub Total 132, 950. 00 Total 1, 225, 130. 20 10% Increase 13, 295. 00 Digitally signed GRAND TOTAL 1, 238, 425. 20 by David B Prepared By: a° ^• y Addison Printed°" YI J ' Date: 2024. 06. 12 08: 57: 04- 04' 00' D. Brent Addison, P. E. # 70611 Banks Engineering S:\ Jobs\ 87xx\ 8731\ Documents\ County\ PPL\ Orange Blossom Outparcels OPC 3- 8324. x1sx Page 1936 of 4116Page 1937 of 4116Page 1938 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.5 ID# 2026-769 Executive Summary Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water utility facilities and accept the conveyance of the potable water facilities and appurtenant utility easements for Anthony Court Utility Expansion. [PL20250010622] OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve final acceptance of the potable water utility facilities and accept the conveyance of the potable water and appurtenant utility easements, in accordance with the Collier County Utility Standards and Procedures, Ordinance No. 2004-31, as amended. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The Developer has constructed the potable water utility facilities for Anthony Court Utility Expansion, within dedicated easements to serve this development (see attached location map). The potable water utility facilities were offered for conveyance to the County, as described in Official Records (O.R.) Book 6559, Page (PG) 2981; O.R. 6559, PG 2987; O.R. 6559, PG 2995; and O.R. 6559, PG 3001, together with appurtenant Deed of Utility Easements recorded in O.R. 6557, PG 1826; O.R. 6559, PG 2967; O.R. 6559, PG 2973; and O.R. 6559, PG 2977, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. The value of these potable water utility facilities (assets) was $34,923.80. 2. Staff recorded all final acceptance documents associated with the potable water utility facilities conveyed to the County in the public records of Collier County, which were reviewed and approved by the County Attorney’s office as to form and legality. The County acquired its interest in the potable water utility facilities by Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale, recorded in O.R. 6559, PG 2981; O.R. 6559, PG 2987; O.R. 6559, PG 2995; and O.R. 6559, PG 3001 (“the Utilities Facilities Deed”). 3. A final inspection to identify defects in materials and workmanship was conducted by staff on February 13, 2026, in coordination with Public Utilities, and the facilities were found satisfactory and acceptable. 4. Staff recommends final acceptance of the subject potable water utility facilities in the amount of $34,923.80. Staff also recommends acceptance of the Utilities Facilities Deed and the facilities described therein. 5. This final acceptance is in accordance with Collier County, Ordinance No. 2004-31, as amended. 6. Staff is unaware of any issues that would serve to negate the recommendation to approve this final acceptance. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to operate an efficient and customer-focused permitting process. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this Executive Summary will have no specific financial impact. However, approval of this Executive Summary will result in the Collier County Water-Sewer District receiving title to the potable water utility facilities, which have a total gross value of $34,923.80 (no depreciation applied). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. – SAA RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve final acceptance of the potable water utility facilities and accept the conveyance of the potable water utility facilities and appurtenant utility easements, for Anthony Court Utility Expansion, PL20250010622. Page 1939 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.5 ID# 2026-769 PREPARED BY: Lucia S. Martin, Project Manager I, Development Review Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Assets Sheet 3. Verification of Final Cost 4. Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale - AC26501 Ulman 5. Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale - Anthony Court LLC 6. Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale - Audrey M Anthony 7. Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale - 2372 Anthony Court LLC 8. Deed of Utility Easement - AC26501 Ulman 9. Deed of Utility Easement - Anthony Court LLC Bonura 10. Deed of Utility Easement - Audrey M. Anthony 11. Deed of Utility Easement - 2372 Anthony Court LLC Page 1940 of 4116ANTHONY COURT UTILITY EXPANSION LOCATION MAP Page 1941 of 4116 Type text here CERTIFICATION OF CONTRIBUTORY ASSETS Tapping Sleeve 10"x6" 1 $2,634.00 $ 2,634.00 DR 14 PVC 6" 600' $ 85.00 $11,736.00 Directional Drill 6" 80' $ 42.36 $ 3,388.80 Fire Hydrant Assembly 6" 1 $6,959.00 $ 6,959.00 Water Service (single) 11/2" 2 $1,285.00 $ 2,570.00 Water Service (double) 11/2" 2 $2,570.00 $ 5,140.00 Gate Valve 6" 1 $1,250.00 $ 1,250.00 Air Release Valve n/a 1 $1,550.00 $ 1,250.00 TOTAL COST 34,923.80 Page 1942 of 4116Page 1944 of 4116Page 1945 of 4116Page 1946 of 4116Page 1947 of 4116Page 1948 of 4116Page 1949 of 4116Page 1950 of 4116Page 1951 of 4116Page 1952 of 4116Page 1953 of 4116Page 1954 of 4116Page 1955 of 4116Page 1956 of 4116Page 1957 of 4116Page 1958 of 4116Page 1959 of 4116Page 1960 of 4116Page 1961 of 4116Page 1962 of 4116Page 1963 of 4116Page 1964 of 4116Page 1965 of 4116Page 1966 of 4116Page 1967 of 4116Page 1968 of 4116Page 1969 of 4116Page 1970 of 4116Page 1971 of 4116Page 1972 of 4116Page 1973 of 4116Page 1974 of 4116Page 1975 of 4116Page 1976 of 4116Page 1977 of 4116Page 1978 of 4116Page 1979 of 4116Page 1980 of 4116Page 1981 of 4116Page 1982 of 4116Page 1983 of 4116Page 1984 of 4116Page 1985 of 4116Page 1986 of 4116Page 1987 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.6 ID# 2026-770 Executive Summary Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the potable water utility facilities and appurtenant utility easement for Chase Randall Curve. [PL20250011907] OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the potable water utility facilities, and appurtenant utility easement, in accordance with the Collier County Utility Standards and Procedures, Ordinance No. 2004-31, as amended. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The Developer has constructed the potable water and sewer utility facilities for Chase Randall Curve, within dedicated easements to serve this development (see attached location map). A portion of the potable water utility facilities was offered for conveyance to the County, as described in Official Records (O.R.) Book 6551, Page (PG) 1971, and O.R. Book 6551, PG 1978, together with appurtenant Deed of Utility Easement recorded in O.R. 6551, PG 1967, are located within the County utility easement dedicated by the Plat of Randall at Orangetree, recorded in Plat Book 74, Pages 11-15 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. The value of these potable water utility facilities (assets) was $10,585. 2. Staff recorded all final acceptance documents associated with the potable water utility facilities conveyed to the County in the public records of Collier County, which were reviewed and approved by the County Attorney’s office as to form and legality. The County acquired its interest in the potable water utility facilities by Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale recorded in O.R. Book 6551, PG 1971, and O.R. Book 6551, PG 1978 (“the Utilities Facilities Deed”). 3. A final inspection to discover defects in materials and workmanship was conducted by staff on January 22, 2026, in coordination with Public Utilities, and these facilities have been found to be satisfactory and acceptable. 4. Staff recommends final acceptance of the subject potable water utility facilities in the amount of $10,585. Staff also recommends acceptance of the Utilities Facilities Deed and the facilities described therein. 5. This final acceptance is in accordance with Collier County, Ordinance No. 2004-31, as amended. 6. Staff is unaware of any issues that would serve to negate the recommendation to approve this final acceptance. This item is consistent with the Collier Count strategic plan objective to operate an efficient and customer-focused permitting process. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this Executive Summary will have no specific financial impact. However, approval of this Executive Summary will result in the Collier County Water-Sewer District receiving title to the potable water utility facilities, which have a total gross value of $10,585 (no depreciation applied). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. – SAA RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the potable water utility facilities and appurtenant utility easement, for Chase Randall Curve, Page 1988 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.6 ID# 2026-770 PL20250011907. PREPARED BY: Lucia S. Martin, Project Manager I, Development Review Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Assets Sheet 3. Verification of Final Cost 4. Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale - JP Morgan Chase 5. Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale - Randall Curve Association 6. Deed of Utility Easement- Tract F 7. Plat Map Page 1989 of 4116CHASE RANDALL CURVE LOCATION MAP Page 1990 of 4116Page 1991 of 4116Page 1992 of 4116Page 1993 of 4116Page 1994 of 4116Page 1995 of 4116Page 1996 of 4116Page 1997 of 4116Page 1998 of 4116Page 1999 of 4116Page 2000 of 4116Page 2001 of 4116Page 2002 of 4116Page 2003 of 4116Page 2004 of 4116Page 2005 of 4116Page 2006 of 4116Page 2007 of 4116Page 2008 of 4116Page 2009 of 4116Page 2010 of 4116Page 2011 of 4116Page 2012 of 4116Page 2013 of 4116Page 2014 of 4116Page 2015 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.7 ID# 2026-774 Executive Summary This item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Commercial Excavation Permit PL20260002040 to remove 77,000 cubic yards of material from the Collier County Resource Recovery Park Industrial Planned Unit Development. [PL20260002040] OBJECTIVE: To approve Commercial Excavation Permit PL20260002040 for the removal of 77,000 cubic yards of material from the Collier County Resource Recovery Business Park Industrial Planned Unit Development (PUD). CONSIDERATIONS: Collier County, as the Applicant and property owner, has applied for a Commercial Excavation Permit for property located in the Collier County Resource Recovery Business Park Industrial Planned Unit Development (PUD), at 3959 City Gate Blvd N, in Section 25, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County. The excavation is required as part of the stormwater management system for the Collier County Sheriff's Office Forensics Buildings, currently under construction. The original Development Excavation Permit (PL20240001696) authorized the excavation of 103,702 cubic yards of fill. During construction, it was determined that not all the authorized fill was needed for the site; approximately 77,000 cubic yards of fill needed to be removed. The Code of Laws Chapter 22, Article IV, Section 22-110(b)(2) requires petitioners to file for a Commercial Excavation Permit for the removal of fill from a site. Commercial excavation permits require approval by the Board of County Commissioners (Board). Environmental Considerations Offsite hauling of fill, if done properly, will have no environmental impact. No wetlands are being preserved in accordance with this site development plan. The required preservation areas, per the PUD, have already been placed in Conservation Easements. The permittee is responsible for mitigation of impacts pursuant to the Environmental Resource Permit regulations, as authorized by either the South Florida Water Management District or the Department of Environmental Protection. EAC RECOMMENDATION On April 2, 2026, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), acting in its role as the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), voted 6–0 to send a recommendation for approval to the Board. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to operate an efficient and customer-focused permitting process. FISCAL IMPACT: The Commercial Excavation Permit application fee of $5,354.50 has been paid by the applicant. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This project has been found to be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP, including specifically the Future Land Use Element (FLUE), Transportation Element, and the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME). LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Petitioner is requesting a Commercial Excavation Permit under Section 22-110 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. The attached staff report and recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), acting as the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), are advisory only and are not binding on you. All testimony given must be under oath. The Petitioner has the burden to prove that the proposed Commercial Excavation is consistent with all the criteria set forth below, and you may question the Petitioner or staff to satisfy yourself that the necessary criteria have been satisfied under Section 22-110(d) of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Should you consider denying the Commercial Excavation Permit, to assure that your decision is not later found to be arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable, the denial must be based upon competent, substantial evidence that the proposal does not meet one or more of the criteria listed below. Criteria for Commercial Excavations Page 2016 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.7 ID# 2026-774 1. The excavation will not interfere with the natural function of any sanitary, storm, or drainage system, or natural flow way, whether public or private, so as to create flooding or public health hazards, or jeopardize the functions of the natural resources and environment of Collier County. 2. Dust or noise generated by the excavation will not cause a violation of any applicable provisions of this article. Rock crushing operations or material stockpiles that will be adjacent to any existing residential area may require separate county approval. 3. The excavation will not adversely affect groundwater levels, water quality, hydroperiod, or surface water flow ways. The County Manager or designee may require the applicant to monitor the quality of the water in the excavation and adjacent ground and surface waters. Under no circumstances shall the excavation be conducted in such a manner as to violate Collier County or applicable State of Florida water quality standards. 4. The excavation will be constructed so as to not cause an apparent safety hazard to persons or property. 5. The excavation does not conflict with the Growth Management Plan or land development regulations adopted pursuant thereto, nor does it conflict with existing zoning regulations. Special criteria and approval procedures may be necessary for projects within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern. 6. In cases where a wetland is no longer capable of performing environmental functions or providing environmental values, or in cases where it is determined that no reasonable alternative exists other than disrupting a wetland, certain alterations may be allowed, except as otherwise authorized through previous county review processes. 7. Flow of water within and through preserved wetlands shall not be impeded. 8. Appropriate sediment control devices (hay bales, silt screens, etc.) shall be employed to prevent sedimentation within the wetland pursuant to the design requirements of Section 10.02.02 of the Land Development Code. Any building site adjacent to a wetland and elevated by fill must employ the same erosion-control devices. Fill must be stabilized using sod, seed, or mulch. Should this item be denied, Florida Statutes section 125.022(3) requires the County to provide written notice to the applicant citing applicable portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial. This item is approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval. -HFAC RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve a Commercial Excavation Permit and the removal of 77,000 cubic yards of fill from the Collier County Resource Recovery Business Park, in accordance with PL20260002040. PREPARED BY: Jaime Cook, Director, Development Review Division, Growth Management Community Development Department ATTACHMENTS: 1. PL20260002040 Resource Recovery Park EX Staff Report 2. Civil Plans 3. Haul Routes 4. Environmental Data 5. Transportation Impact Statement Page 2017 of 4116 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) ACTING AS ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: April 2, 2026 SUBJECT: PETITION EX-PL20260002040: COLLIER COUNTY RESOURCE RECOVERY PARK COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION PERMIT _____________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner / Applicant: Agent: Collier County Gabriella DeLuca 3335 Tamiami Trail E #101 Rycon Construction Naples, FL 34112 112515 Metro Parkway #2 Fort Myers, FL 33966 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a Commercial Excavation Permit to allow for the off-site hauling of 77,000 cubic yards of excess fill from the Collier County Resource Recovery Business Park Industrial Planned Unit Development. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 3959 City Gate Blvd N in Section 25, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, within the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District (RMFU) North Belle Meade (NBMO) Sending Lands in the Future Land Use Element. The property is zoned Resource Recovery Business Park Industrial Planned Unit Development. (See location map on the following page) Page 2018 of 4116PURPOSE / DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant wishes to haul excess fill from an approved site development project (SDP-PL20230002379) off-site. Pursuant to Section 22-110 (b)(2) of the Collier County Code of Laws, applications for commercial excavation permits shall be reviewed by the Environmental Advisory Council for recommendation and approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Page 2019 of 4116SURROUNDING LANE USE AND ZONING: The properties surrounding the Collier County Resource Recovery Business Park IPUD are zoned as follows: North: Agriculture, within the RFMU-NBMO-Sending Lands (consisting of the Hideout Golf Club, Jenkins Way Right-of-Way, and a single-family residence). East: Agriculture, within the RFMU-NBMO-Sending Lands (consisting of a mix of vacant lots and single-family dwellings. South: Agriculture, within the RFMU-NBMO-Sending Lands (consisting of the Collier County Landfill) and the City Gate Planned Unit Development (consisting of the Paradise Coast Sports Complex and a variety of commercial uses). West: Canal and then Estates (consisting of a mix of vacant lots and single-family dwellings). A haul route is attached, showing the primary ingress and egress off City Gate Blvd N. The closest residential structure from the excavation is approximately 700 feet northeast of the lake excavation. Site Plan Exhibit provided by Stantec Engineering Page 2020 of 4116HISTORY AND PERMITS: This project is within the Resource Recovery Business Park Industrial Planned Unit Development. The Site Development Plan (SDP; PL20230002379) was approved on June 10, 2024, and the Development Excavation Permit (EX; PL20240001696) was approved on July 22, 2024. The original EX permit was intended to provide fill for the construction of the Collier County Sheriff’s Office Forensics Buildings and stormwater management for the site. However, the fill generated by the excavation of the lake exceeded the site’s needs, and the contractor is requesting to haul the fill off-site. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: This project has been found to be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP, including specifically the three elements analyzed below: 1) FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE): The subject property is consistent with the FLUE. The subject property is designated RFMU-NBMO-Sending Lands within the Future Land Use Element and on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) in the GMP. The property is zoned “Resource Recovery Business Park Industrial Planned Unit Development (IPUD). Ordinance 17-01 allows Administration Buildings and Equipment Maintenance Buildings as Permitted Uses within the IPUD. The lake provides on-site stormwater retention and treatment for the development, in accordance with Collier County Land Development Code and South Florida Water Management District regulations. 2) TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the proposed Commercial Excavation and has approved the project. The trips associated with this project are considered temporary in nature and are expected to cease with the completion of the excavation activities. Twelve (12) pm peak hour, two-way trips are expected to be generated as a result of the hauling activities. 3) CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT (CCME): Environmental Planning staff has reviewed this petition and has approved the project. The excavation activities will not affect the environmental policies within the CCME. The County has already recorded the Conservation Easements for the entirety of the IPUD. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based. Section 22-110(b)(2) of hte Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances specifies the requirements for the Commercial Excavation Permit. The specific criteria are as follows: Page 2021 of 4116A. The excavation will not interfere with the natural function of any sanitary, storm or drainage system, or natural flow way, whether public or private, so as to create flooding or public health hazards or jeopardize the functions of the natural resources and environment of Collier County. Staff Comment: Staff has reviewed the Excavation Permit and has verified that this excavation will not interfere with the natural function of any sanitary, storm or drainage system, or natural flow way, whether public or private, so as to create flooding or public health hazards or jeopardize the functions of the natural resources and environment of Collier County. B. Dust or noise generated by the excavation will not cause a violation of any applicable provisions of this article. Rock crushing operations or material stockpiles that will be adjacent to any existing residential area may require separate county approval. It is anticipated that these activities will not occur during this operation. Staff Comment: There are twenty-three (23) property owners within 300 feet of the property boundary. An attached aerial depicts the location. Pursuant to Section 22-110 (c) of the Code of Laws and Ordinance, letters have been sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the site advising them of this petition and the EAC and BCC meeting dates. Additionally, signs will be posted in the area providing notice of the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners. The applicant has provided a Dust Control Plan within the Excavation Plans to provide reasonable assurances of dust control; noise is not anticipated to exceed levels allowed by the Code of Laws and Ordinances. C. The excavation will not adversely affect groundwater levels, water quality, hydro-period, or surface water flow ways. The County Manager or designee may require the applicant to monitor the quality of the water in the excavation and adjacent ground and surface waters. Under no circumstances shall the excavation be conducted in such a manner as to violate Collier County or applicable State of Florida water quality standards. Staff Comment: Staff has determined that the excavation will not adversely affect groundwater levels, water quality, hydro-period or surface water flow ways. D. The excavation will be constructed so as to not cause an apparent safety hazard to persons or property. Staff Comment: Staff has determined the excavation follows OSHA guidelines and the County Code of Laws with respect to the excavation operation so as to not cause an apparent safety hazard to persons or property. E. The excavation does not conflict with the growth management plan or land development regulations adopted pursuant thereto, nor does it conflict with existing zoning regulations. Special criteria and approval procedures may be necessary for projects within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern. Page 2022 of 4116 Staff Comment: Staff has determined that the excavation does not conflict with the Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code regulations. The project is not located within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern. F. In cases where a wetland is no longer capable of performing environmental functions or pending environmental value or in cases where it is determined that no reasonable alternative exists other than disrupting a wetland, certain alterations may be allowed, except as otherwise authorized through previous county review processes. Staff Comment: The Environmental Data indicates the property for the proposed excavation consists entirely of upland habitat, with significant exotics present. Therefore, no wetlands will be impacted. G. Flow of water within and through preserved wetlands shall not be impeded. Staff Comment: There are no wetlands within the boundary of the proposed excavation. The required preserve, north and west of the project boundary, was recorded as a conservation easement to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in 2014 (OR 5066, Page 3442). H. Appropriate sediment control devices (hay bales, silt screens, etc.) shall be employed to prevent sedimentation within the wetland pursuant to the design requirements of Section 10.02.02 of the Land Development Code. Any building site adjacent to a wetland and elevated by filling, must employ the same erosion control devices. Fill must be stabilized using sod, seed, or mulch. Staff Comment: Staff has reviewed the Commercial Excavation Permit, and the plans indicate appropriate measures to prevent sedimentation and erosion control. This project has been found to be consistent with the requirements of Chapter 22, Article IV of the Code of Laws and Ordinances. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney’s Office has reviewed the staff report EX-PL20260002040 on March 24, 2026. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend the Collier County Planning Commission, acting as the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) forward Petition PL20260002040 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval, including the excavation permit conditions. Attachments: Civil Plans Haul Routes Environmental Data Transportation Impact Statement Excavation Permit Approval Letter Excavation Permit Renewal Letter Page 2023 of 4116 Reviewed and Approved For: Permit Issuance PL20230002379 Date: 6/10/2024 Page 2024 of 4116Haul Route A Page 2055 of 4116Haul Route B Page 2056 of 4116Haul Route C Page 2057 of 4116 Page 2058 of 4116 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS BUSINESS PARK Environmental Assessment Report August 3, 2023 Prepared for: Collier County 3959 City Gate Boulevard Naples, FL 34117 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc 1821 Victoria Avenue, Suite 1 Fort Myers, FL 33901 Project Number: 2270446701 Page 2059 of 4116 The conclusions in the Report titled Collier County GOBP are Stantec’s professional opinion, as of the time of the Report, and concerning the scope described in the Report. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the scope of work was conducted and do not take into account any subsequent changes. The Report relates solely to the specific project for which Stantec was retained and the stated purpose for which the Report was prepared. The Report is not to be used or relied on for any variation or extension of the project, or for any other project or purpose, and any unauthorized use or reliance is at the recipient’s own risk. Stantec has assumed all information received from Collier County (the “Client”) and third parties in the preparation of the Report to be correct. While Stantec has exercised a customary level of judgment or due diligence in the use of such information, Stantec assumes no responsibility for the consequences of any error or omission contained therein. This Report is intended solely for use by the Client in accordance with Stantec’s contract with the Client. While the Report may be provided by the Client to applicable authorities having jurisdiction and to other third parties in connection with the project, Stantec disclaims any legal duty based upon warranty, reliance or any other theory to any third party, and will not be liable to such third party for any damages or losses of any kind that may result. Prepared by: Signature Fernando Guillen, Jr. Printed Name Reviewed by: Signature Raymond K. Loraine Printed Name Approved by: Signature Chris Brockmeier Printed Name Page 2060 of 4116 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................1 Introduction and Project Location ................................................................................................................. 1 VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES & FLUCCS CODES ................................................................... 1 Cover and Vegetation ................................................................................................................................... 1 Site Conditions .............................................................................................................................................. 1 FLUCCS Codes ............................................................................................................................................ 1 LISTED SPECIES .......................................................................................................................2 ATTACHED FIGURES Figure 1: FLUCCS Map Figure 2: Listed Species Transect Map Figure 3: Collier County Resource Recovery Park (CCRRP) Management Plan for Listed Species Project Number: 2270446701 i Page 2061 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park (GOBP) Introduction Introduction and Project Location Stantec was requested to perform an updated environmental inspection for listed species and potential wetlands related to proposed development of the project property, which will consist of a law enforcement facility and impound lot. The Collier County Government Business Operations Park (GOBP) is a project site within the Collier County Resource Recovery Park (CCRRP) property, which has previously undergone extensive agency review and approval. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) issued Environmental Resource Permit No. 11-0285328-002 for the CCRRP project, and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) issued Permit No. SAJ-2011-00626. The project is located at 3959 City Gate Boulevard, Naples, FL 34117. The respective Parcel ID is 00289720004. The area of the project parcel totals approximately 43.5± acres. The project parcel is surrounded by medium density single-family homes to the west, an injection well and undeveloped land to the east, and undeveloped land to the north and south. Vegetative Communities & FLUCCS Codes Cover and Vegetation The cover and vegetation associations for the project were verified using 2022 aerial photography based on a scale of 1” = 200’ and on-site field investigation. The cover and vegetation assemblages were identified using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). The attached Figure 1 (FLUCCS Map) depicts the location of cover and vegetation within the property. No state or federal jurisdictional wetlands were identified during the site survey. Site Conditions The project parcel consists of disturbed land with spoil piles with overgrown exotics and forested hardwood areas on the property overgrown with invasive species. The exotic vegetation leaf litter throughout the forested area forms a dense, impenetrable ground cover. These conditions are generally unsuitable for the listed species targeted during the survey as listed below. The disturbed, open area contains vegetation and soil that are not ideal for burrowing species. FLUCCS Codes FLUCCS Code 411 E4 Pine Flatwoods (76-100% Exotics): This upland map unit consists of undeveloped land. There are pine flatwoods species present but dominated by invasive species. The existing groundcover on the subject parcels is primarily comprised of Page 2062 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park (GOBP) three-flower beggarticks (Bidens alba), earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), air potato (Dioscorea bulbifera), ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), and slash pine (Pinus elliottii). FLUCCS Code 740 E4: Disturbed Lands (76-100% Exotics): This map unit consists of a portion of the property previously cleared of vegetation. Existing vegetation consists of three-flower beggarticks, foxtail (Alopecurus), ragweed, cogon grass (Imperata cylindrica), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia). Table 2.1 FLUCCS Codes Within Project Area FLUCCS Description Acreage Code 411 E4 Pine Flatwoods (76-100% Exotics) 14.2 740 E4 29.3 Disturbed Lands (76-100% Exotics) Total Acreage 43.5 Listed Species The project site is included in the larger CCRRP project area that was the subject of an extensive wildlife assessment and conservation planning effort completed in 2012. The purpose of the Stantec’s site assessment was to confirm the current status of listed species potentially inhabiting the project area that are regulated by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Stantec environmental scientists conducted parallel pedestrian transects, no more than 20 feet apart, in the early mornings of July 7 and 11, 2023 to assure 100% coverage of the project area in accordance with the methodologies outlined by the FWC (see attached Figure 2: Listed Species Transect Map). Table 3.1 State or Federally Listed Species Summary Page 2063 of 4116Collier County Government Operations Business Park (GOBP) Common Name Scientific Name Listed Probability of Preferred Habitat FLUCFCS Status Occurrence Codes Reptiles Eastern Indigo Drymarchon FT Low Various upland and 411 Snake couperi wetland habitats, winters in xeric habitats Gopher Tortoise Gopherus ST Observed Sandhill, xeric oak scrub, 411, 740 polyphemus sand pine scrub, scrubby flatwoods, shrub and brushland Birds Bald Eagle Haliaeetus BGEPA Low Nests in tall trees along 411 leucocephalus coasts; rivers and lakes Red-cockaded Picoides borealis FE Low/Not Likely Cavities within living pine 411 Woodpecker trees (RCW) Mammals Big Cypress Fox Sciurus niger ST Not Observed Open pine flatwoods, 411 Squirrel avicennia cypress strands, broad- leaf evergreen hammocks, mangroves, and oak forest Florida Bonneted Eumops floridanus FE Low/Not Likely Roosts in forested and 411 Bat other areas with tall, mature trees or other areas with suitable roost structures; Forages over open upland and wetland habitats F=Federally Listed / S=State Listed; E=Endangered / T = Threatened / BGEPA = Protected pursuant to the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act Page 2064 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park (GOBP) Gopher Tortoise Two inactive gopher tortoise burrows were recorded and flagged in the project area. Despite most of the site having dense groundcover, the area where the two burrows were located did have suitable habitat for gopher tortoises. As the consultant in charge of gopher tortoise location and removal, Earth Tech Environmental, LLC will conduct a 100 percent survey for tortoise burrows and if necessary will obtain an FWC Gopher Tortoise permit prior to commencing construction. Gopher Tortoise Commensal – Eastern Indigo Snake No eastern indigo snakes were observed during Stantec’s site visit. There is a low possibility for eastern indigo snakes to occur on within the project site due to the lack of gopher tortoise burrows. The project will comply with the federal Standard Protection Measures for Eastern Indigo Snake as approved in the CCRRP Management Plan for Listed Species during site preparation and project construction. Bald Eagle The Audubon’s Eagle Watch Nest Locator Map and was reviewed to verify whether the project area fell within the 330-foot or 660-foot buffer imposed under federal law for recorded bald eagle nests in the area. There were no active bald eagle nests identified on the databases that were within 660 feet of the project area. The nearest nests in the region (CO06, CO056, and CO015) were between 8,500 and 13,000 feet away. However, a bald eagle call was heard faintly in the direction of CO015. No nests or bald eagles observed were observed during the field visit. Therefore, a permit is not required. Red-cockaded Woodpecker The GOBP project site, surrounding CCRRP property, and properties in the region have been extensively surveyed in the past for the presence of active cavity trees within living pine trees to locate additional breeding clusters in the North Belle Meade area. No additional RCW cavity trees have been observed on the subject property or in the region during annual surveys conducted by other consultants, most recently Boylan Environmental Consultants and Earth Tech Environmental, LLC. No active or inactive cavity trees were observed and ecologists did not observe RCW individuals foraging on the site during the July 2023 survey. The greater CCRRP property is still complying with the RCW Management Activities plan approved in the Management Plan for Listed Species for the approved CCRRP project. The GOBP is not expected to have any impacts on RCW. Big Cypress Fox Squirrel The project area was previously surveyed in 2020 by Stantec ecologists and no Big Cypress fox squirrels were observed. The recent walk through conducted in July 2023 resulted in no fox squirrel observations. The overall CCRRP project will comply with the management plan for big cypress fox squirrels outlined in the CCRRP Management Plan report. Based on the previous and current surveys, it is expected that fox squirrels will not be impacted. Page 2065 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park (GOBP) Florida Bonneted Bat The project area is within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) consultation area. A limited roost survey was previously conducted in 2020 by Stantec ecologists with no Florida bonneted bat individuals or nests were observed. The habitat observed during the July 2023 survey is of very low quality to provide potential foraging habitat due to dense sub-canopy and canopy being dominated by exotic vegetation. The project area did not contain trees with appropriate cavities or other structures to provide suitable habitat for Florida bonneted bats. After reviewing the FWS Florida Bonneted Bat Consultation Key, the GOBP project keys to a determination of may affect, but not likely to adversely affect bonneted bats. Implementation of habitat conservation measures outlined in the overall CCRRP Management Plan for Listed Species approved by Collier County may be expected to serve as best management practices to benefit Florida bonneted bats, should they occur in the region of the project. Page 2066 of 4116Collier County Government Operations Business Park (GOBP) FIGURE 1 FLUCCS Map Page 2067 of 4116 B lu e S a g e D r 25th Ave SW G a 27th Ave SW r la n d 29th Ave SW R d 31st Ave SW Golden Gate Main Canal 411E4 - Pine Flatwoods (76-100% Exotics) - 14.2ac 740E4 - Disturbed Lands (76-100% Exotics) - 29.3ac L E G E N D FLUCCS Boundary Project Boundary C:\Users\brolo\DATA\Collier County Utility - Civil - 2270446701\ProjectMap\ProjectMap.aprx Revised: 2023-07-17 By: brolo Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and Stantec Consulting Services Inc. completeness of the data. The recipient releases Collier County GOBP 0 140 280 Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and 1821 Victoria Ave $ $ agents, from any and all claims arising in any way Feet from the content or provision of the data. FLUCCS Map Ft Myers, FL 33901 (¯ Notes: 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Florida East FIPS 0901 Feet tel 239.939.1020 2. Source data: Stantec July 2023 Prepared by: B.R. 07/17/23 3. Imagery: Esri World Imagery Basemap Technical Review by: C.B. 07/17/23 Page 2068 of 4116Collier County Government Operations Business Park (GOBP) Figure 2 Listed Species Transect Map Page 2069 of 4116 B lu e S a g e D r 25th Ave SW G a 27th Ave SW r la n d 29th Ave SW R d 31st Ave SW Golden Gate Main Canal ¶[2 ¶[1 L E G E N D Gopher Tortoise Burrow ¶[ Active ¶[ Inactive BurrowID Status Position ¶[ Abandoned 1 Inactive 081° 40' 07.4" W 26° 10' 21.4" N Transect 2 Inactive 081° 40' 06.8" W 26° 10' 26.1" N Project Boundary C:\Users\brolo\DATA\Collier County Utility - Civil - 2270446701\ProjectMap\ProjectMap.aprx Revised: 2023-07-17 By: brolo Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and Stantec Consulting Services Inc. completeness of the data. The recipient releases Collier County GOBP 0 140 280 Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and 1821 Victoria Ave $ $ agents, from any and all claims arising in any way Feet from the content or provision of the data. Listed Species Map Ft Myers, FL 33901 (¯ Notes: 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Florida East FIPS 0901 Feet tel 239.939.1020 2. Source data: Stantec July 2023 Prepared by: B.R. 07/17/23 3. Imagery: Esri World Imagery Basemap Technical Review by: C.B. 07/17/23 Page 2070 of 4116Collier County Government Operations Business Park (GOBP) Figure 3 Collier County Resource Recovery Park Management Plan for Listed Species Page 2071 of 4116Collier County Government Operations Business Park Updated Listed Species Survey-Memo of Findings USACE Permit No. SAJ-2011-00626 (SP-KDS) FDEP Permit No. 11-0285328-002 USFWS Consultation Code 2012-F-0324 December 8, 2020 Introduction During a pre-application meeting with Collier County Environmental Services Department, Stantec was requested to perform an updated listed species survey on the Collier County Government Business Operations Park (CCGBOP) project site. The CCGOBP project site contains approximately 61.7 acres and is located within Section 25, Township 49 South, and Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (see Project Location Map-Exhibit A). The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) issued Environmental Resource Permit No. 11-0285328-002 for the Collier County Resource Recovery Park (CCRRP) project and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued Permit No. SAJ-2011-00626 and a Biological Opinion regarding listed species issues for the project. The Collier County Government Operations Business Park property is part of the Collier County Resource Recovery Park property. Stantec is preparing a Collier County Site Development Plan Application and the Collier County Environmental Resources department requested an updated listed species survey. Updated Listed Species Survey A copy of the Management Plan for Listed Species approved by the Collier County Environmental Resources Department as part of the Collier County Resource Recovery Park (PL20150002737) is included as Exhibit B. Also included is a copy of the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) map of the subject property, prepared by others. Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis) The red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) is protected by the U.S. Migratory Bird Treaty Act and protected as an Endangered species by the Federal Endangered Species Act. The RCW listed as a Federally designated Endangered Species by Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species Rule. The Collier County Resource Recovery Park (CCRRP), and properties within the region, have been extensively surveyed in the past for the presence of cavity trees within living pine trees in an effort to locate additional breeding clusters in the North Belle Meade. In the past, no additional RCW cavity trees have been observed on the subject property or in the region during annual surveys conducted by DeLotelle & Guthrie, as far back as 2003, and most recently by environmental scientists from Wild Folk, Ecotone Environmental, and Boylan Environmental Consultants. The results from the past RCW surveys conducted by previous consultants indicated the subject property does not contain active or inactive RCW cavity trees. Ecologists from Stantec performed meandering pedestrian transects across the site to provide near 100% coverage looking for the presence of RCW cavity trees or RCW individuals foraging on the site. Stantec ecologists observed no active or inactive cavity trees and did not observe RCW individuals foraging on the subject property during the updated listed species survey conducted in December 2020. The subject property is complying with the Red-cockaded Woodpecker Management Activities approved in the Management Plan for Listed Species for the approved CCRRP project. V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2072 of 4116Big Cypress Fox Squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia) The Big Cypress fox squirrel (BCFS) is listed as State Threatened by Florida’s State Endangered and Threatened Species Rule. The Federal Status of the BCFS is Not Listed. The subject property is dominated by earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis) and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia). BCFS prefer open ground cover to forage and most habitats on the site are infested with exotic vegetation. No BCFS nests or individuals were observed on the subject property during surveys conducted by previous environmental scientists. Ecologists from Stantec observed no BCFS individuals or potential nests during the updated listed species survey conducted in December 2020. The subject property is complying with the Big Cypress Fox Squirrel Management Activities approved in the Management Plan for Listed Species approved for the CCRRP. The limits of the preserves on the subject property have been flagged in the field prior to clearing and/or construction activities. Immediately prior to construction or clearing, the area scheduled for development will be re-surveyed for the presence of fox squirrel nests. If no nests are found, the clearing will be allowed to commence. If any nests are observed, buffers of 125 feet will be maintained around each nest tree until the nests are found to be inactive or abandoned. In order to consider the nest inactive or abandoned, it will be observed on 3 consecutive days during the morning or evening hours. If no squirrels or sign of activity are documented in the 3 days, FWC will be contacted and the tree containing the nest will be removed and the clearing of the area will commence. Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) The gopher tortoise is listed as State Designated Threatened by Florida’s State Endangered and Threatened Species Rule and the Federal Status as Regionally Threatened/Candidate. Stantec conducted an updated gopher tortoise survey and documented a total of 22 burrows (18 active and 4 potentially active) during the December 2020 updated listed species survey, see Gopher Tortoise Burrow Location Map-Exhibit C. A permit shall be prepared and submitted to FWC for the relocation of captured gopher tortoises on the site. Captured tortoises will be relocated to a gopher tortoise conservation bank or habitat approved by FWC. The Gopher Tortoise Management Activities, as part of the Management Plan for Listed Species. approved for the Collier County Resource Park will be followed. Once a relocation permit has been acquired by FWC for the property, the site will be re-surveyed for the presence of gopher tortoise no longer than 4 weeks prior to site clearing. The physical relocation of gopher tortoise will be done by a qualified FWC Gopher Tortoise Authorized Agent and will occur as follows: A flexible hose will be snaked down the burrow in order to track the direction of burrow. A backhoe will carefully excavate soil material until just before reaching the end of burrow. Excavation will then be conducted manually to ensure no injury to the tortoise. All captured tortoises will be measured and their scutes will be notched according to the prearranged numbering system per the recipient site requirements, and then placed in crates and moved to the gopher tortoise recipient area. In addition, commensal species within gopher tortoise burrows will also be safely relocated to the on- site preserve. If any Eastern indigo snakes are encountered, they will be allowed to vacate the area prior to continuation of work. Note: “tortoises will not be captured/relocated on days for which the overnight low temperature for that day and the two consecutive days thereafter is forecasted by the U.S. National Weather Service to be below 50 degrees Fahrenheit. This 3-day window of milder overnight temperatures is to allow the relocated tortoises to settle into the recipient site”. V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2073 of 4116Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon corias couperi) The Eastern indigo snake is listed as Federally Designated Threatened by the FWC and Threatened by the FWS. No Eastern indigo snakes have been observed on the subject property during surveys conducted by previous environmental scientists or by Stantec ecologists during the December 2020 updated listed species survey. There is a possibility for Eastern indigo snakes to occur on the property due to the presence of gopher tortoise burrows. The Standard Protection Measures for Eastern Indigo Snake will be followed as approved in the CCRRP Management Plan for Listed Species. The approved Eastern Indigo Snake Management Activities and Standard Protection Measures for Eastern Indigo Snake include: 1. An Eastern indigo snake protection/education plan shall be developed by the Applicant or requestor for all construction personnel to follow. The plan shall be provided to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for review and approval at least 30 days prior to any clearing activities. The educational materials for the plan may consist of a combination of posters, videos, pamphlets, and lectures (e.g., an observer trained to identify Eastern indigo snakes could use the protection/education plan to instruct personnel before any clearing activities occur). Informational signs should be posted throughout the construction site and along any proposed access road to contain the following information: a. a description of the Eastern indigo snake, its habits, and protection under Federal Law; b. instruction not to injure, harm, harass, or kill this species; c. directions to cease clearing activities and allow the Eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site on its own before resuming clearing and; d. telephone numbers of pertinent agencies to be contacted if a dead indigo snake is encountered. 2. If not currently authorized through an Incidental Take Statement in association with a Biological Opinion, only individuals who have been either authorized by a section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or by the State of Florida through the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) for such activities, are permitted to come in contact with an Eastern indigo snake. 3. An Eastern indigo snake monitoring report must be submitted to the appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Florida Field Office within 60 days of the construction or clearing phases. The report should be submitted, whether or not, Eastern indigo snakes are observed. The report should contain the following information: a. any sightings of Eastern indigo snakes and b. other obligations required by the FWC, as stipulated in the permit. Prior to clearing activities, a pre-construction meeting will be held with contractors. A sign will be posted (similar to Exhibit D) in the construction area (at the construction trailer or permit board) and each worker will be provided with an information brochure similar to Exhibit D. Florida Bonneted Bat (Eumops floridanus) The Florida bonneted bat is listed by the FWS as Endangered and is listed as Federally Designated Endangered by Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species Rule. No Florida bonneted bat individuals or cavities were observed by Stantec ecologists during the 2020 updated listed species survey. A limited roost survey was performed by Stantec ecologists. Much of the potential foraging habitat on the subject property is very low quality due to the dense sub-canopy and canopy being dominated by exotic plant V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2074 of 4116species. The canopy, sub-canopy, and groundcover is extremely thick and overgrown with a mix of very few living slash pine canopy trees, very few surviving cypress in the canopy/subcanopy, cabbage palm, slash pine saplings, and exotic vegetation including earleaf acacia, Brazilian pepper, and Caesar-weed (Urena lobata) occurring in the groundcover, subcanopy and canopy. Mitigation for potential impacts to Florida bonneted bat are being provided on the overall Collier County Resource Recovery Park (CCRRP) per the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Biological Opinion and approved through the Management Plan for Listed Species approved by Collier County for the development of the CCRRP (see Exhibit E Management Plan for Listed Species approved by the USACE Permit). Approximately 166.53 acres of forested habitat shall be preserved on the CCRRP site, which includes 68.20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 98.33 acres of mixed pine and cypress habitat. The following is a basic framework for what the onsite management for bonneted bats will include: 1. Removal of invasive, exotic vegetation. 2. Develop and implement a controlled burn program within the preserve. 3. Installation of fire lines utilizing best management practices to minimize impacts to mature trees, habitat, and wildlife populations. 4. Control hardwoods, mid story vegetation, and excessive pines in the preserve through the use of mechanical or chemical methods or through the use of prescribed fire so that the density guidelines contained in Appendix 5 of the RCW Recovery Plan (USFWS 2003) are met. An exception to the Recovery Plan will be preservation of existing snag trees as potential roost sites for the bonneted bat. 5. Preserve existing snag trees located within the preserves in order to maintain as potential roost sites for the bonneted bat. 6. Install two bat houses within the preserve as potential roost locations for bats. All of these activities will provide an immediate bonneted bat net conservation benefit and will benefit all other species outlined in this plan. See the RCW sections of the Management Plan for Listed Species for detailed descriptions of land management activities that will apply to both species. The following is a more detailed description on bonneted bat specific activities (#5 and #6): 5: Installing and maintaining at least two bat houses within the CCRRP preserve areas. At least two bat houses will be installed within the CCRRP preserves. The Applicant will consult with Fly by Night, Inc. (www.flybynightinc.org) regarding exact specifications and placement of the houses. The bat houses will be maintained according to best management practices for bats as outlined by Fly by Night, Inc. 6: Monitoring and Reporting Installed bat houses will be monitored annually for 5 years. Houses will be checked for activity and determinations will be made for any maintenance that might be necessary. Annual Property Data Reports will be submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for 5 years (in concert with RCW reporting). These reports will include details on any habitat and land management activities proposed management/maintenance activities for the following year. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) The bald eagle was removed from the FWS Endangered Species List in August 2007 and the FWC Imperiled List in 2008. However, the bald eagle is still protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The FDEP permit issued for the Collier County Resource Recovery Park contained Special Listed Species Permit Condition #19, which stated:” If an eagle nest is identified onsite during clearing or construction, the Permittee shall refer to the FWC Bald Eagle Management Guidelines found at http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/managed/bald-eagle/. V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2075 of 4116Florida Black Bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) The Florida black bear was officially removed from the list of State Designated Threatened species in 2012 and is not listed by the FWS. The FWC approved the Florida Black Bear Management Plan on December 11, 2019, which addresses complex and sometimes contentious issues surrounding human- bear interactions such as garbage and other attractants, bears injuring people, people feeding bears, and population management. The FDEP permit issued for the Collier County Resource Recovery Park contained Special Listed Species Permit Condition #20, which stated: “To avoid contact with bears, the Permittee shall install fencing around the entire project area. The FWC encourages the use of electric fencing as a suitable tool that has proven effective in deterring bears from entering the property (design recommendations attached). See FWC Design Recommendations Exhibit F. V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2076 of 4116 EXHIBITS V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2077 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2078 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2079 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2080 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2081 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2082 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2083 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2084 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2085 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2086 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2087 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2088 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2089 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2090 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2091 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2092 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2093 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2094 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2095 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2096 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2097 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2098 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2099 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2100 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2101 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2102 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2103 of 4116\ V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2104 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2105 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2106 of 4116 EXHIBIT E V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2107 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2108 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2109 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2110 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2111 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2112 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2113 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2114 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2115 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2116 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2117 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2118 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2119 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2120 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2121 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2122 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2123 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2124 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2125 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2126 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2127 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2128 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2129 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2130 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2131 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2132 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2133 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2134 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2135 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2136 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2137 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2138 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2139 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2140 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2141 of 4116 V:v:\2156\active\2270446701\environmental\05_report_deliv\deliverable\mem_of_findings_ccgomp_lss_ttt_20201208.docx Page 2142 of 4116 Traffic Impact Statement Collier County Government Operations Business Park Excavation Permit Modification Collier County, Florida 12/8/2025 Prepared for: Prepared by: Downrite Engineering Inc. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 14241 SW 143rd Court, 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Miami, FL 33186 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 786-493-0274 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee* – $500.00 Fee Collier County Transportation Review Fee* – Small Scale Study – No Fee Note – *to be collected at time of first submittal. Page 2143 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, PE FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 2 Page 2144 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Table of Contents Project Description .......................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................... 5 Project’s Zone of Influence and Traffic Distribution ....................................................................... 7 Background Traffic Volumes ......................................................................................................... 11 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions without Project ........................................................... 13 Future Roadway Conditions with Project ..................................................................................... 15 Code of Ordinance, Sec. 22-111 (a) (3) f ....................................................................................... 19 Improvement Analysis .................................................................................................................. 20 Mitigation of Impact ..................................................................................................................... 20 Appendices Appendix A: Approved Development Excavation Permit ............................................................ 21 Appendix B: SDP Amendment – Approved Permitting and Construction Plan Set - Excerpts .... 24 Appendix C: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) ................................................... 29 Appendix D: Collier County FY25 – FY29 Five Year Work Program/CIE ...................................... 37 Appendix E: Collier County 2024 AUIR Attachment G ................................................................ 39 Appendix F: South US 41 TCEA .................................................................................................... 41 Appendix G: East Central TCMA .................................................................................................. 44 Appendix H: Hurricane Evacuation Routes ................................................................................. 47 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 3 Page 2145 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Project Description The Collier County Government Operations Business Park project (hereafter “project”) is located at 3959 City Gate Boulevard N, generally situated in the northeast quadrant of the Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Interstate 75 (I-75) interchange (Exit 101), in Section 35/36, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The project location map is illustrated in Figure 1. Figure 1 – Project Location Map The subject site is currently zoned Industrial Planned Unit Development (IPUD) to accommodate the uses generally associated with various governmental operations/facilities (Collier County Resource Recovery Business IPUD – Ordinance No. 17-01). Stormwater treatment facility excavation operations are currently approved for the subject site – Excavation Permit No. PL20240001696 (reference Appendix A). The developer proposes to modify the excavation permit to allow the excavated material to be removed from the project site. The purpose of this traffic report is to fulfill the requirements set forth in the Collier County Code of Ordinances Section 22-111 (a) (3) f, for projects seeking to remove the excavated material from the project site. The following Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) will examine the anticipated trip generation of the proposed operation and evaluate the impact the additional trips will have on the surrounding roadway network. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 4 Page 2146 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 This traffic report is in agreement with the latest adopted Collier County Traffic Impact Study Guidelines and Procedures. The subject site provides a direct connection to City Gate Boulevard N which was approved as part of the Excavation Permit No. PL20240001696 (reference Appendix A) and Site Development Plan Amendment, Permitting and Construction Plan Set PL20240001696, dated 7/22/2024 (for relevant excerpts refer to Appendix B). No changes to the existing access are proposed as part of this application. Upon approval, the proposed excavation will be permitted for the removal of approximately 110,000 cubic yards (cy) of overburden material from the subject site. The hauling activities will have a maximum lifespan of 6 months and will be operating from 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM (10-hour workday), Monday through Friday. The excavated material will be hauled to the following destinations: - Location #1: The Renaissance Hall at Old Course – west of Collier Boulevard and south of Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Collier County (+/- 40,000cy); - Location #2: Home Depot – 11800 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Collier County (+/- 15,000cy); - Location #3: 5175 Maple Ln, Naples, Collier County (+/- 33,000cy); - Location #4: Gator Circle at 37th St, Cape Coral, Lee County (+/- 15,000cy); - Location #5: Entrada, Cape Coral, Lee County (+/- 7,000cy). The study analysis year is 2026. A methodology memorandum was transmitted via email to the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on November 26, 2025 (reference Appendix C). Trip Generation Excavation activities are allowed in agreement with the approved Excavation Permit (PL20240001696). This report conservatively assumes that the trip generation for the truck traffic generated by the proposed hauling operations is in addition to the allowed truck traffic associated with the excavation activities. Approximate volume to be hauled = 110,000 cy. The hauling trucks expected to remove the material from the property will be 18 cy. Hauling activities lifespan = 6 months or 20 x 6 = 120 workdays. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 5 Page 2147 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 No reductions for internal capture or pass-by trips have been considered in this report. The average daily two-way trips are based on the number of trucks needed to remove the maximum amount of fill. A 10% adjustment factor is applied to account for any visitor or vendor trips to the site and any potential truck traffic pattern fluctuation. The hauling operation is expected to generate 112 daily two-way truck trips Unadjusted – 2 trip end x 110,000cy/(18cy/truck x 120 workdays) = 102 daily two-way trips Adjustment Factor – 110% x 102 = 112 daily two-way trips Over a 10-hour workday, the project will generate 12 peak hour two-way trips Unadjusted – 102 daily traffic/10 workday hours =10.2 rounded to 10 peak hour two-way trips Adjustment factor – 112 daily traffic/10 workday hours =11.2 rounded to 12 peak hour two-way trips Directional distribution assumption: 50% ingress; 50% egress or 6 enter and 6 exit trips for both the AM and PM peak hours. The project trip generation summary is shown in Table 1. Table 1 – Trip Generation Daily Two- AM Peak Hour* PM Peak Hour* Land Use Factor Way Volume Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Hauling Operations 102 5 5 10 5 5 10 10% Adjustment 1.10 112 6 6 12 6 6 12 Factor Note(s): *Peak Hour Volume = Daily Traffic/ 10 hours. Directional distribution assumption is 50%/50% In agreement with the Collier County Traffic Impact Study Guidelines and Procedures, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net new total trips) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for the adjacent roadway network is PM peak hour. The potential impacts to the roadway segments within the project’s zone of influence are evaluated based on the peak hour, peak direction traffic conditions. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 6 Page 2148 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Project’s Zone of Influence and Traffic Distribution The zone of influence associated with hauling activities is defined in the Collier County Code of Ordinances Section 22-111 (a) (3) f 1 as “the distance from the site that traffic is either generated or attracted to”. Based on the proposed hauling destinations the following truck routes are considered in this report: - Truck Route A – from Project site to Location #1: The Renaissance Hall at Old Course – west of Collier Boulevard and south of Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Collier County (+/- 40,000cy); - Truck Route B – from Project site to Location #2: Home Depot – 11800 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Collier County (+/- 15,000cy) and Location #3: 5175 Maple Ln, Naples, Collier County (+/- 33,000cy); - Truck Route C – from Project site to Location #4: Gator Circle at 37th St, Cape Coral, Lee County (+/- 15,000cy) and Location #5: Entrada, Cape Coral, Lee County (+/- 7,000cy). The proposed truck routes are depicted in Figures 2A, 2B and 2C. Figure 2A – Proposed Truck Route A Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 7 Page 2149 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Figure 2B – Proposed Truck Route B Figure 2C – Proposed Truck Route C Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 8 Page 2150 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 The traffic generated by the proposed project is assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and engineering judgement. The truck trips are distributed and assigned to each haul route that the trucks would use to access the site. Figures 3A, 3B and 3C illustrate the assignment of the projected truck trips based on the PM peak hour, peak direction. A distribution percentage of 100% of the average project peak hour, peak direction trips (Table 1) is utilized for the road segments within the project’s zone of influence. Figure 3A –Truck Route A Trip Distribution Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 9 Page 2151 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Figure 3B – Truck Route B Trip Distribution Figure 3C – Truck Route C Trip Distribution Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 10 Page 2152 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Background Traffic Volumes Tables 2A, 2B and 2C contain the road segments within the project’s zone of influence associated with each truck route, on which the project impact was reviewed. The 2024 background traffic volumes are from the 2024 AUIR. Future 2026 background traffic volumes are estimated using the average annual growth rate for the segment, as utilized in the 2024 AUIR for future volume estimating. Consistent with the AUIR, another way to derive the future background traffic volume is to use the 2024 background traffic volume plus the trip bank volume. The higher of the two results is used as the future background traffic volume. Table 2A – Truck Route A – 2026 Future Background Traffic without Project 2024 AUIR AUIR 2026 Pk Hr, Pk 2026 Pk Hr, Pk CC Pk Hr, Pk Dir Annual Dir Background Dir Background Roadway AUIR Roadway Background Percent Growth Traffic Volume Trip Traffic Volume Link Link Link Location Traffic Growth Factor w/out Project Bank w/out Project ID # Volume Rate (trips/hr) (trips/hr) (trips/hr) (%/yr)(1) Growth Factor(2) Trip Bank(3) City Gate Project to N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Blvd N(4) Collier Blvd City Gate Blvd Collier N to Golden 32.3 1,920 2.07% 1.0418 2,000 210 2,130 Blvd Gate Main Canal Golden Gate Collier 32.2 Main Canal to 1,920 2.07% 1.0418 2,000 58 1,978 Blvd Location #1(5) Note(s): The projected 2026 Peak Hour, Peak Direction background traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which Is underlined and bold as applicable. 1) Annual Growth Rate – estimated from 2008 - 2024 or 2% minimum. 2) Growth Factor = (1 + Annual Growth Rate) ^2. 2026 Projected Volume = 2024 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. 3) 2026 Projected Volume = 2024 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. 4) Not a monitored Collier County facility. 5) Location #1: The Renaissance Hall at Old Course – west of Collier Boulevard and south of Golden Gate Parkway. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 11 Page 2153 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Table 2B – Truck Route B – 2026 Future Background Traffic without Project 2024 AUIR AUIR 2026 Pk Hr, Pk 2026 Pk Hr, Pk CC Pk Hr, Pk Dir Annual Dir Background Dir Background Roadway AUIR Roadway Link Background Percent Growth Traffic Volume Trip Traffic Volume Link Link Location Traffic Growth Factor w/out Project Bank w/out Project ID # Volume Rate (trips/hr) (trips/hr) (trips/hr) (%/yr)(1) Growth Factor(2) Trip Bank(3) City Gate Project to N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Blvd N(4) Collier Blvd Collier City Gate Blvd 32.3 1,920 2.07% 1.0418 2,000 210 2,130 Blvd N to I-75 Collier I-75 to Davis 33.0 3,260 2.00% 1.0404 3,392 181 3,441 Blvd Blvd Davis Blvd to Collier 34.0 Rattlesnake 2,500 2.00% 1.0404 2,601 749 3,249 Blvd Hammock Rd Rattlesnake Collier Hammock Rd 35.0 2,140 2.00% 1.0404 2,226 384 2,524 Blvd to Tamiami Trail E Tamiami Collier Blvd to 94.0 1,570 2.00% 1.0404 1,633 243 1,813 Trail Triangle Blvd Triangle Blvd Tamiami 93.0 to Location 2,370 2.00% 1.0404 2,466 382 2,752 Trail #2(5) Tamiami Location #2(5) 93.0 2,370 2.00% 1.0404 2,466 382 2,752 Trail to Cypress Ln Cypress Tamiami Trail N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ln(4) to Tamiami Ct Tamiami Cypress Ln to N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ct(4) Maple Ln Maple Tamiami Ct to N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ln(4) Location #3(6) Note(s): The projected 2026 Peak Hour, Peak Direction background traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which Is underlined and bold as applicable. 1) Annual Growth Rate – estimated from 2008 - 2024 or 2% minimum. 2) Growth Factor = (1 + Annual Growth Rate) ^2. 2026 Projected Volume = 2024 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. 3) 2026 Projected Volume = 2024 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. 4) Not a monitored Collier County facility. 5) Location #2: Home Depot – 11800 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Collier County (+/- 15,000cy) 6)Location #3: 5175 Maple Ln, Naples, Collier County (+/- 33,000cy) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 12 Page 2154 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Table 2C – Truck Route C – 2026 Future Background Traffic without Project 2024 AUIR AUIR 2026 Pk Hr, Pk 2026 Pk Hr, Pk CC Pk Hr, Pk Dir Annual Dir Background Dir Background Roadway AUIR Roadway Background Percent Growth Traffic Volume Trip Traffic Volume Link Link Link Location Traffic Growth Factor w/out Project Bank w/out Project ID # Volume Rate (trips/hr) (trips/hr) (trips/hr) (%/yr)(1) Growth Factor(2) Trip Bank(3) City Gate Project to N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Blvd N(4) Collier Blvd Collier City Gate 32.3 1,920 2.07% 1.0418 2,000 210 2,130 Blvd Blvd N to I-75 Collier Blvd to County I-75(4) N/A Line and N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Locations #4(5) and #5(6) Note(s): The projected 2026 Peak Hour, Peak Direction background traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which Is underlined and bold as applicable. 1) Annual Growth Rate – estimated from 2008 - 2024 or 2% minimum. 2) Growth Factor = (1 + Annual Growth Rate) ^2. 2026 Projected Volume = 2024 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. 3) 2026 Projected Volume = 2024 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. 4) Not a monitored Collier County facility. 5) Location #4: Gator Circle at 37th St, Cape Coral, Lee County (+/- 15,000cy) 6) Location #5: Entrada, Cape Coral, Lee County (+/- 7,000cy) Existing and Future Roadway Conditions without Project The existing roadway conditions and minimum standard service volumes are from the 2024 AUIR. In agreement with the traffic data provided in 2024 AUIR Attachment F – Roadway Segments, one roadway segment located within the project’s area of influence currently exceeds the adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard: - Collier Blvd. segment from Davis Blvd. to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. (County ID# 34.0). Consistent with the Collier County’s Traffic Impact Study Guidelines and Procedures, roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five- year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement program (CIP) are considered committed improvements. The adopted FY2025 – FY2029 Five Year Work Program/CIE for Collier County is depicted in Appendix D. With potential to the project’s zone of influence, the FY2025 – FY2029 Five Year Work Program/CIE depicts the following committed road improvement: - Collier Blvd. segment from Green Blvd. to Golden Gate Canal (County ID# 32.1 and ID #32.2). Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 13 Page 2155 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Tables 3A, 3B and 3C contain the existing and future conditions for the County monitored road segments within the project’s zone of influence associated with each truck route, on which the project impact was reviewed. Table 3A – Truck Route A – Existing and Future Roadway Conditions 2024 2024 Pk 2026 2026 2026 Pk AUIR 2024 Min. Roadway Roadway Link Roadway Hr, Pk Dir Roadway Min. Hr, Pk Dir Link Standard Link Location Configura Service Configura Standard Service ID # LOS tion Volume tion LOS Volume City Gate Blvd N to Collier 32.3 Golden Gate Main 8D E 3,600 8D E 3,600 Blvd Canal Golden Gate Main Collier 32.2 Canal to Location 4D D 2,300 6D(2) E(2) 3,000(2) Blvd #1(1) Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D = 4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively. LOS = Level of Service. 1) Location #1: The Renaissance Hall at Old Course – west of Collier Boulevard and south of Golden Gate Parkway 2) Future roadway characteristics are consistent with AUIR link #31.2, Collier Blvd. from Green Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. Table 3B – Truck Route B – Existing and Future Roadway Conditions 2024 2024 2024 Pk 2026 2026 2026 Pk AUIR Roadway Roadway Link Roadway Min. Hr, Pk Dir Roadway Min. Hr, Pk Dir Link Link Location Configura Standard Service Configura Standard Service ID # tion LOS Volume tion LOS Volume Collier City Gate Blvd N to I- 32.3 8D E 3,600 8D E 3,600 Blvd 75 Collier 33.0 I-75 to Davis Blvd 8D E 3,600 8D E 3,600 Blvd Davis Blvd to Collier 34.0 Rattlesnake 6D E 3,000 6D E 3,000 Blvd Hammock Rd Rattlesnake Collier 35.0 Hammock Rd to 6D E 3,200 6D E 3,200 Blvd Tamiami Trail Tamiami Collier Blvd to 94.0 6D E 3,000 6D E 3,000 Trail E Triangle Blvd Tamiami Triangle Blvd to 93.0 6D E 3,000 6D E 3,000 Trail Cypress Ln Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D = 4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively. LOS = Level of Service. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 14 Page 2156 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Table 3C – Truck Route C – Existing and Future Roadway Conditions 2024 2024 Pk 2026 2026 2026 Pk AUIR 2024 Min. Roadway Roadway Link Roadway Hr, Pk Dir Roadway Min. Hr, Pk Dir Link Standard Link Location Configura Service Configura Standard Service ID # LOS tion Volume tion LOS Volume Collier City Gate Blvd N to 32.3 8D E 3,600 8D E 3,600 Blvd I-75 Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D = 4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively. LOS = Level of Service. Future Roadway Conditions with Project A roadway concurrency analysis was performed for the study area roadway segments following the guidance provided in the Collier County Traffic Impact Study Guidelines and Procedures and using the information provided in the 2024 AUIR. The roadway segments were evaluated to determine if the adopted LOS standard is expected to be exceeded with the inclusion of the project trips. Tables 4A, 4B and 4C add the project traffic volumes developed in Table 1 to the 2026 background traffic volumes developed in Tables 2A, 2B and 2C. Project Traffic Impacts – Truck Route A Table 4A – Truck Route A – 2026 Future Roadway Total Traffic Conditions 2026 Pk Roadway Pk Min LOS Min LOS 2026 Pk % Service AUIR Hr, Pk Hr, Pk Dir – exceeded exceeded Roadway Roadway Link Hr, Pk Dir Volume Link Dir Project without with Link Location Total Impact by ID # Service Traffic Project? Project? Traffic(2) Project Volume Added(1) Yes/No Yes/No City Gate Blvd N to Collier 32.3 Golden Gate Main 3,600 NB – 6 2,136 0.2% No No Blvd Canal Golden Gate Main Collier 32.2 Canal to Location 3,000 NB – 6 2,006 0.2% No No Blvd #1(3) Note(s): 1) Background traffic peak direction – 2024 AUIR; project traffic added – Table 1. 2) 2026 Projected Volume = 2026 background (Tables 2A, 2B and 2C) + project traffic added. 3) Location #1: The Renaissance Hall at Old Course – west of Collier Boulevard and south of Golden Gate Parkway Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 15 Page 2157 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 The results of the analysis show the capacity of the study area roadway segments does not exceed the available capacity at the adopted LOS standard under the 2026 future traffic peak hour, peak direction conditions, with or without the project traffic added. In addition, the projected traffic impact is de minimis on all analyzed roadway segments. Project Traffic Impacts – Truck Route B Table 4B – Truck Route B – 2026 Future Roadway Total Traffic Conditions 2026 Pk Roadway Pk Min LOS Min LOS 2026 Pk % Service AUIR Hr, Pk Hr, Pk Dir – exceeded exceeded Roadway Roadway Link Hr, Pk Dir Volume Link Dir Project without with Link Location Total Impact by ID # Service Traffic Project? Project? Traffic(2) Project Volume Added(1) Yes/No Yes/No Collier City Gate Blvd N to 32.3 3,600 SB – 6 2,136 0.2% No No Blvd I-75 Collier 33.0 I-75 to Davis Blvd 3,600 SB - 6 3,447 0.2% No No Blvd Davis Blvd to Collier 34.0 Rattlesnake 3,000 SB – 6 3,255 0.2% Yes Yes Blvd Hammock Rd Rattlesnake Collier 35.0 Hammock Rd to 3,200 SB – 6 2,530 0.2% No No Blvd Tamiami Trail Tamiami Collier Blvd to 94.0 3,000 EB – 6 1,819 0.2% No No Trail Triangle Blvd Tamiami Triangle Blvd to 93.0 3,000 EB – 6 2,758 0.2% No No Trail Location #2(3) Tamiami Location #2(3) to 93.0 3,000 EB – 6 2,758 0.2% No No Trail Cypress Ln Note(s): 1) Background traffic peak direction – 2024 AUIR; project traffic added – Table 1. 2) 2026 Projected Volume = 2026 background (Tables 2A, 2B and 2C) + project traffic added. 3) Location #2: Home Depot – 11800 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Collier County (+/- 15,000cy) As shown in Table 4B, the following study area roadway segment is projected to exceed the available capacity at the adopted LOS standard under the 2026 future traffic peak hour, peak direction conditions, with or without the project traffic added. - Collier Blvd. segment from Davis Blvd. to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. (County ID# 34.0). Regulation of growth along deficient roadway segment(s) is presented in Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 6.02.02.H: “Except as provided for below in Transportation concurrency Exemption Areas (TCEA) and Transportation concurrency Management Areas (TCMA), no trips shall be allotted under a Certificate of Public Facility Adequacy for development that Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 16 Page 2158 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 directly accesses and generates more than a de minimis impact (de minimis impact is defined as traffic impact of 1 percent or less of the peak hour service volume) on the deficient roadway segment(s).” The projected traffic impact is de minimis on all analyzed roadway segments. As illustrated in the 2024 AUIR Attachment G – Update Programmed Improvements and Deficiencies Report (Appendix E), the approved solution to the existing transportation deficiency on Collier Blvd. segment ID# 34.0 is to continue to monitor and pursue a study of the Wilson Benfield Corridor Alignment which is a parallel facility to Collier Blvd. (FY2029). Project Traffic Impacts – Truck Route C Table 4C – Truck Route C – 2026 Future Roadway Total Traffic Conditions 2026 Pk Roadway Pk Min LOS Min LOS 2026 Pk % Service AUIR Hr, Pk Hr, Pk Dir – exceeded exceeded Roadway Roadway Link Hr, Pk Dir Volume Link Dir Project without with Link Location Total Impact by ID # Service Traffic Project? Project? Traffic(2) Project Volume Added(1) Yes/No Yes/No Collier City Gate Blvd N to 32.3 3,600 NB – 6 2,136 0.2% No No Blvd I-75 Note(s): 1) Background traffic peak direction – 2024 AUIR; project traffic added – Table 1. 2) 2026 Projected Volume = 2026 background (Tables 2A, 2B and 2C) + project traffic added. Table 4C indicates the capacity of the study area roadway segments does not exceed the available capacity at the adopted LOS standard under the 2026 future traffic peak hour, peak direction conditions, with or without the project traffic added. In addition, the projected traffic impact is de minimis. South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area Pursuant to Policy 5.5 of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), the South U.S. 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) was designated. As illustrated in Policy 5.4 of the Transportation Element of the GMP, development located within the South U.S. 41 TCEA (Maps TR-4 and TR-4.1 reference Appendix F) shall be exempt from transportation concurrency requirements, so long as impacts to the transportation system are mitigated using the procedures below: - Any proposed development within the concurrency exception area that would reduce the LOS on Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) roadways within the County by 5% or more of the capacity at the adopted LOS standard shall meet the transportation concurrency requirements. - Any proposed development within the concurrency exception area that would reduce the LOS on SIS roadways within the County by less than 5% of the capacity at the adopted LOS standard and meets the requirements identified in Policy 5.5 are exempt from the transportation requirements. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 17 Page 2159 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 The proposed project is not located within the designated South US 41 TCEA. The following road segments located within the project’s zone of influence for Truck Route B are part of the South US 41 TCEA: - Collier Blvd. segment from Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. to Tamiami Trail (County ID# 35.0). - Tamiami Trail segment from Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. to Triangle Blvd. (County ID# 93.0). - Tamiami Trail segment from Triangle Blvd. to Collier Blvd. (County ID# 94.0). The subject project is not requesting an exception from transportation concurrency as the impacted segments within the South US 41 TCEA meet the Collier County transportation concurrency requirements (Truck Route B, refer to Table 4B). East Central Transportation Concurrency Management Area To encourage compact urban development, Collier County designated two Transportation Concurrency Management Areas (TCMAs): Norwest TCMA and East Central TCMA. The TCMA’s designations are provided in Policy 5.6 of the Transportation Element – Collier County GMP. The proposed development is not situated within the County’s designated TCMAs. The following analyzed road segments located within the project’s zone of influence are part of the East Central TCMA: - Collier Blvd. segment from Golden Gate Pkwy to Golden Gate Main Canal (County ID# 32.2). - Collier Blvd. segment from Golden Gate Main Canal to I-75 (County ID# 32.3). - Collier Blvd. segment from I-75 to Davis Blvd. (County ID# 33.0). In agreement with Policy 5.7 of the Transportation Element, the TCMA concurrency is measured on a system-wide basis such that each TCMA shall maintain 85% of its lane miles at or above the LOS standards. Based on the information contained in 2024 AUIR, the East Central TCMA percent lane miles meeting standard is 86.3%. The East Central TCMA map and the associated percent lanes miles meeting standard in the year 2024 are illustrated in Appendix G: East Central TCMA. As illustrated in the Policy 5.8, transportation mitigation may be required when the proposed development will impact either a constrained roadway link and/or a deficient roadway link within a TCMA as determined in the most current Annual Update and Inventory Report, by more than a de minimis amount (more than 1% of the maximum service volume at the adopted LOS), yet continue to maintain the established percentage of lanes miles indicated in Policy 5.7 of the GMP Transportation Element. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 18 Page 2160 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 The subject project is not requesting an exception from transportation concurrency as the impacted segments within the East Central TCMA meet the Collier County transportation concurrency requirements (Truck Routes A, B and C; refer to Tables 4A, 4B and 4C). In addition, the projected traffic impact is de minimis on all analyzed roadway segments. As illustrated in Policy 5.8(d) – Transportation Element, no impact will be de minimis if it exceeds the adopted LOS standard of any affected designated hurricane evacuation routes within a TCMA. Any impact to a hurricane evacuation route within a TCMA may require a proportionate share congestion mitigation payment provided the remaining LOS requirements of the TCMA are maintained. Within the East Central TCMA, Tamiami Trail and Colier Boulevard are designated hurricane evacuation routes and are projected to perform within the adopted LOS standard. The Collier County hurricane evacuation routes are illustrated in GMP Transportation Element Map TR-7 (Exhibit H). Code of Ordinance Sec. 22-111 (a) (3) f The Code of Ordinance Sec. 22-111 (a) (3) f was referenced to address the requirements specifically related to the removal of excavated material from the project site. 1. Identify the project's zone of influence, that is, the distance from the site that traffic is either generated from or attracted to. This information was detailed in the section Project’s Zone of Influence and Traffic Distribution and Figures 2A, 2B and 2C of this report. 2. Address the existing condition of the road system within the excavation project's zone of influence. This information was detailed in the section Existing and Future Roadway Conditions without Project of this report. 3. Address the capacity of the road system within the zone of influence to handle existing traffic, normal growth in the traffic, and additional traffic generated from the excavation project in consideration of the time frame of the traffic generation and the wheel loadings of such traffic. The project traffic impacts and the capacity of each roadway segment within the project’s zone of influence was evaluated in the section Future Roadway Conditions with Project of this report. The projected traffic impact is de minimis on all analyzed roadway segments. Tamiami Trail and Collier Blvd. are major arterial roadways in Collier County. They were designed and constructed pursuant to County and State standards to accommodate the heavy vehicle demand this hauling operation will place on these roadways. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 19 Page 2161 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 4. Address the site-specific road work within the zone of influence which is necessary prior to the start of the project and which will be necessary during the project so as to assure that premature road failure and/or severe road damage will not occur. There are no identified road improvements that will be required by this project to accommodate the truck demand anticipated from the haul operations. 5. Road work to be undertaken by the applicant to mitigate adverse road impacts along with confirmation of the security, if applicable, to be provided by the applicant to assure completion of the identified road work. Any and all security and/or performance guarantee required in excess of $100,000.00 as set forth in the road use analysis shall be secured or guaranteed prior to Excavation permit issuance. If necessary, the developer will conduct a review of the existing roadway infrastructure with Collier County Road Maintenance to determine any concerns due to hauling of excavation material. This review will identify any areas of concern. Criteria to be considered include: current pavement rating; field review survey; current scheduled repairs; repairs to reduce the likelihood of accelerated damage under the proposed haul trips. Improvement Analysis Based on the results illustrated within this traffic analysis, the proposed excavation permit modification to allow the hauling of overburden material off-site will not have an adverse impact to the surrounding roadway system within the project’s zone of influence. An adverse impact to a roadway segment is considered when the future 2026 background traffic meets the adopted LOS standard and the segment becomes deficient with the addition of the project traffic. The Collier Blvd. segment from Davis Blvd. to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. (County ID# 34.0) is projected to exceed the available capacity at the adopted LOS standard under the 2026 future background traffic peak hour, peak direction conditions. As illustrated in the 2024 AUIR Attachment G – Update Programmed Improvements and Deficiencies Report, the approved solution to the existing transportation deficiency on Collier Blvd. segment ID# 34.0 is to continue to monitor and pursue a study of the Wilson Benfield Corridor Alignment which is a parallel facility to Collier Blvd. (FY2029). The projected traffic impact is de minimis on all analyzed roadway segments. The proposed hauling activities will be allowed for a limited duration (up to 6 months). Per Collier County Land Development Code Sec. 10.02.07 B.5, temporary uses are exempt from transportation concurrency. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes paying the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee, as applicable. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 20 Page 2162 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Appendix A: Approved Development Excavation Permit Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 21 Page 2163 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 22 Page 2164 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 23 Page 2165 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Appendix B: SDP Amendment – Approved Permitting and Construction Plan Set – Excerpts Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 24 Page 2166 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 25 Page 2167 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 26 Page 2168 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 27 Page 2169 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 28 Page 2170 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Appendix C: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 29 Page 2171 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 30 Page 2172 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 31 Page 2173 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 32 Page 2174 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 33 Page 2175 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 34 Page 2176 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 35 Page 2177 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 36 Page 2178 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Appendix D: Collier County FY25 – FY29 Five Year Work Program/CIE Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 37 Page 2179 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 38 Page 2180 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Appendix E: Collier County 2024 AUIR Attachment G Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 39 Page 2181 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 40 Page 2182 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Appendix F: South US 41 TCEA Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 41 Page 2183 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 42 Page 2184 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 43 Page 2185 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Appendix G: East Central TCMA Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 44 Page 2186 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 45 Page 2187 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 46 Page 2188 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Appendix H: Hurricane Evacuation Routes Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 47 Page 2189 of 4116 Collier County Government Operations Business Park – Excavation Permit Modifications – TIS – December 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 48 Page 2190 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.8 ID# 2026-734 Executive Summary Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program with Luis and Cinthia Alonso for a 2.73-acre parcel at a cost of $76,440 for a total cost not to exceed $78,230, inclusive of closing costs. OBJECTIVE: To purchase one parcel totaling 2.73 acres within the Conservation Collier Panther Walk Preserve Multi- Parcel Project. CONSIDERATIONS: On June 25, 2024, Agenda Item No. 16.A.13., the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approved a Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (CCLAAC) recommended Cycle 12B Active Acquisition List (AAL) and directed staff to actively pursue acquisition of the properties under the Program. The Alonso parcel, within the Panther Walk Preserve multi-parcel project, was approved as an A-list property on the Cycle 12B AAL. Panther Walk Preserve: Although Conservation Collier acquired the original 4.6 acres of Panther Walk Preserve in 2007 and 2008 and began purchasing several more parcels near the preserve in 2022, the Panther Walk Preserve Multi- Parcel Project was not established until February 28, 2023, with Board approval of the Conservation Collier Cycle 11B AAL, Agenda Item No. 11C. To date, the Program has acquired 20% of the 426.1-acre project area, for a total of 84.9 acres. The Panther Walk Preserve Multi-parcel Project is located within the northern reaches of the Horsepen Strand. Strands are a type of forested swamp that forms slow-flowing, linear drainage channels across flatlands with high water tables. The Horsepen Strand begins at Immokalee Rd in the Northern Golden Gate Estates and flows south into the North Belle Meade area north of I-75. These parcels significantly protect water resources and provide the Surficial Aquifer's recharge capacity, as noted by Collier County Stormwater Management staff during the establishment of this multi-parcel project. Properties in this area are subject to frequent flooding. These parcels provide critical flood water attenuation as more land is cleared and filled for development. Wetland vegetation on these parcels slows water flow and filters out nutrients and sediments before they reach the canals leading to the Gulf. The project area contains protected species of plants, including hand fern and four listed bromeliads in the Tillandsia genus. The parcels provide high-quality habitat for wetland-dependent species, including the Florida black bear, listed wading birds, and the Florida panther. The low-density nature of development in this neighborhood allows wildlife to move relatively unimpeded across the landscape and north into the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed. A protected corridor is necessary to preserve wildlife's freedom of movement through this rapidly developing landscape. Parcels within the project area protect the highly diverse Horsepen Strand, expand the Panther Walk Preserve, and provide the backbone for a potential north-south corridor and necessary refugia for urban wildlife. In February 2026, staff contracted with an independent, state-certified general real estate appraisal firm to appraise all parcels within the Panther Walk Project area. The appraisal provided an average appraised value of $28,000 per acre for parcels between 1.14 and 2.73 acres, based on comparable sales from wetland parcels, not upland parcels. The cost to obtain the appraisal was $2,000. Alonso - Parcel 38844560008, north of 64th Ave NE, west of Everglades Blvd. N. • 2.73 acres of vacant, unimproved land consisting of cypress with hydric mapped soils. • The negotiated purchase price of $76,440 was agreed upon on March 6, 2026. The purchase price is 100% of the appraised value. • The Alonso parcel is located within the Panther Walk Preserve project area north of 58th Ave and will be acquired as a fee simple purchase at full appraised value; therefore, it meets the qualifications for Florida Wildlife Corridor Foundation (FWFC) funding assistance under the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Collier County and FWCF, as amended (April 23, 2024, Agenda Item 16A1). FWFC will contribute one-half of the contract price of the parcel, or $38,220, toward its acquisition. Page 2191 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.8 ID# 2026-734 This acquisition consistent with the Conservation Collier Purchasing Policy, Resolution No. 2023-10, which allows offer amounts to be determined by staff but no more than appraised value. Pursuant to Ordinance 2002-63, as amended, Section 12(6), Project Design Reports ("PDRs" s) for these properties are provided herewith. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objectives to preserve and enhance the character of our community and to protect our natural resources. FISCAL IMPACT: The funds for this land acquisition will be withdrawn from the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund (1061). Per the Collier County/FWCF MOU, as amended, FWCF will wire $38,220 to the Conservation Collier Trust Fund (1061) after the Alonso Agreement is approved by the Board and after the FWCF has received documentation demonstrating that all MOU conditions have been met in preparation for the closing. The property identified herein is comprised of a not-to-exceed acquisition cost of $78,230 as follows: Seller Name Acres Appraised Purchase Closing Costs (title Total Purchase Initial 5 Yr. Long-term Value Price commitment, title policy, Price Maint Costs Annual Maint closing fee, recording Costs fees) Alonso 2.73 $76,440 $76,440 $1,790 $78,230 $3,080 $410 TOTAL 2.73 $76,440 $76,440 $1,790 $78,230 $3,080 $410 As of April 28, 2026, the estimated property acquisition costs for Conservation Collier properties, including this property and those under contract, total $141,672,531. The funds for managing this parcel will be expended from the Conservation Collier Maintenance Fund (1062). The initial maintenance costs are provided in the attached PDR. The total maintenance costs for this parcel for the first five years (initial maintenance costs) is estimated at $3,080. After the initial restoration, the estimated annual maintenance costs for this parcel will be approximately $410. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Fee simple acquisition of conservation lands is consistent with and supports Policy 1.3.1(e) in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for approval. - SAA RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. To approve the attached Agreement and accept the Warranty Deed once approved by the County Attorney’s Office. 2. To authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement and any and all other County Attorney’s Office approved documents related to this transaction; and 3. To authorize the County Manager or designee to prepare related vouchers and warrants for payments and to take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure performance under the Agreement. PREPARED BY: Melissa Hennig, Environmental Specialist I, Conservation Collier, Development Review Division Page 2192 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.8 ID# 2026-734 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Alonso Agreement 2. Alonso-PDR-PWP 3. Panther Walk market study appraisal Page 2193 of 4116Page 2194 of 4116Page 2195 of 4116Page 2196 of 4116Page 2197 of 4116Page 2198 of 4116Page 2199 of 4116Page 2200 of 4116Page 2201 of 4116Page 2202 of 4116Page 2203 of 4116Page 2204 of 4116Page 2205 of 4116Page 2206 of 4116 Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program Project Design Report Alonso Property Date: April 2026 Property Owner: Luis and Cinthia Alonso Folio(s): 38844560008 Location: GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 42 TR 57 Size: 2.73 acres Purchase Price: $76,440 History of Project: Selected for the “A” category, #1 Selected for the “A” Purchase offer Purchase offer priority, on the Active Acquisition category, #1 priority, on made to owner accepted List (AAL) by CCLAAC AAL by BCC 3/6/2024 6/25/2024 3/6/2026 3/6/2026 Purpose of Project: Environmental Conservation – Conservation Collier Program Program Qualifications: This parcel is in the middle of the Horsepen Strand within the Panther Walk Preserve multi-parcel project area. The Alonso parcel met the Initial Screening Criteria identified in the Conservation Collier Ordinance, No. 2002-63, as amended, including presence of native habitat, potential for nature-based recreational and educational opportunities, protection of water resource values and wetland dependent species habitat, presence of significant biological/ecological values, listed species habitat, connectivity, and restoration potential. This parcel offers access from 64th Ave NE west of Everglades Blvd – a paved public road. This property could accommodate seasonal outdoor recreation, particularly due to the proximity to the Panther Walk Preserve. The parcel is part of the greater Horsepen Strand flow way and contains 100% wetlands. This parcel is home to many wetland dependent species of flora and fauna including Florida panthers that have been documented within the strand. This parcel, when joined with many others, can protect the flow of both wildlife and water through the Horsepen Strand. Zoning, Growth Management and Land Use Overlays: The Panther Walk and Horsepen Strand project parcels are entirely within the Northern Golden Gate Estates. The zoning classification for all the parcels is Estates (E), a rural residential classification. There are no additional land use overlays applicable. 1 Page 2207 of 4116Projected Management Activities: No hydrologic changes are necessary to maintain wetland characteristics on the project site. Projected management activities include the removal of invasive plants, the development of a Land Management Plan, and continued development of public access to selected portions of the preserve. Estimated Management Costs: Management Element 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Exotics $820 $550 $550 $550 $410 Signage $200 Total $1,020 $550 $550 $550 $410 SEE PAGES 3 AND 4 FOR AERIAL MAPS OF THE PARCEL. 2 Page 2208 of 4116 3 Page 2209 of 4116 4 Page 2210 of 4116 APPRAISAL REPORT SUBJECT PROPERTY: PANTHER WALK PRESERVE FOR NAPLES, FL 34120 THE CONSERVATION COLLIER PROGRAM AND THE COLLIER AT THE REQUEST OF: ROOSEVELT LEONARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY REVIEW APPRAISER II COMMISSIONERS OPERATIONS & PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT/REAL PROPERTY 2685 HORSESHOE DRIVE S., STE. 103 NAPLES, FL 34104 ASSIGNMENT NO.: 7341-TS APPRAISAL EFFECTIVE DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 2026 DATE OF REPORT: FEBRUARY 22, 2026 Page 2211 of 4116 7341 Report Table of Contents Table of Contents SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT DATA AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................... 1 CERTIFICATION ..................................................................................................................................... 3 SCOPE OF WORK ................................................................................................................................... 5 ESTATE APPRAISED .............................................................................................................................. 6 DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE ..................................................................................................... 7 ASSUMED EXPOSURE TIME ................................................................................................................ 7 AREA INFORMATION .......................................................................................................................... 8 MARKET AREA ..................................................................................................................................... 17 PROPERTY INFORMATION ............................................................................................................... 29 SITE DESCRIPTION – PANTHER WALK PRESERVE ................................................................ 32 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION .................................................................................... 33 NATURAL RESOURCE CONCERNS ............................................................................................ 34 FUTURE LAND USE ......................................................................................................................... 37 ZONING .............................................................................................................................................. 39 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ................................................................................................................... 41 CONSIDERATION OF APPROACHES ............................................................................................. 42 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH ................................................................................................. 43 PANTHER WALK (1.14-2.73 ACRES) ................................................................................................ 44 LOCATION MAP OF SUBJECT AND VACANT LAND COMPARABLES ............................. 45 LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – UP TO 25% WETLANDS.............................................. 46 LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 26-50% WETLANDS ..................................................... 47 LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 51-75% WETLANDS ..................................................... 48 LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 76-100% WETLANDS ................................................... 49 FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE - PANTHER WALK (1.14-2.73 ACRES) .............................. 56 PANTHER WALK (2.74-7.86 ACRES) ................................................................................................ 57 LOCATION MAP OF SUBJECT AND VACANT LAND COMPARABLES ............................. 58 LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – UP TO 25% WETLANDS.............................................. 59 LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 26-50% WETLANDS ..................................................... 60 LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 51-75% WETLANDS ..................................................... 61 LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 76-100% WETLANDS ................................................... 62 FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE - PANTHER WALK (2.74-7.86 ACRES) .................................. 69 ADDENDA ............................................................................................................................................. 70 Carroll & Carroll Page 2212 of 4116 7341 Report Summary of Important Data & Conclusions SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT DATA AND CONCLUSIONS This information is summarized only for convenience. The value given is the final, rounded conclusion of the appraisal. To use this summary without first reading the appraisal report could be misleading. PROPERTY INFORMATION Property Identification Panther Walk Preserve Market Area Naples, FL 34120 Property Description Panther Walk Preserve consists of 251 parcels or a total of 524.6 acres located within Golden Gate Estates, Units 42, 44, and 47 in Naples, Florida. Property Type Vacant Land Owner of Record Full List Copied into the Addendum Property ID # Full List Copied into the Addendum CLIENT INFO & VALUE CONCLUSIONS Client Collier County Facilities Management Department Intended Use To assist the Conservation Collier Program and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. Intended Users Conservation Collier Program and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. Appraisal Effective Date February 1, 2026 Date of Report February 22, 2026 Date of Inspection N/A Purpose of Appraisal Estimate the market value on a price per acre basis within the Panther Walk Preserve for the various tiers for parcels ranging in size from 1.14 acres-2.73 acres, 2.74 acres-4.00 acres, and 4.01 acres-7.86 acres. Tiers I. Up to 25% Wetlands II. 26-50% Wetlands III. 51-75% Wetlands IV. 76-100% Wetlands Estate Appraised Fee Simple Interest Appraised 100% Estimated Market Values 1.14-2.73 Acres I Up to 25% Wetlands $78,000 per acre II 26-50% Wetlands $48,000 per acre III 51-75% Wetlands $36,000 per acre IV 76-100% Wetlands $28,000 per acre Carroll & Carroll 1 Page 2213 of 4116 7341 Report Summary of Important Data & Conclusions 2.74-4.00 Acres I Up to 25% Wetlands $55,000 per acre II 26-50% Wetlands $46,000 per acre III 51-75% Wetlands $36,000 per acre IV 76-100% Wetlands $26,000 per acre 4.01-7.86 Acres I Up to 25% Wetlands $55,000 per acre II 26-50% Wetlands $46,000 per acre III 51-75% Wetlands $36,000 per acre IV 76-100% Wetlands $26,000 per acre GENERAL INFO Appraiser Timothy W. Sunyog, MAI State-Certified General Appraiser RZ 3288 Scope of Work All applicable approaches to value were developed. EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS None HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS None Carroll & Carroll 2 Page 2214 of 4116 7341 Report Certification CERTIFICATION I CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF: I did not physically inspect the Panther Walk Preserve parcels or comparable sales, but I relied on aerial photography for my analysis. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and our personal, impartial and unbiased professional analyses, opinions and conclusions. I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. I previously appraised the property February 1, 2025, July 12, 2024, and September 1, 2023 for the Collier County Facilities Management Department. I have had no other relationship to the client or the property within the three years prior to accepting this assignment. I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or the parties involved with this assignment. My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. My analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report was prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. I am also subject to the Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute, which includes provisions for peer review. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the State of Florida relating to review by the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board and to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. Carroll & Carroll 3 Page 2215 of 4116 7341 Report Certification No one other than the undersigned prepared the analyses, opinions and conclusions concerning real estate that are set forth in this report. As of the date of this report, I have completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the State of Florida, and for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute. CARROLL & CARROLL Timothy W. Sunyog, MAI Cert Gen RZ3288 Carroll & Carroll 4 Page 2216 of 4116 7341 Report Scope of Work SCOPE OF WORK All applicable approaches to value were developed and the value conclusion reflects all known information about the subject property, market conditions, and available data. The scope of work was: • I did not physically inspect the Panther Walk Preserve parcels or the comparable sales, but I relied on aerial photography. • Reviewed aerial photographs, land use plans, the Land Development Code, the Conservation Collier Initial Criteria Screening Report, and other documentation. • Reviewed how the properties relate to their neighborhood and to the broader market area in development of an opinion of highest and best use. • Researched vacant land comparable sales, listings, and pending sales. • Developed the sales comparison approach. • Estimated the market value on a price per acres basis within Panther Preserve for the various tiers for parcels ranging in size from 1.14 acres-2.73 acres, 2.74 acres-4.00 acres, and 4.01 acres-7.86 acres. Tiers I. Up to 25% Wetlands II. 26-50% Wetlands III. 51-75% Wetlands IV. 76-100% Wetlands • Prepared an appraisal report summarizing the appraisal assignment, the property appraised, the application of the appraisal methodology, and the logical support for the value conclusions. Sources of market data included local and regional MLS systems, CoStar, LoopNet, public records, and interviews with real estate brokers. Carroll & Carroll 5 Page 2217 of 4116 7341 Report Estate Appraised ESTATE APPRAISED The estate appraised is the Fee Simple Absolute. For appraisal purposes Fee Simple Absolute is synonymous with Fee Simple. The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Seventh Edition, published 2022 by the Appraisal Institute, defines Fee Simple Estate as: Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat. We consider easements, but only to the extent that they are known to us. Appraisal of the fee simple means that an improved property is vacant and available to be put to its highest and best use. Carroll & Carroll 6 Page 2218 of 4116 7341 Report Definition of Market Value DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE In United States tax law, the definition of Fair Market Value is found in the United States Supreme Court decision in the Cartwright case: The fair market value is the price at which the property would change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller, neither being under any compulsion to buy or to sell and both having reasonable knowledge of relevant facts. United States v. Cartwright, 411 U. S. 546, 93 S. Ct. 1713, 1716-17, 36 L. Ed. 2d 528, 73-1 U.S. Tax Case. (CCH) ¶ 12,926 (1973) (quoting from U.S. Treasury regulations relating to Federal estate taxes, at 26 C.F.R. sec. 20.2031-1(b)). ASSUMED EXPOSURE TIME The reasonable exposure time is assumed to have already occurred as of the appraisal effective date. The assumed reasonable exposure time was between 6 and 9 months. Carroll & Carroll 7 Page 2219 of 4116 7341 Report Area Analysis AREA INFORMATION COLLIER COUNTY ANALYSIS An analysis of geography, transportation, population, employment, income, and education for Collier County is performed using data provided by Site to Do Business, Florida Office of Economic & Demographic, United States Department of Labor, all recognized source(s). GEOGRAPHY Collier County is the most southerly county on Florida's west coast offering mainland coastal development. Collier County is west of Ft. Lauderdale and south of Tampa. With 2,025 square miles of land area, it is the largest county in Florida. About 63% of the land area is in public ownership, is set aside for environmental preservation, or is scheduled for public land acquisition. The region enjoys a climate that is classified as subtropical. Summers are relatively mild, and winters are usually frost free. A hard freeze is a rarity. The climate, especially in winter, is one that attracts and is enjoyable to most people. The geography of the area runs generally northwest and southeast as indicated by the trend of the coastline. Beaches extend from the northern county line south to Cape Romano and then, as the coastline trends further to the southeast, beaches give over to mangrove islands and swamps. Moving northeastward from the beaches, elevations increase very slowly. Most of the county is less than 15 feet above mean sea level. Although changes in elevation Carroll & Carroll 8 Page 2220 of 4116 7341 Report Area Analysis are gradual, they are well defined by variations in vegetation. Much of the county is, or was once, wetland. The once plentiful marine resources are largely depleted, but still provide good sport fishing. Population centers include the coastal communities of Naples, Marco Island and Everglades/Chokoloskee. Immokalee, the single large interior community, is in north Collier County and is the agricultural center of the region. POPULATION “The social forces studied by appraisers primarily relate to population characteristics. The demographic composition of the population reveals the potential demand for real estate, which makes the proper analysis and interpretation of demographic trends important in an appraiser’s analysis.” The total population, it's composition by age and gender, and the rate of household formation and dissolution strongly influence real property values. (The Appraisal of Real Estate 14th Edition) Collier County’s population has continued to increase year after year. The population has increased 0.10% as of 2024 from 2022. The population is expected to increase in the coming years Collier County is a popular retirement destination. As of 2023, 58.50% of the County’s residents are over the age of 45. The 2027 forecasts depict a community with 56.5% of the population 45 years of age or older. Carroll & Carroll 9 Page 2221 of 4116 7341 Report Area Analysis EMPLOYMENT Collier County is a largely service based economy with 32.2% of the employees in the leisure, hospitality, education, and health service industries and 20.3% in professional, business, financial and other services. Trade, transportation, & utilities along with government jobs account for 10.4% of the County’s employees. Industries such as natural resources/mining, construction, and manufacturing make up only 17.9% of the market. Carroll & Carroll 10 Page 2222 of 4116 7341 Report Area Analysis The unemployment rate in Collier County exceeded the state average by a slight margin in the 2022 but was similar in 2023 and 2024. Carroll & Carroll 11 Page 2223 of 4116 7341 Report Area Analysis INCOME Collier County’s per capita income and median household income levels are higher than state statistics. The most substantial difference between Collier County and the state is the large percentage difference in household incomes above $100,000 where Collier County exceeds the state by over 9.2 percentage points. Collier County's percentage household incomes ranging from $25,000 to $74,999 is slightly lower than the percentage of household incomes in the state by 3.6 percentage points.. Income levels vary greatly within different areas of Collier County, and so will be discussed in greater detail in the Market Area descriptions. TRANSPORTATION The transportation system reflects local geography, population densities and the primary motivators of tourism, service industry employment, the construction industry, agriculture, and leisure activities. ROADS The earliest roads were coastal, extending from north to south in the early twentieth century with the first settlers. Principal among these is US-41, commonly referred to as the Tamiami Trail because it was built to connect Tampa and Miami. Where it passes through the coastal community US-41 is a four or six lane divided highway with landscaped medians, curb and gutter, streetlights and often with concrete sidewalks. The Trail is the principal coastal arterial and one that defines several important boundaries. Often there is a noticeable land value difference east and west of US-41 because the affluent coastal population prefers to shop and trade close to home. As the highway turns southeast from downtown Naples toward Miami the Trail defines the boundary of the coastal management zone which affects development densities and storm evacuation requirements. The eastern segment of US-41 is a designated national scenic highway popular with tourists, especially during the winter season as they seek adventure in the Everglades. A system of asphalt surfaced arterials, major collectors, minor collectors, and neighborhood streets extend into the urban area east and west from US-41. North-south arterials and major collectors are established about one mile apart. From west to east, these include Goodlette-Frank Road, Airport-Pulling Road, Livingston Road, Santa Barbara Boulevard and Collier Boulevard. The east-west grid is spaced about two miles apart; from north to south being Immokalee Road (CR-864), Vanderbilt Beach Road (CR-862), Pine Ridge Road (CR-896), Golden Gate Parkway (CR-886), Radio Road (CR-856), Davis Boulevard (SR-84), and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR-864). Within the urban area all of these are at least 4 lane divided highways. East of Collier Boulevard the road system reflects the economies of scale of Golden Gate Estates subdivision (the Estates) where 102 square miles of rural subdivision is supported by a grid system of paved and unpaved 2 lane streets, with 2 and 4 lane asphalt surfaced Carroll & Carroll 12 Page 2224 of 4116 7341 Report Area Analysis major collectors. Golden Gate Boulevard, a 4-lane divided road for five of its eleven miles east of CR-951, is the principal east-west collector. Everglades Boulevard (2 lane and asphalt surfaced) is the north-south major collector extending south from Immokalee Road 14 miles to the grade separation at I-75 where it continues into the Picayune Strand State Forest. Most of the neighborhood streets in Golden Gate Estates are asphalt. Collier County is planning to extend east-west collectors through the Estates along the alignment of Vanderbilt Beach Road and somewhere south of Golden Gate Boulevard. A north-south connection is also planned from the eastern terminus of White Boulevard (Pine Ridge Road) north to Golden Gate Boulevard. Interstate highway 75 (I-75) was extended from north to south through Collier County in the mid-1980s along a flood-proof route about five miles inland. Directly east of the City of Naples I-75 joins the original alignment of State Road 84 (Alligator Alley) connecting with Florida's east coast at Ft. Lauderdale. The coastal community I-75 interchanges are spaced three to four miles apart at Immokalee Road (CR-864), Pine Ridge Road (CR-896), Golden Gate Parkway (CR-886), and at Collier Boulevard/Davis Boulevard (CR-951/SR-84). Twenty- one miles east of the coastal community is an interchange at State Road 29; the last interchange in Collier County. Collier County and the FDOT continue to study the feasibility of an interchange at Everglades Boulevard. The advent of I-75 signaled a change in the relationship of Collier County to the rest of Florida and the United States. While US-41 was the only north-south arterial, Collier County was dominated by the conservative mid-western influences of seasonal residents and somewhat isolated from the larger urban areas of Florida. After the late 1980s, road access to Collier was made much more convenient to the northeast via connections with I-4 and I-95. This had the effect of broadening Collier’s market exposure and it stimulated growth. The extension of I-75 south into Dade County promoted better access for European tourists and made Collier County transient lodging attractive for east coast weekenders. Strategic connections exist where Collier Boulevard and CR-92 extend south and west from US-41 providing access to the City of Marco Island from the greater Naples area and from Florida's east coast, respectively. State Road 29 connects the southwest Florida agricultural center of Immokalee with points north, with the Naples coastal community via CR-846, with the Ft. Myers coastal community via SR-82, and with US-41 at Everglades City which is the western gateway to Everglades National Park and the 10,000 Islands region of Collier's southwest coast. The road transportation system is well planned, well maintained, and operating at acceptable capacity. Ambitious road construction projects undertaken in anticipation of growth projections and funded by impact fees have caught up with development. The road system reflects Collier's position at the southerly limit of development on Florida's west coast. Carroll & Carroll 13 Page 2225 of 4116 7341 Report Area Analysis MASS TRANSIT Collier Area Transit (CAT), operated by Collier County Alternative Transportation Modes Department, provides inexpensive alternative transportation throughout the county linking major employment centers of Naples with Marco Island and Immokalee. There are several circulation routes with stops at the County government complex, hospitals, and major shopping establishments. The system accommodates bicycle transport and personal items. The same County department administers the Collier Area Para Transit system which provides subsidized transportation services for the disabled and economically disadvantaged. This is a successful and growing system that connects people with jobs, essential services, and shopping while reducing transportation costs and road congestion. AIRPORTS Collier County is supported by a system of five public airports. Southwest Florida International Airport (RSW) is located in Lee County 25 miles north of Naples; a 45-minute drive via I-75 from the Collier center of population. This facility serves the five county southwest Florida regions offering domestic and international air carrier service. It is modern, convenient, and has planned expansion to keep up with regional growth. Naples Municipal Airport (APF) owned by the City of Naples and operated by the independently constituted Naples Airport Authority which derives its revenue principally from fuel sales. This small airport (about 1 sq. mi.) is located one mile east of downtown Naples. It serves the coastal community and is especially convenient to affluent residents who own private aircraft, to the corporate convention business of the large beachfront hotels, and to essential services like mosquito control, Emergency Medical Services (EMS), the Sheriff’s office, and private air ambulance services. The two paved runways (5/23 @ 5,290’ and 14/32 @ 5,000’) will support jets including the G4 and Challenger series. Naples airport is tower controlled and fully certified for commercial operations and is home to several aircraft charter services and flight training schools. In 2005, Naples Municipal Airport accommodated 163,434 aircraft operations, a record high. Annual operations decreased by nearly 50% from 2005 to 2011. The total operations for 2024 were 123,171, which is a 3.44% increase from the previous year. Due to its downtown location, Naples airport has restricted operations of the noisiest jet aircraft and is at the leading edge of noise abatement measures. The Collier County Airport Authority owns and operates airports at Marco Island, in Everglades City, and at Immokalee. These are primarily funded through fuel sales and hangar leases. Marco Island Airport (MKY) is a very small (64.47 acres) general aviation facility on the mainland four miles northeast of Marco Island. The single paved runway (17/35 @ 5,000') will support light jet traffic. Hanger and ramp space is very limited. Fuel is Carroll & Carroll 14 Page 2226 of 4116 7341 Report Area Analysis available. This airport is convenient to Marco Island residents and to the corporate convention business of the Island hotels. Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) is one mile east of Immokalee and 35 miles by road northeast of Naples. This 2 square mile airport has two paved 5,000-foot runways (18/36 and 09/27) a third diagonal runway is now used as a weekend drag racing strip. The airport is in the Florida Rural Enterprise Zone and a HUB Empowerment Zone. A 60-acre zone in and around the airport is a designated Foreign Trade Zone. To date, the economic potential of this airport is largely unrealized. However, the field is active as a training destination for coastal-based flight schools, it hosts aerial firefighting and crop-dusting operations, and it bases numerous private aircraft. The Everglades Airpark (X01) is a light duty general aviation facility of 29.14 acres that is within walking distance of downtown Everglades City. The single paved strip (15/33 @ 2,400') supports itinerant coastal traffic and half a dozen-based aircraft. Fuel, a comfortable pilot center and bicycles are available. The aviation community is well supported. The greater Naples area is the beneficiary of the winter season influx of corporate executives and affluent individuals who can afford luxury private jet travel. MARINE TRANSPORTATION There is no deep-water port and no commercial marine activity other than that associated with commercial fishing, charter sport fishing, and the marine towing services that support the pleasure boat industry. The controlling depth to the municipal dock in Naples Bay is six feet at mean low water. The US Coast Guard maintains a dredged and well-marked intracoastal waterway from the head of Naples Bay to Coon Key southeast of Marco Island. Local geography requires vessels northbound from Naples to transit 30 miles of the Gulf of Mexico before returning to the sheltered intracoastal system at Sanibel Island. According to the Marine Industries Association of Collier County, as of early 2018 there were 57,685 registered vessels in Southwest Florida. In 2022, Florida registered over 1 million recreational boats. Seasonally, excursions from Marco Island to Key West and from Ft. Myers Beach to Key West are scheduled daily. EDUCATION The Collier County School District provides public education to about 47,000 students encompassing grades K-12 and employs almost 7,000 people of which 3,200 are teachers. The district has 51 public schools consisting of 31 elementary, 10 middle, 8 high schools, one K-12 (Everglades City School), and 1 virtual school. There are also 12 alternative school programs and two technical colleges, Lorenzo Walker Technical College, and Immokalee Technical College, which offer short term and long-term training to adults and high school students. Between 2015 and 2020, the school district had an overall population growth of more than 6,000 students but recently student population growth has leveled off and slightly Carroll & Carroll 15 Page 2227 of 4116 7341 Report Area Analysis decreased. The student population is a diverse culture. 55% of students live in homes where English is not the first language. Students come from 76 different countries of origin and speak 104 different languages. Collier County School District continues to receive an “A” grade by the State of Florida Department of Education. The district and all schools are accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council. Collier County is the leader in Florida in educational technology. It is also a leader in advanced educational programs, offering dual enrollment and Advance Placement courses, Cambridge Advanced International Certificate of Education and Laureate diplomas. Career training is available through 32 career academies. In addition to the public-school system, there are numerous private schools throughout the county. Approximately, 16% of all K-12 students in Collier County are educated in private schools. Collier County is also home to several colleges and accredited universities. Three colleges have campuses in Collier County: Ave Maria University, Keiser University and Florida Southwestern State College (formerly Edison Community College). Ave Maria University is a private catholic university that offers both undergraduate and graduate programs including a law school has around 1,245 students. Keiser University is a private university that offers both undergraduate and graduate programs to over 17,990 students throughout 20 campuses in Florida and an online learning program. Florida Southwestern State College with campuses in Naples, Punta Gorda, and Ft. Myers, offers both two-year and four-year degree programs for 14,714 students. Formerly located in Naples, now in Fort Myers, Hodges University is a private four-year college that offers bachelor’s and master’s degrees in 20 disciplines for around 1,676 students. Nearby Florida Gulf Coast University (located in southern Lee County) is one of the state's fastest growing institutions and home to over 16,500 students. CONCLUSION At the southerly limit of urban development on Florida's west coast, Collier County offers the climate, natural resources, and sporting opportunities to support a superb retirement community. The quality of infrastructure, schools, and social services is what one would expect of such an area. We are experiencing a surge in new development projected to take us through the next several years. In the long term, the attractions of the climate and location, and the stability of fixed-account affluence promise continuing prosperity although probably without the strong emphasis on new development. Carroll & Carroll 16 Page 2228 of 4116 7341 Report Market Area MARKET AREA Market Area is defined as: “The geographic region from which a majority of demand comes and in which the majority of competition is located.” (The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal 7th Edition) “A market area is defined in terms of the market for a specific category of real estate and thus is the area in which alternative, similar properties effectively compete with the subject property in the minds of probable, potential purchasers and users.” (The Appraisal of Real Estate 15th Edition) A market area includes those surrounding land uses which impact the value of a property and it can encompass one or more neighborhoods or districts. An appraiser focuses on the market area in analyzing subject property value influences. BOUNDARIES The subject property is located within the Golden Gate area of Collier County. For appraisal purposes, the Golden Gate or market area boundaries are shown below: Carroll & Carroll 17 Page 2229 of 4116 7341 Report Market Area Introduction The portion of Golden Gate within this market area is approximately 157 square miles in size. Three separate land uses are worth noting. Golden Gate City, which is not incorporated, is a 4-square mile development of high residential density consisting of both single-family and multifamily units. Commercial services for this market area are centralized here. The rural estates consist of approximately 116 square miles and is zoned for estate living. This low-density development serves a rural lifestyle desired by many in the area. A third area, Orange Blossom PUD located on Immokalee Road, is a 4-square mile residential subdivision with commercial support near the Immokalee Road and Randall Boulevard intersection. It is approximately 80% developed with primarily single-family units. Collier County Fairgrounds, a high school, middle school, and elementary school are located here. Demographics for Golden Gate City and rural estates will be discussed separately, where appropriate, Data for Orange Blossom PUD will be included in the rural estate’s demographics. Environmental Influences This area is desired because of mild winter weather and rural lifestyle. Even though it is inland from the coast there is still easy access to miles of beaches. The Naples area is one of the very few in Florida that offers adequate public access to a mainland beach. The subtropical weather allows for year-round recreational opportunities. Boating, swimming, riding ATVs, and camping are popular activities. Bicycling, walking and jogging are supported by an extensive network of connected biking and walking paths. Multiple tennis and pickle ball courts are available, as well as fitness centers. Golden Gate is known for its clean environment and healthy lifestyle. Residents are drawn to the rural estates because of wooded lots, native vegetation and abundance of wildlife. Agriculture uses are permitted; therefore, equestrian activities are common throughout the estates. Golden Gate City is an urban area served by county parks and a biking/walking path network. Governmental Influences This market area, including Golden Gate City, is governed by Collier County Board of County Commissioners which serves as chief legislative body and five constitutional officers: sheriff, clerk of courts, tax collector, supervisor of elections, and property appraiser. County government is managed by a strong county manager structure. Collier County provides services which range from average to high quality. However, Collier County is known for being a difficult county for building and development. The tax burden in Collier County is lower than the national average. Carroll & Carroll 18 Page 2230 of 4116 7341 Report Market Area County government has zoning, and comprehensive plan ordinances designed to protect the character and values of property; to protect and enhance economic development; and to maintain and enhance the attractive nature of the area. Public services include fire protection, solid waste disposal, potable water, sanitary sewer service and storm water drainage. In some areas of Golden Gate Estates where sanitary sewer is not available, septic systems are permitted. Public/private companies proved adequate services for electricity, cable, and internet. Community support facilities such as schools, parks, churches, shopping, and places of employment are all located within this market area. Collier County Sheriff Department provides a full range of services for Collier County. According to the 2022 statistics listed by the Collier County Sheriff’s Office, Collier County has one of the lowest crime rates in Florida. The county averages are representative of conditions in the Golden Gate area. This market area is served by several arterial roadways. All are six-lane divided highways with landscaped medians. Improvements include street lighting and concrete curb and gutter. North-south arterial roadways include Santa Barbara Boulevard which connects Rattlesnake Hammock Road to Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard (SR-951) which is a major arterial linking Marco Island in south Collier County with Immokalee Road near the north county line. Development along Collier Boulevard is a mixture of single/multi-family residential, office, light industrial, institutional, and retail. The Collier Boulevard thoroughfare anchors a grid of arterial roads spaced about 2 miles apart, that serve the greater Naples coastal community which lies to the west and has direct access to I-75. East-west arterials include Golden Gate Parkway, Pine Ridge Road, and Immokalee Road. Each one provides direct access to Interstate I-75. Development along Pine Ridge Road is mainly developed with single family homes and institutional uses. Golden Gate Parkway and Immokalee Roads have a mixture of single/multi-family residential, office, industrial, institutional, and retail uses. Another east-west arterial is Vanderbilt Beach Road which is a direct connection between the Golden Gate area and the Naples beaches. Construction has begun on the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension, which will be extended to Wilson Boulevard. Interstate I-75, which connects Collier County to both North Florida and Florida’s east coast, serves this entire market area and access is provided by three interchanges. The arterial road system is laid out in a grid pattern that provides adequate traffic flow to all areas of the county. Commercial development exists at every major intersection; but the intersections are designed with proper turns lanes and signaling to provide for adequate Carroll & Carroll 19 Page 2231 of 4116 7341 Report Market Area traffic movement. The road network easily handles traffic demand in the off-season, May through December. Traffic more than doubles in January, February, March and April because of seasonal residents and tourists. Even with exceptionally heavy traffic, the road network usually handles peak traffic demand without major delays. The rural estates are served by a grid of residential streets and collector roads. The residential streets, which are two-lane roads with open swales, are located every quarter mile. Most these roads are paved; however, some residential streets located along the eastern edge of this market area have yet to be improved. The residential streets feed into collector roads, which connect to the major arterial highway system. The collector roads include Santa Barbara Boulevard, Golden Gate Boulevard, Wilson Boulevard, Everglades Boulevard, Randall Boulevard and Oil Well Road. They are four to six-lanes in the more populated areas, transitioning to two-lanes in the eastern section of this market area. Public transportation is provided by a county transit bus service. Naples Municipal Airport is located outside the market area but is easily accessed by any resident of the area. The airport is City owned but operated by the independent Naples Airport Authority. It serves private and commercial aviation, as well as aviation related activities. It supports government services, such as, Mosquito Control District and Collier County Sheriff’s aviation unit. Located within the market area is the Paradise Sports Complex developed by Collier County. The 60+ acre site is designed with 19 fields to accommodate football, soccer, field hockey, lacrosse, baseball, and others. There is a 13-acre lake with a beachfront, food-truck area, a market space, a large lawn, a championship stadium with seating capacity for 3,500 and an indoor fieldhouse. The total budget for the project was approximately $80 million dollars. Adjacent to the Paradise Sports Complex will be the proposed Great Wolf Lodge South Florida which is projected to be completed in the spring/summer of 2024. The hotel is situated on 20 acres and will feature 500 family-friendly suites and an expansive 100,000- square-foot indoor water park. Social Influences Golden Gate City is a diverse community of entry level housing. Residents like the small town feel and consider it a safe place to raise a family. Residential is approximately 95% built out. Rural estates are attractive for their quiet country living while being in close proximity to all that the coastal community has to offer. Build out varies in the rural estates from 95% in the western portion of the market area to 40% or less in the southeastern location. Per US Census Bureau forecasts, the 2022 population is 78,769 with a projected growth to 81,893 (0.78% annual growth) by 2027. This area experiences a lower seasonal population increase during the winter months than other areas of Collier County. Carroll & Carroll 20 Page 2232 of 4116 7341 Report Market Area The median age is 36.7 with 73.7% of the population being 54 and younger. The median household income is $83,679. 25.6% have a bachelor’s or professional degree and 24.7% have some college education. There is an average degree of community involvement through civic organizations, neighborhood groups, social service organizations and political committees. The Naples cost of living is 11.9% higher than the average cost of living in the United States. Conversely, Florida has a cost of living that is 1% higher than the US average. Of the 25 locations included in the Economic Policy Institute's dataset for Florida, Naples-Marco Island is the 21st most expensive. In Naples, housing is the category with the highest index (21% above national average), while taxes are the category with the lowest index (15% below national average). (Ref. Careertrends.com; cost of living analysis). Golden Gate has some of the highest density of affordable housing units in Collier County, but because of the high cost of living, home values can still be out of reach for many moving into Collier County. One of the main driving forces impacting growth in this area is the quality of schools. This market area has 15 public schools: two high schools, three middle schools, nine elementary schools, and three Charter schools. In addition to the public school system, there are three, faith-based private schools. Economic Influences The population increased 20.07% over the last 12 years or 1,097 people per year. The population is forecasted to increase an additional 3.97% over the next five years for an average of 625 people per year. This trend is consistent with the past twenty years and should continue into the near future as buildout continues along the eastern edge of this market area. The residential population is dominated by working class and young professional residents. Comparatively, incomes within this market area are less than the county average. Development trends: Residential This market area provides a large range in home values from entry level housing to million- dollar estates and is the greatest source of vacant residential lots in the county. Values in Golden Gate City should remain consistent subject only to general market trends. Values in the eastern rural estates will increase as buildout in the units closest to the coast continues. The average home value in the market area is $384,105 which is considerably lower than the County’s average home value of $567,449. The total number of households in the market area is 27,440, of which, 69.9% are owner occupied, 22.8% renter occupied and 7.3% vacant. Vacancy includes seasonal rentals. Carroll & Carroll 21 Page 2233 of 41167341 Report Market Area Carroll & Carroll 22 Page 2234 of 41167341 Report Market Area Carroll & Carroll 23 Page 2235 of 4116 7341 Report Market Area Commercial Commercial development can be categorized into four different groups. Primary commercial is in Golden Gate City. Second group is newer construction at the arterial road intersections. Third is neighborhood commercial within the rural estates. Fourth is the industrial commerce park near Collier Boulevard and the I-75 interchange. Golden Gate City is the commercial center serving this market area. Santa Barbara Boulevard, north of Golden Gate Parkway, has a mixture of multi-family residential and commercial along the east side of the road. Commercial consists of older single story, single user buildings and 4 to 8 unit retail plazas. Businesses include daycare/ preschools, neighborhood food mart and gas stations, construction company offices, barber shops and beauty salons and small restaurants. Golden Gate Parkway has a mixture of multi-family and commercial development along both sides of the roadway. Newer commercial consists of CVS and Walgreens, carwashes, bank branches and national fast food restaurants. There are three older shopping centers, anchored by Winn Dixie and by Ace Hardware. Single story commercial structures and strip centers house neighborhood businesses such as barber shops and beauty salons, florists and jewelers; veterinary services and family medical clinics; and small locally-run restaurants and food marts. Several businesses consist of automotive support such as gas stations, oil chance and car washes. Professional services are primarily located in executive suites located near Santa Barbara Boulevard. The Quality Inn Hotel & Golf Course located at the southwest corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard was purchased by Collier County in 2019. A lease agreement was signed with BigShots Golf in May 2021 who planned to redevelop the 165 acres with a 12-hole public golf course and a BigShots entertainment facility. The project has still not yet broke ground. Commercial frontage along the west side of Collier Boulevard south of Green Boulevard is very similar to commercial along Golden Gate Parkway in building size, age and use. The exception is that there is a greater density of national food chains. The second-tier commercial properties, without major road frontage, are developed with single story warehouse-type structures housing service-oriented businesses. Newer commercial development is located along Collier Boulevard where it intersects Pine Ridge Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. Each intersection has a shopping center anchored by either a Publix or Winn-Dixie supermarket. Out parcel development includes bank branches and gas station/convenience stores and national pharmacies. Commercial development in the rural estates is limited because residents have orchestrated an ongoing effort to prohibit commercial development in the residential areas. The only neighborhood commercial locations are at the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Carroll & Carroll 24 Page 2236 of 4116 7341 Report Market Area Gate Boulevard, Everglades Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, and at Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road. The Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road intersection is where the majority of commercial development is occurring. There is a Publix anchored shopping center on the east side of the road. Located along the western curve of Immokalee Road is approximately 50 acres that is current being developed and will be known as Randall at Orangetree. Upon completion, the development will include a 400-unit apartment complex and about 350,000 square feet of commercial space. Industrial Industrial/commercial developments are in the northeast quadrant of I-75 and Collier Boulevard interchange. White Lake Industrial Corp Park is one of Collier County’s three primary industrial parks. The White Lake Industrial Park contains 144.4 acres and is approved for 7.80 acres of commercial and 77 acres of industrial. White Lake consists of newer, good quality flex and warehouse properties and it is home to some of the largest manufacturing facilities within the county. It is approximately 85-90% built-out. City Gate Commerce Center contains 288 acres zoned for 2,950,000 S.F. of commercial, light industry, office, warehouse and distribution. The site has over 3,000 feet of frontage on Collier Boulevard where a gas station, a 102 room Spring Hill Marriott Hotel and a 100 room Fairfield Inn Marriott have been constructed. The Paradise Sports Complex was also recently completed. A developer (Uline) recently completed the development of a 936,950- square-foot Distribution Center on approximately 102.68 acres of land within City Gate. There is also an Amazon Distribution Center near the corner of Davis and Collier Blvd. Medical None of Collier County’s major medical facilities are located within this market area. The only major medical center/hospital servicing this area is the Physicians Regional Medical Center located along Pine Ridge Road, just east of Interstate 75. This is a 201-bed facility and is one of the county's four major medical centers. The hospital offers a 24-hour emergency department that provides a full range of traditional emergency services. An additional NCH emergency room facility was completed at the northeast corner of Collier Boulevard and Immokalee Road. This is a two-story 19 room, state of the art emergency room with additional medical space for practicing physicians. The facility was built to help service the rural estates and all the new residential units being constructed along Collier Boulevard and Immokalee Road. Physicians Regional recently completed a similar facility at the southeast corner to serve all the new residential development along Immokalee Road and the Golden Gates Estates community. Encompass Health Rehabilitation Hospital of Naples is a recently completed 50-bed rehabilitation hospital along Collier Boulevard, north of Vanderbilt Beach Road. Carroll & Carroll 25 Page 2237 of 41167341 Report Market Area Carroll & Carroll 26 Page 2238 of 4116 7341 Report Market Area Construction, education, and retail trade dominate the market area business sector. MARKET AREA LIFE CYCLE Market areas often pass through a four-stage life cycle of growth, stability, decline, and revitalization. • Growth – A period during which the market area gains public favor and acceptance. • Stability – A period of equilibrium without marked gains or losses. • Decline – A period of diminishing demand • Revitalization – A period of renewal, redevelopment, modernization and increasing demand. Most of the real estate activity in Golden Gate reflects the growth cycle. The residential and commercial markets continue to be strong. The growth cycle is expected to continue into the near future. Because of the age of the structures, the western portion and the city center are just beginning to experience some revitalization. Carroll & Carroll 27 Page 2239 of 4116 7341 Report Market Area CONCLUSION This continues to be one of the most affordable market areas in Collier County. The houses within the city center provide entry level housing and the rural area satisfies the desire for larger lot sizes and rural lifestyle. A well-designed road network provides easy access to jobs serving the coastal community; coastal beaches and water activities; entertainment endeavors; and commercial and medical services. This area appeals to a cross section of the population but primarily to working-class families. Development continues to push north and east where vacant lots still exist. Golden Gate will likely continue to enjoy a healthy growth while maintaining its affordability. Carroll & Carroll 28 Page 2240 of 4116 7341 Report Property Information PROPERTY INFORMATION Carroll & Carroll 29 Page 2241 of 41167341 Report Property Information Carroll & Carroll 30 Page 2242 of 41167341 Report Property Information Carroll & Carroll 31 Page 2243 of 4116 7341 Report Property Information SITE DESCRIPTION – PANTHER WALK PRESERVE Summary Panther Walk consists of a total of 251 parcels or a total of 524.6 acres. The parcels are located in northern Golden Gate Estates, west of Everglades Boulevard and stretch from Immokalee Road south to the south side of 56th Avenue NE. Parcel ID#& Owners There are a total of 251 parcels or a total of 524.6 acres that Collier County is considering purchasing. A complete list of the parcels is included in the addendum of the report. Size The parcels range in size from 1.14 to 7.86 acres. Shape All the parcels are rectangular in shape. Access All parcels have legal and physical access along paved roads. The parcels are accessible from Everglades Boulevard North, 72nd Avenue NE, 70th Avenue NE, 68th Avenue NE, 66th Avenue NE, 64th Avenue NE, 62nd Avenue NE, 60th Avenue NE, 58th Avenue NE, and 56th Avenue NE. Topography The properties are generally level. Ground Cover The majority of the properties are covered in native and exotic vegetation and have never been cleared. I was provided with a Conservation Collier Initial Criteria Screening Report Panther Walk TPMA dated August 3, 2022 and updated August 26, 2022. The parcels are located within the Horse Pen Strand with most containing wetlands. The parcels consist of a mixture of vegetative communities including cypress strand forest, cypress/mixed hardwood forests, oak/pine hammock, wet prairie, and pine flatwoods. Utilities Electricity, telephone and TV cable are available. The properties are serviced by well and septic. Carroll & Carroll 32 Page 2244 of 4116 7341 Report Property Information ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION Observed Contamination None Noted Concerns None Environmental Assessment No Available Impact on Value None Disclaimer Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous substances or environmental conditions including but not limited to asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls, petroleum leakage, agricultural chemicals, urea formaldehyde insulation, lead paint, toxic mold, et cetera, which might or might not be present in or on the property were not called to the attention of the appraiser. Such tests were not in the appraiser's required scope of work, the appraiser is not qualified to test for such substances and conditions and the appraiser is not qualified to render professional opinions in this specialty area. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions that might exist, or for the knowledge and expertise required to discover them. Carroll & Carroll 33 Page 2245 of 4116 7341 Report Property Information NATURAL RESOURCE CONCERNS Condition of subject The majority of the properties are covered in native and exotic vegetation and have never been cleared. I was provided with a Conservation Collier Initial Criteria Screening Report Panther Walk TPMA dated August 3, 2022 and updated August 26, 2022. The parcels are located within the Horse Pen Strand with most containing wetlands. The parcels consist of a mixture of vegetative communities including cypress strand forest, cypress/mixed hardwood forests, oak/pine hammock, wet prairie, and pine flatwoods. All plant and animal communities are of interest and concern. To a greater or lesser degree depending on the species and the quality of habitat they occupy, plants and animals inhabiting the property will invoke some level of scrutiny and will result in some cost during the permitting process. Natural Resource Audits Available Yes Impact on Value N/A Disclaimer Specialized natural resource audits were not in the appraiser’s required scope of work, the appraiser is not qualified to conduct such audits and the appraiser is not qualified to render professional opinions in this specialty area. No responsibility is assumed for any extraordinary natural resource concerns, or for the knowledge and expertise required to discover them. Carroll & Carroll 34 Page 2246 of 41167341 Report Property Information Carroll & Carroll 35 Page 2247 of 41167341 Report Property Information Carroll & Carroll 36 Page 2248 of 4116 7341 Report Property Information FUTURE LAND USE Ordinance or Plan Collier County Future Land Use Designation GGE- Golden Gate Estates Residential Estates Subdistrict Purpose of Designation The Estates Land Use Designation encompasses lands which are already subdivided into semi-rural residential parcels (2.25 acres as an average) essentially consisting of the Golden Gate Estates Subdivision. The area is identified as having potential for population growth far removed from supportive services and facilities. Expansion of the area shall be discouraged. Refer to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan for siting criteria and development standards for specific land uses. Under the Estates future land use designation there is no provision for a conditional use and therefore a conditional use approval requires an amendment to the GGAMP. Carroll & Carroll 37 Page 2249 of 41167341 Report Property Information Carroll & Carroll 38 Page 2250 of 4116 7341 Report Property Information ZONING Ordinance or Land Development Collier County Code Zoning E- Estates Purpose or Intent of Zoning The subject is zoned “E” – Estates District. The purpose and intent of the Estates district is to provide lands for low density residential development in a semi-rural to rural environment. In addition, several conditional uses including churches, social and fraternal organizations, child care centers, private schools, and group care facilities are available under conditional use provisions. Permitted uses include single-family dwellings and Family Care Facilities, and public schools. Conditional uses permissible in the Estates district include churches and other places of worship, social and fraternal organizations, child and adult care centers, schools and group care facilities. These conditional uses are strictly regulated. Below are the development requirements as set forth in the Estate Zoning District: Minimum Lot Area: 98,010 square feet or 2.25 acres Minimum Lot Width: 150 feet Minimum Front Yard Setback: 75 feet minimum Minimum Side Yard Setback: 30 feet Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 75 feet Maximum Building Height: 30 feet Overlay District None. Carroll & Carroll 39 Page 2251 of 41167341 Report Property Information Carroll & Carroll 40 Page 2252 of 4116 7341 Report Highest and Best Use HIGHEST AND BEST USE DEFINITION The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 7th Edition, published 2022 by the Appraisal Institute, defines Highest and Best Use as: The reasonably probable use of property that results in the highest value. The four criteria that the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity. METHOD There are four criteria that must be met in order for a use to be the highest and best use for a given property. The highest and best use must be: • Legally permissible. • Physically Possible. • Financially feasible. • Maximally productive. Ordinarily these criteria are considered sequentially, each step narrowing the range of alternative uses being considered. ANALYSIS SITE AS THOUGH VACANT Legally Permissible – All parcels are zoned E-Estates with a future land use of Residential Estates. The purpose and intent of the E-Estates district is to apply to an area of low-density single-family residences in a semi-rural environment and permits all necessary residential activities as well as the keeping of limited agricultural animals as specified in this division. Physically Possible: The sites are level and at or slightly below road grade and could be developed as a single-family home sites. The location, surrounding land uses, and the size of the properties suggest some type of single-family use. Due to the potential presence of wetlands on the sites, mitigation could be required to develop single-family residences on some of the properties. Financially Feasible: The financial feasibility of single-family residential development is good. The single-family residential market continues to be strong, especially new construction. Single-family residential development is financially feasible. Although it is not an economic use, acquisition of lands in the area by Collier County is encouraged for habitat preservation and conservation. Carroll & Carroll 41 Page 2253 of 4116 7341 Report Highest and Best Use Maximally Productive: The maximally productive use is that the wetlands be mitigated, and the properties developed with single-family residences, or the properties be purchased for preservation, conservation, and restoration. CONSIDERATION OF APPROACHES Only the sales comparison approach is appropriate for these vacant parcels. Carroll & Carroll 42 Page 2254 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach SALES COMPARISON APPROACH INTRODUCTION In the sales comparison approach, the subject property is compared with similar properties that have sold recently or for which listing prices or offering prices are known. Data from generally similar properties is used, and comparisons are made to demonstrate a probable price at which the subject property would sell if offered on the market. This approach is particularly strong when comparable sales data is plentiful and there is good conformity among properties in the neighborhood. Following is the procedure to be followed in developing this approach: 1. Research the market to gather information on sales, listings, and offers to purchase properties similar to the subject. 2. Verify the information as to factual accuracy and arm's-length market considerations. 3. Identify relevant units of comparison and develop a comparative analysis for each unit. 4. Compare the subject with comparable sale properties using elements of comparison and adjust the sale price of each comparable appropriately. 5. Reconcile the various value indicators produced from the analysis of comparables into a single value indication or a range of values. The outline above is developed in detail on the following pages. Carroll & Carroll 43 Page 2255 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach PANTHER WALK (1.14-2.73 ACRES) Collier County is interested in determining a per acre value for the various tiers for the Panther Walk Preserve Area to assist them in acquiring parcels for the Conservation Collier land preservation program. The price per acre will be estimated for the various tiers for parcels ranging in size from 1.14 acres-2.73 acres. Tiers I. Up to 25% Wetlands II. 26-50% Wetlands III. 51-75% Wetlands IV. 76-100% Wetlands SALES DATA A search was made for sales of land comparable to the subject parcels. The intention was to find comparable sales in similar locations that offer similar functional utility. A total of 18 comparable sales were identified as the best available for analysis. Price per acre of gross land area was developed as the unit of comparison, since that is the unit best suited to the analysis, and the one most often utilized by local buyers, sellers, and brokers of land similar to the subject parcel. Due to the location and physical characteristics, I elected to bracket the subject within the range indicated by comparables. This is preferable to a conventional adjustment process where the magnitude of adjustments is likely to be great, and there is little support for specific adjustments. Comparable land sales grids are given on the following pages. Each comparable is identified by a number which will be used for reference throughout the report. Each comparable is identified on the location map immediately following this page. Carroll & Carroll 44 Page 2256 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LOCATION MAP OF SUBJECT AND VACANT LAND COMPARABLES Carroll & Carroll 45 Page 2257 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – UP TO 25% WETLANDS ITEM SUBJECT COMP #1 COMP #2 COMP #2 COMP #4 COMP #5 COMP #6 PARCEL # 38841120001 38662560002 38968560007 39091320003 38964840006 39832320000 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Panther Walk 60th Avenue 56th Avenue 54th Avenue 68th Avenue 50th Avenue 47th Avenue NE NE NE NE NE NE SALE PRICE N/A $110,000 $189,000 $187,500 $120,000 $178,000 $165,000 REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS N/A Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple 0 0 0 0 0 0 CONDITIONS OF SALE Market Market Market Market Market Market Market 0 0 0 0 0 0 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS None None None None None None None 0 0 0 0 0 0 FINANCING Cash or PENDING Cash to seller PENDING Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Equivalent 0 0 0 0 0 0 ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $110,000 $189,000 $187,500 $120,000 $178,000 $165,000 Recording Date N/A 02/01/26 11/26/25 02/01/26 05/19/25 07/22/25 02/10/25 Months Prior To Effective Date 02/01/26 0.00 2.20 0.00 8.48 6.38 11.70 MARKET CHANGE ADJUSTMENT N/A 0.0% 1.1% 0.0% 4.2% 3.2% 5.9% ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $110,000 $191,081 $187,500 $125,089 $183,676 $174,655 Parcel Area in Gross Acres 1.14-2.73 1.14 2.34 2.34 1.59 2.73 2.73 PRICE PER ACRE ? $96,491 $81,659 $80,128 $78,672 $67,281 $63,976 LOCATION ADDRESS Panther Walk 60th Ave. NE 56th Ave. NE 54th Ave. NE 68th Ave. NE 50th Ave. NE 47th Ave. NE CORNER LOT N/A No No No No No No PAVED ROAD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes CANAL FRONTAGE N/A No No No No No No OVERALL LOCATION Average Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% UTILITIES Well & Septic Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% COMP. PLAN Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates ZONING E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% SIZE IN ACRES 1.14-2.73 1.14 2.34 2.34 1.59 2.73 2.73 SHAPE/CONFIGURATION Rectangular Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Native Veg. Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar WETLANDS No No No No No Yes WETLANDS % 0-25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% WETLANDS QUALITY N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Low 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% GROSS ADJUSTMENT N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% INDICATION OF UNIT VALUE ? $96,491 $81,659 $80,128 $78,672 $67,281 $63,976 Carroll & Carroll 46 Page 2258 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 26-50% WETLANDS ITEM SUBJECT COMP #7 COMP #8 COMP #9 COMP #10 PARCEL # 38841400006 38964120001 39083200005 38850000002 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Panther Walk 2433 62nd 56th Avenue 3265 68th 2960 58th Avenue NE NE Avenue NE Avenue NE SALE PRICE N/A $130,000 $124,990 $110,000 $87,500 REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS N/A Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple 0 0 0 0 CONDITIONS OF SALE Market Market Market Market Market 0 0 0 0 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS None None None None None 0 0 0 0 FINANCING Cash or Cash to seller Cash to seller Conventional Conventional Equivalent 0 0 0 0 ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $130,000 $124,990 $110,000 $87,500 Recording Date N/A 01/12/26 06/05/25 03/14/25 11/14/25 Months Prior To Effective Date 02/01/26 0.66 7.92 10.65 2.60 MARKET CHANGE ADJUSTMENT N/A 0.3% 4.0% 5.3% 1.3% ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $130,427 $129,941 $115,858 $88,636 Parcel Area in Gross Acres 1.14-2.73 2.50 2.73 2.27 2.27 PRICE PER ACRE ? $52,171 $47,597 $51,039 $39,047 LOCATION ADDRESS Panther Walk 62nd Ave. NE 56th Ave. NE 68th Ave. NE 58th Ave. NE CORNER LOT N/A No No No No PAVED ROAD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes CANAL FRONTAGE N/A No No No No OVERALL LOCATION Average Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% UTILITIES Well & Septic Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% COMP. PLAN Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates ZONING E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates 0% 0% 0% 0% SIZE IN ACRES 1.14-2.73 2.50 2.73 2.27 2.27 SHAPE/CONFIGURATION Rectangular Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Native Veg. Similar Similar Similar Similar WETLANDS Yes Yes Yes Yes WETLANDS % 26-50% 43% 26% 26-50% 29% WETLANDS QUALITY High/Medium Medium N/A Low 0% 0% 0% 0% GROSS ADJUSTMENT N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% INDICATION OF UNIT VALUE ? $52,171 $47,597 $51,039 $39,047 Carroll & Carroll 47 Page 2259 of 41167341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 51-75% WETLANDS ITEM SUBJECT COMP #11 COMP #12 COMP #13 PARCEL # 38968200008 38966400004 39082120005 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Panther Walk 50th 50th 72nd Avenue Avenue NE Avenue NE NE SALE PRICE N/A $80,000 $85,000 $95,000 REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS N/A Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple 0 0 0 CONDITIONS OF SALE Market Market Market Market 0 0 0 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS None None None None 0 0 0 FINANCING Cash or Cash to seller PENDING Cash to seller Equivalent 0 0 0 ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $80,000 $85,000 $95,000 Recording Date N/A 03/03/25 02/01/26 06/06/24 Months Prior To Effective Date 02/01/26 11.01 0.00 19.89 MARKET CHANGE ADJUSTMENT N/A 5.5% 0.0% 9.9% ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $84,405 $85,000 $104,447 Parcel Area in Gross Acres 1.14-2.73 2.73 2.73 2.27 PRICE PER ACRE ? $30,918 $31,136 $46,012 LOCATION ADDRESS Panther Walk 50th Ave. NE 50th Ave. NE 72nd Ave. NE CORNER LOT N/A No No No PAVED ROAD Yes Yes Yes Yes CANAL FRONTAGE N/A No No No OVERALL LOCATION Average Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% UTILITIES Well & Septic Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% COMP. PLAN Estates Estates Estates Estates ZONING E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates 0% 0% 0% SIZE IN ACRES 1.14-2.73 2.73 2.73 2.27 SHAPE/CONFIGURATION Rectangular Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Native Veg. Similar Similar Similar WETLANDS Yes Yes Yes WETLANDS % 51-75% 69% 69% 51-75% WETLANDS QUALITY Medium Medium N/A 0% 0% 0% GROSS ADJUSTMENT N/A 0% 0% 0% INDICATION OF UNIT VALUE ? $30,918 $31,136 $46,012 Carroll & Carroll 48 Page 2260 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 76-100% WETLANDS ITEM SUBJECT COMP #14 COMP #15 COMP #16 COMP #17 COMP #18 PARCEL # 38782200006 38782760009 39085520000 38846160008 39146200007 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Panther Walk 62nd Avenue 58th Avenue 70th Avenue 64th Avenue 2631 72nd NE NE NE NE Avenue NE SALE PRICE N/A $25,000 $60,000 $29,900 $69,900 $35,000 REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS N/A Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple 0 0 0 0 0 CONDITIONS OF SALE Market Market Market Market Market Market 0 0 0 0 0 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS None None None None None None 0 0 0 0 0 FINANCING Cash or Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Equivalent 0 0 0 0 0 ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $25,000 $60,000 $29,900 $69,900 $35,000 Recording Date N/A 09/02/25 11/12/25 01/30/26 11/02/25 01/27/25 Months Prior To Effective Date 02/01/26 5.00 2.66 0.07 2.99 12.16 MARKET CHANGE ADJUSTMENT N/A 2.5% 1.3% 0.0% 1.5% 6.1% ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $25,625 $60,799 $29,910 $70,946 $37,129 Parcel Area in Gross Acres 1.14-2.73 1.14 2.27 1.14 2.27 1.14 PRICE PER ACRE ? $22,478 $26,784 $26,237 $31,254 $32,569 LOCATION ADDRESS Panther Walk 62nd Ave. NE 58th Ave. NE 70th Ave. NE 64th Ave. NE 72nd Ave. NE CORNER LOT N/A No No No No No PAVED ROAD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes CANAL FRONTAGE N/A No No No No No OVERALL LOCATION Average Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% UTILITIES Well & Septic Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% COMP. PLAN Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates ZONING E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% SIZE IN ACRES 1.14-2.73 1.14 2.27 1.14 2.27 1.14 SHAPE/CONFIGURATION Rectangular Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Native Veg. Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar WETLANDS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes WETLANDS % 76-100% 75%+ 75%+ 75%+ 75%+ 75%+ WETLANDS QUALITY N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% GROSS ADJUSTMENT N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% INDICATION OF UNIT VALUE ? $22,478 $26,784 $26,237 $31,254 $32,569 Carroll & Carroll 49 Page 2261 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach DISCUSSION OF ADJUSTMENTS Usually, comparable sale properties are not exactly like the subject property. If a typical buyer would perceive the difference to be significant, then adjustment(s) must be made to the comparable sales so that in the end each offers a realistic indication of value for the subject. Adjusting comparable sales is a two-step process. First, adjustments are made so that all of the comparable sales meet the standard of a “market” transaction as outlined in the definition of market value. Customarily, the first group of adjustments is made before the comparables are reduced to a common unit of comparison. Included at this stage are adjustments to bring historic sales current to the appraisal effective date. The second group of adjustments is made after an appropriate unit of comparison is chosen. These adjustments account for physical differences like location, physical characteristics and size. Sometimes adjustment is required for differences in the permitted land use (zoning) or in the availability of public service (infrastructure). When the adjustment process is complete, the unit value indications are reconciled and converted into an estimate of value for the subject. REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS CONVEYED This adjustment category is intended to account for the interest, benefits, and rights inherent in the ownership of real estate. This category reflects the impact on value caused by the fee simple versus the leased fee interest or the contract rent as opposed to market rent. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. CONDITIONS OF SALE This adjustment category is intended to account for a variety of factors that might affect the purchase price. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS This category of adjustment is intended to account for the positive or negative contribution to value of building improvements included with the sale of the land. Buildings that made a positive contribution to the sale price require a negative adjustment. Buildings that were demolished and removed require a positive adjustment to account for demolition costs which are treated as part of the purchase price. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. Carroll & Carroll 50 Page 2262 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach FINANCING Adjustments in this category are intended to account for unusual terms of financing that are not considered equivalent to cash or conventional financing. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. MARKET CHANGE This adjustment is intended to account for changes in value due to the ebb and flow of market forces over time. • The comparables occurred between 2025 and 2026, which market conditions continue to improve. The vacant lot sales from the prior 12 months within the market boundaries of Immokalee Road to the north, Desoto Boulevard to the east, Oil Well Boulevard to the south, and Golden Gate Canal to the west, were plotted on a graph by median sale price. The median sale price in March 2025 was $100,000 and the median sale price in February 2026 was $110,000 indicating an increase of 10.0% or 0.83% per month. Comparing the average sale price of $103,278 in March 2025 to the average sale price of $114,167 in February 2026, also indicates an upward trend. Carroll & Carroll 51 Page 2263 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach I also analyzed recent paired sales in the submarket area which indicate a positive market change, but at a lower monthly rate. Land values continue to appreciate due to the demand for affordable residential land. The buyers include a mix of individuals who plan to build a home, investors, and speculative home builders. Giving consideration to all of the above, I applied a market change rate of 0.50% per month or 6.00% annually. LOCATION/ACCESS/EXPOSURE This category of adjustment reflects the impact on value caused by the advantages or disadvantages of a given location. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. UTILITIES/INFRASTRUCTURE This category of adjustment references the availability and adequacy of the road system, the public was distribution system and the public wastewater collection system of each comparable property as that compares with the same services available to the subject property. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/LAND USE This category of adjustment accounts for differences in the potential land uses (Comprehensive Plan) or in the specific uses (Zoning) to which a property could be developed. Differences in value between the subject property and comparable sales might exist because their highest and best uses are different as a result of government regulation through zoning and land use controls. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. SIZE/SHAPE This category of adjustment addresses the effect on the marketability of a given property, because its physical size/shape might limit the physical utility, or because the size and term of the financial investment required of an investor/speculator is such that the unit price is reduced. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS This category of adjustment reflects the physical aspects of a property that impact its use for development. Physical characteristics included land elevation, soil conditions, Carroll & Carroll 52 Page 2264 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach drainage characteristics, threatened or endangered plant and animal species on the property and the extent and density of covering vegetation. • I was provided with the Conservation Collier Initial Criteria Screening Report Panther Walk TPMA dated August 3, 2022 and updated August 26, 2022. The parcels are located within the Panther Preserve with most containing wetlands. The higher the quality of the wetlands, the higher the mitigation costs. The parcels consist of a mixture of vegetative communities including cypress strand forest, cypress/mixed hardwood forests, oak/pine hammock, wet prairie, and pine flatwoods. • I analyzed aerials, reviewed the listing history, and interviewed brokers, buyers and sellers to determine the wetlands associated with the Comparable sales. No adjustments were made for physical characteristics and instead the comparables were bracketed with some being superior, similar, and inferior. RECAPITULATION OF DATA After making the adjustments discussed above, the comparable sales indicated the following unit values: UP TO 25% WETLANDS Comparables Price Per Gross Acre of Land Area 1 $96,491 2 $81,659 3 $80,128 4 $78,672 5 $67,281 6 $63,976 The range of unit value indications is from $63,976 to $96,491 per acre with an average of $78,034 per acre and a median of $79,400 per acre. Based on the range, I concluded to a unit value of $78,000 per acre. Carroll & Carroll 53 Page 2265 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach 26-50% WETLANDS Comparables Price Per Gross Acre of Land Area 7 $52,171 8 $47,597 9 $51,039 10 $39,047 The range of unit value indications is from $39,047 to $52,171 per acre with an average of $47,463 per acre and a median of $49,318 per acre. Based on the range, I concluded to a unit value of $48,000 per acre. Carroll & Carroll 54 Page 2266 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach 51-75% WETLANDS Comparables Price Per Gross Acre of Land Area 11 $30,918 12 $31,136 13 $46,102 The range of unit value indications is from $30,918 to $46,102 per acre with an average of $36,022 per acre and a median of $31,136 per acre. Based on the range, I concluded to a unit value of $36,000 per acre. Carroll & Carroll 55 Page 2267 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach 76-100% WETLANDS Comparables Price Per Gross Acre of Land Area 14 $22,478 15 $26,784 16 $26,237 17 $31,254 18 $32,569 The range of unit value indications is from $22,478 to $32,569 per acre with an average of $27,864 per acre and a median of $26,784 per acre. Based on the range, I concluded to a unit value of $28,000 per acre. FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE - PANTHER WALK (1.14-2.73 ACRES) The final indications of value on a per acre basis as of February 1, 2026 are presented below. Tier Amount of Wetlands Price Per Gross Acre I Up to 25% Wetlands $78,000 II 26-50% Wetlands $48,000 III 51-75% Wetlands $36,000 IV 76-100% Wetlands $28,000 Carroll & Carroll 56 Page 2268 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach PANTHER WALK (2.74-7.86 ACRES) SALES DATA A search was made for sales of land comparable to the subject parcels. The intention was to find comparable sales in similar locations that offer similar functional utility. A total of 18 comparable sales were identified as the best available for analysis. Price per acre of gross land area was developed as the unit of comparison, since that is the unit best suited to the analysis, and the one most often utilized by local buyers, sellers, and brokers of land similar to the subject parcel. There are a limited number of parcels from 2.74 to 5.00+ acres within the Panther Walk Preserve and it appears there is not differences in unit price given the size differences. The larger parcels tend to sell for similar unit prices because they can be subdivided into two or more lots. Comparable land sales grids are given on the following pages. Each comparable is identified by a number which will be used for reference throughout the report. Each comparable is identified on the location map immediately following this page. Carroll & Carroll 57 Page 2269 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LOCATION MAP OF SUBJECT AND VACANT LAND COMPARABLES Carroll & Carroll 58 Page 2270 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – UP TO 25% WETLANDS ITEM SUBJECT COMP #1 COMP #2 COMP #3 COMP #4 COMP #5 COMP #6 PARCEL # 39020321002 38790000007 39086600000 38724440109 39140360008 38850800008 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Panther Walk 5435 40th 3745-3765 3460 70th 62nd Avenue 72nd Avenue 3025 62nd Street NE 62nd Ave. NE Avenue NE NE NE Avenue NE SALE PRICE N/A $200,000 $270,000 $250,000 $239,900 $390,000 $129,000 REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS N/A Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple 0 0 0 0 0 0 CONDITIONS OF SALE Market Market Market Market Market Market Market 0 0 0 0 0 0 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS None None None None None None None 0 0 0 0 0 0 FINANCING Cash or Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller PENDING Equivalent 0 0 0 0 0 0 ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $200,000 $270,000 $250,000 $239,900 $390,000 $129,000 Recording Date N/A 03/28/25 09/03/25 01/03/25 04/22/25 01/01/26 02/01/26 Months Prior To Effective Date 02/01/26 10.19 4.96 12.95 9.37 1.02 0.00 MARKET CHANGE ADJUSTMENT N/A 5.1% 2.5% 6.5% 4.7% 0.5% 0.0% ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $210,191 $276,701 $266,190 $251,138 $391,987 $129,000 Parcel Area in Gross Acres 2.74-5.00+ 2.92 4.54 5.00 5.00 8.11 2.81 PRICE PER ACRE ? $71,983 $60,947 $53,238 $50,228 $48,334 $45,907 LOCATION ADDRESS Panther Walk 40th St. NE 62nd Ave. NE 70th Ave. NE 62nd Ave. NE 72nd Ave. NE 62nd Ave. NE CORNER LOT N/A No No No No No Yes PAVED ROAD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes CANAL FRONTAGE N/A Yes No No No Yes No OVERALL LOCATION Average Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% UTILITIES Well & Septic Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% COMP. PLAN Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates ZONING E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% SIZE IN ACRES 2.74-5.00+ 2.92 4.54 5.00 5.00 8.11 2.81 SHAPE/CONFIGURATION Rectangular Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Native Veg. Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar WETLANDS No No No No No Yes WETLANDS % 0-25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% WETLANDS QUALITY N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% GROSS ADJUSTMENT N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% INDICATION OF UNIT VALUE ? $71,983 $60,947 $53,238 $50,228 $48,334 $45,907 Carroll & Carroll 59 Page 2271 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 26-50% WETLANDS ITEM SUBJECT COMP #7 COMP #8 COMP #9 COMP #10 PARCEL # 38841400006 38964120001 39718960005 38788320003 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Panther Walk 2433 62nd 2514 56th 4587 45th 3625 64th Avenue NE Avenue NE Avenue NE Avenue NE SALE PRICE N/A $130,000 $124,990 $230,000 $170,000 REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS N/A Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple 0 0 0 0 CONDITIONS OF SALE Market Market Market Market Market 0 0 0 0 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS None None None None None 0 0 0 0 FINANCING Cash or Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Equivalent 0 0 0 0 ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $130,000 $124,990 $230,000 $170,000 Recording Date N/A 01/12/26 05/30/25 02/27/25 05/29/25 Months Prior To Effective Date 02/01/26 0.66 8.12 11.14 8.15 MARKET CHANGE ADJUSTMENT N/A 0.3% 4.1% 5.6% 4.1% ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $130,427 $130,064 $242,816 $176,930 Parcel Area in Gross Acres 2.74-5.00+ 2.50 2.73 5.00 5.00 PRICE PER ACRE ? $52,171 $47,643 $48,563 $35,386 LOCATION ADDRESS Panther Walk 62nd Ave. NE 56th Ave. NE 45th Ave. NE 64th Ave. NE CORNER LOT N/A No No No No PAVED ROAD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes CANAL FRONTAGE N/A No No No No OVERALL LOCATION Average Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% UTILITIES Well & Septic Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% COMP. PLAN Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates ZONING E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates 0% 0% 0% 0% SIZE IN ACRES 2.74-5.00+ 2.50 2.73 5.00 5.00 SHAPE/CONFIGURATION Rectangular Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Native Veg. Similar Similar Similar Similar WETLANDS Yes Yes Yes Yes WETLANDS % 26-50% 43% 26% 37% 44% WETLANDS QUALITY High/Medium Medium Medium Medium 0% 0% 0% 0% GROSS ADJUSTMENT N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% INDICATION OF UNIT VALUE ? $52,171 $47,643 $48,563 $35,386 Carroll & Carroll 60 Page 2272 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 51-75% WETLANDS ITEM SUBJECT COMP #11 COMP #12 COMP #13 COMP #14 PARCEL # 38661000000 38968200008 38966400004 39082120005 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Panther Walk 56th Avenue 50th 50th 72nd Avenue NE Avenue NE Avenue NE NE SALE PRICE N/A $180,000 $80,000 $85,000 $95,000 REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS N/A Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple 0 0 0 0 CONDITIONS OF SALE Market Market Market Market Market 0 0 0 0 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS None None None None None 0 0 0 0 FINANCING Cash or Cash to seller Cash to seller PENDING Cash to seller Equivalent 0 0 0 0 ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $180,000 $80,000 $85,000 $95,000 Recording Date N/A 04/02/25 03/03/25 02/01/26 06/06/24 Months Prior To Effective Date 02/01/26 10.03 11.01 0.00 19.89 MARKET CHANGE ADJUSTMENT N/A 5.0% 5.5% 0.0% 9.9% ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $189,024 $84,405 $85,000 $104,447 Parcel Area in Gross Acres 2.74-5.00+ 5.15 2.73 2.73 2.27 PRICE PER ACRE ? $36,704 $30,918 $31,136 $46,012 LOCATION ADDRESS Panther Walk 56th Ave. NE 50th Ave. NE 50th Ave. NE 72nd Ave. NE CORNER LOT N/A No No No No PAVED ROAD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes CANAL FRONTAGE N/A No No No No OVERALL LOCATION Average Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% UTILITIES Well & Septic Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% COMP. PLAN Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates ZONING E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates 0% 0% 0% 0% SIZE IN ACRES 2.74-5.00+ 5.15 2.73 2.73 2.27 SHAPE/CONFIGURATION Rectangular Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Native Veg. Similar Similar Similar Similar WETLANDS Yes Yes Yes Yes WETLANDS % 51-75% 61% 69% 69% 51-75% WETLANDS QUALITY Medium Medium Medium N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% GROSS ADJUSTMENT N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% INDICATION OF UNIT VALUE ? $36,704 $30,918 $31,136 $46,012 Carroll & Carroll 61 Page 2273 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID – 76-100% WETLANDS ITEM SUBJECT COMP #15 COMP #16 COMP #17 COMP #18 PARCEL # 38782760009 38846160008 38910800003 38850720007 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Panther Walk 58th Avenue 64th Avenue 4621 66th Everglades NE NE Avenue NE Blvd. SALE PRICE N/A $60,000 $69,900 $70,000 $61,500 REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS N/A Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple 0 0 0 0 CONDITIONS OF SALE Market Market Market Market Market 0 0 0 0 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS None None None None None 0 0 0 0 FINANCING Cash or Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Equivalent 0 0 0 0 ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $60,000 $69,900 $70,000 $61,500 Recording Date N/A 11/12/25 11/02/25 02/18/25 12/12/25 Months Prior To Effective Date 02/01/26 2.66 2.99 11.44 1.68 MARKET CHANGE ADJUSTMENT N/A 1.3% 1.5% 5.7% 0.8% ADJUSTED SALE PRICE N/A $60,799 $70,946 $74,004 $62,016 Parcel Area in Gross Acres 2.74-5.00+ 2.27 2.27 3.03 2.81 PRICE PER ACRE ? $26,784 $31,254 $24,424 $22,070 LOCATION ADDRESS Panther Walk 58th Ave. NE 64th Ave. NE 66th Ave. NE 62nd Ave. NE CORNER LOT N/A No No No Yes PAVED ROAD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes CANAL FRONTAGE N/A No No No No OVERALL LOCATION Average Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% UTILITIES Well & Septic Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% COMP. PLAN Estates Estates Estates Estates Estates ZONING E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates E - Estates 0% 0% 0% 0% SIZE IN ACRES 2.74-5.00+ 2.27 2.27 3.03 2.81 SHAPE/CONFIGURATION Rectangular Similar Similar Similar Similar 0% 0% 0% 0% PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Native Veg. Similar Similar Similar Similar WETLANDS Yes Yes Yes Yes WETLANDS % 76-100% 75%+ 75%+ 100% 80% WETLANDS QUALITY N/A N/A Medium Medium/High 0% 0% 0% 0% GROSS ADJUSTMENT N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% INDICATION OF UNIT VALUE ? $26,784 $31,254 $24,424 $22,070 Carroll & Carroll 62 Page 2274 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach DISCUSSION OF ADJUSTMENTS Usually, comparable sale properties are not exactly like the subject property. If a typical buyer would perceive the difference to be significant, then adjustment(s) must be made to the comparable sales so that in the end each offers a realistic indication of value for the subject. Adjusting comparable sales is a two-step process. First, adjustments are made so that all of the comparable sales meet the standard of a “market” transaction as outlined in the definition of market value. Customarily, the first group of adjustments is made before the comparables are reduced to a common unit of comparison. Included at this stage are adjustments to bring historic sales current to the appraisal effective date. The second group of adjustments is made after an appropriate unit of comparison is chosen. These adjustments account for physical differences like location, physical characteristics and size. Sometimes adjustment is required for differences in the permitted land use (zoning) or in the availability of public service (infrastructure). When the adjustment process is complete, the unit value indications are reconciled and converted into an estimate of value for the subject. REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS CONVEYED This adjustment category is intended to account for the interest, benefits, and rights inherent in the ownership of real estate. This category reflects the impact on value caused by the fee simple versus the leased fee interest or the contract rent as opposed to market rent. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. CONDITIONS OF SALE This adjustment category is intended to account for a variety of factors that might affect the purchase price. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS This category of adjustment is intended to account for the positive or negative contribution to value of building improvements included with the sale of the land. Buildings that made a positive contribution to the sale price require a negative adjustment. Buildings that were demolished and removed require a positive adjustment to account for demolition costs which are treated as part of the purchase price. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. Carroll & Carroll 63 Page 2275 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach FINANCING Adjustments in this category are intended to account for unusual terms of financing that are not considered equivalent to cash or conventional financing. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. MARKET CHANGE This adjustment is intended to account for changes in value due to the ebb and flow of market forces over time. • The comparables occurred between 2025 and 2026, which market conditions continue to improve. The vacant lot sales from the prior 12 months within the market boundaries of Immokalee Road to the north, Desoto Boulevard to the east, Oil Well Boulevard to the south, and Golden Gate Canal to the west, were plotted on a graph by median sale price. The median sale price in March 2025 was $100,000 and the median sale price in February 2026 was $110,000 indicating an increase of 10.0% or 0.83% per month. Comparing the average sale price of $103,278 in March 2025 to the average sale price of $114,167 in February 2026, also indicates an upward trend. Carroll & Carroll 64 Page 2276 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach I also analyzed recent paired sales in the submarket area which indicate a positive market change, but at a lower monthly rate. Land values continue to appreciate due to the demand for affordable residential land. The buyers include a mix of individuals who plan to build a home, investors, and speculative home builders. Giving consideration to all of the above, I applied a market change rate of 0.50% per month or 6.00% annually. LOCATION/ACCESS/EXPOSURE This category of adjustment reflects the impact on value caused by the advantages or disadvantages of a given location. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. UTILITIES/INFRASTRUCTURE This category of adjustment references the availability and adequacy of the road system, the public was distribution system and the public wastewater collection system of each comparable property as that compares with the same services available to the subject property. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/LAND USE This category of adjustment accounts for differences in the potential land uses (Comprehensive Plan) or in the specific uses (Zoning) to which a property could be developed. Differences in value between the subject property and comparable sales might exist because their highest and best uses are different as a result of government regulation through zoning and land use controls. • None of the comparables sales required adjustment in this category. SIZE/SHAPE This category of adjustment addresses the effect on the marketability of a given property, because its physical size/shape might limit the physical utility, or because the size and term of the financial investment required of an investor/speculator is such that the unit price is reduced. • None of the comparable sales required adjustment in this category. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS This category of adjustment reflects the physical aspects of a property that impact its use for development. Physical characteristics included land elevation, soil conditions, Carroll & Carroll 65 Page 2277 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach drainage characteristics, threatened or endangered plant and animal species on the property and the extent and density of covering vegetation. • I was provided with the Conservation Collier Initial Criteria Screening Report Panther Walk TPMA dated August 3, 2022 and updated August 26, 2022. The parcels are located within the Panther Preserve with most containing wetlands. The higher the quality of the wetlands, the higher the mitigation costs. The parcels consist of a mixture of vegetative communities including cypress strand forest, cypress/mixed hardwood forests, oak/pine hammock, wet prairie, and pine flatwoods. • I analyzed aerials, reviewed the listing history, and interviewed brokers, buyers and sellers to determine the wetlands associated with the Comparable sales. No adjustments were made for physical characteristics and instead the comparables were bracketed with some being superior, similar, and inferior. RECAPITULATION OF DATA After making the adjustments discussed above, the comparable sales indicated the following unit values: UP TO 25% WETLANDS Comparables Price Per Gross Acre of Land Area 1 $71,983 2 $60,947 3 $53,238 4 $50,228 5 $48,334 6 $45,907 The range of unit value indications is from $45,907 to $71,983 per acre with an average of $55,106 per acre and a median of $51,733 per acre. Based on the range, I concluded to a unit value of $55,000 per acre. Carroll & Carroll 66 Page 2278 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach 26-50% WETLANDS Comparables Price Per Gross Acre of Land Area 7 $52,171 8 $47,643 9 $48,563 10 $35,386 The range of unit value indications is from $35,386 to $48,563 per acre with an average of $45,941 per acre and a median of $48,103 per acre. Based on the range, I concluded to a unit value of $46,000 per acre. Carroll & Carroll 67 Page 2279 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach 51-75% WETLANDS Comparables Price Per Gross Acre of Land Area 11 $36,704 12 $30,918 13 $31,136 14 $46,012 The range of unit value indications is from $30,918 to $46,012 per acre with an average of $36,192 per acre and a median of $33,920 per acre. Based on the range, I concluded to a unit value of $36,000 per acre. Carroll & Carroll 68 Page 2280 of 4116 7341 Report Sales Comparison Approach 76-100% WETLANDS Comparables Price Per Gross Acre of Land Area 15 $26,784 16 $31,254 17 $24,424 18 $22,070 The range of unit value indications is from $22,070 to $31,254 per acre with an average of $26,133 per acre and a median of $25,604 per acre. Based on the range, I concluded to a unit value of $26,000 per acre. FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE - PANTHER WALK (2.74-7.86 ACRES) The final indications of value on a per acre basis as of February 1, 2026 are presented below. Tier Amount of Wetlands Price Per Gross Acre I Up to 25% Wetlands $55,000 II 26-50% Wetlands $46,000 III 51-75% Wetlands $36,000 IV 76-100% Wetlands $26,000 CARROLL & CARROLL Timothy W. Sunyog, MAI Cert Gen RZ3288 Carroll & Carroll 69 Page 2281 of 4116 7341 Report Addenda ADDENDA (In Order of Appearance) Page Topic Count Page(s) Page(s) Assumptions and Limiting Conditions............................................................................ 2 Parcel List.............................................................................................................................. 2 Qualifications of Appraiser................................................................................................. 2 Carroll & Carroll Page 2282 of 4116 7341 Report Addenda ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS The certification of the appraiser appearing in this report is subject to the following assumptions and limiting conditions. ACCEPTANCE OF AND/OR USE OF THIS APPRAISAL REPORT CONSTITUTES ACCEPTANCE OF ALL GENERAL AND EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS. EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS None HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS None GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for matters including legal or title considerations. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable. 2. The property is appraised free and clear of liens and encumbrances. 3. Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed. 4. The information furnished by others is assumed to be true, correct and reliable. A reasonable effort was made to verify such information, but the appraiser bears no responsibility for its accuracy. 5. All engineering is assumed to be correct. The plot plans and illustrative material is included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. 6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies that might be required to discover them. 7. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations and laws. Carroll & Carroll Page 2283 of 4116 7341 Report Addenda 8. It is assumed that the property is either in compliance with, or is "grandfathered" or "vested" under, all applicable zoning, use regulations and restrictions. 9. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or private entity or organization have been, or can be, obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate is based. 10. It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of the property described, and that there is no encroachment or trespass. 11. It is assumed that the subject site and improvements are not contaminated by any hazardous material or toxic substance. During the property inspection we were sensitive to obvious signs of contamination and we reported anything unusual. However, we are not qualified to render professional opinions regarding the existence or the nature of hazardous materials in or on the subject property. If a definitive opinion is desired, then the client is urged to retain an expert in the field. 12. The distribution of the total value in this report, between land and improvements, applies only under the stated program of utilization. The separate allocations for land and buildings must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. 13. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. 14. Unless previous arrangements were made, the appraisers, by reason of this appraisal, are not required to give further consultation, testimony, or to be in attendance in court. Carroll & Carroll Page 2284 of 41167341 Report Addenda Carroll & Carroll Page 2285 of 41167341 Report Addenda Carroll & Carroll Page 2286 of 41167341 Report Addenda Carroll & Carroll Page 2287 of 41167341 Report Addenda Carroll & Carroll Page 2288 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.9 ID# 2026-735 Executive Summary Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program with Thien Van Tran and Lua Thi-Kim Nguyen (“Tran”) for a 2.27-acre parcel at a cost of $150,000, for a total cost not to exceed $152,180, inclusive of closing costs. OBJECTIVE: To purchase a 2.27-acre property within North Golden Gate Estates for the Conservation Collier Program. CONSIDERATIONS: On May 27, 2025, Agenda Item No. 11.C., the Board approved a CCLAAC recommended AAL and directed staff to actively pursue acquisition of the properties under the Program. The Tran parcel was approved as an A-list property on the May 2025 AAL. Tran - 41612760001 – 38th Ave. SE in North Golden Gate Estates, east of Everglades Blvd. S, north of I-75 • 2.27 acres of vacant, unimproved land consisting primarily of upland Mesic flatwoods and Oak/Pine hammock plant communities. • Located within the Everglades and I-75 Blvd. TPMA. • Frequent use by the Florida black bear and the Florida panther in this area. Conservation parcels in this area will protect a connection from private conservation lands and undeveloped property within North Belle Meade to the west to Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve and the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge to the east. • Staff contracted one independent, state-certified, general real estate appraisal firm to appraise the Tran property and five other properties in the same area. The total cost to obtain all six appraisals was $3,900. • An offer of $142,500 was made on January 29, 2026, and rejected. The negotiated purchase price of $150,000 was accepted on February 17, 2026. • The purchase price is 100% of the appraised value. The Tran property met 3 of 8 Initial Screening Criteria identified in the Conservation Collier Ordinance No. 2002-63, as amended, including native plant communities, human social values, and being within a Target Protection Mailing Area (TPMA). Telemetry indicates significant utilization of this area by the Florida black bear and the federally endangered Florida panther. Preservation of this property would allow refuge for wildlife, including the Florida panther, travelling between North Golden Gate Estates and Picayune Strand State Forest to the south. The property can also be built upon with other acquisitions in this area to provide a connection from private conservation lands and undeveloped property within North Belle Meade to Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve and the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge to the east. The property provides opportunities for hiking and fishing. The parcel is zoned Estates, which allows a maximum of 1 single family unit per 2.25 acres. This acquisition is consistent with Conservation Collier Purchasing Policy, Resolution No. 2025-194, which allows the offer amount to be determined by staff but shall be no more than the appraised value. Pursuant to Ordinance 2002-63, as amended, a Project Design Report (PDR) for this property is provided herewith. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objectives to preserve and enhance the character of our community and to protect our natural resources. FISCAL IMPACT: The funds for this vacant land acquisition will be withdrawn from the Conservation Collier Acquisition Fund (1061). The property identified herein comprises a not-to-exceed acquisition cost of $152,180 as follows: Page 2289 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.9 ID# 2026-735 Seller Acres Appraised Purchase Closing Costs (title Total Initial 5 Long-term Name Value Price commitment, title Purchase Yr. Maint Annual policy, closing fee, Price Costs Maint recording fees) Costs Tran 2.27 $150,000 $150,000 $2,180 $152,180 $5,100 $575 As of April 28, 2026, the estimated property acquisition costs for Conservation Collier properties, including this property and those under contract, total $141,672,531. The funds for managing this property will be expended from the Conservation Collier Maintenance Fund (1062). The initial costs of maintenance are provided in the attached PDR. The total maintenance costs for this parcel for the first five years (initial maintenance costs) are estimated at $5,100. After initial restoration, the estimated maintenance costs for this parcel will be approximately $575 annually. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Fee simple acquisition of conservation lands is consistent with and supports Policy 1.3.1(e) in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval. - SAA RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. To approve the attached Agreement and accept the Warranty Deed once approved by the County Attorney’s Office. 2. To authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement and any and all other County Attorney’s Office approved documents related to this transaction; and 3. To authorize the County Manager or designee to prepare related vouchers and warrants for payments and to take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure performance under the Agreement. PREPARED BY: Melissa Hennig, Environmental Specialist I, Conservation Collier, Development Review Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Tran Agreement 2. Tran PDR 3. Tran Appraisal Page 2290 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between THIEN VAN TRAN and LUA THI-KIM NGUYEN, husband and wife, whose address is 323 Wolf Pointe Trail, Long Lake, MN 55356, (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Seller"), and COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, its successors and assigns, whose address is 2685 Horseshoe Drive South, Suite 103, Naples, FL 34104 (hereinafter referred to as "Purchaser"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Seller is the owner of that certain parcel of real property (hereinafter referred to as "Property"), located in Collier County, State of Florida, and being more particularly described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference. WHEREAS, Purchaser is desirous of purchasing the Property, subject to the conditions and other agreements hereinafter set forth, and Seller is agreeable to such sale and to such conditions and agreements. NOW, THEREFORE, and for and in consideration of the premises and the respective undertakings of the parties hereinafter set forth and the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, it is agreed as follows: I. AGREEMENT 1.01 In consideration of the purchase price and upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, Seller shall sell to Purchaser and Purchaser shall purchase from Seller the Property, described in Exhibit "A". II. PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE 2.01 The purchase price (the "Purchase Price") for the Property shall be ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND and 00/100 DOLLARS ($150,000), (U.S. Currency) payable at time of closing. III. CLOSING 3.01 The Closing (THE "CLOSING DATE", "DATE OF CLOSING", OR "CLOSING") of the transaction shall be held on or before one hundred and eighty (180) days following execution of this Agreement by the Purchaser, or within thirty (30) days of Purchaser's receipt of all closing documents, whichever is later. The Closing shall CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 1 of 13 Page 2291 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 be held at the office of the insuring title company or by mail. The procedure to be followed by the parties in connection with the Closing shall be as follows: 3.011 Seller shall convey a marketable title free of any liens, encumbrances, exceptions, or qualifications. Marketable title shall be determined according to applicable title standards adopted by the Florida Bar and in accordance with law. At the Closing, the Seller shall cause to be delivered to the Purchaser the items specified herein and the following documents and instruments duly executed and acknowledged, in recordable form: 3.0111 Warranty Deed in favor of Purchaser conveying title to the Property, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances other than: (a) The lien for current taxes and assessments. (b) Such other easements, restrictions, or conditions of record. 3.0112 Combined Purchaser-Seller closing statement. 3.0113 A "Gap Tax Proration, Owner's Non-Foreign Affidavit", as required by Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code and as required by the title insurance underwriter to insure the "gap" and issue the policy contemplated by the title insurance commitment. 3.0114 A W-9 Form, "Request for Taxpayer Identification and Certification" as required by the Internal Revenue Service. 3.012 At the Closing, the Purchaser, or its assignee, shall cause to be delivered to the Seller the following: 3.0121 A negotiable instrument (County Warrant) in an amount equal to the Purchase Price. No funds shall be disbursed to Seller until the Title Company verifies that the state of the title to the Property has not changed adversely since the date of the last endorsement to the commitment, referenced in Section 4.011 thereto, and the Title Company is irrevocably committed to pay the Purchase Price to Seller and to issue the Owner's title policy to Purchaser in accordance with the commitment immediately after the recording of the deed. 3.0122 Funds payable to the Seller representing the cash payment due at Closing in accordance with Article III hereof, shall be subject to adjustment for prorations as hereinafter set forth. CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 2 of 13 Page 2292 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 3.02 Each party shall be responsible for payment of its own attorney's fees. Seller, at its sole cost and expense, shall pay at Closing all documentary stamp taxes due relating to the recording of the Warranty Deed, in accordance with Chapter 201.01, Florida Statutes, closing fee for title services, and the cost and electronic fee of recording any instruments necessary to clear Seller's title to the Property. The cost of the Owner's Form B Title Policy, issued pursuant to the Commitment provided for in Section 4.011 below, shall be paid by Purchaser. The cost of the title commitment shall also be paid by Purchaser. If required by a Phase I report and desired by Purchaser, Seller shall pay for a Phase II Environmental Assessment selected by Purchaser. 3.03 Purchaser shall pay for the cost of recording the Warranty Deed. Real Property taxes shall be prorated based on the current year's tax with due allowance made for maximum allowable discount, homestead and any other applicable exemptions and paid by Seller. If Closing occurs at a date which the current year's millage is not fixed, taxes will be prorated based upon such prior year's millage. IV. REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS 4.01 Upon execution of this Agreement by both parties or at such other time as specified within this Article, Purchaser and/or Seller, as the case may be, shall perform the following within the times stated, which shall be conditions precedent to the Closing; 4.011 Within fifteen (15) days after the date hereof, Purchaser shall request as evidence of title an ALTA Commitment for an Owner's Title Insurance Policy (ALTA Form B-1970) covering the Property, together with hard copies of all exceptions shown thereon. Purchaser shall have thirty (30) days, following receipt of the title insurance commitment, to notify Seller in writing of any objection to title other than liens evidencing monetary obligations, if any, which obligations shall be paid at closing. If the title commitment contains exceptions that make the title unmarketable, Purchaser shall deliver to the Seller written notice of its intention to waive the applicable contingencies or to terminate this Agreement. 4.012 If Purchaser shall fail to advise the Seller in writing of any such objections in Seller's title in the manner herein required by this Agreement, the title shall be deemed acceptable. Upon notification of Purchaser's objection to title, Seller shall have thirty (30) days to remedy any defects to convey good and marketable title at Seller's expense, except for liens or monetary obligations which will be satisfied at Closing. Seller, at its sole expense, shall use its best efforts to make such title good and marketable. In the event Seller is unable to cure said objections within said time period, Purchaser, by CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 3 of 13 Page 2293 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 providing written notice to Seller within seven (7) days after expiration of said thirty (30) day period, may accept title as it then is, waiving any objection; or Purchaser may terminate the Agreement. A failure by Purchaser to give such written notice of termination within the time period provided herein shall be deemed an election by Purchaser to accept the exceptions to title as shown in the title commitment. 4.013 Seller agrees to furnish any existing surveys of the Property in Seller's possession to Purchaser within ten (10) days of the effective date of this Agreement. Purchaser shall have the option, at its own expense, to obtain a current survey of the Property prepared by a surveyor licensed by the State of Florida. No adjustments to the Purchase Price shall be made based upon any change to the total acreage referenced in Exhibit "A," unless the difference in acreage revealed by survey exceeds 5% of the overall acreage. If the survey provided by Seller or obtained by Purchaser, as certified by a registered Florida surveyor, shows: (a) an encroachment onto the property; or (b) that an improvement located on the Property projects onto lands of others, or (c) lack of legal access to a public roadway, the Purchaser shall notify the Seller in writing of such encroachment, projection, or lack of legal access, and Seller shall have the option of curing said encroachment or projection, or obtaining legal access to the Property from a public roadway, within sixty (60) days of receipt of said written notice from Purchaser. Purchaser shall have ninety (90) days from the effective date of this Agreement to notify Seller of any such objections. Should Seller elect not to or be unable to remove the encroachment, projection, or provide legal access to the property within said sixty (60) day period, Purchaser, by providing written notice to Seller within seven (7) days after expiration of said sixty (60) day period, may accept the Property as it then is, waiving any objection to the encroachment, or projection, or lack of legal access, or Purchaser may terminate the Agreement. A failure by Purchaser to give such written notice of termination within the time period provided herein shall be deemed an election by Purchaser to accept the Property with the encroachment, or projection, or lack of legal access. V. INSPECTION PERIOD 5.01 Purchaser shall have one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of this Agreement, ("Inspection Period"), to determine through appropriate investigation that: 1. Soil tests and engineering studies indicate that the Property can be developed without any abnormal demucking, soil stabilization or foundations. 2. There are no abnormal drainage or environmental requirements to the development of the Property. CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 4 of 13 Page 2294 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 3. The Property is in compliance with all applicable State and Federal environ- mental laws and the Property is free from any pollution or contamination. 4. The Property can be utilized for its intended use and purpose in the Conservation Collier program. 5.02 If Purchaser is not satisfied, for any reason whatsoever, with the results of any investigation, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller prior to the expiration of the Inspection Period, written notice of its intention to waive the applicable contingencies or to terminate this Agreement. If Purchaser fails to notify the Seller in writing of its specific objections as provided herein within the Inspection Period, it shall be deemed that the Purchaser is satisfied with the results of its investigations and the contingencies of this Article V shall be deemed waived. In the event Purchaser elects to terminate this Agreement because of the right of inspection, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller copies of all engineering reports and environmental and soil testing results commissioned by Purchaser with respect to the Property. 5.03 Purchaser and its agents, employees and servants shall, at their own risk and expense, have the right to go upon the Property for the purpose of surveying and conducting site analyses, soil borings and all other necessary investigation. Purchaser shall, in performing such tests, use due care. Seller shall be notified by Purchaser no less than twenty-four (24) hours prior to said inspection of the Property. VI. INSPECTION 6.01 Seller acknowledges that the Purchaser, or its authorized agents, shall have the right to inspect the Property at any time prior to the Closing. VII. POSSESSION 7.01 Purchaser shall be entitled to full possession of the Property at Closing. VIII. PRORATIONS 8.01 Ad valorem taxes next due and payable, after closing on the Property, shall be prorated at Closing based upon the gross amount of current year taxes, and shall be paid by Seller. IX. TERMINATION AND REMEDIES 9.01 If Seller shall have failed to perform any of the covenants and/or agreements contained herein which are to be performed by Seller, within ten (10) days of written notification of such failure, Purchaser may, at its option, terminate this CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 5 of 13 Page 2295 of 4116 CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 Agreement by giving written notice of termination to Seller. Purchaser shall have the right to seek and enforce all rights and remedies available at law or in equity to a contract vendee, including the right to seek specific performance of this Agreement. 9.02 The parties acknowledge that the remedies described herein and in the other provisions of this Agreement provide mutually satisfactory and sufficient remedies to each of the parties and take into account the peculiar risks and expenses of each of the parties. X. SELLER'S AND PURCHASER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 10.01 Seller and Purchaser represent and warrant the following: 10.011 Seller and Purchaser have full right and authority to enter into and to execute this Agreement and to undertake all actions and to perform all tasks required of each hereunder. Seller is not presently the subject of a pending, threatened or contemplated bankruptcy proceeding. Seller further represents the Property is free from any and all occupants, tenants, and other persons or entities claiming possession of the Property at the time of closing. This provision shall survive closing. 10.012 Seller has full right, power, and authority to own and operate the Property, and to execute, deliver, and perform its obligations under this Agreement and the instruments executed in connection herewith, and to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby. All necessary authorizations and approvals have been obtained authorizing Seller and Purchaser to execute and consummate the transaction contemplated hereby. At Closing, certified copies of such approvals shall be delivered to Purchaser and/or Seller, if necessary. 10.013 The warranties set forth in this paragraph shall be true on the date of this Agreement and as of the date of Closing. Purchaser's acceptance of a deed to the said Property shall not be deemed to be full performance and discharge of every agreement and obligation on the part of the Seller to be performed pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 10.014 Seller represents that it has no knowledge of any actions, suits, claims, proceedings, litigation or investigations pending or threatened against Seller, at law, equity or in arbitration before or by any federal, state, municipal or other governmental instrumentality that relate to this agreement or any other property that could, if continued, adversely affect Seller's ability to sell the Property to Purchaser according to the terms of this Agreement. CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 6 of 13 Page 2296 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 10.015 No party or person other than Purchaser has any right or option to acquire the Property or any portion thereof. 10.016 Until the date fixed for Closing, so long as this Agreement remains in force and effect, Seller shall not encumber or convey any portion of the Property or any rights therein, nor enter into any agreements granting any person or entity any rights with respect to the Property or any part thereof, without first obtaining the written consent of Purchaser to such conveyance, encumbrance, or agreement which consent may be withheld by Purchaser for any reason whatsoever. 10.017 Seller represents that they have (it has) no knowledge that there is or ever has been incinerators, septic tanks, or cesspools on the Property; all waste, if any, is discharged into a public sanitary sewer system; Seller represents that they have (it has) no knowledge that any pollutants are or have been discharged from the Property, directly or indirectly into any body of water. Seller represents that to their knowledge the Property has not been used for the production, handling, storage, transportation, manufacture, or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances or wastes, as such terms are defined in applicable laws and regulations, or any other activity that would have toxic results, and no such hazardous or toxic substances are currently used in connection with the operation of the Property, and there is no proceeding or inquiry by any authority with respect thereto. Seller represents that they have (it has) no knowledge that there is ground water contamination on the Property or potential of ground water contamination from neighboring properties. Seller represents that they have (it has) no knowledge that there is or ever has been any storage tanks for gasoline, or any other substances are or were located on the Property at any time during or prior to Seller's ownership thereof. Seller represents that they have (it has) no knowledge that any part of the Property has ever been used as a sanitary landfill. 10.018 Seller has no knowledge that the Property and Seller's operations concerning the Property are in violation of any applicable Federal, State or local statute, law or regulation, or of any notice from any governmental body has been served upon Seller claiming any violation of any law, ordinance, code or regulation or requiring or calling attention to the need for any work, repairs, construction, alterations or installation on or in connection with the Property in order to comply with any laws, ordinances, codes or regulation with which Seller has not complied. Seller represents that it has no knowledge of consent orders, notices of violation, correspondence and any other documents issued by or submitted to any governmental agency or regulatory authority relating to the environmental condition of the property. CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 7 of 13 CAO Page 2297 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 10.019 Seller has no knowledge of unrecorded leases, licenses or other possessory interests, restrictions, easements, or rights of way (other than existing zoning regulations) that restrict or affect the use of the Property, and there are no maintenance, construction, advertising, management, leasing, employment, service, or other contracts affecting the Property. 10.020 Seller has no knowledge that there are any suits, actions or arbitration, bond issuances or proposals therefor, proposals for public improvement assessments, pay-back agreements, paving agreements, road expansion or improvement agreements, utility moratoriums, use moratoriums, improvement moratoriums, administrative or other proceedings or governmental investigations or requirements, formal or informal, existing or pending or threatened which affects the Property or which adversely affects Seller's ability to perform hereunder; nor is there any other charge or expense upon or related to the Property which has not been disclosed to Purchaser in writing prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 10.021 Seller acknowledges and agrees that Purchaser is entering into this Agreement based upon Seller's representations stated above and on the understanding that Seller will not cause the zoning or physical condition of the Property to change from its existing state on the effective date of this Agreement up to and including the Date of Closing. Therefore, Seller agrees not to enter into any contracts or agreements pertaining to or affecting the Property and not to do any act or omit to perform any act which would change the zoning or physical condition of the Property or the governmental ordinances or laws governing same. Seller also agrees to notify Purchaser promptly of any change in the facts contained in the foregoing representations and of any notice or proposed change in the zoning, or any other action or notice, that may be proposed or promulgated by any third parties or any governmental authorities having jurisdiction of the development of the property which may restrict or change any other condition of the Property. 10.022 At the Closing, Seller shall deliver to Purchaser a statement (hereinafter called the "Closing Representative Statement") reasserting the foregoing representations as of the Date of Closing, which provisions shall survive the Closing. 10.023 Seller represents, warrants and agrees to indemnify, reimburse, defend and hold Purchaser harmless from any and all costs (including attorney's fees) asserted against, imposed on or incurred by Purchaser, directly or indirectly, pursuant to or in connection with the application of any federal, state, local or common law relating to pollution or protection of the environment which shall be in accordance with, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. Section 9601, CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 8 of 13 Page 2298 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 et seq., ("CERCLA" or "Superfund"), which was amended and upgraded by the Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act of 1986 ("SARA"), including any amendments or successor in function to these acts. This provision and the rights of Purchaser, hereunder, shall survive Closing and are not deemed satisfied by conveyance of title. 10.024 Any loss and/or damage to the Property between the date of this Agreement and the date of Closing shall be Seller's sole risk and expense. XI. NOTICES 11.01 Any notice, request, demand, instruction, or other communication to be given to either party hereunder shall be in writing, sent by facsimile with automated confirmation of receipt, or by registered, or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and with notification to the other Party sent via email containing the tracking number and/or fax number (if applicable) of such notice addressed as follows: If to Purchaser: Attn: Matthew Denison Conservation Collier Program 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Naples, Florida 34104 Email: Matthew. Denison@collier.gov With a copy to: Attn: Vivian Rodriguez Collier County Real Property Management 2685 Horseshoe Drive South, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 Telephone number: 239-252-8402 Email: vivian.rodriguez@collier.gov If to Seller: Thien Van Tran Lua Thi-Kim Nguyen 323 Wolf Pointe Trail Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Telephone number: Thien - 320-260-0920 Telephone number: Lua Thi-Kim: 320-267-1904 Email: Itnguyen611969@yahoo.com 11.02 The addressees and numbers for the purpose of this Article may be changed by either party by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided herein. For the purpose of changing such addresses or addressees only, unless and until such written notice is received, the last CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 9 of 13 Page 2299 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 addressee and respective address stated herein shall be deemed to continue in effect for all purposes. XII. REAL ESTATE BROKERS 12.01 Any and all brokerage commissions or fees shall be the sole responsibility of the Seller. Seller shall indemnify Purchaser and hold Purchaser harmless from and against any claim or liability for commission or fees to any broker or any other person or party claiming to have been engaged by Seller as a real estate broker, salesman or representative, in connection with this Agreement. Seller agrees to pay any and all commissions or fees at closing pursuant to the terms of a separate agreement, if any. XIII. MISCELLANEOUS 13.01 This Agreement may be executed in any manner of counterparts which together shall constitute the agreement of the parties. 13.02 This Agreement and the terms and provisions hereof shall be effective as of the date this Agreement is executed by both parties and shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, personal representatives, successors, successor trustee, and assignees whenever the context so requires or admits. 13.03 Any amendment to this Agreement shall not bind any of the parties hereof unless such amendment is in writing and executed and dated by Purchaser and Seller. Any amendment to this Agreement shall be binding upon Purchaser and Seller as soon as it has been executed by both parties. 13.04 Captions and section headings contained in this Agreement are for or convenience and reference only; in no way do they define, describe, extend, limit the scope or intent of this Agreement or any provisions hereof. 13.05 All terms and words used in this Agreement, regardless of the number and gender in which used, shall be deemed to include any other gender or number as the context or the use thereof may require. 13.06 No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing signed by the party against whom it is asserted, and any waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be applicable only to the specific instance to which it is related and shall not be deemed to be a continuing or future waiver as to such provision or a waiver as to any other provision. CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 10 of 13 Page 2300 of 4116CONSECONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 13.07 If any date specified in this Agreement falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, then the date to which such reference is made shall be extended to the next succeeding business day. 13.08 Seller is aware of and understands that the "offer" to purchase represented by this Agreement is subject to acceptance and approval by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida. 13.09 If the Seller holds the Property in the form of a partnership, limited partnership, corporation, trust, or any form of representative capacity whatsoever for others, Seller shall make a written public disclosure, according to Chapter 286, Florida Statutes, under oath, of the name and address of every person having a beneficial interest in the Property before Property held in such capacity is conveyed to Collier County. (If the corporation is registered with the Federal Securities Exchange Commission or registered pursuant to Chapter 517, Florida Statutes, whose stock is for sale to the general public, it is hereby exempt from the provisions of Chapter 286, Florida Statutes.) 13.10 This Agreement is governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. XIV. ENTIRE AGREEMENT 14.01 This Agreement and the exhibits attached hereto contain the entire agreement between the parties, and no promise, representation, warranty, or covenant not included in this Agreement, or any such referenced agreements has been or is being relied upon by either party. No modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be of any force or effect unless made in writing and executed and dated by both Purchaser and Seller. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. XV. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF POTENTIAL FUTURE USE 15.01 Any development rights or credits available on the Property are relinquished by the Seller and conveyed to the Purchaser at closing as part of the sale of the Property. 15.02 Seller and Purchaser acknowledge and agree that any portion of the Property may be used for public road right of way and roadway related improvements, including, but not limited to, stormwater and utility improvements, at the sole discretion of Purchaser. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES. CC Agreement 06/05/2025 Page 11 of 13 CAO Page 2301 of 4116 CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX lD NUMBER: 416i2760001 iN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have signed below. Dated ProjecVAcquisition Approved by BCC:_ AS TO PURCHASER: ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, Clerk of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Circuit Court and Comptroller COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA a rr- , Deputy Clerk DAN KOWAL, Chairman ASTO SELLER. DATED, By. THIEN TRAN By: LUA THI.KIM N N Approved as to form and legality: Assistant County ilr CC Agreemenl 06i/05/2025 Page 12 of 13 Page 2302 of 4116CONSERVATION COLLIER TAX ID NUMBER: 41612760001 EXHIBIT "А" PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: 41612760001 West 150 feet of Tract 30, Golden Gate Estates Unit No. 92, according to the map or plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page(s) 31, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 2.27 ACRES CC Agreement 06/6/05/2025 Page 13 of 13 CAO Page 2303 of 4116 Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program Project Design Report Tran Property Date: April 2026 Property Owners: Thien Van Tran and Lua Thi-Kim Nguyen Folio(s): 41612760001 Location: East of Everglades Blvd. S. and north of I-75; north off 38th Ave. SE Size: 2.27 acres Purchase Price: $150,000 History of Project: Recommended for the “A” Selected for the “A” Offer made to category on the Active Acquisition category on AAL by Offer Accepted owner List (AAL) by CCLAAC BCC 3/5/2025 5/27/2025 1/29/2026 1/30/2026 Purpose of Project: Environmental Conservation – Conservation Collier Program Program Qualifications: The Echeverria parcel met 3 out of 8 Initial Screening Criteria identified in the Conservation Collier Ordinance No. 2002-63, as amended, including native plant communities, human social values, and within a Target Protection Mailing Area (TPMA). The property can provide many recreational opportunities including hiking and fishing. The acquisition of adjacent parcels would expand potential for recreational opportunities. The parcel contains Mesic flatwoods and Oak/Pine hammock. Telemetry also indicates significant utilization of this area by Florida black bear and the federally endangered Florida panther. This parcel contributes to an important wildlife corridor connecting species from the Florida Panther Refuge, Golden Gate Rural Estates, Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve, North Belle Meade, as well as the Picayune Strand State Forest and Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve to the south through wildlife underpasses under I-75. Zoning, Growth Management and Land Use Overlays: The parcel is zoned Estates, which allows a maximum of 1 single family unit per 2.25 acres. Projected Management Activities: Management of this property will address the costs of exotic vegetation and cabbage palm removal and control. 1 Page 2304 of 4116Estimated Management Costs: Management Element 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Exotics $1,150 $900 $900 $575 $575 Cabbage palm treatment $1,000 Total $2,150 $900 $900 $575 $575 2 Page 2305 of 4116 Tran Property Location Map 3 Page 2306 of 4116 Tran Property Aerial Map 4 Page 2307 of 4116 REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL REPORT TRAN PARCEL Residential Land 38th Avenue SE Naples, Collier County, Florida, 34117 PREPARED FOR: Mr. Roosevelt Leonard, R/W-AC Supervisor – Operations & Performance Management Collier County 2685 Horseshoe Drive South, Suite 103 Naples, FL 34104 PO No. 4500242751 EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE APPRAISAL: January 4, 2026 DATE OF THE REPORT: January 9, 2026 REPORT FORMAT: Appraisal Report PREPARED BY: RKL Appraisal and Consulting, PLC RKL File Number: 2025-288 4500 Executive Drive, Suite 230 Naples, FL 34119-8908 Phone: 239-596-0800 www.rklac.com Page 2308 of 4116 Tran Parcel 38th Avenue SE Naples, Florida 4500 Executive Drive, Suite 230 Naples, FL 34119-8908 Phone: 239-596-0800 www.rklac.com Page 2309 of 4116 January 9, 2026 Mr. Roosevelt Leonard, R/W-AC Collier County 2685 Horseshoe Drive South, Suite 103 Naples, FL 34104 Re: Real Estate Appraisal Tran Parcel 38th Avenue SE, Naples, Collier County, Florida, 34117 PO No. 4500242751 RKL File Number: 2025-288 Dear Mr. Leonard: At your request, RKL Appraisal and Consulting, PLC has prepared the accompanying appraisal for the above referenced property. The purpose of the appraisal is to estimate the market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property. The intended users for the assignment are Conservation Collier and the Collier County Board of Commissioners, and the intended use of the appraisal is to assist with the acquisition decisions by Conservation Collier and the Collier County Board of Commissioners. We use the appraisal report option of Standards Rule 2-2 of USPAP to report the assignment results. Please reference the appraisal scope section of this report for important information regarding the scope of research and analysis for this appraisal, including property identification, inspection, highest and best use analysis, and valuation methodology. The accompanying appraisal conforms with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute and the appraisal guidelines of Collier County. The subject is a vacant residential land parcel of land containing an area of 2.27 acres, or 99,000 square feet. Low density residential with limited agricultural uses are permitted under the present Estates (E) zoning designation. 4500 Executive Drive, Suite 230 Naples, FL 34119-8908 Phone: 239-596-0800 www.rklac.com Page 2310 of 4116 Mr. Roosevelt Leonard, R/W-AC Collier County January 9, 2026 Page 2 Based on the appraisal described in the accompanying report, subject to the Limiting Conditions and Assumptions, Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions (if any), I have made the following value conclusion(s): VALUE CONCLUSIONS Appraisal Premise Interest Appraised Date of Value Value Conclusion Market Value, As Is Fee Simple January 4, 2026 $150,000 The value conclusion(s) are subject to the following hypothetical conditions and extraordinary conditions. These conditions may affect the assignment results. Hypothetical Conditions: None. Extraordinary Assumptions: None. Respectfully submitted, RKL APPRAISAL AND CONSULTING, PLC Rachel M. Zucchi, MAI, CCIM Florida State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ2984 rzucchi@rklac.com; Phone 239-596-0801 4500 Executive Drive, Suite 230 Naples, FL 34119-8908 Phone: 239-596-0800 www.rklac.com Page 2311 of 4116TRAN PARCEL TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary of Important Facts and Conclusions ................................................................... 1 Conservation Features Summary Overview ....................................................................... 2 Introduction Information ..................................................................................................... 3 Subject Identification ...................................................................................................... 3 Current Ownership and Property History ....................................................................... 3 Appraisal Scope .............................................................................................................. 3 Client, Intended User, and Intended Use ........................................................................ 4 Definition of Market Value ............................................................................................. 4 Definition of Property Rights Appraised ........................................................................ 4 Purpose of Appraisal, Property Rights Appraised, and Dates ........................................ 4 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................ 5 Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................. 6 National Economic Analysis........................................................................................... 6 Florida Economic Analysis ............................................................................................. 8 Collier County Area Analysis ....................................................................................... 10 Market Area Analysis ................................................................................................... 27 Property Description and Analysis ................................................................................... 32 Site Analysis ................................................................................................................. 32 Real Estate Taxes and Assessments .............................................................................. 41 Highest and Best Use .................................................................................................... 42 Valuation Methodology .................................................................................................... 44 Analyses Applied .......................................................................................................... 45 Sales Comparison Approach ......................................................................................... 46 Reconciliation ............................................................................................................... 54 Final Value Conclusion................................................................................................. 54 Certification ...................................................................................................................... 55 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions ............................................................................. 57 Addenda Appraiser Qualifications ....................................................................................... Addendum A Property Information ............................................................................................ Addendum B Comparable Data .................................................................................................. Addendum C Page 2312 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS GENERAL Subject: Tran Parcel 38th Avenue SE, Naples, Collier County, Florida, 34117 Owner: Thien Van Tran and Lua Thi-Kim Nguyen Legal Description: Golden Gate Estates Unit 92, West 150 feet of Tract 30, according to the map or plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page(s) 31, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Tax Identification: 41612760001 Intended Use: The intended use is to assist with the acquisition decisions by Conservation Collier and the Collier County Board of Commissioners. Intended User(s): Conservation Collier and the Collier County Board of Commissioners PROPERTY Land Area: Total: 2.27 acres; 99,000 square feet Flood Zone: Zone AH Zoning: E - Estates Highest and Best Use As Vacant Single-family residential development Exposure Time 10-12 months Marketing Period 10-12 months VALUE INDICATIONS Value Range of Comparables: $63,800 to $71,280 per acre Reconciled Value(s): As Is Value Conclusion(s) $150,000 Effective Date(s) January 4, 2026 Property Rights Fee Simple The value conclusion(s) are subject to the following hypothetical conditions and extraordinary conditions. These conditions may affect the assignment results. Hypothetical Conditions: None. Extraordinary Assumptions: None. Page 1 Page 2313 of 4116TRAN PARCEL CONSERVATION FEATURES SUMMARY OVERVIEW CONSERVATION FEATURES SUMMARY OVERVIEW Project Name: Tran Parcel Folio numbers with owner(s) of record: 41612760001 Zoning and overlays: E (Estates) within Estates Designation - Residential Estates Subdistrict future land use Zoning Considerations for TDR’s, PHU, other endangered species: None Was the cost to mitigate wetlands or endangered species taken into consideration? Yes. Heavily vegetated site located along south side of 38th Avenue SE. According to a Conservation Collier Property Summary Report dated March 2025, there are no wetlands on the parcel. According to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Wetlands Mapper, the parcel consists entirely of uplands. According to a Wetlands Determination by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection dated March 2, 2024, there is a small area of wetlands near the northwest corner (front) of the site. According to the Conservation Collier Property Summary, the parcel consists of mesic flatwoods and Oak/Pine hammock. The estimated cost to remove exotics is $900 with ongoing annual costs estimated at $340. Cabbage Palm thinning is estimated at $900. Scope of proposed mitigation: None. Land Area: 2.27 acres or 99,000 square feet Access for the parcel taken into consideration: Yes, access is average. Highest and Best Use: Single-family residential development Date of estimated value: January 4, 2026 Estimated value: $150,000 Page 2 Page 2314 of 4116TRAN PARCEL INTRODUCTION INFORMATION INTRODUCTION INFORMATION SUBJECT IDENTIFICATION Subject: Tran Parcel 38th Avenue SE, Naples, Collier County, Florida, 34117 Legal Description: Golden Gate Estates Unit 92, West 150 feet of Tract 30, according to the map or plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page(s) 31, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Tax Identification: 41612760001 The subject is a vacant residential land parcel of land containing an area of 2.27 acres, or 99,000 square feet. Low density residential with limited agricultural uses are permitted under the present Estates (E) zoning designation. CURRENT OWNERSHIP AND PROPERTY HISTORY Owner The owner of the property is Thien Van Tran and Lua Thi-Kim Nguyen. Sale History According to public records, the subject has not sold in the last three years. Current Listing/Contract(s): The subject is not currently listed for sale, or under contract. To the best of our knowledge, no other sale or transfer of ownership has occurred within the past three years, and as of the effective date of this appraisal, the property is not subject to an agreement of sale or option to buy, nor is it listed for sale. APPRAISAL SCOPE According to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, it is the appraiser’s responsibility to develop and report a scope of work that results in credible results that are appropriate for the appraisal problem and intended user(s). Therefore, the appraiser must identify and consider: ● the client and any other intended users; ● the intended use of the appraiser’s opinions and conclusions; ● the type and definition of value; ● the effective date of the appraiser’s opinions and conclusions; ● subject of the assignment and its relevant characteristics ● assignment conditions ● the expectations of parties who are regularly intended users for similar assignments; and Page 3 Page 2315 of 4116TRAN PARCEL INTRODUCTION INFORMATION ● what an appraiser’s peer’s actions would be in performing the same or a similar assignment. CLIENT, INTENDED USER, AND INTENDED USE The client and the intended user of the appraisal are Conservation Collier and the Collier County Board of Commissioners. The intended use is to assist with the acquisition decisions by Conservation Collier and the Collier County Board of Commissioners. The appraisal is not intended for any other use or user. DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE Market value definition used by agencies that regulate federally insured financial institutions in the United States is defined by The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 7th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2022) as: The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: ▪ Buyer and seller are typically motivated; ▪ Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best interests; ▪ A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; ▪ Payment is made in terms of cash in United States dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and ▪ The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.” (Source: 12 C.F.R. Part 34.42(h); 55 Federal Register 34696, August 24, 1990, as amended at 57 Federal Register 12202, April 9, 1992; 59 Federal Register 29499, June 7, 1994; 79 Federal Register 28400, May 16, 2014; 83 Federal Register April 9, 2018; 84 Federal Register, October 8, 2019) DEFINITION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED Fee simple estate is defined as an: “Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat.” (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 7th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2022) PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL, PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED, AND DATES The purpose of the appraisal is to estimate the market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property. The effective date of the subject appraisal is January 4, 2026. The date of inspection was January 4, 2026. The date of the report is January 9, 2026. Page 4 Page 2316 of 4116TRAN PARCEL INTRODUCTION INFORMATION SCOPE OF WORK The problem to be solved is to estimate the market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property. SCOPE OF WORK Report Type: This is an Appraisal Report as defined by Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice under Standards Rule 2-2(a). This format provides a summary or description of the appraisal process, subject and market data and valuation analyses. Property Identification: The subject has been identified by the legal description and the assessors' parcel number. Inspection: A complete on site inspection was made and photographs were taken. Market Area and Analysis of A complete analysis of market conditions has been made. Market Conditions: The appraiser maintains and has access to comprehensive databases for this market area and has reviewed the market for sales and listings relevant to this analysis. Highest and Best Use Analysis: A complete as vacant highest and best use analysis for the subject has been made. Physically possible, legally permissible, and financially feasible uses were considered, and the maximally productive use was concluded. Valuation Analyses Cost Approach: A cost approach was not applied as there are no improvements that contribute value to the property. Sales Comparison Approach: A sales approach was applied as typically this is the most appropriate approach for the valuation of vacant land. This approach is applicable to the subject because there is an active market for similar properties and sufficient sales data is available for analysis. Income Approach: An income approach was not applied as the subject is not likely to generate rental income as vacant land. Hypothetical Conditions: None. Extraordinary Assumptions: None. Comments The individual sections of the report detail the additional research, confirmation, and analysis of relevant data. Page 5 Page 2317 of 4116TRAN PARCEL NATIONAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ECONOMIC ANALYSIS NATIONAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS The Federal Reserve Open Market Committee (FOMC) released the following statement on December 10, 2025. Available indicators suggest that economic activity has been expanding at a moderate pace. Job gains have slowed this year, and the unemployment rate has edged up through September. More recent indicators are consistent with these developments. Inflation has moved up since earlier in the year and remains somewhat elevated. The Committee seeks to achieve maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run. Uncertainty about the economic outlook remains elevated. The Committee is attentive to the risks to both sides of its dual mandate and judges that downside risks to employment rose in recent months. In support of its goals and in light of the shift in the balance of risks, the Committee decided to lower the target range for the federal funds rate by 1/4 percentage point to 3- 1/2 to 3-3/4 percent. In considering the extent and timing of additional adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, the Committee will carefully assess incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks. The Committee is strongly committed to supporting maximum employment and returning inflation to its 2 percent objective. In assessing the appropriate stance of monetary policy, the Committee will continue to monitor the implications of incoming information for the economic outlook. The Committee would be prepared to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate if risks emerge that could impede the attainment of the Committee's goals. The Committee's assessments will take into account a wide range of information, including readings on labor market conditions, inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and financial and international developments. The Federal Reserve cut rates by 25 basis points in September 2025, the first cut of the year, and another 25 basis points in October 2025 and December 2025. According to the Fed’s dot plot, policymakers are split with a majority projecting just one cut in 2026, down from expectations earlier in the year. The following table details the economic forecasts of Federal Reserve Board members and Federal Reserve Bank presidents as of December 2025. Real GDP is projected to grow at a rate of 2.3% in 2026, an increase from the September 2025 projection of 1.8%. The unemployment projection for 2026 remained at 4.4%. The Core PCE inflation projection for 2026 decreased to 2.5% from the September 2025 projection of 2.6%. Page 6 Page 2318 of 4116TRAN PARCEL NATIONAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Lawrence Yun, NAR Chief Economist, noted in a January 2025 Economic Issues and Home Sales Trends webinar that 2025 may be a better year for real estate, with more inventory, more listings and more sales. Dr. Yun projects home sales rising 9% this year and another 13% in 2026. He projects price growth to be more muted at 0% to 5%. According to the Freddie Mac 2025 Outlook, although demand is expected to remain well above average in 2025, vacancy is expected to increase to 6.2%. The below-average rent growth of 2.2% and rising vacancy rates result in a forecast of gross rental income growth of 2% for 2025. According to the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts’ (NAREIT) 2025 Report, “there is a real possibility for an environment with both moderating interest rates and robust economic growth, otherwise known as an economic soft landing. Nevertheless, there are both lingering and emerging risks, including soft property fundamentals in some sectors and higher interest rates reflecting fiscal imbalances. Overall, in a world that will be marked by increasing and accelerating change, we see opportunities for REITs in 2025.” In the 2025 CBRE U.S. Real Estate Market Outlook, Dr. Richard Barkham, Global Chief Economist and Head of Global Research, predicts that despite many uncertainties, “the U.S. economy is poised for growth in 2025, driven by consumer spending, easing financial conditions and productivity gains. While retail and data centers have been supported by longer-term trends, all other real estate sectors will see the start of a new cycle.” Even though the 10-year Treasury yield is projected to remain above 4%, Dr. Barkham projects capitalization rates will compress slightly. Investors have the opportunity to secure long-term returns that have not been available for many years. Page 7 Page 2319 of 4116TRAN PARCEL FLORIDA ECONOMIC ANALYSIS According to the Deloitte Center for Financial Services annual Commercial Real Estate Outlook for 2025, “the global economic recovery has been uneven across geographies, and this will likely continue going forward.” Results from Deloitte’s 2025 commercial real estate outlook survey give some indication that commercial real estate owners and investors are hopeful that 2025 will emerge as a year of potential recovery over two years of muted revenues and pullbacks in spending. After two consecutive years where most survey respondents expected revenue declines, 88% of global respondents now report they expect their company’s revenues to increase going forward, a substantial shift from the 60% who expected further declines last year. Moreover, 60% of respondents expect growth to be in excess of 5% year over year. According to the PwC Emerging Trends in Real Estate 2025, real estate investors and developers should be poised for an upturn in industry trends as the post-pandemic disruption abates and positive cyclical forces gain strength. “The Federal Reserve is among the most important cyclical forces. Its pivot to reducing interest rates indicates a peak for inflation and construction costs — and the pivot is helping real estate markets to clear, boosting transaction activity. However, not all dealmakers are ready to jump in with both feet. After all, rate cuts also indicate a slower economy and that could affect net operating income (NOI) growth. The path to renewed vigor could take surprising detours.” According to J.P. Morgan Chase 2025 commercial real estate outlook, Following several years of elevated inflation, muted growth and general uncertainty, commercial real estate could be positioned for an upswing. “The industry is poised to be in a better place compared to the last few years,” said Victor Calanog, Global Head of Research and Strategy, Real Estate Private Markets at Manulife Investment Management. “It appears that the landing will be relatively soft, so that should mean continued positive momentum for economic activity, benefiting leasing and income drivers, including rents and occupancies.” Overall, the outlook for the 2025 commercial real estate is positive. The industrial sector remains the industry’s darling. Multifamily and retail continue to perform well, although they do have vulnerabilities. In some markets, even office vacancy rates are beginning to moderate. FLORIDA ECONOMIC ANALYSIS According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Florida was home to four of the nation’s top five fastest-growing metropolitan statistical areas and three of the top 10 that gained the largest number of people from 2022 to 2023, reflecting continued population growth across the South. U.S. migration patterns played a significant role in the South’s population growth. Many people moved to this region, contributing to its overall positive net domestic migration (more people moving in from the rest of the United States than moving out to other parts of the United States). From 2022 to 2023, 28 of the top 30 metro areas with the highest positive domestic migration were in the South. According to the Winter 2024 Florida Forecast prepared by the Institute for Economic Competitiveness at the University of Central Florida, Florida’s economy, as measured by real Gross State Product, will expand at an average annual rate of 2.5% from 2024 to Page 8 Page 2320 of 4116TRAN PARCEL FLORIDA ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 2027. Real Gross State Product will decelerate during the economic slowdown as growth will slow to 3.3% in 2024 and 2.2% in 2025, then accelerate to reach 2.5% by 2026 and ease to 2.1% in 2027. According to WalletHub’s 2025 Best States for Retirement report, Florida remains the top choice based on affordability and quality of life. According to the report, the combination of warm weather, miles of coastline and a tax-friendly environment keeps it at No. 1. Florida stands out not just for its beaches and recreation options but also for what it lacks: state income, inheritance and estate taxes. WalletHub analyst Chip Lupo said, "There's a lot of talk in Florida now about doing away with property taxes, which would make it even more appealing to retirees." Other top-ranking states included Minnesota, Colorado, Wyoming and South Dakota. Payroll job growth in Florida will begin to gradually decelerate as the economy remains at full employment. After year-over-year growth of 5.7% in 2022, payroll employment in 2023 was 3.4% but will slow to 2.0% in 2024 and drift lower to 0.6% by 2027. Housing starts have felt the bitter chill of higher mortgage rates. Total starts were 193,500 in 2022—before higher mortgage rates and worries of a slowing economy started a deceleration that will slow starts to 157,072 in 2027. The unemployment rate fell to 2.7% in 2023. The slower economy will push the rate up to 3.1% in 2024, and to 3.6% in 2025 before creeping to 3.8% in 2027. Page 9 Page 2321 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS Collier County has long been an attractive place to retire and it continues to be an area that experiences a great deal of seasonal population increases. According to the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department, Collier County’s population increases up to 25% between November and April due to seasonal residents and short-term agricultural workers in the Immokalee area. The population increase creates a high degree of seasonality within the retail, service, and hospitality sectors of Collier County’s economy. Collier County is located less than 150 miles from Fort Myers, Fort Lauderdale, Miami, Sarasota, and West Palm Beach as shown in the following table. Distance to Other Major Markets Metro Area Miles Fort Myers 44 Jacksonville 378 Fort Lauderdale 107 Tallahassee 435 Miami 128 Atlanta 616 Sarasota 120 New York 1,311 West Palm Beach 150 Dallas 1,315 Tampa 169 Chicago 1,335 Orlando 238 Population The Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Florida released the following population statistics for Southwest Florida. As shown, total population increased in all six Southwest Florida counties with the greatest percentage growth in Lee County and the second highest in Charlotte County. Projections of Florida Population by County, 2025-2050, with Estimates for 2023 Percent Change Population 2023 2025 2030 2023 2025 2030 2035 to 2025 to 2030 to 2035 Southwest Florida 1,922,304 1,993,700 2,144,000 2,262,900 3.71% 7.54% 5.55% Charlotte 204,126 211,300 226,900 240,000 3.51% 7.38% 5.77% Collier 399,480 413,300 443,000 466,000 3.46% 7.19% 5.19% Glades 12,591 12,700 12,900 13,000 0.87% 1.57% 0.78% Hendry 40,895 41,500 42,600 43,400 1.48% 2.65% 1.88% Lee 800,989 835,900 908,500 964,400 4.36% 8.69% 6.15% Sarasota 464,223 479,000 510,100 536,100 3.18% 6.49% 5.10% Source: University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Florida Population Studies, Bulletin 198, January 2024 Page 10 Page 2322 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS U.S. News & World Report, the global authority in rankings and consumer advice evaluated the country’s 150 most populous metropolitan areas based on affordability, job prospects and desirability. The 2024 25 Best Places to Retire includes six Florida metro areas with Daytona Beach the top Florida market at No. 8. Tampa is No. 12 overall while Sarasota is No. 18. Naples is ranked 6th overall in the 2023-2024 Best Places to Live report released by U.S. News & World Report and Sarasota is ranked 5th. Naples ranks No. 1 in the annual U.S. News & World Report Best Places to Live in the U.S. Sarasota, was ranked No. 11. Employment The local economy is largely dependent on the real estate market. Naples is one of the wealthiest areas in Florida, and it has seen significant population and job growth over the past several years. As migration from state to state has returned to pre-pandemic levels, the Naples region has seen population and job growth slow over the past year. According to the 4Q 2025 CoStar report, the market is one of the most affluent areas in Florida, with a median household income of $94,000, about 10% higher than the national median. The area's reputation as a retirement destination is reflected in its median age of 54, well above the state's median of 43. This demographic profile shapes both the local economy and commercial real estate landscape, as the market caters to a population with considerable disposable income and a preference for high-quality amenities and healthcare services. Population growth has long been a primary driver of commercial real estate expansion in Naples. Growth peaked between 2021 and 2022, when the market added approximately 13,000 new residents, but has since slowed to 3,100 net new residents in the past year. Migration patterns have largely returned to pre pandemic norms, with in-migration from out-of-state movers expected to remain subdued in the future. This moderation in population growth is having a cascading impact on commercial real estate fundamentals, with demand for office, industrial, and retail space softening as the pace of new residents slows. Healthcare is the cornerstone of Naples' economy, representing the largest share of the market's employment base. Major hospital systems are among the top employers, and the presence of Arthrex, a global medical device manufacturer employing nearly 4,000 people, underscores the market's strength in health related industries. The area's aging population continues to drive demand for medical office space, outpatient facilities, and specialized healthcare services, supporting ongoing investment by healthcare companies. Additionally, tourism, real estate, and finance contribute to the region's economic diversity, but none rival healthcare's dominance in local employment. Page 11 Page 2323 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS Page 12 Page 2324 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS The following table shows employment projections through 2032 by the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. As shown, the Construction and Professional and Business Services Industries have the largest projected growth rate of 11.1% and 11% respectively. Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting are all projected to decline by 10%. JOBS BY INDUSTRY WORKFORCE REGION 24 - CHARLOTTE, COLLIER, GLADES, HENDRY, LEE AND MONROE COUNTIES Employment Percent NAICS Title 2024 2032 Growth Growth Total, All Industries 667,076 710,326 43,250 6.5 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 6,315 5,681 -634 -10.0 Mining 583 622 39 6.7 Construction 74,293 82,513 8,220 11.1 Manufacturing 16,413 16,459 46 0.3 Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 117,977 125,261 7,284 6.2 Information 6,229 6,715 486 7.8 Financial Activities 31,824 33,907 2,083 6.5 Professional and Business Services 82,530 91,587 9,057 11.0 Education and Health Services 76,975 84,462 7,487 9.7 Leisure and Hospitality 100,721 103,073 2,352 2.3 Other Services, Ex. Public Admin 24,972 26,837 1,865 7.5 Government 77,367 79,170 1,803 2.3 Self Employed and Unpaid Family Workers, All Jobs 50,877 54,039 3,162 6.2 Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity The annual Collier County rate peaked in 2010 at 11.6% and had declined steadily since until the spike from the Covid-19 pandemic in April 2020. Since the pandemic, unemployment numbers steadily decreased through 2024 as the economy continued to improve. However, unemployment rates in 2025 year-to-date have exceeded 2024 levels. The preliminary reported unemployment rate in August 2025 was 4.8%. Page 13 Page 2325 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS As of August 2025, the unemployment rate for the State of Florida was 4.4%, down from the peak in May 2020 of 14.2%. On a national level, the unemployment rate in August 2025 was 4.5%, a decrease from the peak in April 2020 of 14.8%. Collier County currently has a slightly higher August rate, at 4.8%, than state levels and lower rate than national levels. Page 14 Page 2326 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS The local economy is largely dependent on the real estate market. The following table from the U.S. Department of Labor shows Naples/Immokalee/Marco Island employment from 2014 through 2024. As shown, unemployment from the Covid-19 pandemic affected the service and leisure and hospitality sectors the most. All sectors have regained all lost jobs and have exceeded 2019 levels. Recent hurricanes, including Ian (September 2022), Helene (September 2024), and Milton (October 2024) have also affected the labor market. The Service-Providing and Leisure and Hospitality sector have both lost jobs in 2025 year to date. Naples - Immokalee - Marco Island Service- % Goods % Mining, Logging, & % Leisure and % All Employees, % Year Providing Change Producing Change Const. Change Hospitality Change Total Nonfarm Change 2015 118,500 3.6% 17,000 10.4% 13,600 12.4% 26,500 3.9% 135,500 4.7% 2016 123,200 4.0% 18,700 10.0% 14,900 9.6% 27,500 3.8% 141,900 4.7% 2017 125,400 1.8% 19,400 3.7% 15,400 3.4% 28,300 2.9% 144,800 2.0% 2018 128,600 2.6% 21,500 10.8% 17,200 11.7% 29,100 2.8% 150,100 3.7% 2019 132,200 2.8% 22,400 4.2% 17,700 2.9% 30,000 3.1% 154,600 3.0% 2020 125,300 -5.2% 22,100 -1.3% 17,200 -2.8% 25,600 -14.7% 147,400 -4.7% 2021 132,000 5.3% 23,200 5.0% 18,100 5.2% 27,800 8.6% 155,300 5.4% 2022 139,700 5.8% 24,800 6.9% 19,400 7.2% 29,300 5.4% 164,500 5.9% 2023 145,400 4.1% 26,300 6.0% 20,700 6.7% 30,300 3.4% 171,100 4.0% 2024 150,300 3.4% 27,000 2.7% 21,100 1.9% 32,000 5.6% 177,300 3.6% 2025* 149,300 -0.9% 27,300 1.4% 21,300 1.0% 31,100 -4.9% 176,600 -0.6% *Through August 2025; percentage increase in comparison to August 2024 YTD Source: U.S. Department of Labor Collier County and the entire Southwest Florida Region is substantially dependent on the real estate and construction sectors. Therefore, the area has been and should be more susceptible to cyclical fluctuations that have occurred in other areas dominated by a single industry. The Southwest Florida Economic Development Alliance reports key employers in Southwest Florida (Collier, Lee and Charlotte County) from Biofuels, healthcare, technology, apparel design, to sugar production are a driving force behind the region’s success. The tables below provides a few examples of some key employers in Southwest Florida and the largest industries. Page 15 Page 2327 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS The following table shows the Top 25 Employers as reported by the Florida Gulf Coast University Regional Economic Research Institute in 2023. Page 16 Page 2328 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS Tourist Tax Revenues The following graph from the Southwest Florida Regional Economic Indicators August 2025 report prepared by Florida Gulf Coast University shows Collier, Lee, Charlotte, Sarasota County’s tourist tax revenues. Seasonally-adjusted real tourist tax revenues for the coastal counties registered $8.0 million in August 2025, up 0.5 percent from the prior month and 0.1 percent decline from the August 2024 figure. Collier County’s seasonally-adjusted real tourist tax revenues were $3.9 million in August 2025, a 0.7 percent increase from July 2025 and a 1.8 percent increase from August 2024. Development Growth continues to shift east with Ave Maria becoming the top-selling single-family residential community in Collier County and was recently ranked as one of the Top 20 Selling Master-Planned Communities in the United States. It has maintained the top ranking in the Naples-Fort Myers market for the past eight years. Ave Maria reported a total of 600 new home sales in 2024 and 652 new home sales in 2023. It is the highest- ranking community in all of Collier County. There are currently four residential builders in Ave Maria, CC Homes, Del Webb Naples, Lennar and Pulte Homes. The grand opening of The National Golf and Country Club at Ave Maria, a bundled golf community by Lennar, was held on January 7, 2021. The Immokalee Road corridor between Naples Page 17 Page 2329 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS and Ave Maria is projected to see thousands of new homes developed in the next few years. According to a June 2023 Naples Daily News article, Collier County commissioners approved an increase in the town of Ave Maria by nearly 1,000 acres to 5,000 acres which doesn’t include the roughly 1,000-acre Ave Maria University campus and other public benefits such as parks. According to David Genson, president of development for Barron Collier Cos., while more single-family homes will be built, the maximum number of residences won’t change, with the cap remaining at 11,000. With the way the town was originally laid out, it would have supported about 8,400 units without adding more land. The original plans called for 60% of the homes to be single- family which will increase to more than 80%. Approximately 50% of the buyers are from the east coast of Florida. In January 2020, in what was described as one of the most important votes for the future of growth in Collier County, commissioners approved Rivergrass Village. The village is the first of three planned 1,000-acre villages stretching from just north of Oil Well Road to east of Golden Gate Boulevard East. Rivergrass Village will allow for up to 2,500 homes; 100,000 square feet of retail and office uses and a minium of 25,000 square feet for civic government, and institutional buildings. Longwater Village will allow for up to 2,600 homes; 65,000 square feet of retail and office space and 25,000 square feet for civic government, and institutional buildings and Bellmar Village will allow for up to 2,750 homes; 85,000 square feet of retail and office space and 27,500 square feet for civic government, and institutional buildings. In a near unanimous decision, the Collier County Planning Commission agreed to recommend approval of Longwater in March 2021. The project has sparked controversy because the property sits in the environmentally sensitive Rural Lands Stewardship Area, or RLSA. Commissioners voted to approve the Longwater and Bellmar Villages on June 8, 2021. The commissioners approved Brightshore, another rural village with thousands of proposed homes in December 2022. In December 2025, Collier County commissioners unanimously approved a new rural village known as Horse Trails Village. The Collier Enterprises development is planned on nearly 1,218 acres on the north side of Oil Well Road, west of State Road 29 within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area. According to the Naples Daily News, it's the eighth village or town the county has approved in the environmentally sensitive Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA). Horse Trails is approved for up to 3,205 homes, including 305 set aside as affordable housing; a maximum of 169,865 square feet of retail and office development; a maximum of 100,000 square feet of indoor self-storage; and a minimum of 32,050 square feet of civic, governmental and institutional uses. Other approved uses include senior housing such as assisted living centers and continuing care retirement communities, limited to 300 residences. Development could begin in 2027, with the build-out expected to take about 15 years. There are more than $1 billion in new luxury high-rise developments near the coast including The Ritz-Carlton Residences, Naples (formerly known as One Naples) at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Gulf Shore Drive as well as Pelican Bay (Mystique completed in 2019) and Kalea Bay (Towers 100 and 200 are complete, Tower Page 18 Page 2330 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS 300 was completed in December 2022, Tower 400 was completed in 2024 and Tower 500 is scheduled for completion in September 2026 in North Naples. New commercial development is very active at the intersections of Collier Boulevard and US 41 East as well as Collier Boulevard and Immokalee Road. In its 2nd Quarter 2025 report, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) found that the Naples- Marco Island MSA had a 0.45% increase in home prices (purchase-only) over the trailing 12 months. Home prices (purchase-only) in the state of Florida decreased 1.39% over the past year (2Q 2024 – 2Q 2025) which was 50th in the nation. The continuing care retirement community, Moorings Park, teamed with London Bay Homes to develop an independent living development with 275 residences in 17 buildings. All of the buildings are six stories over parking. Grande Lake, will be built on 55 acres off Golden Gate Parkway, between Airport-Pulling and Livingston Roads. Entrance fees start at $1.5 million and are 70% refundable. Construction on the first 47 units in three buildings commenced in December 2018 with completion in May 2020. NCH Healthcare partnered with New York-based Hospital for Hospital for Special Surgery, known as HSS, to build a three-story, 80,000-square-foot hospital. HSS at NCH will be a 15-bed acute-care addition on the hospital campus located along the north side of Immokalee Road near the NCH North Naples campus between Health Park and Medical Boulevards. The facility opened to patients in June 2025. Paradise Coast Sports Complex, is Collier County’s new $100 million Amateur Sports Complex. The county hopes to become a destination for traveling youth sports teams and amateur athletes. While the focus of the complex is athletics, with 20 fields between soccer, baseball and softball, plus a 10,000-person championship stadium, the goal is to get people to stay after the game is over with The Cove and The Factory. The Cove is a bar and food truck area for patrons to relax, listen to live music and play a variety of yard games (bag toss, oversized Connect Four and Jenga, plus ping pong). The Factory is an outdoor workout facility focusing on functional fitness (similar to CrossFit) which is available on a monthly membership basis. Additionally, the man-made lake next to The Cove includes a 2/3 mile jogging loop with three workout stations. There is a climbing wall for public use and a beach volleyball court. Collier County Commissioners approved a $15 million economic development agreement on June 22, 2021 for The Great Wolf Lodge. The Lodge is built on 20 acres of land along City Gate Boulevard North and feature a 100,000 square foot indoor water park, 500- room hotel, and 62,000 square feet of amenities and attractions. The resort opened in September 2024 and has 600 full-time and part-time employees. Naples Comprehensive Health (NCH) announced plans for an estimated $65 million osteopathic medical school that will be located near the corner of Hacienda Lakes Boulevard and Collier Boulevard in East Naples. According to a Naples Daily News article, dated November 11, 2025, Bay College of Osteopathic Medicine LLC is looking for a "sister school" to complement its recently completed Orlando College of Page 19 Page 2331 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS Osteopathic Medicine. The Collier County Commission unanimously approved $6 million in economic development funds over 10 years for the initiative. The project is expected to have a $1.7 billion to $2 billion overall economic impact in the region over 25 years, according to county officials. The Naples College of Osteopathic Medicine will accommodate 400 students on campus and is expected to open in the fall of 2028, according to Dr. Robert Hasty, dean of the Orlando osteopathic school. Work is underway for Collier County’s first Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) at Pine Ridge Road and I-75. A second DDI will be installed at the Immokalee Road interchange along with the proposed widening of Interstate 75. Phase I of the widening project (from Immokalee Road to the Lee County line) is projected to commence in 2027. Phase II (from the Lee County line to just south of Bonita Beach Road up to Corkscrew Road) is projected to commence in 2029. Phase III (from Pine Ridge Road north to Immokalee Road) is projected to commence in 2030 and Phase IV (from Golden Gate Parkway north to Pine Ridge Road) is projected to commence in 2031. Investment Trends The following CoStar data shows Collier County trends in the Multi-Family, Retail, Office, and Industrial sectors as of the fourth quarter 2025. According to the CoStar report, multifamily investment activity in the Naples market has remained resilient, with total sales volume reaching $228 million over the trailing 12- month period. This level of activity places current quarterly averages roughly 20% above the 2015 to 2019 annual average. However, sales activity has trended downward for three consecutive quarters, with the third quarter of 2025 recording just under $35 million in total sales volume, a notable decline from the $89 million posted in the fourth quarter of 2024. A handful of large transactions have accounted for the bulk of recent activity. Over the past year, six sales closed at prices north of $10 million, compared to just two such transactions in the prior 12 months. The largest deal year to date was Excelsa's $41 million acquisition of Oasis at Naples, a 216-unit, 1990s-vintage property that traded at $190,000 per unit. Excelsa has announced plans to invest an additional $7 million in capital improvements, highlighting the growing prevalence of value-add strategies in the market. By comparison, the largest trade of 2024 was PLK Communities' $82 million purchase of the newly built Mark Lane Apartments, which traded at $287,000/unit for a 2022-vintage asset. Despite these headline transactions, the broader investment landscape has become more challenging. Multifamily fundamentals have waned over the past two years, with rising vacancies and declining rents weighing on underwriting and investor sentiment. The market has seen a shift toward value-add plays, as buyers seek opportunities to reposition older assets and drive returns through renovations and operational improvements. Page 20 Page 2332 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS Transaction activity is likely to remain subdued until there is a meaningful improvement in market fundamentals. While select deals will continue to close, widespread sales activity is unlikely in the near term. According to the CoStar Report, retail investment activity has been consistent over the past year, with the market recording $203 million in total sales volume. Current levels are down from the impressive run seen between 2021 and 2023, when the market averaged around $400 million in annual sales volume. The bulk of transactions over the past year have been on the smaller side here, with an average sale price of $3.4 million. The Naples market opened 2025 with a larger transaction. Colorado-based M Development purchased a nearly 20,000-SF building on 5th Avenue in Downtown Naples for $29.5 million, roughly $1,500/SF. The buyer and its Page 21 Page 2333 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS affiliates have bought several buildings in Downtown Naples over the past few years, including a 28-property $263 million deal in October 2023. A more typical market trade would be the $3.1 million acquisition of a free-standing restaurant along Bellaire Bay Drive in March 2025. The 5,500-SF building was 100% leased at the time of sale and traded for $560/SF after being on the market for 60 days. According to the CoStar Report, office investment activity has remained muted over the course of 2025, with very few transactions closing for more than $3 million. In the past 12 months in Naples, sales volume has tallied $76.6 million which represented 330,000 SF of inventory, and it compares to the five-year average of $115 million. The cyclical peak for quarterly sales volume was $118 million during 23Q4, and the last completed quarter totaled $54.5 million. Page 22 Page 2334 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS Sale transactional pricing, which fluctuates based on the mix of assets sold over the trailing year, has averaged $310/SF in the past 12 months versus the five-year average of $280/SF. Conversely, market pricing, which estimates the value of all office assets in Naples based on completed sales, measures $250/SF. That compares to the five-year average of $240/SF. Office transactions are typically on the smaller side here, averaging just $1.5 million. However, on a per SF basis, Naples is one of the most expensive office markets to purchase buildings in Florida. At $310/SF on a transactional basis, office buildings trade here much higher than the national average of $199/SF. For example, SG Contracting Inc. purchased the 100% occupied Commons V MOB from Healthcare Realty Trust for $19.25 million, or $320/SF. Page 23 Page 2335 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS According to the CoStar report, industrial investment activity has been relatively muted over the past few quarters after a multi-year run of historic sales volumes. Over the past year, the market has recorded $79.5 million in total sales volume, well below the 5-year average of $123 million. Pricing has remained more or less the same over the past several years, averaging around $192/SF, as of the fourth quarter of 2025. Sales are typically on the smaller side here, with an average sale price of just under $2 million. This market is not reliant on institutional investors, and as such, future investment volumes should be in line with current volumes. The largest sale was a $10.25 million acquisition of a 40,000-SF industrial building along Horseshoe Drive by a local private investor. The building was 50% occupied at the time of sale and traded for roughly $260/SF. Page 24 Page 2336 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS Income Personal income is a significant factor in determining the real estate demand in a given market. The following table shows Collier County households by income from the CCIM Site to do Business. Overall, Collier County has an average household income of $151,444 and a per capita income of $65,894. Conclusion The long term economic outlook for Collier County is positive. The area lures people from all over the country for tourism as well as retirement, with the beaches and weather considered major demand drivers. The projected growth in population and employment provide an economic base that supports demand for real estate in the subject neighborhood and for the subject property. These conditions have resulted in increasing property values and should stimulate continued increases within the foreseeable future. Prior to the coronavirus pandemic, the residential market had stabilized after several years of an expansion period, with sustained growth in demand and increasing construction. Since the coronavirus pandemic, residential demand increased significantly with record sales in 2020 and continued high demand but limited inventory in 2021 and 2022. Inventory increased in 2023 and 2024 as demand declined due to continued increases in interest rates. Pricing generally stabilized in 2025 and is projected to remain fairly stable through 2026. According to the Naples Area Board of Realtors (NABOR), there was a record $18.2 billion in sales in Collier County during 2020. Demand eclipsed all expectations in 2021 with a 25.8% increase in overall sales in 2021 and a 20.3% increase in median closed price (year over year). According to the August 2025 Naples Area Board of Realtors Market Report, “the Naples housing market held steady during the summer, with inventory decreasing to pre-pandemic levels and an overall median closed price that showed strong value retention.” The median closed price was down 1.1% from $595,000 in August 2024 to $588,500 in August 2025. Generally, the commercial market lags the residential market. The significant residential demand since the pandemic has generally stabilized the commercial market overall with an increased demand for the industrial sector and select retail and office properties. The recent 50 basis point decrease and subsequent 25 basis point decreases in the federal funds rate, are expected to further stabilize the commercial market and potentially Page 25 Page 2337 of 4116TRAN PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY AREA ANALYSIS increase demand for both residential and commercial property. The Federal Reserve cut rates by 25 basis points in September 2025, the first cut of the year, and another 25 basis points in October 2025 and December 2025. According to the Fed’s dot plot, policymakers are split with a majority projecting just one cut in 2026, down from expectations earlier in the year. Finally, it is noted that Hurricane Ian, a Category 4 storm, made landfall in Southwest Florida on September 28, 2022, and caused widespread wind and storm surge damage. The analyses and value opinion(s) in this appraisal are based on the data available to the appraiser at the time of the assignment and apply only as of the effective date indicated. No analyses or opinions contained in this appraisal should be construed as predictions of future market conditions or value(s). Collier County Area Map Subject Page 26 Page 2338 of 4116TRAN PARCEL MARKET AREA ANALYSIS MARKET AREA ANALYSIS Boundaries The subject is located in the north central part of Collier County in the northwestern portion of the Collier County Rural Estates Planning Community. This surrounding area is generally delineated as follows: North Immokalee and Oil Well Roads South Interstate 75 (Alligator Alley) East Desoto Blvd. West Generally County Road 951 The subject is located in Golden Gate Estates which consists of single family homes on acreage parcels. Market Area Access and Linkages Primary access to the area is provided by Interstate 75 (I-75), a major arterial that runs east to Fort Lauderdale and north through Tampa, Florida; I-75 terminates to the north at the US/Canadian Border in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan. Further access to the area from Interstate75 is by: • State Road 29 (I-75 exit 80) at Miles City. • County Highway 846 (Immokalee Road, I-75 exit 111). • Golden Gate Boulevard Overall, vehicular access is average. Collier Boulevard extends from Immokalee Road to the north and Marco Island to the south. Golden Gate Boulevard West intersects with Collier Boulevard between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Pine Ridge Road. Golden Gate Boulevard West becomes Golden Gate Boulevard East, east of the Wilson Boulevard N. Wilson Boulevard N and Everglades Boulevard N provide access to Immokalee Road from the market area. Desoto Boulevard N provides access to Randall Blvd and Oil Well Rd, both of which connect to Immokalee Road. The Southwest Florida International Airport (RSW) is located about 25+/- miles from the market area; travel time is about 35 to 45 minutes, depending on traffic conditions. The Naples Municipal Airport (APF) is approximately 15+/- miles and 30 to 40 minutes southwest. Downtown Naples is approximately 20+/- miles from the market area and 30 to 40 minutes southwest. Page 27 Page 2339 of 4116TRAN PARCEL MARKET AREA ANALYSIS Major Employers Major employers in the area include the new NCH Healthcare Northeast located at the northeast quadrant of Immokalee Road and Collier Blvd (CR 951). The freestanding Emergency Room opened in late 2015 and is the first free standing ER facility in Collier County. The two-story building has 19 private patient care room with 75 full-time employees. The complex includes a small rehabilitation center on the ground floor with a separate entrance from the emergency room and the second floor has physician offices. Other employers include the Heritage Bay Government Center, immediately north of NCH Northeast, commercial development within Founders Square, a 55-acre mixed-use development located on the southeast corner of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard, and commercial development at Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road. Demographics / Demand Generators The following table shows the historical, current and projected population, households, housing, and income demographics for the immediate market area defined as a 3 mile radius from Everglades Blvd S and 40th Ave SE. The table was developed using data from STDBOnline.com. Page 28 Page 2340 of 4116TRAN PARCEL MARKET AREA ANALYSIS Development Activity and Trends The Davis Group, a commercial developer based in Atlanta, commenced development on The Randall at Orangetree, mixed used planned development approved with up to 400 residential units and 150,000 square feet of commercial space at the northeastern corner of Immokalee Road and Fourth Street N.E., Randall Curve area in mid 2022. The development will include an Aldi grocery store, Ace Hardware, NCH Healthcare, Self Storage, McDonalds, AutoZone, Chase Bank, and Brickyard Car Wash. Barron Collier Companies and Metro Development Group developed Founders Square, a 55-acre mixed-use development located on the southeast corner of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard 2021. The development is anchored by The Pointe, a collection of 10 separate restaurants and other retail tenants. It also include a 400-unit Class A apartment community, known as The Haldeman; Physicians Regional Medical Group; and StorQuest Self Storage. A new Collier County government center located along the east side of Collier Blvd within the northeast corner of Immokalee Road and Collier Blvd opened in early 2022. The first phase of the Heritage Bay Government Center includes a 22,750 square foot government services building on 7.7 acres the county owns immediately north of NCH Northeast. The county tax collector’s office has the largest space in the one-story Page 29 Page 2341 of 4116TRAN PARCEL MARKET AREA ANALYSIS building, but satellite offices also will be provided for the property appraiser, supervisor of elections and select services of the clerk of courts. As discussed, the new NCH Healthcare Northeast located at the northeast quadrant of Immokalee Road and Collier Blvd (CR 951) opened in late 2015 and is the first free standing ER facility in Collier County. The two-story building consists of approximately 41,500± square feet. Watercrest Naples Assisted Living and Memory Care, a new 128-unit luxury senior living community opened in 2019 on the north side of Immokalee Road east of Collier Boulevard. A 46,000 square foot Publix opened in March 2017 at the corner of Immokalee Road and Randall Boulevard. The Neighborhood Shoppes at Orangetree development includes a CVS pharmacy, Publix Liquors store, China Palace restaurant, and Diamond Nails salon. Residential growth continues to shift east with Ave Maria becoming the top-selling single-family residential community in Collier County. The Immokalee Road corridor between Naples and Ave Maria is projected to see thousands of new homes developed in the next few years. Outlook and Conclusions As with the overall Collier County market, the long term economic outlook for Rural Estates is positive. Total population is projected to increase slightly over the next five years and begin a more normalized pattern thereafter. Prior to the coronavirus pandemic, the residential market had stabilized after several years of an expansion period, with sustained growth in demand and increasing construction. Since the coronavirus pandemic, residential demand increased significantly with record sales in 2020 and continued high demand but limited inventory in 2021 and 2022. Inventory increased in 2023 and 2024 as demand declined due to continued increases in interest rates. Pricing generally stabilized in 2025 and is projected to remain fairly stable through 2026. The recent 50 basis point decrease and subsequent 25 basis point decreases in the federal funds rate, are expected to further stabilize the commercial market and potentially increase demand for both residential and commercial property. The Federal Reserve cut rates by 25 basis points in September 2025, the first cut of the year, and another 25 basis points in October 2025 and December 2025. According to the Fed’s dot plot, policymakers are split with a majority projecting just one cut in 2026, down from expectations earlier in the year. Page 30 Page 2342 of 4116TRAN PARCEL Market Area Map Page 31 Page 2343 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SITE ANALYSIS PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS SITE ANALYSIS The following description is based on our property inspection and public records. Land Summary Gross Land Area Gross Land Area Parcel ID (Acres) (Sq Ft) 41612760001 2.27 99,000 SITE Location: The subject is located along the south side of 38th Ave SE, east of Everglades Blvd S in Golden Gate Estates Unit 92. Current Use of the Property: Vacant Estates (E) zoned land. Shape: The site is rectangular. Road Frontage/Access: The subject property has average access with frontage as follows: • 38th Avenue SE: 150 feet The site has an average depth of 660 feet. It is not a corner lot. Visibility: Average Topography: According to the Conservation Collier Property Summary dated March 2025, there are no wetlands on the parcel. According to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Wetlands Mapper, the parcel consists entirely of uplands. According to a Wetlands Determination by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection dated March 2, 2024, there is a small area of wetlands near the northwest corner (front) of the site. Soil Conditions: According to the Conservation Collier Property Summary dated March 2025, the site consists of mesic flatwoods and Oak/Pine hammock with very minimal aquifer recharge. Utilities: Electricity: FP&L Sewer: None Water: None Underground Utilities: The site is not serviced by underground utilities Adequacy: The subject's utilities are typical and adequate for the market area. Site Improvements: • Street Lighting: There is no street lighting. • Sidewalks: There are no sidewalks. • Curbs and Gutters: There are drainage swales along each side of 38th Avenue SE. • Curb Cuts: The subject currently has no driveway. • Landscaping: According to the Conservation Collier Property Summary dated March 2025, the parcel consists of mesic flatwoods and Oak/Pine hammock. The estimated cost to remove exotics is $900 with ongoing annual costs estimated at $340. Cabbage Palm thinning is estimated at $900. Page 32 Page 2344 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SITE ANALYSIS Flood Zone: The subject is located in an area mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The subject is located in FEMA flood zone AH, which is classified as a flood hazard area. FEMA Map Number: 12021C 0445H FEMA Map Date: May 16, 2012 The subject is in a flood zone. The appraiser is not an expert in this matter and is reporting data from FEMA maps. Environmental Issues: We were not provided with an environmental assessment report for the purpose of this appraisal. Environmental issues are beyond our scope of expertise; therefore, aside from the wetlands and exotics we assume the property is not adversely affected by environmental hazards. Encumbrance / Easements: A current title report was not provided for the purpose of this appraisal. We are not aware of any easement, restrictions, or encumbrances that would adversely affect value. Therefore, our valuation assumes the subject has a clear and marketable title with no adverse easement, restrictions, or encumbrances. Site Comments: Heavily vegetated site located along south side of 38th Avenue SE. According to a Conservation Collier Property Summary Report dated March 2025, there are no wetlands on the parcel. According to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Wetlands Mapper, the parcel consists entirely of uplands. According to a Wetlands Determination by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection dated March 2, 2024, there is a small area of wetlands near the northwest corner (front) of the site. According to the Conservation Collier Property Summary, the parcel consists of mesic flatwoods and Oak/Pine hammock. The estimated cost to remove exotics is $900 with ongoing annual costs estimated at $340. Cabbage Palm thinning is estimated at $900. ZONING Zoning Code E Zoning Authority Collier County Zoning Description Estates Permitted Uses Includes single-family dwellings, family care facilities (subject to section 5.05.04), essential services (as set forth in section 2.01.03), and schools, public, including educational plants. Current Use Legally Conforming The subject is legal and conforming use. Zoning Change Likely A zoning change is unlikely. Minimum Lot Area (Acres) 2.25 acres Minimum Floor Area (SF) 1,000 Minimum Street Frontage (Feet) 150 Front Set Back Distance (Feet) 75 Rear Set Back Distance (Feet) 75 Side Yard Distance (Feet) 30 feet; 37.5 feet for corner lots along longest side Maximum Density/FAR One dwelling units per 2.25 acres Maximum Building Height (Feet) 30 Page 33 Page 2345 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SITE ANALYSIS Future Land Use Designation Estates Designation - Residential Estates Subdistrict Zoning Map Page 34 Page 2346 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SITE ANALYSIS Aerial Page 35 Page 2347 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SITE ANALYSIS Wetlands Mapper Subject Page 36 Page 2348 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SITE ANALYSIS Flood Map Subject Page 37 Page 2349 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SITE ANALYSIS Site Photographs 38th Avenue SE – Easterly (Photo Taken on January 4, 2026) 38th Avenue SE – Westerly (Photo Taken on January 4, 2026) Page 38 Page 2350 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SITE ANALYSIS Site Photographs Typical Site View (Photo Taken on January 4, 2026) Typical Site View (Photo Taken on January 4, 2026) Page 39 Page 2351 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SITE ANALYSIS Site Photographs Typical Site View (Photo Taken on January 4, 2026) Typical Site View (Photo Taken on January 4, 2026) Page 40 Page 2352 of 4116TRAN PARCEL REAL ESTATE TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS REAL ESTATE TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS The real estate tax assessment of the subject is administered by Collier County. In 2008, Florida voters amended the Constitution to give non-homestead property owners some protection against increases in their annual property tax assessments. As amended, the Florida Constitution now prohibits the assessment of certain non-homestead property from increasing by more than 10% per year. The 10% cap applies to most types of commercial property, including non-homestead residential property (i.e. apartments and other rental property) and nonresidential property (i.e. commercial property and vacant land). The cap was set to expire on January 1, 2019; however, in November 2018 Florida voters amended the Constitution to make the cap permanent. The protection of the 10% cap is lost when there is a change of ownership or control. The property tax identification number and assessed value of the property for tax year 2025 are as follows: ASSESSED VALUES Tax Identification Number 41612760001 Land Assessed Value $68,497 Building Assessed Value $0 10% Assessment Cap -$21,884 Total Assessed Value $46,613 Totals Total Land Assessed Value $68,497 Total Building Assessed Value $0 10% Assessment Cap -$21,884 Total Assessment $46,613 Total Assessment per Square Foot $0.47 Total Assessment per Land Acre $20,510 Rates, Taxes, More Tax Rate 1.25% Ad Valorem Tax Amount $583 Special Assessment Amount $0 Special Assessment Comments None Total Tax Liability $583 Property Tax Comments The 2024 taxes have been paid. The 2025 taxes are due April 1, 2026. The School Board millage is applied to the uncapped assessed value. The tax assessment for subject property is currently $20,510 per acre, or $30,139 per acre excluding the assessment cap. Based on our valuation analysis, the subject’s assessment appears low. Page 41 Page 2353 of 4116TRAN PARCEL HIGHEST AND BEST USE HIGHEST AND BEST USE Highest and best use may be defined as: The reasonably probable use of property that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity. 1 ▪ Physically possible for the land to accommodate the size and shape of the ideal improvement. ▪ Legally permissible under the zoning regulations, building codes, environmental regulations, and other restrictions that apply to the site. A property use that is either currently allowed or most probably allowable. ▪ Financially feasible to generate sufficient income to support the use. ▪ Maximally productive, or capable of producing the highest value from among the permissible, possible, and financially feasible uses. Highest and Best Use As Vacant Physically Possible The subject site is 2.27 acres or 99,000 square feet with 150 feet of frontage along 38th Avenue SE. The physical characteristics of the subject tract should reasonably accommodate any use that is not restricted by its size. The subject's utilities are typical and adequate for the market area. The site is rectangular. The site is located in a FEMA flood zone AH area per FEMA Flood Map Number: 12021C 0445H, dated May 16, 2012, which is classified as a flood hazard area. There are no known physical reasons that would unusually restrict development. The site is considered to have a functional utility suitable for a variety of uses. Legally Permissible The subject site is zoned Estates (E), which allows low density residential with limited agricultural uses. Permitted uses include single-family dwellings, family care facilities (subject to section 5.05.04), essential services (as set forth in section 2.01.03), and schools, public, including educational plants. Recognizing the principle of conformity, we consider the prevailing land use patterns in the area. Therefore, only single-family residential uses are given further consideration in determining the highest and best use of the site, as if vacant. 1 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal 7th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2022) Page 42 Page 2354 of 4116TRAN PARCEL HIGHEST AND BEST USE Financially Feasible Financial feasibility is an analysis of the ability of a property to generate sufficient income to support the use, or a reasonable probability of producing a positive income stream net of operating expenses, financial costs, and capital amortization. The projected growth in population and employment provide an economic base that supports demand for real estate in the subject neighborhood and for the subject property. These conditions have resulted in increasing property values and should stimulate continued increases within the foreseeable future. Prior to the coronavirus pandemic, the residential market had stabilized after several years of an expansion period, with sustained growth in demand and increasing construction. Since the coronavirus pandemic, residential demand increased significantly with record sales in 2020 and continued high demand but limited inventory in 2021 and 2022. Inventory increased in 2023 and 2024 as demand declined due to continued increases in interest rates. Pricing generally stabilized in 2025 and is projected to remain fairly stable through 2026. The recent 50 basis point decrease and subsequent 25 basis point decreases in the federal funds rate, are expected to further stabilize the commercial market and potentially increase demand for both residential and commercial property. The Federal Reserve cut rates by 25 basis points in September 2025, the first cut of the year, and another 25 basis points in October 2025 and December 2025. According to the Fed’s dot plot, policymakers are split with a majority projecting just one cut in 2026, down from expectations earlier in the year. On this basis, barring unforeseen changes in the market, a well-designed single-family home that is appropriately marketed and priced, should be received favorably by the market. Maximally Productive The maximally productive land use yields the highest value of the possible uses. Single- family residential development is the only use that meets the tests of physically possible, legally permissible, and financially feasible. Therefore, single-family residential development is concluded to be the maximally productive and highest and best use of the site. Highest and Best Use as Improved No improvements are situated on the site. Therefore, a highest and best use analysis as improved is not applicable. Most Probable Buyer Considering the size and location of the property, the most probable buyer is an owner- user or builder for single-family development. Page 43 Page 2355 of 4116TRAN PARCEL VALUATION METHODOLOGY VALUATION METHODOLOGY Three basic approaches may be used to arrive at an estimate of market value. They are: 1. The Cost Approach 2. The Sales Comparison Approach 3. The Income Approach Cost Approach The Cost Approach estimates the current cost to construct the existing structure including an entrepreneurial incentive, depreciation, and the estimated land value. This approach is particularly applicable when the improvements represent the highest and best use of the land and are relatively new. It is also applicable when the property has unique or specialized improvements for which there is little or no sales data from comparable properties. Sales Comparison Approach The Sales Comparison Approach compares sales of similar properties with the subject property. Each comparable sale is adjusted for its inferior or superior characteristics. The values derived from the adjusted comparable sales form a range of value for the subject. By process of correlation and analysis, a final indicated value is derived. This approach is most reliable in an active market, and is least reliable when valuing a property for which no direct comparable sales data is available. Income Approach The Income Approach converts the anticipated flow of future benefits (cash flows and reversion) to a present value estimate through a capitalization and or a discounting process. This approach generally reflects a typical investor’s perception of the relationship between the potential income of a property and its market value. Final Reconciliation The appraisal process concludes with the Final Reconciliation of the values derived from the approaches applied for a single estimate of market value. The reconciliation of the approaches is based on an evaluation of the quantity and quality of the available data in each approach. Furthermore, different properties require different means of analysis and lend themselves to one approach over the others. Page 44 Page 2356 of 4116TRAN PARCEL VALUATION METHODOLOGY ANALYSES APPLIED A cost analysis was considered and was not developed because there are no improvements that contribute value to the property. A sales comparison analysis was considered and was developed because typically this is the most appropriate approach for the valuation of vacant land. This approach is applicable to the subject because there is an active market for similar properties and sufficient sales data is available for analysis. An income analysis was considered and was not developed because the subject is not likely to generate rental income as vacant land. Page 45 Page 2357 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SALES COMPARISON APPROACH SALES COMPARISON APPROACH The Sales Comparison Approach is based on the premise that a buyer would pay no more for a specific property than the cost of obtaining a property with the same quality, utility, and perceived benefits of ownership. It is based on the principles of supply and demand, balance, substitution and externalities. The following steps describe the applied process of the Sales Comparison Approach. • The market in which the subject property competes is investigated; comparable sales, contracts for sale and current offerings are reviewed. • The most pertinent data is further analyzed and the quality of the transaction is determined. • The most meaningful unit of value for the subject property is determined. • Each comparable sale is analyzed and where appropriate, adjusted to equate with the subject property. • The value indication of each comparable sale is analyzed and the data reconciled for a final indication of value via the Sales Comparison Approach. Land Comparables I have researched five comparables for this analysis; these are documented on the following pages followed by a location map and analysis grid. All sales have been researched through numerous sources, inspected and verified by a party to the transaction. For this analysis, we use the price per acre as the appropriate unit of comparison because market participants typically compare sale prices and property values on this basis. Page 46 Page 2358 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Comp Address Date Price Comp City Acres Price Per Acre Sale Comments Subject 38th Avenue SE 1/4/2026 Subject Naples 2.27 1 40th Ave SE Tract 127 11/25/2025 $145,000 Heavily treed parcel located along the north side of 40th Ave SE. Informal Wetland Determination dated 7/19/2022 prepared by Tropical Environmental Consultants shows 1 Naples 2.27 $63,800 the lot is entirely uplands. Lot was purchased in August 2022 for $125,000 and then relisted in September 2025 for $165,000. 2 3367 36th Ave SE 11/6/2025 $150,000 Heavily treed parcel located along the north side of 36th Ave SE. DEP Wetland Determination dated March 7, 2025 shows the site is largely uplands with a small amount of wetlands in the center along the eastern lot line. Lot was listed in November 2 Naples 2.27 $66,000 2024 for $180,000 and reduced to $170,000 in February 2025. Listing was terminated on October 11, 2025. Relisted October 14, 2025 for $155,000. 3 2643 26th Ave SE 10/9/2025 $150,000 Partially treed parcel located along the north side of 26th Ave SE. Informal Wetland Determination dated 8/4/2022 prepared by Wetland Consultants shows the lot is entirely uplands. Lot was purchased in July 2023 for $150,000 and relisted in September 2025 for $150,000. Listing agent reported approximately $30,000 of site improvements 3 Naples 2.27 $66,000 including clearing, gravel driveway and fill. According to the listing agent, the seller wanted to use the property as storage; however, the county required him to either construct a home or restore the trees. Therefore, the seller decided to sell and the property received significant interest resulting in a quick sale. 4 18th Ave SE Tract 73 10/7/2025 $180,000 Heavily treed parcel located along the north side of 18th Ave SE. Informal Wetland Determination dated 1/22/2025 prepared by Tropical Environmental Consultants shows the lot is entirely uplands. Lot was listed in January 2025 for $249,900 and listing was 4 Naples 2.73 $66,000 terminated in March 2025. Relisted in May 2025 for $219,900 and price was reduced multiple times finally to $199,900 on August 26, 2025. 5 12th Ave SE Tract 134 11/25/2025 $180,000 Heavily treed parcel located along the south side of 12th Ave SE. Informal Wetland Determination dated 5/20/2025 prepared by Wetland Consultants shows the site is 5 Naples 2.27 $79,200 entirely uplands. Lot was listed in July 2025 for $217,900 and price was reduced multiple times finally to $193,000 on September 21, 2025. Buyer is constructing a spec home on the site which is currently listed for $869,000. Comparables Map Page 47 Page 2359 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Comparables Map - Aerial Page 48 Page 2360 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Analysis Grid The above sales have been analyzed and compared with the subject property. I have considered adjustments in the areas of: Effective Sale Price This takes into consideration unusual conditions involved in the sale that could affect the sales price, such as excess land, non- realty components, commissions, or other similar factors. Usually the sale price is adjusted for this prior to comparison to the subject. Real Property Rights Property rights dissimilar to the subject which affect value. Financing Terms Favorable or unfavorable seller financing, or assumption of existing financing. Conditions of Sale Circumstances that atypically motivate the buyer or seller, such as 1031 exchange transaction, assemblage, or forced sale. Market Conditions Inflation or deflation since sale date due to economic influences Location Market or submarket area influences on sale price; surrounding land use influences. Physical Characteristics Attributes such as size, shape, utilities, frontage, zoning, etc. On the following page is a sales comparison grid displaying the subject property, the comparables and the adjustments applied. Page 49 Page 2361 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Land Analysis Grid Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Name Tran Parcel 40th Ave SE Tract 127 3367 36th Ave SE 2643 26th Ave SE 18th Ave SE Tract 73 12th Ave SE Tract 134 Address 38th Avenue SE 40th Ave SE Tract 127 3367 36th Ave SE 2643 26th Ave SE 18th Ave SE Tract 73 12th Ave SE Tract 134 City Naples Naples Naples Naples Naples Naples Date 1/4/2026 11/25/2025 11/6/2025 10/9/2025 10/7/2025 11/25/2025 Price $145,000 $150,000 $150,000 $180,000 $180,000 Acres 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.73 2.27 Acre Unit Price $63,800 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $79,200 Transaction Adjustments Property Rights Fee Simple Fee Simple 0.0% Fee Simple 0.0% Fee Simple 0.0% Fee Simple 0.0% Fee Simple 0.0% Financing Cash 0.0% Cash 0.0% Conventional 0.0% Conventional 0.0% Cash 0.0% Conditions of Sale Arm's length 0.0% Arm's length 0.0% Arm's length 0.0% Arm's length 0.0% Arm's length 0.0% Adjusted Acre Unit Price $63,800 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $79,200 Market Trends Through 1/4/2026 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Adjusted Acre Unit Price $63,800 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $79,200 Location Average Similar Similar Similar Similar Superior % Adjustment 0% 0% 0% 0% -10% $ Adjustment $0 $0 $0 $0 -$7,920 Acres 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.73 2.27 % Adjustment 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% $ Adjustment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Environmental Issues Largely Uplands 100% Uplands Largely Uplands 100% Uplands 100% Uplands 100% Uplands % Adjustment 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% $ Adjustment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Topography Heavily Treed Heavily Treed Heavily Treed Partially Treed with site Heavily Treed Heavily Treed improvements % Adjustment 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% $ Adjustment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Zoning E (E) Estates (E) Estates (E) Estates (E) Estates (E) Estates % Adjustment 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% $ Adjustment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Adjusted Acre Unit Price $63,800 $66,000 $66,000 $66,000 $71,280 Net Adjustments 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% -10.0% Gross Adjustments 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% Page 50 Page 2362 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Comparable Land Sale Adjustments Property Rights All of the comparables transferred in fee simple interest; therefore, no adjustments for property rights are required. Financing All of the comparable sales had market orientated financing or were cash transactions; therefore, no adjustments for financing are required. Conditions of Sale All of the comparable sales were arm’s length transactions; therefore, no adjustments for conditions of sale are required. The listing agent for Comparable 3 noted that the seller wanted to use the property for storage; however, reportedly it was not permitted by the county; therefore, decided to sell the property. The lot was listed for the same price as the 2023 purchase price and closed within six days. The below market asking price is considered to be offset by the site improvements described in the following topography adjustment. Therefore, no adjustments are made. Economic Trends The following graph shows comparable residential land sales on the Southwest Florida MLS within the surrounding market area over the past four months. The survey included 23 transactions. Prices per acre ranged from $21,245 to $80,000 per acre and averaged $51,255 per acre. The graph indicates a relatively stable trend sales Page 51 Page 2363 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SALES COMPARISON APPROACH prices over the past four months. However, it is noted this is unadjusted raw data and does not relate directly to the subject. Based on the previous analysis a market conditions adjustment is not applied. Location The comparables are all located within the immediate market area. No adjustments could be supported; therefore, none are made. Size For this analysis, the comparables are relatively similar in terms of size; therefore, no adjustments are required. Environmental Issues According to a Conservation Collier Property Summary Report dated March 2025, there are no wetlands on the parcel. According to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Wetlands Mapper, the parcel consists entirely of uplands. According to a Wetlands Determination by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection dated March 2, 2024, there is a small area of wetlands near the northwest corner (front) of the site. According to the Conservation Collier Property Summary, the parcel consists of mesic flatwoods and Oak/Pine hammock. The estimated cost to remove exotics is $900 with ongoing annual costs estimated at $340. Cabbage Palm thinning is estimated at $900. Comparables 1, 3, 4, and 5 have Informal Wetland Determinations showing the lots are entirely uplands similar to the subject; therefore, no adjustments are required. Comparable 2 has an Informal Wetland Determination showing a small amount of wetlands in the center of the site along the eastern lot line. No adjustment could be supported; therefore, none is made. The comparables are all heavily treed and likely have similar exotics; therefore, no additional adjustments are made for the removal of exotics or Cabbage Palm thinning. Topography The subject and Comparables 1, 2, 4, and 5 are all heavily treed; therefore, no adjustments are required. Comparable 3 is partially treed. The listing agent reported approximately $30,000 of site improvements including clearing, gravel driveway, and fill. The site improvements are considered to be offset by the below market asking price previously described in the Conditions of Sale adjustment. Therefore, no adjustments are made. Zoning All of the comparables are similar in terms of zoning; therefore, no adjustments are required. Page 52 Page 2364 of 4116TRAN PARCEL SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Sales Comparison Approach Conclusion All of the value indications have been considered in arriving at my final reconciled per acre value of $65,000. Land Value Ranges & Reconciled Values Number of Comparables: 5 Unadjusted Adjusted % Δ Low: $63,800 $63,800 0.00% High: $79,200 $71,280 -10.00% Average: $68,200 $66,616 -2.32% Reconciled Value/Unit Value: $65,000 Subject Size: 2.27 Indicated Value: $147,727 Reconciled Final Value: $150,000 Page 53 Page 2365 of 4116 TRAN PARCEL RECONCILIATION RECONCILIATION The process of reconciliation involves the analysis of each approach to value. The quantity and quality of data applied the significance of each approach as it relates to market behavior and defensibility of each approach are considered and weighed. Finally, each is considered separately and comparatively with each other. As discussed previously, we use only the sales comparison approach in developing an opinion of value for the subject. The cost and income approaches are not applicable, and are not used. FINAL VALUE CONCLUSION Based on the data and analyses developed in this appraisal, I have reconciled to the following value conclusion(s), as of January 4, 2026, subject to the Limiting Conditions and Assumptions of this appraisal. VALUE CONCLUSIONS Appraisal Premise Interest Appraised Date of Value Value Conclusion Market Value, As Is Fee Simple January 4, 2026 $150,000 The value conclusion(s) are subject to the following hypothetical conditions and extraordinary conditions. These conditions may affect the assignment results. Hypothetical Conditions: None. Extraordinary Assumptions: None. Exposure and Marketing Times Exposure time is always presumed to precede the effective date of the appraisal and is the length of time the subject property would have been exposed for sale in the market had it sold on the effective valuation date at the concluded market value. Marketing time is an estimate of the amount of time it might take to sell a property at the estimated market value immediately following the effective date of value. Based on our review of recent sales transactions for similar properties and our analysis of supply and demand in the local market it is our opinion that the probable marketing and exposure time for the property is 10-12 months. Page 54 Page 2366 of 4116TRAN PARCEL CERTIFICATION CERTIFICATION I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: 1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. 2. The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions and conclusions. 3. I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and have no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. 4. I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. 5. Our engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. 6. Our compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. 7. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics & Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. 8. My reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice 9. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. 10. Rachel M. Zucchi, MAI, CCIM has made an inspection of the subject property. 11. No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person signing this certification. 12. We have experience in appraising properties similar to the subject and are in compliance with the Competency Rule of USPAP. Page 55 Page 2367 of 4116TRAN PARCEL 13. This appraisal is not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the approval of a loan. 14. We have not relied on unsupported conclusions relating to characteristics such as race, color, religion, national origin, gender, marital status, familial status, age, receipt of public assistance income, handicap, or an unsupported conclusion that homogeneity of such characteristics is necessary to maximize value. 15. Rachel M. Zucchi, MAI, CCIM has not performed any services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. 16. As of the date of this report, Rachel M. Zucchi, MAI, CCIM has completed the continuing education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute. Rachel M. Zucchi, MAI, CCIM Florida State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ2984 rzucchi@rklac.com; Phone 239-596-0801 Page 56 Page 2368 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS This appraisal is based on the following assumptions, except as otherwise noted in the report. 1. The title is marketable and free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, encroachments, easements and restrictions. The property is under responsible ownership and competent management and is available for its highest and best use. 2. There are no existing judgments or pending or threatened litigation that could affect the value of the property. 3. There are no hidden or undisclosed conditions of the land or of the improvements that would render the property more or less valuable. Furthermore, there is no asbestos in the property. 4. The revenue stamps placed on any deed referenced herein to indicate the sale price are in correct relation to the actual dollar amount of the transaction. 5. The property is in compliance with all applicable building, environmental, zoning, and other federal, state and local laws, regulations and codes. 6. The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable, but no warranty is given for its accuracy. This appraisal is subject to the following limiting conditions, except as otherwise noted in the report. 1. An appraisal is inherently subjective and represents our opinion as to the value of the property appraised. 2. The conclusions stated in our appraisal apply only as of the effective date of the appraisal, and no representation is made as to the effect of subsequent events. 3. No changes in any federal, state or local laws, regulations or codes (including, without limitation, the Internal Revenue Code) are anticipated. 4. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this appraisal, and we reserve the right to revise or rescind any of the value opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies. If any environmental impact statement is required by law, the appraisal assumes that such statement will be favorable and will be approved by the appropriate regulatory bodies. 5. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, we are not required to give testimony, respond to any subpoena or attend any court, governmental or other hearing with reference to the property without compensation relative to such additional employment. 6. We have made no survey of the property and assume no responsibility in connection with such matters. Any sketch or survey of the property included in this report is for illustrative purposes only and should not be considered to be Page 57 Page 2369 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS scaled accurately for size. The appraisal covers the property as described in this report, and the areas and dimensions set forth are assumed to be correct. 7. No opinion is expressed as to the value of subsurface oil, gas or mineral rights, if any, and we have assumed that the property is not subject to surface entry for the exploration or removal of such materials, unless otherwise noted in our appraisal. 8. We accept no responsibility for considerations requiring expertise in other fields. Such considerations include, but are not limited to, legal descriptions and other legal matters such as legal title, geologic considerations such as soils and seismic stability, and civil, mechanical, electrical, structural and other engineering and environmental matters. 9. The distribution of the total valuation in the report between land and improvements applies only under the reported highest and best use of the property. The allocations of value for land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. The appraisal report shall be considered only in its entirety. No part of the appraisal report shall be utilized separately or out of context. 10. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraisers, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute) shall be disseminated through advertising media, public relations media, news media or any other means of communication (including without limitation prospectuses, private offering memoranda and other offering material provided to prospective investors) without the prior written consent of the person signing the report. 11. Information, estimates and opinions contained in the report, obtained from third- party sources are assumed to be reliable and have not been independently verified. 12. Any income and expense estimates contained in the appraisal report are used only for the purpose of estimating value and do not constitute predictions of future operating results. 13. If the property is subject to one or more leases, any estimate of residual value contained in the appraisal may be particularly affected by significant changes in the condition of the economy, of the real estate industry, or of the appraised property at the time these leases expire or otherwise terminate. 14. No consideration has been given to personal property located on the premises or to the cost of moving or relocating such personal property; only the real property has been considered. 15. The current purchasing power of the dollar is the basis for the value stated in our appraisal; we have assumed that no extreme fluctuations in economic cycles will occur. 16. The value found herein is subject to these and to any other assumptions or conditions set forth in the body of this report but which may have been omitted from this list of Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. Page 58 Page 2370 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 17. The analyses contained in the report necessarily incorporate numerous estimates and assumptions regarding property performance, general and local business and economic conditions, the absence of material changes in the competitive environment and other matters. Some estimates or assumptions, however, inevitably will not materialize, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur; therefore, actual results achieved during the period covered by our analysis will vary from our estimates, and the variations may be material. 18. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. We have not made a specific survey or analysis of any property to determine whether the physical aspects of the improvements meet the ADA accessibility guidelines. In as much as compliance matches each owner’s financial ability with the cost to cure the non-conforming physical characteristics of a property, we cannot comment on compliance to ADA. Given that compliance can change with each owner’s financial ability to cure non-accessibility, the value of the subject does not consider possible non-compliance. A specific study of both the owner’s financial ability and the cost to cure any deficiencies would be needed for the Department of Justice to determine compliance. 19. The appraisal report is prepared for the exclusive benefit of the Client, its subsidiaries and/or affiliates. It may not be used or relied upon by any other party. All parties who use or rely upon any information in the report without our written consent do so at their own risk. 20. No studies have been provided to us indicating the presence or absence of hazardous materials on the subject property or in the improvements, and our valuation is predicated upon the assumption that the subject property is free and clear of any environment hazards including, without limitation, hazardous wastes, toxic substances and mold. No representations or warranties are made regarding the environmental condition of the subject property and the person signing the report shall not be responsible for any such environmental conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because we are not experts in the field of environmental conditions, the appraisal report cannot be considered as an environmental assessment of the subject property. 21. The person signing the report may have reviewed available flood maps and may have noted in the appraisal report whether the subject property is located in an identified Special Flood Hazard Area. We are not qualified to detect such areas and therefore do not guarantee such determinations. The presence of flood plain areas and/or wetlands may affect the value of the property, and the value conclusion is predicated on the assumption that wetlands are non-existent or minimal. 22. RKL Appraisal and Consulting, PLC is not a building or environmental inspector. RKL Appraisal and Consulting, PLC does not guarantee that the subject property is free of defects or environmental problems. Mold may be present in the subject property and a professional inspection is recommended. Page 59 Page 2371 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 23. The appraisal report and value conclusion for an appraisal assumes the satisfactory completion of construction, repairs or alterations in a workmanlike manner. 24. The intended use of the appraisal is stated in the General Information section of the report. The use of the appraisal report by anyone other than the Client is prohibited except as otherwise provided. Accordingly, the appraisal report is addressed to and shall be solely for the Client’s use and benefit unless we provide our prior written consent. We expressly reserve the unrestricted right to withhold our consent to your disclosure of the appraisal report (or any part thereof including, without limitation, conclusions of value and our identity), to any third parties. Stated again for clarification, unless our prior written consent is obtained, no third party may rely on the appraisal report (even if their reliance was foreseeable). 25. All prospective value estimates presented in this report are estimates and forecasts which are prospective in nature and are subject to considerable risk and uncertainty. In addition to the contingencies noted in the preceding paragraph, several events may occur that could substantially alter the outcome of our estimates such as, but not limited to changes in the economy, interest rates, and capitalization rates, behavior of consumers, investors and lenders, fire and other physical destruction, changes in title or conveyances of easements and deed restrictions, etc. It is assumed that conditions reasonably foreseeable at the present time are consistent or similar with the future. Page 60 Page 2372 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDA - APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS ADDENDA Page 2373 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM A - APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS ADDENDUM A APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS Page 2374 of 4116 TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM A - APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS RKL Appraisal and Consulting, PLC COMPANY PROFILE: RKL Appraisal and Consulting, PLC was founded in 2009 by three designated Members of the Appraisal Institute. It is our mission to maximize our combined appraisal experience to provide our clients with the highest quality of Real Estate Appraisal and Consulting Services. Rachel M. Zucchi, MAI, CCIM K.C. Lowry, MAI, CPA Louis C. Bobbitt, MAI Partner / Managing Director Partner Senior Partner (Retired) rzucchi@rklac.com klowry@rklac.com lbobbitt@rklac.com BUSINESS FOCUS: Practice is focused on community/neighborhood shopping centers, retail and office buildings, industrial warehouse/distribution buildings, residential and commercial condominium and subdivision projects, hotels and motels, vacant land and special purpose properties. Specialized services include appraisal review, business valuations, market feasibility studies, acquisition/disposition counseling, and litigation support in connection with real estate transactions including bankruptcy, eminent domain, estate valuations, and matrimonial and equitable distribution. Clients served include banks and financial institutions, developers and investors, law firms, government, and property owners. 4500 Executive Drive, Suite 230 Naples, FL 34119-8908 Phone: 239-596-0800 www.rklac.com Page 2375 of 4116 TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM A - APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF Rachel M. Zucchi, MAI, CCIM EXPERIENCE: Partner / Managing Director of RKL Appraisal and Consulting, PLC Naples, FL (2009 – Present) President of D&R Realty Group, Inc. Naples, FL (2009 – Present) Senior Real Estate Analyst, Integra Realty Resources – Southwest Florida Naples, FL (2003 – 2009) Research Associate, Integra Realty Resources – Southwest Florida Naples, FL (2002-2003) PROFESSIONAL Member: Appraisal Institute – MAI Certificate Number 451177 ACTIVITIES: President: Appraisal Institute Florida Gulf Coast Chapter (2020) VP/Secretary/Treasurer: Appraisal Institute Florida Gulf Coast Chapter (2017 - 2019) Region X Representative: Appraisal Institute Florida Gulf Coast Chapter (2017 - 2022) Board of Directors: Appraisal Institute Florida Gulf Coast Chapter (2015 - 2021) Government Relations: Appraisal Institute National (2022) Prof. Standards & Guidance: Appraisal Institute National (2023-2026) LDAC Attendee: Leadership Development & Advisory Council Appraisal Institute - Washington, D.C. (2016, 2017, 2018) Member: CCIM Institute - CCIM Designation Pin Number 21042 Member: Naples Area Board of REALTORS Licensed: Florida State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser License No. RZ 2984 Licensed: Real Estate Broker (Florida) License No. BK3077672 EXPERT WITNESS: Qualified as an expert witness in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit Court of Collier County and Lee County EDUCATION: Bachelor of Arts, Major in Economics Florida Gulf Coast University, 2002 Graduated Magna Cum Laude Presented at Eastern Economic Association Conference Successfully completed real estate and valuation courses and seminars sponsored by the Appraisal Institute and others. BUSINESS FOCUS: Actively engaged in real estate valuation and consulting since 2003. Practice is focused on community/neighborhood shopping centers, retail and office buildings, industrial warehouse/distribution, multi-family and single-family subdivisions, condominium developments, hotels/motels, vacant land and special purpose properties. Specialized services include market feasibility studies and litigation support in connection with real estate transactions. Clients served include banks and financial institutions, developers and investors, law firms, government, and property owners. Valuations have been performed for eminent domain, bankruptcy, estate, matrimonial/equitable distribution, financing, and due diligence support. Page 2376 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM A - APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS Page 2377 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM B - PROPERTY INFORMATION ADDENDUM B PROPERTY INFORMATION Page 2378 of 4116 Collier County Property Appraiser Summary Parcel ID 41612760001 Site Location 3560 38TH AVE SE, NAPLES 34117 Name / Address VAN TRAN, THIEN LUA THI-KIM NGUYEN 323 WOLF POINTE TRAIL City LONG LAKE State MN Zip 55356 Legal GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 92 W 150FT OF TR 30 OR 1992 PG 1659 -1663 Sub./Condo 354700 - GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 92 Use Code 0 - VACANT RESIDENTIAL Millage Area 80 Municipality UNINCORPORATED Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 4D32 354700 30 04D32 32 49 28 2.27 Latest Sales History 2025 Certified Tax Roll (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) (Subject to Change) Date Book-Page Vacant / Improved Qualified Amount Just Values Amount 12/02/20 5857-2279 V Y $50,000 Land $68,497 09/08/04 3637-2027 V N $0 (=) Total Just $68,497 10/10/94 1992-1659 I N $0 Assessment Reductions Applies To 08/01/90 1554-1066 I N $0 (-) Non-Homestead 10% Non-School $21,884 02/01/88 1328-1890 I N $0 Assessed Values 08/01/87 1291-340 I Y $3,300 (=) Non-School Assessed $46,613 (=) School Assessed $68,497 Taxable Values Millage Rates (=) Non-School Taxable 6.2568 $46,613 (=) School Taxable 4.2490 $68,497 Tax Amounts Ad Valorem Taxes $582.70 (=) Total Tax $582.70 Important: This is not a tax bill. Do not rely on current taxes to estimate taxes after a change in ownership. A transfer may significantly affect the taxable value due to loss of exemptions, reset of Save Our Homes or the 10% Cap, and/or market changes. Use our Tax Estimator to estimate taxes under new ownership. Values reflect conditions as of January 1st each year and may differ from the actual tax bill due to millage changes or additional non-ad valorem assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information, please visit the Collier County Tax Collector’s Office. Page 2379 of 4116 Collier County Property Appraiser Detail Parcel ID 41612760001 Site Location 3560 38TH AVE SE, NAPLES 34117 Permits (Provided for reference purposes only. ) Tax Yr Issuer Permit # Issued Date CO Date Temp CO Final Bldg Type Land Building/Extra Features # Calc Code Units # Year Built Description Area Adj Area 10 ACREAGE 2.27 Page 2380 of 4116Page 2381 of 4116Page 2382 of 4116Page 2383 of 4116Page 2384 of 4116Page 2385 of 4116Page 2386 of 4116Page 2387 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM C - COMPARABLE DATA ADDENDUM C COMPARABLE DATA Page 2388 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM C - COMPARABLE DATA Land Comparable 1 Transaction ID 11575 Date 11/25/2025 Name 40th Ave SE Tract 127 Price $145,000 Address 40th Ave SE Tract 127 Price Per Acre $63,800 City Naples Transaction Type Sold Grantor Jerry Jo Oconnor & Donna Ann Financing Cash Steiner Grantee Elodia Bello Vazquez and Property Rights Fee Simple Filemon Martinez Sanchez Tax ID 41720240002 Days on Market 47 days Sale Verification Date 1/7/2026 Book/Page or Reference Instr #6757392 Sale Verification Source Richard Parlante, PA w/ Doc Downing Frye Realty Inc. Arm's length Sale History 8/2022 - $125,000 Conditions of Sale Site Acres 2.27 Topography Heavily Treed Land SF 99,000 Zoning (E) Estates Primary Frontage Feet 150 Dimensions 150' x 660' Primary Frontage Street 40th Ave SE Shape Rectangular Utilities None Topography Heavily Treed Comments Heavily treed parcel located along the north side of 40th Ave SE. Informal Wetland Determination dated 7/19/2022 prepared by Tropical Environmental Consultants shows the lot is entirely uplands. Lot was purchased in August 2022 for $125,000 and then relisted in September 2025 for $165,000. Page 2389 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM C - COMPARABLE DATA Land Comparable 2 Transaction ID 11576 Date 11/6/2025 Name 3367 36th Ave SE Price $150,000 Address 3367 36th Ave SE Price Per Acre $66,000 City Naples Transaction Type Sold Grantor Best Homes Builder At Golden Financing Cash Gate LLC Grantee Y & C Development Homes, Property Rights Fee Simple LLC Tax ID 41610440006 Days on Market 3 days Sale Verification Date 1/7/2026 Book/Page or Reference Instr #6752381 Sale Verification Source Tony Arias w/ O K Realty Inc Doc Arm's length Sale History No arm's length transactions Conditions of Sale in previous 3 years Site Acres 2.27 Topography Heavily Treed Land SF 99,000 Zoning (E) Estates Primary Frontage Feet 150 Dimensions 150' x 660' Primary Frontage Street 36th Ave SE Shape Rectangular Utilities None Topography Heavily Treed Comments Heavily treed parcel located along the north side of 36th Ave SE. DEP Wetland Determination dated March 7, 2025 shows the site is largely uplands with a small amount of wetlands in the center along the eastern lot line. Lot was listed in November 2024 for $180,000 and reduced to $170,000 in February 2025. Listing was terminated on October 11, 2025. Relisted October 14, 2025 for $155,000. Page 2390 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM C - COMPARABLE DATA Land Comparable 3 Transaction ID 11577 Date 10/9/2025 Name 2643 26th Ave SE Price $150,000 Address 2643 26th Ave SE Price Per Acre $66,000 City Naples Transaction Type Listing Grantor Casey Michael & Jill Elizabeth Financing Conventional Eyman Grantee Jose Guelmes and Maria Ofelia Property Rights Fee Simple Periche Tax ID 41341760000 Days on Market 6 days Sale Verification Date 1/7/2026 Book/Page or Reference Instr #6740373 Sale Verification Source Armid Metohu w/ Coldwell Doc Banker Realty Arm's length Sale History 7/2023 - $150,000 Conditions of Sale Site Acres 2.27 Topography Partially Treed Land SF 99,000 Zoning (E) Estates Primary Frontage Feet 150 Dimensions 150' x 660' Primary Frontage Street 26th Ave SE Shape Rectangular Utilities None Topography Partially Treed Comments Partially treed parcel located along the north side of 26th Ave SE. Informal Wetland Determination dated 8/4/2022 prepared by Wetland Consultants shows the lot is entirely uplands. Lot was purchased in July 2023 for $150,000 and relisted in September 2025 for $150,000. Listing agent reported approximately $30,000 of site improvements including clearing, gravel driveway and fill. According to the listing agent, the seller wanted to use the property as storage; however, the county required him to either construct a home or restore the trees. Therefore, the seller decided to sell and the property received significant interest resulting in a quick sale. Page 2391 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM C - COMPARABLE DATA Land Comparable 4 Transaction ID 11578 Date 10/7/2025 Name 18th Ave SE Tract 73 Price $180,000 Address 18th Ave SE Tract 73 Price Per Acre $66,000 City Naples Transaction Type Sold Grantor Mary K & Cody J Houchin Financing Conventional Grantee Carlos Perez and Jennifer Ruiz Property Rights Fee Simple Tax ID 41226560008 Days on Market 3-4 months Sale Verification Date 1/7/2026 Book/Page or Reference Instr #6740521 Sale Verification Source Josh Otto w/ eXp Realty LLC Doc Arm's length Sale History No arm's length transactions Conditions of Sale in previous 3 years Site Acres 2.73 Topography Heavily Treed Land SF 118,800 Zoning (E) Estates Primary Frontage Feet 180 Dimensions 180' x 660' Primary Frontage Street 18th Ave SE Shape Rectangular Utilities None Topography Heavily Treed Comments Heavily treed parcel located along the north side of 18th Ave SE. Informal Wetland Determination dated 1/22/2025 prepared by Tropical Environmental Consultants shows the lot is entirely uplands. Lot was listed in January 2025 for $249,900 and listing was terminated in March 2025. Relisted in May 2025 for $219,900 and price was reduced multiple times finally to $199,900 on August 26, 2025. Page 2392 of 4116TRAN PARCEL ADDENDUM C - COMPARABLE DATA Land Comparable 5 Transaction ID 11581 Date 11/25/2025 Name 12th Ave SE Tract 134 Price $180,000 Address 12th Ave SE Tract 134 Price Per Acre $79,200 City Naples Transaction Type Sold Grantor Matthew A Emy Financing Cash Grantee Almax Homes, LLC Property Rights Fee Simple Tax ID 40991320008 Days on Market 3-4 months Sale Verification Date 1/7/2026 Book/Page or Reference Instr #6758625 Sale Verification Source Mike Miller w/ Berkshire Doc Hathaway FL Realty Arm's length Sale History 3/2022 - $75,000 Conditions of Sale Site Acres 2.27 Topography Heavily Treed Land SF 99,000 Zoning (E) Estates Primary Frontage Feet 150 Dimensions 150' x 660' Primary Frontage Street 12th Ave SE Shape Rectangular Utilities None Topography Heavily Treed Comments Heavily treed parcel located along the south side of 12th Ave SE. Informal Wetland Determination dated 5/20/2025 prepared by Wetland Consultants shows the site is entirely uplands. Lot was listed in July 2025 for $217,900 and price was reduced multiple times finally to $193,000 on September 21, 2025. Buyer is constructing a spec home on the site which is currently listed for $869,000. Page 2393 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.10 ID# 2026-745 Executive Summary Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or designee, to submit an application to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's Invasive Plant Management Section to be eligible to receive funding assistance services worth $150,000 in FY 2027 through the Upland Invasive Exotic Plant Management Program for the removal of invasive exotic vegetation within Conservation Collier's Shell Island Preserve, Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve, and Symphony property and to authorize staff to accept such funding assistance services if awarded. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) authorize the County Manager or designee to submit an application to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s Invasive Plant Management Section to be eligible to receive funding assistance services worth $150,000 in FY 2027 for the treatment of invasive exotic vegetation within Conservation Collier’s Shell Island preserve, Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve, and Symphony property, and to authorize staff to accept such funding assistance services, if awarded. CONSIDERATIONS: The Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission (FWC) Invasive Plant Management Section (IPMS) offers funding assistance for invasive plant treatment projects on public conservation lands throughout the State of Florida. The County must submit an application to FWC in order to receive this assistance. The attached draft applications are subject to technical revisions before submission. If funding assistance is received, IPMS will pay State contractors to treat invasive, exotic plants within the Shell Island Preserve ($50,000), Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve ($50,000), and the Symphony property ($50,000) during FY 2027; the work performed would be worth up to $150,000 in total. No funds will be transferred to Collier County. Approval of this item authorizes staff to submit the application to FWC for funding assistance services and accept such services if awarded. Please note that the Symphony property was acquired in September 2025 and has not yet been officially named; a proposed preserve name will be presented to the Board in 2026. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objectives to preserve and enhance the character of our community and to protect our natural resources. FISCAL IMPACT: If funding assistance is awarded, it will save the Conservation Collier Program up to $150,000 for exotic plant treatment within Shell Island Preserve, Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve, and Symphony property. The State Uplands Program provides funding for approved projects through a fixed-price purchase order issued to an approved contractor or through a task assignment issued to a government agency under an existing state contract. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This proposal supports Goal 6 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the County Growth Management Plan, which is to identify, protect, conserve, and appropriately use native vegetative communities and wildlife habitats. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for approval. -SAA RECOMMENDATION(S): To authorize the County Manager or designee to submit an application to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s Invasive Plant Management Section to be eligible to receive funding assistance services worth up to $150,000 in FY 2027 for the removal of invasive exotic vegetation within Conservation Collier’s Shell Island Preserve, Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve, and Symphony property, and to authorize staff to accept such funding assistance services, if awarded. PREPARED BY: Matthew Denison, Manager – Conservation Collier, Development Review Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Call for Proposals 2026 2. IPMS Shell Island Preserve Application Page 2394 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.10 ID# 2026-745 3. IPMS Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve Application 4. IPMS Symphony Properties Application Page 2395 of 4116From: Weston, Michael Subject: SWFL Regional FWC IPMS Annual Ranking Meeting - April 29th, 2026 - SAVE THE DATE Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 3:21:51 PM This email was sent to your old CollierCountyFL.gov email address. Please contact the sender to change to your new email domain @Collier.gov EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Good afternoon Southwest Florida Working Group, Looking to save a date on everyone’s calendar! On behalf of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s Invasive Plant Management Section, you are invited to the 2026 Southwest Florida regional invasive plant project proposal ranking meeting. The meeting will take place on April 29th, 2026 at Alva Community Park in Lee County at 21471 North River Road, Alva, FL 33920. This is the same location as last year. The meeting will start at 9 am and conclude around 2 pm. To note – there is a refrigerator available on- site. We will not be stopping for lunch, so bring a lunch to avoid passing out. It’s really hard to rank projects when you are ‘hangry’ as well. Parking is somewhat limited, so please carpool, if possible, though we did all fit last year in the parking lot. Please forward to anyone that you think will need this email that manage public conservation lands. The Southwest Florida Working Group covers Collier, Lee, and Charlotte counties. If they want to be on this super awesome email list, email me or have the person you are sending this to email me. That way, everyone gets spammed an equal amount from me. I will be sending some more details after we have a liaison’s meeting with FWC staff this Friday, though I expect things to be very similar to last year. Sincerely, Michael Weston Forestry Resource Administrator – Caloosahatchee Forestry Center Florida Forest Service Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (239) 690-8021 Office (239) 220-2404 Cell (239) 690-8002 Fax Michael.Weston@fdacs.gov Caloosahatchee Forestry Center 10941 Palm Beach Blvd. Page 2396 of 4116Fort Myers, FL 33905 www.fdacs.gov Please note that Florida has a broad public records law (Chapter 119, Florida Statues). Most written communications to or from state employees are public records obtainable by the public upon request. Emails sent to me at this email address may be considered public and will only be withheld from disclosure if deemed confidential pursuant to the laws of the State of Florida. Page 2397 of 4116 Project Project Information Project Title : Shell Island Preserve Project * Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Both initial and maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Angel First Name : Melissa Last Name : Kelley Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive South Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34104 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2396310162 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : angel.kelley@colliercountyfl.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Total Acreage of Managed Area : 131 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location The preserve is located in Naples, FL off of Collier Blvd, Shell Island Rd, and Port Au Prince Dr. The preserve has portions on each side of Collier Blvd. Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location The pre​bid meeting location will be along Port Au Prince Dr.  See map for specific location. Lat/Long Coordinates: 26.02455° N, 81.69799° W Description Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Habitat Description Wetland Forested Hardwoods Mangrove Swamp  Freshwater Marsh FNAI Natural Communities Page 2398 of 4116 Select FNAI Natural Communities (%) Hardwood Forested Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Wetlands Hardwoods Unit 1 85 % 5 % 10 % 19 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 2 25 % 70 % 5 % 64 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 3 25 % 65 % 5 % 27 Hardwood Forested Pine Flatwoods and Freshwater Non­forested Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Dry Prairie Wetlands ­ Marshes Hardwoods Unit 4 15 % 5 % 65 % 20 % 18 Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis melaleuca, paperbark Melaleuca quinquenervia Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia rattlebox, purple sesban ( CT ) Sesbania punicea Peruvian primrosewillow ( CT,SS ) Ludwigia peruviana lead tree Leucaena leucocephala Japanese climbing fern ( SS ) Lygodium japonicum Old World climbing fern Lygodium microphyllum (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. (SS) The species in red are known to be senescent for a portion of the year. While their detectability and/or treatability may be low during this senescence, the contractor is still responsible for treating them effectively at the contractual 100% treatment/95% kill rate. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History Year Acres Unit Agency Species TreatmentType Amount 2025 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $11,115.00 2024 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2023 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2022 99.00 1,2 County All FISC Maintenance $21,560.00 2021 72.00 1,2,3 County All FISC Maintenance $18,275.00 Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Unit(s) Method Type Acres infested with Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia: 19. cover class 3, dense unit 4 19.00 Herbicide Initial cover of Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia along old road bed, and pockets in freshwater marshes Unit 1 19.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated .10 acre infested ­ this unit is most recently treated Unit 2 64.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Unit 3 18.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Total Treatment Acres: 120.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan Attached is the invasive plant management plan map. Unit 1 is being treated in FY25, Unit 3 in FY26, Unit 3 and 4 in FY27­28 Restoration Plan for Native Plants Expected re­vegetation to occur in the restoration area. Replanting is not planned, but will be considered if necessary for restoration of this site. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments Exotics treatment will occur yearly in unit 4 until into a maintenance state. Units 1,2,3 will be in a maintenance rotation. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations UNIT 1: Vehicles allowed along Shell Island Rd. There is limited parking W of unit. There is a service trail (walking only) within the unit along an old road. You may also access the unit from LCEC Rd on the w. boundary of preserve.  UNITS 2, 3: Vehicles along LCEC Rd only.  UNIT 4: No vehicles permitted within unit. Access to site will be from Port Au Prince Rd, see map. Site is seasonally wet Other Requirements and Provisions UNIT 2: There is a DO NOT DISTURB site within the unit. This area must not be entered as it is a study area. Site is seasonally wet. Must treat between March​­ June. No storage or mixing areas. No water on site. No known site security issues. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata, Tillandsia balbisiana, Tillandsia flexuosa, Tillandsia utriculata. T&E wildlife species include wood storks and American alligators Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: Winter/Spring 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Treatment cannot occur during these dates Start Date End Date 7/1/2026 12:00:00 AM 1/31/2027 12:00:00 AM Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events. A field trip with local partners at the restoration occurring on Unit 4 is considered in FY27. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars $0.00 Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  $0.00 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment of Management Unit 4, and maintenance treatment of Units 1­3. Collier County will be responsible for all subsequent maintenance treatments. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity Locationmap SI 2026.pdf Projet location map IPMS Fy26 Pre Bid Location.pdf Pre­bid location map Pre bid FY26 IPMS Map.pdf Treatment area map FY26 SI IPMS Map.pdf Area maintenance plan SI Treatment Map Shell Island ­ SWFL Working Group Regional Criteria IPMS_SWWorkingGroup_RankingCriteria_2026.pdf Regional Criteria Form Project Project Information Project Title : Shell Island Preserve Project * Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Both initial and maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Angel First Name : Melissa Last Name : Kelley Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive South Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34104 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2396310162 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : angel.kelley@colliercountyfl.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Total Acreage of Managed Area : 131 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location The preserve is located in Naples, FL off of Collier Blvd, Shell Island Rd, and Port Au Prince Dr. The preserve has portions on each side of Collier Blvd. Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location The pre​bid meeting location will be along Port Au Prince Dr.  See map for specific location. Lat/Long Coordinates: 26.02455° N, 81.69799° W Description Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Habitat Description Wetland Forested Hardwoods Mangrove Swamp  Freshwater Marsh FNAI Natural Communities Select FNAI Natural Communities (%) Hardwood Forested Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Wetlands Hardwoods Unit 1 85 % 5 % 10 % 19 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 2 25 % 70 % 5 % 64 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 3 25 % 65 % 5 % 27 Hardwood Forested Pine Flatwoods and Freshwater Non­forested Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Dry Prairie Wetlands ­ Marshes Hardwoods Unit 4 15 % 5 % 65 % 20 % 18 Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis melaleuca, paperbark Melaleuca quinquenervia Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia rattlebox, purple sesban ( CT ) Sesbania punicea Peruvian primrosewillow ( CT,SS ) Ludwigia peruviana lead tree Leucaena leucocephala Japanese climbing fern ( SS ) Lygodium japonicum Old World climbing fern Lygodium microphyllum (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. (SS) The species in red are known to be senescent for a portion of the year. While their detectability and/or treatability may be low during this senescence, the contractor is still responsible for treating them effectively at the contractual 100% treatment/95% kill rate. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History Year Acres Unit Agency Species TreatmentType Amount 2025 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $11,115.00 2024 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2023 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2022 99.00 1,2 County All FISC Maintenance $21,560.00 2021 72.00 1,2,3 County All FISC Maintenance $18,275.00 Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Unit(s) Method Type Acres infested with Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia: 19. cover class 3, dense unit 4 19.00 Herbicide Initial cover of Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia along old road bed, and pockets in Page 2399 of 4116 freshwater marshes Unit 1 19.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated .10 acre infested ­ this unit is most recently treated Unit 2 64.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Unit 3 18.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Total Treatment Acres: 120.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan Attached is the invasive plant management plan map. Unit 1 is being treated in FY25, Unit 3 in FY26, Unit 3 and 4 in FY27­28 Restoration Plan for Native Plants Expected re­vegetation to occur in the restoration area. Replanting is not planned, but will be considered if necessary for restoration of this site. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments Exotics treatment will occur yearly in unit 4 until into a maintenance state. Units 1,2,3 will be in a maintenance rotation. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations UNIT 1: Vehicles allowed along Shell Island Rd. There is limited parking W of unit. There is a service trail (walking only) within the unit along an old road. You may also access the unit from LCEC Rd on the w. boundary of preserve.  UNITS 2, 3: Vehicles along LCEC Rd only.  UNIT 4: No vehicles permitted within unit. Access to site will be from Port Au Prince Rd, see map. Site is seasonally wet Other Requirements and Provisions UNIT 2: There is a DO NOT DISTURB site within the unit. This area must not be entered as it is a study area. Site is seasonally wet. Must treat between March​­ June. No storage or mixing areas. No water on site. No known site security issues. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata, Tillandsia balbisiana, Tillandsia flexuosa, Tillandsia utriculata. T&E wildlife species include wood storks and American alligators Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: Winter/Spring 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Treatment cannot occur during these dates Start Date End Date 7/1/2026 12:00:00 AM 1/31/2027 12:00:00 AM Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events. A field trip with local partners at the restoration occurring on Unit 4 is considered in FY27. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars $0.00 Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  $0.00 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment of Management Unit 4, and maintenance treatment of Units 1­3. Collier County will be responsible for all subsequent maintenance treatments. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity Locationmap SI 2026.pdf Projet location map IPMS Fy26 Pre Bid Location.pdf Pre­bid location map Pre bid FY26 IPMS Map.pdf Treatment area map FY26 SI IPMS Map.pdf Area maintenance plan SI Treatment Map Shell Island ­ SWFL Working Group Regional Criteria IPMS_SWWorkingGroup_RankingCriteria_2026.pdf Regional Criteria Form Project Project Information Project Title : Shell Island Preserve Project * Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Both initial and maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Angel First Name : Melissa Last Name : Kelley Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive South Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34104 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2396310162 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : angel.kelley@colliercountyfl.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Total Acreage of Managed Area : 131 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location The preserve is located in Naples, FL off of Collier Blvd, Shell Island Rd, and Port Au Prince Dr. The preserve has portions on each side of Collier Blvd. Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location The pre​bid meeting location will be along Port Au Prince Dr.  See map for specific location. Lat/Long Coordinates: 26.02455° N, 81.69799° W Description Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Habitat Description Wetland Forested Hardwoods Mangrove Swamp  Freshwater Marsh FNAI Natural Communities Select FNAI Natural Communities (%) Hardwood Forested Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Wetlands Hardwoods Unit 1 85 % 5 % 10 % 19 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 2 25 % 70 % 5 % 64 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 3 25 % 65 % 5 % 27 Hardwood Forested Pine Flatwoods and Freshwater Non­forested Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Dry Prairie Wetlands ­ Marshes Hardwoods Unit 4 15 % 5 % 65 % 20 % 18 Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis melaleuca, paperbark Melaleuca quinquenervia Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia rattlebox, purple sesban ( CT ) Sesbania punicea Peruvian primrosewillow ( CT,SS ) Ludwigia peruviana lead tree Leucaena leucocephala Japanese climbing fern ( SS ) Lygodium japonicum Old World climbing fern Lygodium microphyllum (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. (SS) The species in red are known to be senescent for a portion of the year. While their detectability and/or treatability may be low during this senescence, the contractor is still responsible for treating them effectively at the contractual 100% treatment/95% kill rate. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History Year Acres Unit Agency Species TreatmentType Amount 2025 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $11,115.00 2024 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2023 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2022 99.00 1,2 County All FISC Maintenance $21,560.00 2021 72.00 1,2,3 County All FISC Maintenance $18,275.00 Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Unit(s) Method Type Acres infested with Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia: 19. cover class 3, dense unit 4 19.00 Herbicide Initial cover of Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia along old road bed, and pockets in freshwater marshes Unit 1 19.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated .10 acre infested ­ this unit is most recently treated Unit 2 64.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Unit 3 18.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Total Treatment Acres: 120.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan Attached is the invasive plant management plan map. Unit 1 is being treated in FY25, Unit 3 in FY26, Unit 3 and 4 in FY27­28 Restoration Plan for Native Plants Expected re­vegetation to occur in the restoration area. Replanting is not planned, but will be considered if necessary for restoration of this site. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments Exotics treatment will occur yearly in unit 4 until into a maintenance state. Units 1,2,3 will be in a maintenance rotation. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations UNIT 1: Vehicles allowed along Shell Island Rd. There is limited parking W of unit. There is a service trail (walking only) within the unit along an old road. You may also access the unit from LCEC Rd on the w. boundary of preserve.  UNITS 2, 3: Vehicles along LCEC Rd only.  UNIT 4: No vehicles permitted within unit. Access to site will be from Port Au Prince Rd, see map. Site is seasonally wet Page 2400 of 4116 Other Requirements and Provisions UNIT 2: There is a DO NOT DISTURB site within the unit. This area must not be entered as it is a study area. Site is seasonally wet. Must treat between March​­ June. No storage or mixing areas. No water on site. No known site security issues. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata, Tillandsia balbisiana, Tillandsia flexuosa, Tillandsia utriculata. T&E wildlife species include wood storks and American alligators Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: Winter/Spring 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Treatment cannot occur during these dates Start Date End Date 7/1/2026 12:00:00 AM 1/31/2027 12:00:00 AM Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events. A field trip with local partners at the restoration occurring on Unit 4 is considered in FY27. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars $0.00 Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  $0.00 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment of Management Unit 4, and maintenance treatment of Units 1­3. Collier County will be responsible for all subsequent maintenance treatments. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity Locationmap SI 2026.pdf Projet location map IPMS Fy26 Pre Bid Location.pdf Pre­bid location map Pre bid FY26 IPMS Map.pdf Treatment area map FY26 SI IPMS Map.pdf Area maintenance plan SI Treatment Map Shell Island ­ SWFL Working Group Regional Criteria IPMS_SWWorkingGroup_RankingCriteria_2026.pdf Regional Criteria Form Project Project Information Project Title : Shell Island Preserve Project * Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Both initial and maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Angel First Name : Melissa Last Name : Kelley Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive South Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34104 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2396310162 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : angel.kelley@colliercountyfl.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Total Acreage of Managed Area : 131 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location The preserve is located in Naples, FL off of Collier Blvd, Shell Island Rd, and Port Au Prince Dr. The preserve has portions on each side of Collier Blvd. Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location The pre​bid meeting location will be along Port Au Prince Dr.  See map for specific location. Lat/Long Coordinates: 26.02455° N, 81.69799° W Description Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Habitat Description Wetland Forested Hardwoods Mangrove Swamp  Freshwater Marsh FNAI Natural Communities Select FNAI Natural Communities (%) Hardwood Forested Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Wetlands Hardwoods Unit 1 85 % 5 % 10 % 19 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 2 25 % 70 % 5 % 64 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 3 25 % 65 % 5 % 27 Hardwood Forested Pine Flatwoods and Freshwater Non­forested Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Dry Prairie Wetlands ­ Marshes Hardwoods Unit 4 15 % 5 % 65 % 20 % 18 Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis melaleuca, paperbark Melaleuca quinquenervia Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia rattlebox, purple sesban ( CT ) Sesbania punicea Peruvian primrosewillow ( CT,SS ) Ludwigia peruviana lead tree Leucaena leucocephala Japanese climbing fern ( SS ) Lygodium japonicum Old World climbing fern Lygodium microphyllum (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. (SS) The species in red are known to be senescent for a portion of the year. While their detectability and/or treatability may be low during this senescence, the contractor is still responsible for treating them effectively at the contractual 100% treatment/95% kill rate. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History Year Acres Unit Agency Species TreatmentType Amount 2025 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $11,115.00 2024 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2023 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2022 99.00 1,2 County All FISC Maintenance $21,560.00 2021 72.00 1,2,3 County All FISC Maintenance $18,275.00 Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Unit(s) Method Type Acres infested with Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia: 19. cover class 3, dense unit 4 19.00 Herbicide Initial cover of Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia along old road bed, and pockets in freshwater marshes Unit 1 19.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated .10 acre infested ­ this unit is most recently treated Unit 2 64.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Unit 3 18.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Total Treatment Acres: 120.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan Attached is the invasive plant management plan map. Unit 1 is being treated in FY25, Unit 3 in FY26, Unit 3 and 4 in FY27­28 Restoration Plan for Native Plants Expected re­vegetation to occur in the restoration area. Replanting is not planned, but will be considered if necessary for restoration of this site. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments Exotics treatment will occur yearly in unit 4 until into a maintenance state. Units 1,2,3 will be in a maintenance rotation. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations UNIT 1: Vehicles allowed along Shell Island Rd. There is limited parking W of unit. There is a service trail (walking only) within the unit along an old road. You may also access the unit from LCEC Rd on the w. boundary of preserve.  UNITS 2, 3: Vehicles along LCEC Rd only.  UNIT 4: No vehicles permitted within unit. Access to site will be from Port Au Prince Rd, see map. Site is seasonally wet Other Requirements and Provisions UNIT 2: There is a DO NOT DISTURB site within the unit. This area must not be entered as it is a study area. Site is seasonally wet. Must treat between March​­ June. No storage or mixing areas. No water on site. No known site security issues. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata, Tillandsia balbisiana, Tillandsia flexuosa, TillandsiaPage 2401 of 4116 utriculata. T&E wildlife species include wood storks and American alligators Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: Winter/Spring 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Treatment cannot occur during these dates Start Date End Date 7/1/2026 12:00:00 AM 1/31/2027 12:00:00 AM Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events. A field trip with local partners at the restoration occurring on Unit 4 is considered in FY27. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars $0.00 Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  $0.00 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment of Management Unit 4, and maintenance treatment of Units 1­3. Collier County will be responsible for all subsequent maintenance treatments. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity Locationmap SI 2026.pdf Projet location map IPMS Fy26 Pre Bid Location.pdf Pre­bid location map Pre bid FY26 IPMS Map.pdf Treatment area map FY26 SI IPMS Map.pdf Area maintenance plan SI Treatment Map Shell Island ­ SWFL Working Group Regional Criteria IPMS_SWWorkingGroup_RankingCriteria_2026.pdf Regional Criteria Form Project Project Information Project Title : Shell Island Preserve Project * Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Both initial and maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Angel First Name : Melissa Last Name : Kelley Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive South Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34104 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2396310162 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : angel.kelley@colliercountyfl.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Total Acreage of Managed Area : 131 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location The preserve is located in Naples, FL off of Collier Blvd, Shell Island Rd, and Port Au Prince Dr. The preserve has portions on each side of Collier Blvd. Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location The pre​bid meeting location will be along Port Au Prince Dr.  See map for specific location. Lat/Long Coordinates: 26.02455° N, 81.69799° W Description Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Habitat Description Wetland Forested Hardwoods Mangrove Swamp  Freshwater Marsh FNAI Natural Communities Select FNAI Natural Communities (%) Hardwood Forested Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Wetlands Hardwoods Unit 1 85 % 5 % 10 % 19 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 2 25 % 70 % 5 % 64 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 3 25 % 65 % 5 % 27 Hardwood Forested Pine Flatwoods and Freshwater Non­forested Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Dry Prairie Wetlands ­ Marshes Hardwoods Unit 4 15 % 5 % 65 % 20 % 18 Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis melaleuca, paperbark Melaleuca quinquenervia Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia rattlebox, purple sesban ( CT ) Sesbania punicea Peruvian primrosewillow ( CT,SS ) Ludwigia peruviana lead tree Leucaena leucocephala Japanese climbing fern ( SS ) Lygodium japonicum Old World climbing fern Lygodium microphyllum (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. (SS) The species in red are known to be senescent for a portion of the year. While their detectability and/or treatability may be low during this senescence, the contractor is still responsible for treating them effectively at the contractual 100% treatment/95% kill rate. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History Year Acres Unit Agency Species TreatmentType Amount 2025 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $11,115.00 2024 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2023 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2022 99.00 1,2 County All FISC Maintenance $21,560.00 2021 72.00 1,2,3 County All FISC Maintenance $18,275.00 Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Unit(s) Method Type Acres infested with Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia: 19. cover class 3, dense unit 4 19.00 Herbicide Initial cover of Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia along old road bed, and pockets in freshwater marshes Unit 1 19.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated .10 acre infested ­ this unit is most recently treated Unit 2 64.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Unit 3 18.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Total Treatment Acres: 120.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan Attached is the invasive plant management plan map. Unit 1 is being treated in FY25, Unit 3 in FY26, Unit 3 and 4 in FY27­28 Restoration Plan for Native Plants Expected re­vegetation to occur in the restoration area. Replanting is not planned, but will be considered if necessary for restoration of this site. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments Exotics treatment will occur yearly in unit 4 until into a maintenance state. Units 1,2,3 will be in a maintenance rotation. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations UNIT 1: Vehicles allowed along Shell Island Rd. There is limited parking W of unit. There is a service trail (walking only) within the unit along an old road. You may also access the unit from LCEC Rd on the w. boundary of preserve.  UNITS 2, 3: Vehicles along LCEC Rd only.  UNIT 4: No vehicles permitted within unit. Access to site will be from Port Au Prince Rd, see map. Site is seasonally wet Other Requirements and Provisions UNIT 2: There is a DO NOT DISTURB site within the unit. This area must not be entered as it is a study area. Site is seasonally wet. Must treat between March​­ June. No storage or mixing areas. No water on site. No known site security issues. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata, Tillandsia balbisiana, Tillandsia flexuosa, Tillandsia utriculata. T&E wildlife species include wood storks and American alligators Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: Winter/Spring 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Treatment cannot occur during these dates Start Date End Date 7/1/2026 12:00:00 AM 1/31/2027 12:00:00 AM Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events. A field trip with local partners at the restoration occurring on Unit 4 is considered in FY27. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars $0.00 Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  $0.00 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Page 2402 of 4116 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment of Management Unit 4, and maintenance treatment of Units 1­3. Collier County will be responsible for all subsequent maintenance treatments. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity Locationmap SI 2026.pdf Projet location map IPMS Fy26 Pre Bid Location.pdf Pre­bid location map Pre bid FY26 IPMS Map.pdf Treatment area map FY26 SI IPMS Map.pdf Area maintenance plan SI Treatment Map Shell Island ­ SWFL Working Group Regional Criteria IPMS_SWWorkingGroup_RankingCriteria_2026.pdf Regional Criteria Form Project Project Information Project Title : Shell Island Preserve Project * Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Both initial and maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Angel First Name : Melissa Last Name : Kelley Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive South Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34104 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2396310162 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : angel.kelley@colliercountyfl.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Total Acreage of Managed Area : 131 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location The preserve is located in Naples, FL off of Collier Blvd, Shell Island Rd, and Port Au Prince Dr. The preserve has portions on each side of Collier Blvd. Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location The pre​bid meeting location will be along Port Au Prince Dr.  See map for specific location. Lat/Long Coordinates: 26.02455° N, 81.69799° W Description Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Habitat Description Wetland Forested Hardwoods Mangrove Swamp  Freshwater Marsh FNAI Natural Communities Select FNAI Natural Communities (%) Hardwood Forested Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Wetlands Hardwoods Unit 1 85 % 5 % 10 % 19 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 2 25 % 70 % 5 % 64 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 3 25 % 65 % 5 % 27 Hardwood Forested Pine Flatwoods and Freshwater Non­forested Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Dry Prairie Wetlands ­ Marshes Hardwoods Unit 4 15 % 5 % 65 % 20 % 18 Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis melaleuca, paperbark Melaleuca quinquenervia Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia rattlebox, purple sesban ( CT ) Sesbania punicea Peruvian primrosewillow ( CT,SS ) Ludwigia peruviana lead tree Leucaena leucocephala Japanese climbing fern ( SS ) Lygodium japonicum Old World climbing fern Lygodium microphyllum (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. (SS) The species in red are known to be senescent for a portion of the year. While their detectability and/or treatability may be low during this senescence, the contractor is still responsible for treating them effectively at the contractual 100% treatment/95% kill rate. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History Year Acres Unit Agency Species TreatmentType Amount 2025 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $11,115.00 2024 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2023 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2022 99.00 1,2 County All FISC Maintenance $21,560.00 2021 72.00 1,2,3 County All FISC Maintenance $18,275.00 Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Unit(s) Method Type Acres infested with Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia: 19. cover class 3, dense unit 4 19.00 Herbicide Initial cover of Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia along old road bed, and pockets in freshwater marshes Unit 1 19.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated .10 acre infested ­ this unit is most recently treated Unit 2 64.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Unit 3 18.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Total Treatment Acres: 120.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan Attached is the invasive plant management plan map. Unit 1 is being treated in FY25, Unit 3 in FY26, Unit 3 and 4 in FY27­28 Restoration Plan for Native Plants Expected re­vegetation to occur in the restoration area. Replanting is not planned, but will be considered if necessary for restoration of this site. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments Exotics treatment will occur yearly in unit 4 until into a maintenance state. Units 1,2,3 will be in a maintenance rotation. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations UNIT 1: Vehicles allowed along Shell Island Rd. There is limited parking W of unit. There is a service trail (walking only) within the unit along an old road. You may also access the unit from LCEC Rd on the w. boundary of preserve.  UNITS 2, 3: Vehicles along LCEC Rd only.  UNIT 4: No vehicles permitted within unit. Access to site will be from Port Au Prince Rd, see map. Site is seasonally wet Other Requirements and Provisions UNIT 2: There is a DO NOT DISTURB site within the unit. This area must not be entered as it is a study area. Site is seasonally wet. Must treat between March​­ June. No storage or mixing areas. No water on site. No known site security issues. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata, Tillandsia balbisiana, Tillandsia flexuosa, Tillandsia utriculata. T&E wildlife species include wood storks and American alligators Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: Winter/Spring 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Treatment cannot occur during these dates Start Date End Date 7/1/2026 12:00:00 AM 1/31/2027 12:00:00 AM Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events. A field trip with local partners at the restoration occurring on Unit 4 is considered in FY27. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars $0.00 Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  $0.00 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment of Management Unit 4, and maintenance treatment of Units 1­3. Collier County will be responsible for all subsequent maintenance treatments. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity Locationmap SI 2026.pdf Projet location map IPMS Fy26 Pre Bid Location.pdf Pre­bid location map Pre bid FY26 IPMS Map.pdf Treatment area map FY26 SI IPMS Map.pdf Area maintenance plan SI Treatment Map Shell Island ­ SWFL Working Group Regional Criteria IPMS_SWWorkingGroup_RankingCriteria_2026.pdf Regional Criteria Form Page 2403 of 4116 Project Project Information Project Title : Shell Island Preserve Project * Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Both initial and maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Angel First Name : Melissa Last Name : Kelley Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive South Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34104 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2396310162 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : angel.kelley@colliercountyfl.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Total Acreage of Managed Area : 131 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location The preserve is located in Naples, FL off of Collier Blvd, Shell Island Rd, and Port Au Prince Dr. The preserve has portions on each side of Collier Blvd. Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location The pre​bid meeting location will be along Port Au Prince Dr.  See map for specific location. Lat/Long Coordinates: 26.02455° N, 81.69799° W Description Managed Area : Shell Island Preserve Habitat Description Wetland Forested Hardwoods Mangrove Swamp  Freshwater Marsh FNAI Natural Communities Select FNAI Natural Communities (%) Hardwood Forested Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Wetlands Hardwoods Unit 1 85 % 5 % 10 % 19 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 2 25 % 70 % 5 % 64 Marine and Estuarine Vegetated Freshwater Non­forested Wetlands ­ Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Wetlands Marshes Hardwoods Unit 3 25 % 65 % 5 % 27 Hardwood Forested Pine Flatwoods and Freshwater Non­forested Freshwater Forested Wetlands ­ Unit Uplands Dry Prairie Wetlands ­ Marshes Hardwoods Unit 4 15 % 5 % 65 % 20 % 18 Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis melaleuca, paperbark Melaleuca quinquenervia Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia rattlebox, purple sesban ( CT ) Sesbania punicea Peruvian primrosewillow ( CT,SS ) Ludwigia peruviana lead tree Leucaena leucocephala Japanese climbing fern ( SS ) Lygodium japonicum Old World climbing fern Lygodium microphyllum (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. (SS) The species in red are known to be senescent for a portion of the year. While their detectability and/or treatability may be low during this senescence, the contractor is still responsible for treating them effectively at the contractual 100% treatment/95% kill rate. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History Year Acres Unit Agency Species TreatmentType Amount 2025 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $11,115.00 2024 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2023 20.00 1 County All FISC Maintenance $10,950.00 2022 99.00 1,2 County All FISC Maintenance $21,560.00 2021 72.00 1,2,3 County All FISC Maintenance $18,275.00 Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Unit(s) Method Type Acres infested with Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia: 19. cover class 3, dense unit 4 19.00 Herbicide Initial cover of Melaleuca and Earleaf Acacia along old road bed, and pockets in freshwater marshes Unit 1 19.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated .10 acre infested ­ this unit is most recently treated Unit 2 64.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Unit 3 18.00 Herbicide Maintenance Estimated 1 acre infested ­ Brazilian Pepper, Earleaf, Melaleuca Total Treatment Acres: 120.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan Attached is the invasive plant management plan map. Unit 1 is being treated in FY25, Unit 3 in FY26, Unit 3 and 4 in FY27­28 Restoration Plan for Native Plants Expected re­vegetation to occur in the restoration area. Replanting is not planned, but will be considered if necessary for restoration of this site. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments Exotics treatment will occur yearly in unit 4 until into a maintenance state. Units 1,2,3 will be in a maintenance rotation. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations UNIT 1: Vehicles allowed along Shell Island Rd. There is limited parking W of unit. There is a service trail (walking only) within the unit along an old road. You may also access the unit from LCEC Rd on the w. boundary of preserve.  UNITS 2, 3: Vehicles along LCEC Rd only.  UNIT 4: No vehicles permitted within unit. Access to site will be from Port Au Prince Rd, see map. Site is seasonally wet Other Requirements and Provisions UNIT 2: There is a DO NOT DISTURB site within the unit. This area must not be entered as it is a study area. Site is seasonally wet. Must treat between March​­ June. No storage or mixing areas. No water on site. No known site security issues. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata, Tillandsia balbisiana, Tillandsia flexuosa, Tillandsia utriculata. T&E wildlife species include wood storks and American alligators Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: Winter/Spring 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Treatment cannot occur during these dates Start Date End Date 7/1/2026 12:00:00 AM 1/31/2027 12:00:00 AM Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events. A field trip with local partners at the restoration occurring on Unit 4 is considered in FY27. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars $0.00 Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  $0.00 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment of Management Unit 4, and maintenance treatment of Units 1­3. Collier County will be responsible for all subsequent maintenance treatments. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity Locationmap SI 2026.pdf Projet location map IPMS Fy26 Pre Bid Location.pdf Pre­bid location map Pre bid FY26 IPMS Map.pdf Treatment area map FY26 SI IPMS Map.pdf Area maintenance plan SI Treatment Map Shell Island ­ SWFL Working Group Regional Criteria IPMS_SWWorkingGroup_RankingCriteria_2026.pdf Regional Criteria Form Page 2404 of 4116 M arton Artesia DR Cypress Snook CIR Winding CT Barefoot Williams RD e Palm ll R E View DR s N k Cypress e aArtesia I a LN o L DR o R n y C n Eagle WillowR o I TamiamiDR TRL E r T a DR W e S n C a c ntiago c N Creek DR Henderson Creek LNS P C zi N Sa u Tangelo L L L DR V Derhen Oceania Dockside CT Hen son DR Tower RD derson DR S d RD DR Ye rwoo Aquam llo Rive A arine C w VE Jade IR fin Rookery DR RD DR Jasper D OakDR SkylineTurquoise N DR R or anatee AVE Pi fo M ne lk LN LucyLN EnbrookLOOP Queen TranquilBrook DR Palm DR Bright Dawn DR Roost RD Gr Summerlit osbeak AVE LN Campanile LN o T CIR s C e CoveyVadala s e Diamo ake CIR r e ai v nd L u v T Bend h o rL s o C C PT ilve ake a C CT C OpalLake S B s Lakere LN e LVD AmethystT ir h Y Ruby p A NicoloCT Southern Breeze DR p e Carmini WAY a Wv S o CT Tre C H asure Cove Treasure aw BLVD C W hampion CIR Maho A ks shipD gany Y N R MontreuxBend D e R Collier BLVD s Mulberry Co LN t P tt CT a on th G S Is DR ree oWla n l D Y Shell Island RD A e W Port Au Y l K P C C Prince DR ST k e lu e nte b Ind Mulberry LNe r B iesD r L E C VD OchoMoon Bay R s Rios IsleST of er dl T d R r W Saint Thomas i un a B F aw c h Y e ay e is A D l L W p W R la N e Mallar g A r ds io Y Bellagio DR Shell Island Roads 0 625 1,250 2,500 Feet Preserve_Boundaries Location ± Page 2405 of 4116 Default Folder: A:\Maps\_Preserves\Shell Island\ArcGIS PROs\Exotics Treatment FY25 Port Au Prince DR Collier BLVD Salinas DR Shell Island RD Roads Shell Island Preserve Trail 0 80 160 320 Feet Preserve_Boundaries IPMS Pre-bid Location Pre-bid meeting location ± Default Folder: A:\Maps\_Preserves\Shell Island\ArcGISPage PROs\Exotics 2406 Treatment FY25of 4116 Southern B reeze DR DR Treasure Championship DR Co SouthernBreeze ve BLVD st e H N Unit 3 a w ks ks aw R N H D es tW A Y Collier BLVD Unit 2 Port Au Prince DR Unit 4 Salinas DR Ocho RiosST ST Moon Bay Unit 1 Shell Island RD Unit 1 Unit 2 Shell Island Invasive 0 150 300 600 Feet Unit 3 Roads Plant Management Plan Unit 4 Trail ± Page 2407 of 4116 Default Folder: A:\Maps\_Preserves\Shell Island\ArcGIS PROs\Exotics Treatment FY25 Southern B reeze DR DR Treasure Championship DR Co SouthernBreeze ve BLVD st e H N Unit 3 a w ks ks aw R N H D es tW A Y Collier BLVD Unit 2 Port Au Prince DR Unit 4 Salinas DR Ocho RiosST ST Moon Bay Unit 1 Shell Island RD Unit 1 Unit 2 Shell Island Invasive Unit 3 Roads 0 150 300 600 Feet Unit 4 Trail Plant Management Plan DoNotDisturb ± Page 2408 of 4116 Default Folder: A:\Maps\_Preserves\Shell Island\ArcGIS PROs\Exotics Treatment FY251.) FWC Invasive Plant Management Section (IPMS) Priorities. Points can only be awarded for only one choice in 1a, 1b, 1c, OR 1d. (Presenters need to determine which priority their project is composed of and the %'s of the treatment area) (FWC will supply this total based on the criteria the presenter lays out in their presentation) 1a.) (5-40 pts) Is this project a FWC Priority 1 project? 40 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 30 = 74%-50% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 10 = 49%-25% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 5 = 24%-10% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 1b.) (2-20 pts) Is this project a FWC Priority 2 project? 20 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 2 treatment 15 = 74%-50% of project will contain FWC Priority 2 treatment 5 = 49%-25% of project will contain FWC Priority 2 treatment 2 = 24%-10% of project will contain FWC Priority 2 treatment 1c.) (8-10 pts) Is this project a FWC Priority 3 project? 10 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 3 treatment 8 = 74%-50% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 3 treatment 1d.) (5 pts) Is this project site a FWC Priority 4 project? 5 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 4 treatment 2.) (0 or 10 pts) Is this a population of a FLEPPC Category I/Category II species that is new to the SWFL region (not just the parcel) and that could expand and cause greater problems in the future? (CISMA members to agree in ranking meeting in absence of updated regional list) 0 = No 10 = Yes 3.) (1-10 pts) Are there currently matching funds available for this project? Matching funds include both direct funding and in-kind funding (e.g. – staff time, volunteers, other sources of labor, AmeriCorps). Match can also include funds expended on invasive plant treatment at this project site within the last year. ( Presenter to explain match % ) 10 = 100% match; 9 = 90% match; 8 = 80% match; 7 = 70% match; 6 = 60% match; 5 = 50% match; 4 = 40% match; 3 = 30% match; 2 = 20% match; 1 = 10% match 4.) (6 pts) Have listed plant species been documented for this project site (not your entire property boundary – just this project site)? 6 = 5 or more plants or 1 or more critically endangered endemic 3 = 3-4 listed plant species documented 1 = 1-2 listed plant species documented 5.) (1-3 pts) Does this project help protect adjacent natural areas that have received FWC Invasive Plant Management Section (IPMS) funding? 3 = Project site abuts another FWC IPMS funded natural area 2 = Project site is within 1 mile of another FWC IPMS funded natural area 1 = Project site is within 10 miles of another FWC IPMS funded natural area 6.) (0 or 3 pts) Are any partners that have not received FWC IMPS funding involved in this project? (This includes private or public landowners who are simultaneously treating exotics on properties that abut the project site) 3=Yes 7.) (1-5 pts) Will exceptional ecological benefits be achieved by the project? e.g., the work will increase species diversity or protect natural plant communities of local, regional, or statewide ecological significance. Presenters must make their case to be awarded points. Points are subjective to the ranker based on the presentation. 8.) ____ (0 or -5) Applicant prioritizes applications (Select primary). For first application (No minus) points for each additional application (Minus 5 points). 9.) ______ (0 or -1) Shapefile submittted before the working group meeting to Linda King, Michael Sowinski, and John Kunzer (FWC will supply answer) 30 TOTAL points (cannot exceed 77) Page 2409 of 4116 Project Project Information Project Title :Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve Fiscal Year :2026-2027 Project Category :Small Treatment Type :Initial Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information First Name : Angel Last Name : Kelley Address1 : City 2800 Horseshoe Drive N : State : Zip : Naples Primary Phone : FL Email : 34104 239-2721086 Angel.Kelley@Collier.gov Location Managed Area :Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve Total Acreage of Managed Area :37 Lead Agency :Collier County Regional Working Group :Southwest Project Location The Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve is located at 6371 Adkins Avenue, Naples, FL in Section 16, Township 50S, Range 26E. It is north of Rattlesnake Hammock Blvd, West of Collier Blvd, and East of Santa Barbara Blvd in South Naples. Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre-quote Location Contractors will meet at the entrance gate at 6371 Adkins Avenue, Naples, FL 34112. Description Managed Area : Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve Habitat Description The property is made up of two parcels comprising 37 acres in total. The Florida Land Cover Classification System defines the Preserve’s plant community as Mixed Hardwood- Coniferous surrounded by various disturbed/developed habitats. The preserve is characterized by a central oak/palm hammock bound by forested wetland hammocks. There are two depressional wetlands, one of manmade origin in the northern portion of the preserve. An access road/conservation easement runs along the eastern boundary. Page 2410 of 4116FNAI Natural Communities Select FNAI Natural Communities (%) Unit Hardwood Forested Uplands Freshwater Non-forested Wetlands - Marshes Disturbed Lands 1 7 acre 97% 2 % 1 % Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name Japanese climbing fern ( SS ) Lygodium japonicum Old World climbing fern Lygodium microphyllum Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia melaleuca, paperbark Melaleuca quinquenervia jambolan, Java plum Syzygium cumini Peruvian primrosewillow ( CT,SS ) Ludwigia peruviana coral ardisia Ardisia crenata climbing or Christmas cassia Senna pendula Balsampear, bitter melon ( CT ) Momordica charantia C Earleaf Acacia Acacia auriculiformis (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. (SS) The species in red are known to be senescent for a portion of the year. While their detectability and/or treatability may be low during this senescence, the contractor is still responsible for treating them effectively at the contractual 100% treatment/95% kill rate. Other Targeted Plants Other Targeted Plants None Unit Treatment History Year Acres Unit Agency Species TreatmentType Amount 20211.20 1 Collier County Brazilian pepper, melaleuca, java plum, coral ardisia Initial $21,000.00 20210.50 1 Collier County Brazilian pepper Maintenance $800.00 20210.50 1 Collier County Brazilian pepper Maintenance $800.00 Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) : 1) <1% 2)1-5% 3)6-25% 4)26-50% 5)51-75% 6)76-95% 7)95-100% Treatment Unit(s) Acreage Control Method Treatment Type Cover class estimates, etc. 1 31.00 Herbicide/Mechanical Initial 7 Acres- cover class 6 Total Treatment Acres:7.16 Page 2411 of 4116Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan If a FY27 Treatment is approved by IPMS, Collier County will provide a 6-month maintenance treatment of the mechanically removed Brazilian Pepper in FY27. A follow-up maintenance treatment of the entire unit will be carried out in FY28 and conducted regularly on a 1-2 year basis afterward to maintain. Restoration Plan for Native Plants 0.5 acres of Brazilian Pepper Monoculture that was mechanically removed in FY21 have been replanted with native understory/canopy species. Collier County has restoried herbaceous cover wetlands with supplemental native plantings. Melaleuca Mechanical removal will be replanted by Collier County following treatment to restore native canopy and understory of the site. The remaining portion of the units will be re-vegetated by existing on-site native species. Funding and Labor Source for Follow-up Treatments Funding for maintenance treatments exists within the Conservation Collier Management Fund. Follow-up maintenance treatments will be conducted on a 1-2 year basis in perpetuity by Collier County contractors/ staff spot treatments. Page 2412 of 4116Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the mos effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Smal seedlings/saplings may be hand-pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle cut” method When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marke dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non-target damage to native plan species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure tha no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the projec specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter-length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations A 3000 ft UTV access trail exists within the preserve. The eastern boundary is accessible by pickup truck through a mowed access easement road. Treatment must occur between sunrise-sunset due to the neighborhood location of the preserve. A gated parking area will be available for crews for staging at the entrance to the preserve. No water access exists on site. Other Requirements and Provisions The preserve wetlands are inundated from June-October. The preserve is gated, an access code will be provided to contractors. Site manager will meet contractor on-site as needed. If an office setting is required, meetings can take place at 2800 Horseshoe Drive N. No water or disposal available on-site. Threatened, etc. Species Plants unmarked. Florida royal palm, reflexed wild pine, cardinal airplant, giant airplant, Simpson's stopper, pineland passifonflower. Wildlife species: Florida panther, little blue heron, wood stork, tri-colored heron, american alligator Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment:Winter/Spring 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes x No Does treatment date matter? xYes No Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) xYes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) xYes No Page 2413 of 4116Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Public volunteer workdays to remove exotics. Outreach hikes by staff/volunteers. Exotic Plant/Restoration signage along trail. Social media restoration updates. This preserve will be open to the public eventuslly. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC :$50,000.00 Method of Control :Contracted Source Dollars $30,000.00 Total matching funds from project sponsor (A): $30,000.00 In-kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in-kind value ($) supervisor hours 10 $50.00 $500.00 Total in-kind value from project sponsor (B):$0.00 Total matching and in-kind dollars (A+B):$30,000.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C):$50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C):$80,000.00 Notes/Explanations Request that mechanically removed melaleuca an Brazilian pepper be mulched or removed off-site rather than dropped and left within the unit. This is to reduce fire fuel loads and facilitate success of restoration plantings. Machinery such as a posi- track may be required to accomplish this in the 4 acres of mechanical treatment requested Page 2414 of 4116Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity Rattlesnake Hammock Rattlesnake Hammock Site Visit Location Map.pdf map Preserve Location Map Treatment area map Rattlesnake Hammock Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve Treatment Unit.jpg Preserve Treatment Area Rattlesnake Hammock Ranking Criteria Scoring Regional Criteria Regional Criteria Sheet.pdf Rattlesnake Hammock T&E T and E Species.jpg T&E species Page 2415 of 4116 Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve Site Visit Location 6371 Adkins Avenue, Naples, FL I- 75 N I- 75 S Radio RD Santa Barbara BLVD Davis BLVD Collier BLVD County Barn RD Adkins AVE Polly AVE Rattlesnake Hammock RD Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve 0 0.5 1 Miles ´ Page 2416 of 4116Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve Treatment Unit.jpg Treatment area map Page 2417 of 41161.) FWC Invasive Plant Management Section (IPMS) Priorities. Points can only be awarded for 1a, 1b, 1c, OR 1d. 1a.) (5-40 pts) Is this project a FWC Priority 1 project? 40 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 30 = 74%-50% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 10 = 49%-25% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 5 = 24%-10% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment (2- 1b.) 20 pts) Is this project a FWC Priority 2 project? 20 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 2 treatment 15 = 74%-50% of project will contain FWC Priority 2 treatment 5 = 49%-25% of project will contain FWC Priority 2 treatment 2 = 24%-10% of project will contain FWC Priority 2 treatment (8-10 pts) Is this project a FWC Priority 3 project? 1c.) 10 10 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 3 treatment 8 = 74%-50% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 3 treatment (5 pts) Is this project site a FWC Priority 4 project? 1d.) 5 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 4 treatment 2 .) (10 pts) Is this a population of a FLEPPC Category I/Category II species that is new to the SWFL region and that could expand and cause greater problems in th10 = Yes 3.) 4 (1-10 pts) Are there currently matching funds available for this project? Matchingfunds includeboth directfunding and in-kind funding (e.g. – staff time, volunteers, other sources of labor, AmeriCorps). Match can also include funds expended on invasive plant treatment at this project site within the last year. 10 = 100% match; 9 = 90% match; 8 = 80% match; 7 = 70% match; 6 = 60% match; 5 = 50% match; 4 = 40% match; 3 = 30% match; 2 = 20% match; 1 = 10% match 4.) 6 (6 pts) Have listed plant species been documented for this project site (not your entire property boundary – just this project site)? 6 = 5 or more plants or 1 or more critically endangered endemic 3 = 3-4 listed plant species documented 1 = 1-2 listed plant species documented 5.) 1 (1-3 pts) Does this project help protect adjacent natural areas that have received FWC Invasive Plant Management Section (IPMS) funding? 3 = Project site abuts another FWC IPMS funded natural area 2 = Project site is within 1 mile of another FWC IPMS funded natural area 1 = Project site is within 10 miles of another FWC IPMS funded natural area (3 pts) Are any partners that have not received FWC IMPS funding involved in this project? (This includes private or 6.) 3 public landowners who are simultaneously treating exotics on properties that abut the project 3=Yes 7.) 5 (1-5 pts) Will exceptional ecological benefits be achieved by the project? e.g., theworkwill increasespecies diversity or protect natural plant communities of local, regional, or statewide ecological significance. Presenters must make their case to be awarded points 29 TOTALp oints(cannotexceed77) Page 2418 of 4116 T and E Species.jpg T&E species PLANTS Scientific Name Common Name Status Roystonea regia Florida Royal Palm State Endangered Tillandsia balbisiana Reflexed Wild Pine State Threatened Tillandsia fasciculata Cardinal Airplant State Endangered Tillandsia utriculata Giant Airplant State Endangered Passiflora pallens Pineland Passionvine State Threatened WILDLIFE Scientific Name Common Name Status Puma concolor coryi Florida Panther Federally Endangered Egretta caerulea Little Blue Heron State Threatened Mycteria americana Wood Stork Federally Threatened Egretta tricolor Tricolored Heron State Threatened Alligator mississippiensis American Alligator Federally Threatened Page 2419 of 4116 Project Project Information Project Title : Symphony Properties Initial Treatment Project Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Christal First Name : Melissa Last Name : Segura Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34109 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2392522495 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : christal.segura@collier.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Symphony Properties Total Acreage of Managed Area : 155 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location 1330 Peach Place Naples, FL.  In the Golden Gate Estates/ Belle Meade Area of Collier County Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location 26°12'24.46"N 81°34'03.23"W   1330 Peach Place Naples, FL Take Collier Blvd (CR 951) to Golden Gate Blvd East.  Drive east to 20th St. SE.  Turn right (south) to to the end of the road. Turn right on Frangipani Ave then turn left onto Peach Place.  Peach Place will dead end at the entrance Gate. Description Managed Area : Symphony Properties Habitat Description The preserve is 80% Pine Flatwoods, Palmetto Prairie and scrub/brushland. The remainder is considered disturbed due to historical nursery activity, and structures. FNAI Natural Communities Page 2420 of 4116 Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name rosary pea ( CT ) Abrus precatorius earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis cogon grass Imperata cylindrica lantana, shrub verbena Lantana camara Natal grass ( GM ) Melinis repens Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia Caesar's weed ( CT ) Urena lobata Balsampear, bitter melon ( CT ) Momordica charantia Missiongrass ( GM ) Pennisetum polystachion (GM) You have selected a species for which a Grass Management Plan is required. Please consult the current TIERS handbook for requirements of this plan and upload it under “other documents” of the Upload Documents section project description page. (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History This unit has never been treated for exotics. Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Unit(s) Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Method Type Symphony Estimated 10­15% infestation throughout the preserve. Cover 154.00 Herbicide Initial Property class 3. Total Treatment Acres: 154.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan The entire preserve will be treated no less than one time per year for invasive exotic plants.  The initial treatment is planned to be completed in 2026 and maintenance treatment will follow each year for the next 2 years.  After two years we may move to every 2 years if deemed appropriate. Restoration Plan for Native Plants 10 acres of the eastern portion of the preserve is being considered for revegetation in the next 5 years. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments The Collier County Conservation Collier Program has maintenance funds budgeted to maintain the invasive exotics on the preserve each year. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations Four­wheeled drive vehicles can access the entire preserve. Firebreaks and roads are present around the perimeter and through the center of the preserve. Some areas are sandy and will need four­wheel drive. The preserve does not flood and it dry year­round. Other Requirements and Provisions The entrance gate is locked with a combination lock.  There is only one entrance to the preserve.   The entire preserve is fenced.  There is water available on­site to use to mix herbicide as needed.  Meetings can take place near storage building by entrance gate. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata. T&E wildlife species include Florida Panther, Gopher tortoise, and American alligators. Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: No Preference 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events.  We plan to open up the preserve to the public by 2027. We plan to have a kiosk and educational signage that will educate visitors about invasive plants.  We will also offer guided hikes in which this topic will be incorporated. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  0 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment so that our current funds can be used for initial cabbage palm reduction and treatment. The density of cabbage palms in many areas of the preserve is extremely high. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity SymphonyAerialLocationMap.pdf map Symphony Aerial Map.jpg Treatment area map Symphony Aerial Map IPMS_Symphony_RankingCriteria_2025.pdf Regional Criteria Ranking Criteria Project Project Information Project Title : Symphony Properties Initial Treatment Project Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Christal First Name : Melissa Last Name : Segura Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34109 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2392522495 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : christal.segura@collier.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Symphony Properties Total Acreage of Managed Area : 155 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location 1330 Peach Place Naples, FL.  In the Golden Gate Estates/ Belle Meade Area of Collier County Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location 26°12'24.46"N 81°34'03.23"W   1330 Peach Place Naples, FL Take Collier Blvd (CR 951) to Golden Gate Blvd East.  Drive east to 20th St. SE.  Turn right (south) to to the end of the road. Turn right on Frangipani Ave then turn left onto Peach Place.  Peach Place will dead end at the entrance Gate. Description Managed Area : Symphony Properties Habitat Description The preserve is 80% Pine Flatwoods, Palmetto Prairie and scrub/brushland. The remainder is considered disturbed due to historical nursery activity, and structures. FNAI Natural Communities Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name rosary pea ( CT ) Abrus precatorius earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis cogon grass Imperata cylindrica lantana, shrub verbena Lantana camara Natal grass ( GM ) Melinis repens Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia Caesar's weed ( CT ) Urena lobata Balsampear, bitter melon ( CT ) Momordica charantia Missiongrass ( GM ) Pennisetum polystachion (GM) You have selected a species for which a Grass Management Plan is required. Please consult the current TIERS handbook for requirements of this plan and upload it under “other documents” of the Upload Documents section project description page. (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History This unit has never been treated for exotics. Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Unit(s) Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Method Type Symphony Estimated 10­15% infestation throughout the preserve. Cover 154.00 Herbicide Initial Property class 3. Total Treatment Acres: 154.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan The entire preserve will be treated no less than one time per year for invasive exotic plants.  The initial treatment is planned to be completed in 2026 and maintenance treatment will follow each year for the next 2 years.  After two years we may move to every 2 years if deemed appropriate. Page 2421 of 4116 Restoration Plan for Native Plants 10 acres of the eastern portion of the preserve is being considered for revegetation in the next 5 years. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments The Collier County Conservation Collier Program has maintenance funds budgeted to maintain the invasive exotics on the preserve each year. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations Four­wheeled drive vehicles can access the entire preserve. Firebreaks and roads are present around the perimeter and through the center of the preserve. Some areas are sandy and will need four­wheel drive. The preserve does not flood and it dry year­round. Other Requirements and Provisions The entrance gate is locked with a combination lock.  There is only one entrance to the preserve.   The entire preserve is fenced.  There is water available on­site to use to mix herbicide as needed.  Meetings can take place near storage building by entrance gate. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata. T&E wildlife species include Florida Panther, Gopher tortoise, and American alligators. Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: No Preference 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events.  We plan to open up the preserve to the public by 2027. We plan to have a kiosk and educational signage that will educate visitors about invasive plants.  We will also offer guided hikes in which this topic will be incorporated. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  0 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment so that our current funds can be used for initial cabbage palm reduction and treatment. The density of cabbage palms in many areas of the preserve is extremely high. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity SymphonyAerialLocationMap.pdf map Symphony Aerial Map.jpg Treatment area map Symphony Aerial Map IPMS_Symphony_RankingCriteria_2025.pdf Regional Criteria Ranking Criteria Project Project Information Project Title : Symphony Properties Initial Treatment Project Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Christal First Name : Melissa Last Name : Segura Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34109 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2392522495 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : christal.segura@collier.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Symphony Properties Total Acreage of Managed Area : 155 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location 1330 Peach Place Naples, FL.  In the Golden Gate Estates/ Belle Meade Area of Collier County Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location 26°12'24.46"N 81°34'03.23"W   1330 Peach Place Naples, FL Take Collier Blvd (CR 951) to Golden Gate Blvd East.  Drive east to 20th St. SE.  Turn right (south) to to the end of the road. Turn right on Frangipani Ave then turn left onto Peach Place.  Peach Place will dead end at the entrance Gate. Description Managed Area : Symphony Properties Habitat Description The preserve is 80% Pine Flatwoods, Palmetto Prairie and scrub/brushland. The remainder is considered disturbed due to historical nursery activity, and structures. FNAI Natural Communities Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name rosary pea ( CT ) Abrus precatorius earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis cogon grass Imperata cylindrica lantana, shrub verbena Lantana camara Natal grass ( GM ) Melinis repens Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia Caesar's weed ( CT ) Urena lobata Balsampear, bitter melon ( CT ) Momordica charantia Missiongrass ( GM ) Pennisetum polystachion (GM) You have selected a species for which a Grass Management Plan is required. Please consult the current TIERS handbook for requirements of this plan and upload it under “other documents” of the Upload Documents section project description page. (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History This unit has never been treated for exotics. Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Unit(s) Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Method Type Symphony Estimated 10­15% infestation throughout the preserve. Cover 154.00 Herbicide Initial Property class 3. Total Treatment Acres: 154.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan The entire preserve will be treated no less than one time per year for invasive exotic plants.  The initial treatment is planned to be completed in 2026 and maintenance treatment will follow each year for the next 2 years.  After two years we may move to every 2 years if deemed appropriate. Restoration Plan for Native Plants 10 acres of the eastern portion of the preserve is being considered for revegetation in the next 5 years. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments The Collier County Conservation Collier Program has maintenance funds budgeted to maintain the invasive exotics on the preserve each year. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations Four­wheeled drive vehicles can access the entire preserve. Firebreaks and roads are present around the perimeter and through the center of the preserve. Some areas are sandy and will need four­wheel drive. The preserve does not flood and it dry year­round. Other Requirements and Provisions The entrance gate is locked with a combination lock.  There is only one entrance to the preserve.   The entire preserve is fenced.  There is water available on­site to use to mix herbicide as needed.  Meetings can take place near storage building by entrance gate. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata. T&E wildlife species include Florida Panther, GopherPage 2422 of 4116 tortoise, and American alligators. Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: No Preference 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events.  We plan to open up the preserve to the public by 2027. We plan to have a kiosk and educational signage that will educate visitors about invasive plants.  We will also offer guided hikes in which this topic will be incorporated. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  0 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment so that our current funds can be used for initial cabbage palm reduction and treatment. The density of cabbage palms in many areas of the preserve is extremely high. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity SymphonyAerialLocationMap.pdf map Symphony Aerial Map.jpg Treatment area map Symphony Aerial Map IPMS_Symphony_RankingCriteria_2025.pdf Regional Criteria Ranking Criteria Project Project Information Project Title : Symphony Properties Initial Treatment Project Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Christal First Name : Melissa Last Name : Segura Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34109 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2392522495 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : christal.segura@collier.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Symphony Properties Total Acreage of Managed Area : 155 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location 1330 Peach Place Naples, FL.  In the Golden Gate Estates/ Belle Meade Area of Collier County Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location 26°12'24.46"N 81°34'03.23"W   1330 Peach Place Naples, FL Take Collier Blvd (CR 951) to Golden Gate Blvd East.  Drive east to 20th St. SE.  Turn right (south) to to the end of the road. Turn right on Frangipani Ave then turn left onto Peach Place.  Peach Place will dead end at the entrance Gate. Description Managed Area : Symphony Properties Habitat Description The preserve is 80% Pine Flatwoods, Palmetto Prairie and scrub/brushland. The remainder is considered disturbed due to historical nursery activity, and structures. FNAI Natural Communities Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name rosary pea ( CT ) Abrus precatorius earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis cogon grass Imperata cylindrica lantana, shrub verbena Lantana camara Natal grass ( GM ) Melinis repens Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia Caesar's weed ( CT ) Urena lobata Balsampear, bitter melon ( CT ) Momordica charantia Missiongrass ( GM ) Pennisetum polystachion (GM) You have selected a species for which a Grass Management Plan is required. Please consult the current TIERS handbook for requirements of this plan and upload it under “other documents” of the Upload Documents section project description page. (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History This unit has never been treated for exotics. Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Unit(s) Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Method Type Symphony Estimated 10­15% infestation throughout the preserve. Cover 154.00 Herbicide Initial Property class 3. Total Treatment Acres: 154.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan The entire preserve will be treated no less than one time per year for invasive exotic plants.  The initial treatment is planned to be completed in 2026 and maintenance treatment will follow each year for the next 2 years.  After two years we may move to every 2 years if deemed appropriate. Restoration Plan for Native Plants 10 acres of the eastern portion of the preserve is being considered for revegetation in the next 5 years. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments The Collier County Conservation Collier Program has maintenance funds budgeted to maintain the invasive exotics on the preserve each year. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations Four­wheeled drive vehicles can access the entire preserve. Firebreaks and roads are present around the perimeter and through the center of the preserve. Some areas are sandy and will need four­wheel drive. The preserve does not flood and it dry year­round. Other Requirements and Provisions The entrance gate is locked with a combination lock.  There is only one entrance to the preserve.   The entire preserve is fenced.  There is water available on­site to use to mix herbicide as needed.  Meetings can take place near storage building by entrance gate. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata. T&E wildlife species include Florida Panther, Gopher tortoise, and American alligators. Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: No Preference 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Page 2423 of 4116 Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events.  We plan to open up the preserve to the public by 2027. We plan to have a kiosk and educational signage that will educate visitors about invasive plants.  We will also offer guided hikes in which this topic will be incorporated. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  0 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment so that our current funds can be used for initial cabbage palm reduction and treatment. The density of cabbage palms in many areas of the preserve is extremely high. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity SymphonyAerialLocationMap.pdf map Symphony Aerial Map.jpg Treatment area map Symphony Aerial Map IPMS_Symphony_RankingCriteria_2025.pdf Regional Criteria Ranking Criteria Project Project Information Project Title : Symphony Properties Initial Treatment Project Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Christal First Name : Melissa Last Name : Segura Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34109 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2392522495 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : christal.segura@collier.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Symphony Properties Total Acreage of Managed Area : 155 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location 1330 Peach Place Naples, FL.  In the Golden Gate Estates/ Belle Meade Area of Collier County Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location 26°12'24.46"N 81°34'03.23"W   1330 Peach Place Naples, FL Take Collier Blvd (CR 951) to Golden Gate Blvd East.  Drive east to 20th St. SE.  Turn right (south) to to the end of the road. Turn right on Frangipani Ave then turn left onto Peach Place.  Peach Place will dead end at the entrance Gate. Description Managed Area : Symphony Properties Habitat Description The preserve is 80% Pine Flatwoods, Palmetto Prairie and scrub/brushland. The remainder is considered disturbed due to historical nursery activity, and structures. FNAI Natural Communities Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name rosary pea ( CT ) Abrus precatorius earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis cogon grass Imperata cylindrica lantana, shrub verbena Lantana camara Natal grass ( GM ) Melinis repens Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia Caesar's weed ( CT ) Urena lobata Balsampear, bitter melon ( CT ) Momordica charantia Missiongrass ( GM ) Pennisetum polystachion (GM) You have selected a species for which a Grass Management Plan is required. Please consult the current TIERS handbook for requirements of this plan and upload it under “other documents” of the Upload Documents section project description page. (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History This unit has never been treated for exotics. Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Unit(s) Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Method Type Symphony Estimated 10­15% infestation throughout the preserve. Cover 154.00 Herbicide Initial Property class 3. Total Treatment Acres: 154.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan The entire preserve will be treated no less than one time per year for invasive exotic plants.  The initial treatment is planned to be completed in 2026 and maintenance treatment will follow each year for the next 2 years.  After two years we may move to every 2 years if deemed appropriate. Restoration Plan for Native Plants 10 acres of the eastern portion of the preserve is being considered for revegetation in the next 5 years. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments The Collier County Conservation Collier Program has maintenance funds budgeted to maintain the invasive exotics on the preserve each year. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations Four­wheeled drive vehicles can access the entire preserve. Firebreaks and roads are present around the perimeter and through the center of the preserve. Some areas are sandy and will need four­wheel drive. The preserve does not flood and it dry year­round. Other Requirements and Provisions The entrance gate is locked with a combination lock.  There is only one entrance to the preserve.   The entire preserve is fenced.  There is water available on­site to use to mix herbicide as needed.  Meetings can take place near storage building by entrance gate. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata. T&E wildlife species include Florida Panther, Gopher tortoise, and American alligators. Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: No Preference 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events.  We plan to open up the preserve to the public by 2027. We plan to have a kiosk and educational signage that will educate visitors about invasive plants.  We will also offer guided hikes in which this topic will be incorporated. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  0 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment so that our current funds can be used for initial cabbage palm reduction and treatment. The density of cabbage palms in many areas of the preserve is extremely high. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity SymphonyAerialLocationMap.pdf map Symphony Aerial Map.jpg Treatment area map Symphony Aerial Map IPMS_Symphony_RankingCriteria_2025.pdf Regional Criteria Ranking Criteria Page 2424 of 4116 Project Project Information Project Title : Symphony Properties Initial Treatment Project Fiscal Year : 2026­2027 Project Category : Small Treatment Type : Maintenance Contact Information Site Manager Contact Information Secondary Contact Information First Name : Christal First Name : Melissa Last Name : Segura Last Name : Hennig Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Address1 : 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N City : NAPLES City : NAPLES State : FL State : FL Zip : 34109 Zip : 34104 Primary Phone : 2392522495 Primary Phone : 2392892934 Email : christal.segura@collier.gov Email id : melissa.hennig@collier.gov Location Managed Area : Symphony Properties Total Acreage of Managed Area : 155 Lead Agency : Collier County Regional Working Group : Southwest Project Location 1330 Peach Place Naples, FL.  In the Golden Gate Estates/ Belle Meade Area of Collier County Project Counties County Collier Directions to Pre­quote Location 26°12'24.46"N 81°34'03.23"W   1330 Peach Place Naples, FL Take Collier Blvd (CR 951) to Golden Gate Blvd East.  Drive east to 20th St. SE.  Turn right (south) to to the end of the road. Turn right on Frangipani Ave then turn left onto Peach Place.  Peach Place will dead end at the entrance Gate. Description Managed Area : Symphony Properties Habitat Description The preserve is 80% Pine Flatwoods, Palmetto Prairie and scrub/brushland. The remainder is considered disturbed due to historical nursery activity, and structures. FNAI Natural Communities Targeted Plants Common Name Scientific Name rosary pea ( CT ) Abrus precatorius earleaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis cogon grass Imperata cylindrica lantana, shrub verbena Lantana camara Natal grass ( GM ) Melinis repens Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia Caesar's weed ( CT ) Urena lobata Balsampear, bitter melon ( CT ) Momordica charantia Missiongrass ( GM ) Pennisetum polystachion (GM) You have selected a species for which a Grass Management Plan is required. Please consult the current TIERS handbook for requirements of this plan and upload it under “other documents” of the Upload Documents section project description page. (CT) You have selected a species that FWC will only treat on a conditional basis. You may have to submit a detailed treatment plan, or justify why this species should be included in this project. Please contact either John Kunzer or Jackie Smith for guidance. Other Targeted Plants Unit Treatment History This unit has never been treated for exotics. Unit Description COVER CLASS | RANGE(%) :   1) <1%  2)1­5%  3)6­25%  4)26­50%  5)51­75%  6)76­95%  7)95­100% Treatment Unit(s) Acreage Control Treatment Cover class estimates, etc. Method Type Symphony Estimated 10­15% infestation throughout the preserve. Cover 154.00 Herbicide Initial Property class 3. Total Treatment Acres: 154.00 Maintenance Current Fiscal Year Area Maintenance Plan The entire preserve will be treated no less than one time per year for invasive exotic plants.  The initial treatment is planned to be completed in 2026 and maintenance treatment will follow each year for the next 2 years.  After two years we may move to every 2 years if deemed appropriate. Restoration Plan for Native Plants 10 acres of the eastern portion of the preserve is being considered for revegetation in the next 5 years. Funding and Labor Source for Follow­up Treatments The Collier County Conservation Collier Program has maintenance funds budgeted to maintain the invasive exotics on the preserve each year. Specifications STANDARD Work Specifications Contractor shall begin treatment where directed by the Site Manager and shall proceed in a systematic manner across contiguous areas to ensure 100% of target vegetation is treated. Contractor will treat each target species by the most effective method, such as basal bark or cut stump for trees and shrubs, and foliar for ferns, vines, and grasses. Small seedlings/saplings may be hand­pulled and bagged, or hung on branches of surrounding trees. Pulled seedlings/saplings should never be left on the ground. Climbing ferns and vines over six feet tall should be treated by the “poodle­cut” method. When girdling trees that are to be left standing, unless directed otherwise in writing, the girdling cuts may not be done in such a manner that structurally weakens the tree. Contractor shall follow all label directions for applied herbicides. The label is the law. All herbicide mixes should contain the adjuvant(s) necessary to ensure an effective treatment. A marker dye should be included in all tank mixes. Contractor shall be liable for unacceptable non­target damage to native plant species. Disposal of plant material will be in accordance with the SOW, which may include offsite dumping and tipping fees. Contractor shall supply all transportation, chemicals, labor, and equipment necessary to accomplish the work assigned, unless otherwise stated in the SOW (e.g., chemicals may be provided to Contractor). Contractor shall fully complete a Weekly Progress Report (WPR) for all time worked on site and shall submit the WPR to the Site Manager (or designee) via TIERS. GPS tracks of each treatment area shall be recorded by Contractor and provided to the Site Manager and the Commission weekly. Contractor will be responsible for security of work areas, such as closing and locking gates during and after work hours. Contractor shall decontaminate all equipment before entering or leaving the project area to ensure that no propagules or reproductive materials are transported between treatment sites or managed areas. If the project specifications include 2 treatments of grasses, the second treatment may not be conducted until the expected regrowth is at least 1.5 feet high, or in shorter­length grass species, until the expected regrowth is at least 60% of the total expected leaf blade length. Equipment Considerations Four­wheeled drive vehicles can access the entire preserve. Firebreaks and roads are present around the perimeter and through the center of the preserve. Some areas are sandy and will need four­wheel drive. The preserve does not flood and it dry year­round. Other Requirements and Provisions The entrance gate is locked with a combination lock.  There is only one entrance to the preserve.   The entire preserve is fenced.  There is water available on­site to use to mix herbicide as needed.  Meetings can take place near storage building by entrance gate. Threatened, etc. Species Plants will not be marked. T&E species: Tillandsia fasciculata. T&E wildlife species include Florida Panther, Gopher tortoise, and American alligators. Project Time Frame Timing of the Treatment: No Preference 2 treatments/cogon grass only Yes No Does treatment date matter? Yes No Can treatment occur on weekends? (Required) Yes No Can treatment occur outside of normal business hours? (Required) Yes No Education and Regional Issues Public Education Program Conservation Collier is regularly involved with CISMA events and workdays. We also regularly speak about exotic treatments and awareness at outreach events, on our social media, and preserve events.  We plan to open up the preserve to the public by 2027. We plan to have a kiosk and educational signage that will educate visitors about invasive plants.  We will also offer guided hikes in which this topic will be incorporated. Regional Criteria Issues Please Upload Budget FWC Upland Invasive Exotic Control Program Budget Justification Worksheet Total funds requested from FWC : $50,000.00 Method of Control : Contracted Source Dollars Total matching funds from project sponsor (A):  0 In­kind Contribution Category Total Hours Rate($/Hr) Total in­kind value ($) Total in­kind value from project sponsor (B): 0 Total matching and in­kind dollars (A+B): $0.00 Total funds requested from FWC (C): $50,000.00 Total cost of Project (A+B+C): $50,000.00 Notes/Explanations Entire cost is to be funded by FWC. Collier County is requesting FWC funds for initial treatment so that our current funds can be used for initial cabbage palm reduction and treatment. The density of cabbage palms in many areas of the preserve is extremely high. Uploaded documents for the Proposal Document Name Document Type Description Project location/proximity SymphonyAerialLocationMap.pdf map Symphony Aerial Map.jpg Treatment area map Symphony Aerial Map IPMS_Symphony_RankingCriteria_2025.pdf Regional Criteria Ranking Criteria Page 2425 of 4116Page 2426 of 4116Symphony Aerial Map.jpg Treatment area map Page 2427 of 41161.) FWC Invasive Plant Management Section (IPMS) Priorities. Points can only be awarded for only one choice in 1a, 1b, 1c, OR 1d. (Presenters need to determine which priority their project is composed of and the %'s of the treatment area) (FWC will supply this total based on the criteria the presenter lays out in their presentation) 1a.) (5-40 pts) Is this project a FWC Priority 1 project? 40 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 30 = 74%-50% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 10 = 49%-25% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 5 = 24%-10% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 1 treatment 1b.) (2-20 pts) Is this project a FWC Priority 2 project? 20 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 2 treatment 15 = 74%-50% of project will contain FWC Priority 2 treatment 5 = 49%-25% of project will contain FWC Priority 2 treatment 2 = 24%-10% of project will contain FWC Priority 2 treatment 1c.) 10 (8-10 pts) Is this project a FWC Priority 3 project? 10 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 3 treatment 8 = 74%-50% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 3 treatment 1d.) (5 pts) Is this project site a FWC Priority 4 project? 5 = 100%-75% of project is comprised of FWC Priority 4 treatment 2.) 0 (0 or 10 pts) Is this a population of a FLEPPC Category I/Category II species that is new to the SWFL region (not just the parcel) and that could expand and cause greater problems in the future? (CISMA members to agree in ranking meeting in absence of updated regional list) 0 = No 10 = Yes 3.) 0 (1-10 pts) Are there currently matching funds available for this project? Matching funds include both direct funding and in-kind funding (e.g. – staff time, volunteers, other sources of labor, AmeriCorps). Match can also include funds expended on invasive plant treatment at this project site within the last year. ( Presenter to explain match % ) 10 = 100% match; 9 = 90% match; 8 = 80% match; 7 = 70% match; 6 = 60% match; 5 = 50% match; 4 = 40% match; 3 = 30% match; 2 = 20% match; 1 = 10% match 4.) 1 (6 pts) Have listed plant species been documented for this project site (not your entire property boundary – just this project site)? 6 = 5 or more plants or 1 or more critically endangered endemic 3 = 3-4 listed plant species documented 1 = 1-2 listed plant species documented 5.) 0 (1-3 pts) Does this project help protect adjacent natural areas that have received FWC Invasive Plant Management Section (IPMS) funding? 3 = Project site abuts another FWC IPMS funded natural area 2 = Project site is within 1 mile of another FWC IPMS funded natural area 1 = Project site is within 10 miles of another FWC IPMS funded natural area 6.) 0 (0 or 3 pts) Are any partners that have not received FWC IMPS funding involved in this project? (This includes private or public landowners who are simultaneously treating exotics on properties that abut the project site) 3=Yes 7.) 2 (1-5 pts) Will exceptional ecological benefits be achieved by the project? e.g., the work will increase species diversity or protect natural plant communities of local, regional, or statewide ecological significance. Presenters must make their case to be awarded points. Points are subjective to the ranker based on the presentation. 8.) ____ (0 or -5) Applicant prioritizes applications (Select primary). For first application (No minus) points for each additional application (Minus 5 points). 9.) ______ (0 or -1) Shapefile submittted before the working group meeting to Linda King, Michael Sowinski, and John Kunzer (FWC will supply answer) 13 TOTAL points (cannot exceed 77) Page 2428 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.11 ID# 2026-827 Executive Summary Recommendation to authorize staff to issue an Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) to solicit a qualified development partner for the construction of housing that is affordable on County-owned property at Port of the Islands. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) authorize staff to negotiate to solicit a qualified development partner for the construction of housing that is affordable on County-owned property at Port of the Islands, and advance the development of housing that is affordable in Collier County in alignment with the Housing Element of the Growth Management Plan. CONSIDERATIONS: On January 9, 2020, the Board of County Commissioners acquired the Port of the Islands “Old Hotel” property (12323 Union Road; Folio No. 01058920500) via Escheatment Tax Deed at a cost of $1,239.80. The County subsequently invested $388,444 to demolish the existing structure. The 6.86-acre site is now cleared and development-ready. The County Manager has received a Letter of Intent from an affordable housing developer proposing to lease and develop the site as a 100% affordable housing community. The property is zoned Residential Tourist (RT), which permits a range of uses, including multifamily residential and townhouses. Under current zoning, the site supports a maximum density of 16 units per acre, yielding approximately 110 residential units. Given the strategic importance of this asset, a competitive ITN process is recommended to ensure the selection of a development partner that best advances County priorities and maximizes public benefit. • Staff proposes that the ITN evaluation criteria prioritize: • Total number of affordable units delivered • Depth of affordability, including units below 60% Area Median Income (AMI) • Targeted populations, including essential service personnel, veterans, and seniors • Duration and enforceability of affordability restrictions • Leveraging external funding sources (e.g., LIHTC, SAIL, bonds, private equity) • Demonstrated financial feasibility • Hurricane resilience and environmental sustainability • Strong developer experience and a proven delivery track record • Project timeline and readiness to proceed The ITN will be structured to encourage ground leases or similar arrangements that retain County ownership of the land while enabling private development, thereby further protecting the long-term public interest. Next steps after the award would be the Board's approval of a Developer Agreement and a Long-term Ground Lease with the selected developer. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to support comprehensive affordable housing opportunities. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with issuing the ITN. Future fiscal considerations will be subject to Board approval and are anticipated to prioritize minimal or no direct County general fund subsidy, with preference given to proposals that are financially self-sustaining and leverage external funding sources. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Utilizing County-owned land for housing that is affordable directly advances the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Housing Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved for form and legality. A majority vote is Page 2429 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.11 ID# 2026-827 required for Board approval. -CLD RECOMMENDATION(S): To authorize staff to issue an Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) for the development of housing that is affordable on the County-owned Port of the Islands property. PREPARED BY: Cormac Giblin Division Director, Housing Policy & Economic Development ATTACHMENTS: 1. Folio ID 01058950800_12323 Union Rd -Aerial Location Page 2430 of 41163/30/26, 3:35 PM Collier County Property Appraiser Maps Collier County Property Appraiser ID: 01058920500 COLLIER CNTY 12323 UNION RD Build# / Unit#: 007 / 0 Disclaimer: The Collier County Property Appraiser provides all information and services "as is" without warranties of any kind. No guarantees are made regarding accuracy, completeness, functionality, or uninterrupted access. All content is subject to change without notice, and users assume all risks associated with its use. For the full disclaimer, please visit www.collierappraiser.com. https://maps.collierappraiser.com/map.aspx 1/1 Page 2431 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.12 ID# 2026-800 Executive Summary Recommendation to waive the nighttime hearing requirement and hear a Land Development Code amendment related to adding a comparable use provision to the Industrial (I) Zoning District, at two regularly scheduled daytime Board of County Commissioners meetings, and approve a request to advertise the Land Development Code Amendment. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) waive the nighttime hearing requirement and advertise a Land Development Code (LDC) amendment at two regularly scheduled hearings. CONSIDERATIONS: On November 10, 2020, the Board adopted Ordinance 2020-44, an LDC amendment (PL20190000389) that changed the Zoning Verification Letter (ZVL) — Comparable Use Determination (CUD) process. Prior to its adoption, when an applicant wanted to know if an unlisted use was comparable to a listed use in a conventional zoning district, the applicant would have to submit a Zoning Verification Letter-Comparable Use Determination application to the County. Staff would review the application, decide on its compatibility, and draft a ZVL accordingly, and the ZVL would then be scheduled for a public hearing with either the Hearing Examiner (HEX) or the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) for their affirmation. However, with the adoption of Ordinance 2020-44, the CUD process was removed from the ZVL process, and a separate process was created for the CUD, along with new evaluation criteria. With this improved process in place, when a CUD application is received, staff now generates a Staff Report, which includes a recommendation, and forwards both to the HEX, which serves as the final decision maker, or to the Board of Zoning Appeals by resolution. The adoption of Ordinance 2020-44 also eliminated the applicability of the Comparable Use provisions from the lists of conditional uses in many zoning districts, including the Industrial (I) Zoning District, which had been in the LDC since 2008. On October 12, 2021, the Board reviewed four motions filed by the owner of the proposed Isles of Capri Food Truck Park. The Board directed staff to bring back an LDC amendment, emphasizing the need to have the conditional use process apply to CUD applications, and for each CUD request to be examined for comparability, compatibility, and consistency on a site-specific basis only—and not applied uniformly to all areas within the County that share the same zoning district or to other zoning classifications having higher intensities. In response to the Board's direction, staff drafted another LDC amendment (PL20220000207) with the goal of clearing any confusion or the misapplication of the scope of a CUD, so that each request would be restricted to a site-specific location (e.g., lot, parcel, tract of land, etc.) and correct any unintended consequences of expanding the CUD process beyond what the Board intended. On October 11, 2022, staff requested the Board's direction to advertise the draft Ordinance. The LDC amendment included the requirement that all CUD applications need to obtain conditional use approval (except for applications involving properties within certain PUDs). The Board directed staff to advertise the draft Ordinance; no changes to the (I) Zoning District were proposed at that time. However, at the Board meeting on January 24, 2023, the Board wanted to reevaluate the conditional use component of the amendment. During that meeting, the Board wanted to make it clear that their intent was such that if a CUD is approved on one parcel, its approval on that one parcel does not entitle the use on a different parcel, even within the same zoning district. The Board wanted to ensure that the CUD application is site- specific and demonstrates compatibility with the neighborhood. The item was continued until the following month. The LDC amendment was returned to the Board on February 28, 2023; however, this version did not contain the conditional use component, and no changes were proposed to the lists of permitted or conditional uses in any zoning district. The LDC amendment clarified that if the HEX did not review the CUD, the CCPC would review it and then offer its recommendation to the BZA. The Board approved the LDC amendment (PL20220000207), resulting in the adoption of Ordinance 2023-16. Staff began working on an LDC amendment (PL20250000180) that affected the CUD process. This LDC amendment required that a public notice sign must be posted on a property involving a CUD request prior to the advertised public hearing. On October 28, 2025, the Board approved the LDC amendment, resulting in the adoption of Ordinance 2025- 51. The LDC amendment also amended the definitions section (LDC section 1.08.02), by defining "Comparable Use Determination" as follows: "A process, in accordance with LDC section 10.03.06 K, to determine whether a use for a site-specific location that is not expressly listed within a conventional zoning district, overlay, or PUD ordinance is comparable in nature and consistent with the list of identified permitted uses in a conventional zoning district, overlay, or PUD ordinance." Page 2432 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.12 ID# 2026-800 On December 9, 2025, the Board declared the addition of the comparable use language to the (I) Zoning District as an act of "Zoning in Progress," which allows for staff to process comparable use requests while developing this LDC amendment. LDC amendments are reviewed by the Board of County Commissioners (Board), Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC), and the Land Development Review Subcommittee of the DSAC (DSAC-LDR Subcommittee). DSAC-LDR Subcommittee Recommendation: On January 20, 2026, the DSAC-LDR Subcommittee recommended approval of the proposed LDC amendment and recommended to DSAC that the Comparable Use Determination process be expanded to include the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district. DSAC Recommendation: On February 4, 2026, the DSAC recommended approval of the proposed LDC amendment and asked staff to assess whether the Comparable Use Determination process should be expanded also to include the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district. Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) Recommendation: On April 2, 2026, the CCPC held a nighttime hearing starting at 5:05 PM and recommended approval of the proposed LDC amendment. It is staff's opinion that the public had an opportunity to address their concerns at the nighttime CCPC hearing and that a nighttime hearing by the Board will not be necessary. This item is consistent with the Collier County Strategic Plan object to encourage diverse economic opportunities by fostering a business-friendly environment. FISCAL IMPACT: There are no anticipated fiscal or operational impacts to the County’s stakeholders associated with this LDC amendment. The costs associated with processing and advertising the proposed LDC amendment are estimated at $50. Funds have been allocated within the Unincorporated Area General Fund (1011) and the Comprehensive Planning Cost Center (138317). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: No growth management impact is associated with this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: LDC section 10.03.06.K provides two Board meetings are required for LDC amendments initiated by the County that propose changes to the actual list of permitted, conditional, or prohibited uses of land within a zoning category, and at least one hearing shall be held after 5:00 p.m. on a weekday, unless the Board by supermajority vote the Board elects to waive the nighttime hearing and hold the hearing at another time of day. This item is approved as to form and legality, and it requires a supermajority vote for approval. - CLD RECOMMENDATION(S): To waive the nighttime hearing requirement and hear a Land Development Code amendment related to adding a comparable use provision to the Industrial (I) Zoning District, at two regularly scheduled daytime Board of County Commissioners meetings, and approve a request to advertise the proposed Land Development Code Amendment. PREPARED BY: Eric L. Johnson, AICP, CFM, Planning Manager I, Zoning Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Ordinance (03-13-2026) 2. LDCA (04-03-2026) Page 2433 of 4116 ORDINANCE NO. 26– ___ AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04- 41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO ADD A COMPARABLE USE PROVISION TO THE INDUSTRIAL (I) ZONING DISTRICT BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE, RECITALS; SECTION TWO, FINDINGS OF FACT; SECTION THREE, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FOLLOWING: CHAPTER TWO – ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES, INCLUDING SECTION 2.03.04 INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; SECTION FOUR, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; SECTION FIVE, INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND SECTION SIX, EFFECTIVE DATE. (PL20250014625) Recitals WHEREAS, on October 30, 1991, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance No. 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code (hereinafter LDC), which was subsequently amended; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Board) on June 22, 2004, adopted Ordinance No. 04-41, which repealed and superseded Ordinance No. 91-102, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which had an effective date of October 18, 2004; and WHEREAS, on March 18, 1997, the Board adopted Resolution 97-177 establishing local requirements and procedures for amending the LDC; and WHEREAS, all requirements of Resolution 97-177 have been met; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission, sitting as the land planning agency, did hold an advertised public hearing on January 15, 2026, and reviewed the proposed amendments for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and did recommend approval; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, in a manner prescribed by law, did hold an advertised public hearing on ________ __, 2026, and did take action concerning these amendments to the LDC; and [25-LDS-00390/2004647/1]20 2/27/2026 Page 1 of 6 Words struck through are deleted, words underlined are added Page 2434 of 4116 WHEREAS, the subject amendments to the LDC are hereby determined by this Board to be consistent with and to implement the Collier County Growth Management Plan as required by Subsections 163.3194 (1) and 163.3202 (1), Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, this ordinance is adopted in compliance with and pursuant to the Community Planning Act (F.S. § 163.3161 et seq.), and F.S. § 125.01(1)(t) and (1)(w); and WHEREAS, this ordinance is adopted pursuant to the constitutional and home rule powers of Fla. Const. Art. VIII, § 1(g); and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have otherwise been met. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that: SECTION ONE: RECITALS The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and incorporated by reference herein as if fully set forth. SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT The Board of Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, hereby makes the following findings of fact: 1. Collier County, pursuant to §163.3161, et seq., F.S., the Florida Community Planning Act (herein after the “Act”), is required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan. 2. After adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the Act and in particular §163.3202(1). F.S., mandates that Collier County adopt land development regulations that are consistent with and implement the adopted comprehensive plan. 3. Section 163.3201, F.S., provides that it is the intent of the Act that the adoption and enforcement by Collier County of land development regulations for the total unincorporated area shall be based on, be related to, and be a means of implementation for, the adopted comprehensive plan. 4. Section 163.3194(1)(b), F.S., requires that all land development regulations enacted or amended by Collier County be consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, and any land regulations existing at the time of adoption which are not [25-LDS-00390/2004647/1]20 2/27/2026 Page 2 of 6 Words struck through are deleted, words underlined are added Page 2435 of 4116 consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall be amended so as to be consistent. 5. Section 163.3202(3), F.S., states that the Act shall be construed to encourage the use of innovative land development regulations. 6. On January 10, 1989, Collier County adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan (hereinafter the “Growth Management Plan” or “GMP”) as its comprehensive plan pursuant to the requirements of §163.3161 et seq., F.S. 7. Section 163.3194(1)(a), F.S., mandates that after a comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, has been adopted in conformity with the Act, all development undertaken by, and all actions taken in regard to development orders by, governmental agencies in regard to land covered by such comprehensive plan or element shall be consistent with such comprehensive plan or element as adopted. 8. Pursuant to §163.3194(3)(a), F.S., a development order or land development regulation shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan if the land uses, densities or intensities, and other aspects of development are compatible with, and further the objectives, policies, land uses, densities, or intensities in the comprehensive plan and if it meets all other criteria enumerated by the local government. 9. Section 163.3194(3)(b), F.S., states that a development approved or undertaken by a local government shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan if the land uses, densities or intensities, capacity or size, timing, and other aspects of development are compatible with, and further the objectives, policies, land uses, densities, or intensities in the comprehensive plan and if it meets all other criteria enumerated by the local government. 10. On October 30, 1991, Collier County adopted the Collier County Land Development Code, which became effective on November 13, 1991. The Land Development Code adopted in Ordinance 91-102 was recodified and superseded by Ordinance 04-41. 11. Collier County finds that the Land Development Code is intended and necessary to preserve and enhance the present advantages that exist in Collier County; to encourage the most appropriate use of land, water and resources consistent with the public interest; to overcome present handicaps; and to deal effectively with future problems that may result from the use and development of land within the total unincorporated area of Collier County and it is intended that this Land Development Code preserve, promote, protect and improve the public health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance, convenience and general welfare of Collier County; to prevent [25-LDS-00390/2004647/1]20 2/27/2026 Page 3 of 6 Words struck through are deleted, words underlined are added Page 2436 of 4116 the overcrowding of land and avoid the undue concentration of population; to facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, recreational facilities, housing and other requirements and services; to conserve, develop, utilize and protect natural resources within the jurisdiction of Collier County; to protect human, environmental, social and economic resources; and to maintain through orderly growth and development, the character and stability of present and future land uses and development in Collier County. 12. It is the intent of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County to implement the Land Development Code in accordance with the provisions of the Collier County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 125, Fla. Stat., and Chapter 163, Fla. Stat., and through these amendments to the Code. SECTION THREE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE * * * * * * * * * * * * * SUBSECTION 3.A. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 2.03.04 INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Section 2.03.04 Industrial Zoning Districts, of Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 2.03.04 - Industrial Zoning Districts A. Industrial District (I). The purpose and intent of the industrial district (I) is to provide lands for manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, and distribution. Service and commercial activities that are related to manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, and distribution activities, as well as commercial uses relating to automotive repair and heavy equipment sales and repair are also permissible in the I district. The I district corresponds to and implements the industrial land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP. 1. The following uses, as identified within the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section, are permitted as a right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the industrial district (I). a. Permitted uses. 1. Agricultural services (0711, except that chemical treatment of soil for crops, fertilizer application for crops and lime spreading for crops shall be a minimum of 500 feet from a residential zoning district, 0721, except that aerial dusting and spraying, disease control for [25-LDS-00390/2004647/1]20 2/27/2026 Page 4 of 6 Words struck through are deleted, words underlined are added Page 2437 of 4116 crops, spraying crops, dusting crops, and insect control for crops, with or without fertilizing, shall be a minimum of 500 feet from a residential zoning district. 0722-0724, 0761, 0782, 0783). * * * * * * * * * * * * * 58. Existing retail uses that were in operation on January 1, 2009, in the Industrial zoning district and which have been continuously and conspicuously operating in the Industrial zoning district as of June 8, 2010, without limitation as to square footage of the retail use. These existing retail businesses shall be treated as legal non- conforming uses in accordance with the LDC, provided however that in the event of destruction or damage due to natural disaster, the structures housing such uses may be rebuilt to their pre-disaster condition. 59. Any other industrial use which is comparable in nature with the list of permitted uses and consistent with the purpose and intent statement of the district, as determined by the Hearing Examiner or CCPC, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06 K. * * * * * * * * * * * * * SECTION FOUR: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY In the event that any provisions of this ordinance should result in an unresolved conflict with the provisions of the Land Development Code (LDC) or Growth Management Plan (GMP), the applicable provisions of the LDC or GMP shall prevail. In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County or other applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION FIVE: INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Land Development Code of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or any other appropriate word. SECTION SIX: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Florida Department of State. [25-LDS-00390/2004647/1]20 2/27/2026 Page 5 of 6 Words struck through are deleted, words underlined are added Page 2438 of 4116 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this ___ day of ______________, 2026. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By:__________________________ By:________________________________ , Deputy Clerk Dan Kowal, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: __________________________ CLD Courtney L. DaSilva 3/13/26 Assistant County Attorney [25-LDS-00390/2004647/1]20 2/27/2026 Page 6 of 6 Words struck through are deleted, words underlined are added Page 2439 of 4116 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT PETITION SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT PL20250014625 This Land Development Code (LDC) amendment updates the applicability of the Comparable Use Determination provisions to include ORIGIN the Industrial (I) zoning district. LDC amendments are reviewed by the Board of County Board of County Commissioners (Board), Collier County Planning Commissioners (Board) Commission (CCPC), Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC), and the Land Development Review Subcommittee of the DSAC (DSAC-LDR Subcommittee). HEARING DATES LDC SECTION TO BE AMENDED Board 04/28/2026 02.03.04 Industrial Zoning Districts CCPC 04/02/2026 DSAC 02/04/2026 DSAC-LDR 01/20/2026 ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS DSAC-LDR DSAC CCPC Approval with recommendations Approval with recommendations Approval BACKGROUND On November 10, 2020, the Board adopted Ordinance 2020-44, which was an LDC amendment (PL20190000389) that changed the Zoning Verification Letter-Comparable Use Determination process. Prior to its adoption, when an applicant wanted to know if an unlisted use was comparable to a listed use in a conventional zoning district, the applicant would have to submit a Zoning Verification Letter-Comparable Use Determination application to the County. Staff would review the application, decide on its compatibility, and draft a ZVL accordingly, and the ZVL would then be scheduled for a public hearing with either the Hearing Examiner (HEX) or the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) for their affirmation. However, with the adoption of Ordinance 2020-44, the CUD process was removed from the ZVL process, and a separate process was created for the CUD, along with new evaluation criteria. With this improved process in place, when a CUD application is received, staff now generate a Staff Report, include a recommendation, and forward both to the HEX, which serves as the final decision-maker, or to the Board of Zoning Appeals by resolution. The adoption of Ordinance 2020-44 also eliminated the applicability of the Comparable Use provisions from the lists of conditional uses in many zoning districts, including the Industrial (I) Zoning District, which had been in the LDC since 2008. On October 12, 2021, the Board reviewed four motions filed by the owner of the proposed Isles of Capri Food Truck Park. During this item, the Board directed staff to bring back an LDC amendment emphasizing the need to have the conditional use process apply to CUD applications, and for each CUD request be examined for comparability, compatibility, and consistency on a site-specific basis only—and not applied uniformly to all areas within the County that share the same zoning district or to other zoning classifications having higher intensities. In response to the Board’s direction, staff drafted another LDC amendment (PL20220000207) with the goal of clearing any confusion or the misapplication of the scope of a CUD, so that each request would be restricted to a site-specific location (e.g., lot, parcel, tract of land, etc.) and correct any unintended consequences of expanding the CUD process beyond what the Board intended. On October 11, 2022, staff requested the Board's direction to advertise the draft Ordinance. The LDC amendment included the requirement that all CUD applications need to obtain conditional use approval (except for applications involving properties within certain PUDs). The Board directed staff to advertise the draft ordinance; no changes to the I Zoning District were proposed at that time. However, at the Board meeting on January 24, 2023, the Board wanted to reevaluate the conditional 1 Page 2440 of 4116 use component of the amendment. During that meeting, the Board wanted to make it clear that their intent was such that if a CUD is approved on one parcel, that its approval on that one parcel does not entitle the use on a different parcel, even within the same zoning district. The Board wanted to ensure that the CUD application is site-specific and demonstrates compatibility with the neighborhood. The item was continued until the following month. The LDC amendment returned to the Board on February 28, 2023; however, this version did not contain the conditional use component, and no changes were proposed to the lists of permitted or conditional uses in any zoning district. The LDC amendment clarified that if the CUD was not reviewed by the HEX, it would be reviewed by the CCPC, which would offer its recommendation to the BZA. The Board approved the LDC amendment (PL20220000207), resulting in the adoption of Ordinance 2023-16. Staff began working on another LDC amendment (PL20250000180) that affected the CUD process. This LDC amendment required that a public notice sign must be posted on a property involving a CUD request prior to the advertised public hearing. On October 28, 2025, the Board approved the LDC amendment, resulting in the adoption of Ordinance 2025-51. The LDC amendment also amended the definitions section (LDC section 1.08.02), by defining “Comparable Use Determination” as follows: “A process, in accordance with LDC section 10.03.06 K, to determine whether a use for a site-specific location that is not expressly listed within a conventional zoning district, overlay, or PUD ordinance is comparable in nature and consistent with the list of identified permitted uses in a conventional zoning district, overlay, or PUD ordinance.” On December 9, 2025, the Board declared the addition of the comparable use language to the I Zoning District as an act of “Zoning in Progress,” which allows for staff to process comparable use requests while developing this LDC amendment. DSAC-LDR Subcommittee Recommendation: On January 20, 2026, the DSAC-LDR Subcommittee recommended approval of the proposed LDC amendment and recommended to DSAC that the Comparable Use Determination process be expanded to include the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district. DSAC Recommendation: On February 4, 2026, the DSAC recommended approval of the proposed LDC amendment and asked staff to assess whether the Comparable Use Determination process should be expanded to also include the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district. Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) Recommendation: On April 2, 2026, the CCPC held a nighttime hearing starting at 5:05 PM and recommended approval of the proposed LDC amendment. _________________________________________________________________________________________ FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS GMP CONSISTENCY There are no anticipated fiscal or operational The proposed LDC amendment has been reviewed by impacts associated with this amendment. Comprehensive Planning staff and may be deemed consistent with the GMP. EXHIBITS: None 2 Page 2441 of 4116 Amend the LDC as follows: 1 2 2.03.04 – Industrial Zoning Districts 3 4 A. Industrial District (I). The purpose and intent of the industrial district (I) is to provide lands 5 for manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, and distribution. 6 Service and commercial activities that are related to manufacturing, processing, storage 7 and warehousing, wholesaling, and distribution activities, as well as commercial uses 8 relating to automotive repair and heavy equipment sales and repair are also permissible 9 in the I district. The I district corresponds to and implements the industrial land use 10 designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP. 11 12 1. The following uses, as identified within the Standard Industrial Classification 13 Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section, are permitted as 14 a right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the industrial district (I). 15 16 a. Permitted uses. 17 18 1. Agricultural services (0711, except that chemical treatment of soil 19 for crops, fertilizer application for crops and lime spreading for 20 crops shall be a minimum of 500 feet from a residential zoning 21 district, 0721, except that aerial dusting and spraying, disease 22 control for crops, spraying crops, dusting crops, and insect control 23 for crops, with or without fertilizing, shall be a minimum of 500 feet 24 from a residential zoning district. 0722-0724, 0761, 0782, 0783). 25 26 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 27 28 58. Existing retail uses that were in operation on January 1, 2009, in 29 the Industrial zoning district and which have been continuously 30 and conspicuously operating in the Industrial zoning district as of 31 June 8, 2010, without limitation as to square footage of the retail 32 use. These existing retail businesses shall be treated as legal 33 non-conforming uses in accordance with the LDC, provided 34 however that in the event of destruction or damage due to natural 35 disaster, the structures housing such uses may be rebuilt to their 36 pre-disaster condition. 37 38 59. Any other industrial use which is comparable in nature with the list 39 of permitted uses and consistent with the purpose and intent 40 statement of the district, as determined by the Hearing Examiner 41 or CCPC, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06 K. 42 43 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 3 Page 2442 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.13 ID# 2026-829 Executive Summary Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to authorize the Chair to sign the CareerSource Southwest Florida compliance and approval documents related to the One-Stop Operator designation for the Southwest Florida Workforce Development Area. OBJECTIVE: To maintain continued participation in CareerSource Southwest Florida’s network connecting employers with qualified, skilled talent and Collier residents with employment and career development opportunities to achieve economic prosperity. CONSIDERATIONS: Collier County received CareerSource Southwest Florida’s request for the Chairman to sign compliance and approval documents required by CareerSource Southwest Florida in connection with its designation as the One-Stop Operator for the Southwest Florida Workforce Development Area. The requested signatures are administrative and required for submission to state agencies as part of the workforce development governance and compliance process. The Southwest Florida Workforce Development Consortium (the Consortium) represents Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Lee, and Monroe Counties, and oversees CareerSource Southwest Florida (CSSWF) as the region’s workforce development system. The Consortium approved CSSWF to serve as the One-Stop Operator for the Local Workforce Development Board following a competitive procurement process conducted by an independent third party. Documentation of approval by the Chair/Mayor of each of the six counties’ Boards of County Commissioners is required by Florida Commerce, CareerSource Florida, and other applicable state agencies. The documents requiring signature include: 1. The Request for Subsequent Local Workforce Development Area Designation (LWDA); CSSWF’s designation as a Local Workforce Development Area (LWDA) under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) expires on June 30, 2026. To receive subsequent designation, the local workforce development board must demonstrate successful performance and sustained fiscal integrity. 2. The Statement of Intent within the Request to Extend Designation as a Direct Provider of Workforce Services; CareerSource Southwest Florida currently serves as the direct provider of WIOA Adult, WIOA Dislocated Worker, WIOA Youth, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) services through staff located in our one-stop centers throughout the Local Workforce Development Area. The current three-year designation expires June 30, 2026. The requested extension is for the period of July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2029. The Direct Provider of Workforce Services Plan has been posted for public comment and is attached. The plan provides justification and additional details supporting the request. A key consideration is cost savings, which allow CSSWF to serve more individuals and businesses. Over the past three years, we estimate cost savings of $2,186,054 due to being a direct provider of services, with anticipated additional savings of $1,738,037 over the next three years. 3. The Consortium Resolution approving CareerSource Southwest Florida as the One-Stop Operator; and 4. The Consortium One-Stop Operator Agreement. The U.S. Department of Labor requires each local workforce system to designate a One-Stop Operator whose primary role is to coordinate service delivery among required one-stop partners and service providers within the local one-stop delivery system. The Consortium has approved several providers over the years; however, this year the Board of Directors is recommending that CareerSource Southwest Florida serve as the One-Stop Operator. Execution of the aforementioned documents confirms Collier County’s participation in the regional workforce development consortium and supports continued workforce development funding, programs, and services benefiting residents and businesses within Collier County and the Southwest Florida region. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to encourage diverse economic opportunities by fostering business friendly environment. Page 2443 of 4116 4/28/2026 Item # 16.A.13 ID# 2026-829 FISCAL IMPACT: This action has no fiscal impact to the County and is primarily administrative to ensure compliance with state workforce program requirements GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This item directly supports the Goal of the Economic Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan to achieve and maintain a diverse and stable economy by providing a positive business climate that assures maximum employment opportunities while maintaining a high quality of life. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality and requires majority vote for approval. – CLD RECOMMENDATION(S): To authorize the Chair to sign the CareerSource Southwest Florida compliance and approval documents related to the One-Stop Operator designation for the Southwest Florida Workforce Development Area. PREPARED BY: Sarah Harrington, Manager, Housing Policy and Economic Development ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2. Consortium One-Stop Operator Agreement 3. Statement of Intent - Direct Service Provider 4. Local Workforce Development Area Designation Page 2444 of 4116 RESOLUTION 2026-1 A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WORI(FORCE DEVELOPMENT CONSORTIUM UNDER THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR CHARLOTTE, COLLIER, GLADES, HENDRY, LEE AND MONROE COUNTIES APPROVING SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD, INC. DIBIA CAREERSOURCE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA TO SERVE AS THE ONE- STOP OPERATOR; AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF STATE APPROVAL REQUESTS AND RELATED SUPPORTING MATERIALS; AUTHORIZING FURTHER ACTION BY THE CONSORTIUM CHAIR AND APPROPRIATE CSSWF OFFICERS AND REPRESENTATTVES AS MAY BE REASONABLY NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE THIS RESOLUTION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, CONFLICTS AND AN EFFECTryE DATE. WHEREAS, Southwest Florida Workforce Development Board, lnc. dlbla CareerSource Southwest Florida ("W") is the local workforce development board for the local workforce development area covering Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Lee and Monroe Counties (the "fu[!1ygg! Florida Local Workforce Development Area"); and WHEREAS, Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Lee and Monroe Counties, acting through the board known as the Consortium established under that certain Fifth Amended and Restated Interlocal Florida Workforce Development Consortium effective as of July 1,2024 (lhe ..@,,),arethechieflocalelectedofficialsfortheSouthwestFloridaWorkforceAgreement for the Southwest Development Area; and WHEREAS, earlier in the 2025-26 program year, Workforce Development Board of Treasure Coast, lnc. dlbla CareerSource Research Coast was approved to act as the independent third party to conduct, arrange, notice, and process the competitive procurement for the one-stop operator for the Southwest Florida Local Workforce Development Area; and WHEREAS, CSSWF submitted a proposal to serve as the one-stop operator for the Southwest Florida Local Workforce Development Area; and WHEREAS, following such independent third-party competitive procurement process, CareerSource Research Coast recommended CSSWF for selection as the one-stop operator for the Southwest Florida Local Workforce Development Area; and WHEREAS, on March 11,2026, the Board of Directors of CSSWF approved the recommendation of CareerSource Research Coast for CSSWF to serve as the one-stop operator for the Southwest Florida Local Workforce Development Area; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the One-Stop Operator Approval Process set forth in the Interlocal Agreement, the approval of CSSWF to serve as the one-stop operator for the Southwest Florida Local Workforce Development Area has been presented to the Consortium for review and approval; and WHEREAS, Florida Commerce, CareerSource Florida, and other applicable state agencies or entities may require documentation of approval by the chief local elected officials for the local workforce development area as part ofthe applicable state review and approval process; and CAO Page 2445 of 4116 WHEREAS, the Consortium desires to approve CSSWF to serve as the one-stop operator for the Southwest Florida Local Workforce Development Area in accordance with the Interlocal Agreement; WHEREAS, the Consortium further desires to authorize that certain One-Stop Operator Authorization Agreement attached hereto as fr[i[!!!!]. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Consortium as follows: Section 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2. Approval of One-Stop Operator. CSSWF is hereby approved to serve as the one-stop operator for the Southwest Florida Local Workforce Development Area covering Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Lee and Monroe Counties, subject to any applicable state review and approval requirements. Section 3. State Approval Request. The Consortium hereby authorizes the submission to Florida Commerce, CareerSource Florida, and any other applicable agency or entity of any request or requests for approval of CSSWF as the one-stop operator, together with any supporting materials, certifications, assurances, and related documentation necessary or appropriate for such review or approval. Section 4. One-Stop Operator Authorization Agreement. The One-Stop Operator AuthorizationAgreementattachedheretoas@isherebyapproved. Section 5. Further Authority. The Consortium hereby authorizes the Consortium Chair and appropriate officers and representatives of CSSWF to take such further actions, and to execute and submit such further documents, certifications, confirmations, and other materials, as may be reasonably necessary or appropriate to effectuate the purposes ofthis Resolution. Section 6. Severability. If any section or part of a section of this Resolution be declared invalid or unconstitutional, the validity, force and effect of any other section or part of a section of this Resolution shall not thereby be affected or impaired unless it clearly appears that such other section or part of such section of this Resolution is wholly or necessarily dependent upon the section or part of a section so held to be invalid or unconstitutional, it being expressly found and declared that the remainder of this Resolution would have been adopted despite the invalidity of such section or part of such section. Section 7. Conflicts. All resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are, to the extent of such conflict, superseded and repealed. Section 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its passage. {Remainder of page intentionally left blank. Signatures begin on next page.} 2 CAO Page 2446 of 4116PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of_,2026. CHARLOTTE COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Name: Joe Tiseo Title: Chief Local Elected Official COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Name: Dan Kowal Title: Chief Local Elected Official GLADES COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Name:Tim Stanley Title: Chief Local Elected Official HENDRY COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Name: Ramon lglesias Title: Chief Local Elected Official LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Name: Cecil Pendergrass Title:Chief Local Elected Official MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Name: Michelle Lincoln Title:Chief Local Elected Official CAO Page 2447 of 4116 Consortium One-Stop Operator Agreement THIS CONSORTIUM ONE-STOP OPERATOR AGREEMENT (this "A@1") is made and entered into as ofthis day of , 2026, by and between the SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT CONSORTIUM, acting as and through the chief local elected officials for Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Lee, and Monroe Counties, Florida, pursuant to that certain Fifth Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement for the Southwest Florida WorkforceDeveIopmentConsortiumeffectiveJuly1,2024(the..@,,);andSoUTHwEST FLORIDA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD, INC., a Florida not-for-profit corporation dlbla CareerSource Southwest Florida ("W"). The Consortium and CSSWF are sometimes referred to individually as a "&11[" and collectively as the "@." Recitals A. CSSWF serves as the local workforce development board for the local workforce development area covering Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Lee, and Monroe Counties (the "@! Workforce DeveloDment Area"). B. Under the Fifth Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement for the Southwest Florida WorkforceDevelopmentConsortiumeffectiveasofJuly1,2024(the..@,,),the Consortium collectively acts as the chief local elected official for the Local Workforce Development Area and is authorized to review and approve one-stop operator actions in accordance with applicable law and the Interlocal Agreement. C. Applicable federal and state law require the selection of a one-stop operator through a competitive procurement process, and further require the approval of the chief local elected officials acting through the Consortium and the State when the local workforce development board is selected to serve as the one-stop operator. D. Earlier in the 2025-26 program year, Workforce Development Board of Treasure Coast, lnc. dlbla CareerSource Research Coast was engaged as the independent third-parfy to arrange, notice, and process the competitive procurement for the one-stop operator for the Local Workforce Development Area. E. CSSWF submitted a proposal in response to that procurement process, and, following the independent third-party competitive procurement, CareerSource Research Coast recommended CSSWF for selection as the one-stop operator for the Local Workforce Development Area. F. On March 11,2026, the Board of Directors of CSSWF approved the recommendation that CSSWF serve as the one-stop operator for the Local Workforce Development Area, subject to all required approvals. G. The Consortium approved CSSWF to serve as the one-stop operator for the Local Workforce Development Area pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement and the Consortium's duly adopted resolution approving such action. H. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement to define the authorization, responsibilities, firewalls, conflict management requirements, oversight framework, and related terms applicable to CSSWF's service as the one-stop operator for the Local Workforce Development Area. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the Parties agree as follows: CAO Page 2448 of 4116 l. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. 2. Purpose and Authorization. a. The one-stop operator (the "9gg$lgNI@I") means the entity selected to coordinate service delivery among required one-stop partners and service providers within the one-stop delivery system for the Local Workforce Development Area, as permitted by applicable law. The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize CSSWF to perform the duties of the One-Stop Operator for the Local Workforce Development Area, subject to all required approvals under applicable federal and state law. The Parties acknowledge and agree that (a) CSSWF's authority to act as the One-Stop Operator is based on its selection through an independent third-party competitive procurement process; (b) such authority is further based on the Consortium's approval under the Interlocal Agreement; and (c) implementation of this Agreement and CSSWF's operation as One-Stop Operator remain subject to any required approval by Florida Commerce, CareerSource Florida, and any other applicable govemmental authority. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, CSSWF shall not commence or perform services as the One-Stop Operator under this Agreement unless and until all required state and other governmental approvals have been obtained. b. The United States Department of Labor requires that when a Local Workforce Development Board also functions at the One-Stop Operator, sufficient conflict of interest policies must be in place to ensure transparency, accountability, and integrity. For CSSWF, this includes the actions of oversight, monitoring and evaluation of one-stop performance. 3. CSSWF Responsibilities and Authority. CSSWF shall have the following responsibilities and authority: a. Oversight and Seoaration of Duties. CSSWF agrees to implement and maintain the following controls: 1. Operational Independence. Staff responsible for One-Stop Operator duties shallbe organizationally and functionally separate from staff supporting CSSWF governance, fiscal oversight, and monitoring functions. 2. Governance Firewall. No individual involved in the day-to-day One-Stop Operator operations will participate in CSSWF decision-making regarding oversight or evaluation of One- Stop Operator performance. 3. Neutral Evaluation. CSSWF agrees to conduct internal monitoring of One-Stop Operator performance using staff not involved in dayto-day One-Stop Operator functions. The President/CEO of CSSWF shall have the right to engage a third party to review One-Stop Operator operations or compliance with this Agreement at any time. Monitoring results and corrective actions (if applicable) by both in-house monitoring and Florida Commerce will be shared with both the President/CEo and the Board of Directors of CSSWF. b. Conflict of Interest and Ethical Standards. 1. CSSWF shall comply with applicable requirements of Florida's Government in the Sunshine Law, Chapter 286, Florida Statutes, regarding official activities of CSSWF, Page 2449 of 4116CAO including but not limited to all meetings ofthe Board of Directors and committees where One-Stop Operator performance, oversight, or related matters are discussed. 2. All members of the Board of Directors of CSSWF and required and special trust staff of CSSWF shallcomplete and file a Form I with the Commission on Ethics. 3. CSSWF will disclose any potential conflicts of interest arising from the relationships of the One-Stop Operator with training service providers or other service providers, including but not limited to career services providers, and will comply with federal and state laws/policies regarding conflict of interests. c. Confidentiality and Disclosure. l. Except as required by law, CSSWF will keep all documents and other information related to the One-Stop Operator services confidential. Such information may be disclosed to designated members of the Consortium, the Board of County Commissioners of each county comprising the Consortium, the Board of Directors of CSSWF, and the Executive Committee of CSSWF. Other than these exceptions, the One-Stop Operator will not publish, reproduce, or otherwise divulge such information, completely or in part, nor authorize or permit others to do so. d. Scope of Services as One-Stop Operator. The One-Stop Operator will: 1. Coordinate and host up to four in-person meetings with required and other partners to support the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and MOU/IFA implementation/ongoing coordination (virtual option for partners). The One-Stop Operator will develop meeting agendas (in conjunction with CSSWF staff), meeting activities, facilitate meetings, and provide meeting notes. The One-Stop Operator must be onsite at the comprehensive center for these meetings. 2. Develop, in collaboration with partners, an assessment of the effectiveness, physical and programmatic accessibility in the One-Stop Center in accordance with section 188, if applicable, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.). The One- Stop Operator must be on site for these collaborations. 3. Develop strategies for technological improvements to facilitate access to, and improve the quality of, services and activities provided through the one- stop delivery system. Such improvements include enhancing digital literacy skills; accelerating the acquisition of skills and recognized postsecondary credentials by participants; strengthening the professional development of providers and workforce professionals; and ensuring such technology is accessible to individuals with disabilities. 4. Develop strategies to improve coordination of services across one-stop partner programs to enhance service delivery (including but not limited to the design and implementation of common intake, data collection, performance measurement and reporting processes) with local input into such design and implementation. 5. Provide up to four, but not less than two, comprehensive reports indicating results from the meetings and data collection including each of the items listed above. 6. The Board of Directors of CSSWF shall establish and certify to the Consortium on an annual basis that sufficient firewalls in regard to oversight, monitoring, and evaluation J Page 2450 of 4116CAOof performance of the One-Stop Operator, and conflict of interest policies and procedures are in place and working effectively. 4. Consortium Responsibilities and Authoritv. The Consortium shall have the following responsibilities and authority: a. Consult from time to time and on a continuing basis with CSSWF or as either Party requests. b. Ensure that there is no conflict of interests, or the appearance thereof, in the activities of the Consortium or its members or staff with respect to all activities provided for under this Agreement; and c. Review monitoring and performance reports provided by the Board of Directors of CSSWF. 5. Joint Resnonsibility and Authoritv. The following shall be joint responsibilities of Parties: a. Ensure the effective delivery of services to provide the most benefit to residents and employers of the Local Workforce DevelopmentArea. It is furtherthe shared responsibility of both Parties to stimulate the active and effective participation of all sectors of the community in the provision of workforce development services. b. CSSWF and the Consortium may choose to further effective communication by meeting jointly, on occasion, in accordance with mutually agreed upon meeting schedules and either Party may take whatever additional steps as deemed necessary to assure effective communication between the two bodies. c. CSSWF and the Consortium agree to resolve any disputes between the Parties through discussions involving the Consortium and senior staff and officers of CSSWF. 6. Term. The term of this Agreement shall begin on July 1,2026 and shall continue through June 30, 2029, unless CSSWF neglects to fulfill its responsibilities for reasons unforeseen to either of the Parties. Either Party may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other Party. 7. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument executed by the Parties. Any amendment shall remain subject to applicable law and, where required, to further Consortium or state approval. 8. No Waiver. A failure by either Party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of that provision or any other provision. 9. Severabilify. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall continue in effect to the fullest extent permitted by law, unless the invalid provision is so material that the essential purpose of the Agreement would be defeated. 10. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter addressed herein and supersedes prior oral or written understandings on 4 Page 2451 of CAO4116that subject, except that the Interlocal Agreement and applicable Law shall continue to govern where applicable. I l. Interlocal Agreement and Apolicable Law. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to, and shall be construed in a manner consistent with, the Interlocal Agreement and applicable federal and state law. In the event of any conflict between this Agreement, on the one hand, and the Interlocal Agreement or applicable law, on the other hand, the Interlocal Agreement and applicable law shall control. 12. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida. 13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute one instrument. {Remainder ofpage intentionally left blank. Signatures begin on next page.} 5 CAO Page 2452 of 4116IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as indicated below. CSSWF: SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD, INC. d/b/a CAREERSOURCE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA Name: _Michael Wukitsch Title: Board Chair {Signatures Continue on Next Page} 6 Page 2453 of 4116CAOCONSORTIUM: CHARLOTTE COUNTY, FLORIDA Name: Joe Tiseo Title: Chief Local Elected Official COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Name: Dan Kowal Title:Chief Local Elected Official GLADES COUNTY, FLORIDA Name:Tim Stanley Title: Chief Local Elected Official HENDRY COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Name: Ramon Iglesias Title:(: Chief Local Elected Official LEE COUNTY,( FLORIDA By: Name:- Cecil Pendergrass Title: Chief Local Elected Official MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Name: Michelle Lincoln Title: Chief Local E,lected Offi cial CAO Page 2454 of 4116 SrlrpnrrNT oF INTENT (Requesting Permission to Serve As a Direct Service Provider) Local WomroRcr Anra Ixrontr,lTloN Name of Local Area: CareerSource Southwest Florida LWDB Number: 24 Date of Submission: Contact Person Name: Phone: 239-225-2500 xl 80 I Peg Elmore Email Address: pelmore@careersourceswfl .com AMENDMENT TO THE LOCAL WORKFORCE SERVICES PLAN This amendment authorizes designation of the Local Workforce Development Board direct provider of certain services by agreement of the Chief Elected Official and the Governor. The Local Workforce Service Plan will be amended to include designation of the Local Workforce Development Board as a direct provider of workforce services (other than training services). This amendment to the Local Workforce Service Plan will be effective for the period from July 1,2026 through June 30. 2029. The signatures below certify agreement to the plan amendment submitted by the Local Workforce Development Board and the assurance that the Local Workforce Development Board will operate in accordance with this plan amendment and applicable federal and state laws and regulations. LocaI WoRTT,ORCE DEVELOPMENT BONRO CHITRIITIN Name: Michael (Mike) Wukitsch Title: Chair Signature: Dut"t3rzsr2026 Locu Cuter Elpcreo Orrrcral Name and Title: Joseph Tiseo, Commissioner County: Charlotte Signature: Date: CAO Page 2455 of 4116 Loclr, Cstnr Elrcrnn Oprtclal Name and Title: Burt Saunders, Commissioner County: Collier Signature: Date: Locat- Cutnr Er.ncren Orrtct.lt- Name and Title: Tim Stanley, Commissioner County: Glades Signature: Date: Loclr- Csrer ELECTED Orrtct,u Name and Title: Ramon lglesias, Commissioner County: Hendry Signature: Date: Locu Csrer Elrcrro OrRtctnt. Name and Title: Cecil Pendergrass, Commissioner County: Lee Signature: Date: Loclr- Curep Elncrro Orptcrlr- Name and Title: Michelle Lincoln, Mayor County: Monroe Signature: Date: Local Currr Elrcrro OErrcr,rl Name and Title: County: Signature: Date: CAO Page 2456 of 4116Name of Local \Yorkforce Development Area: careersource southwest Frorida Name of Cnntact Person: Phone l'cs blmorc Number: ng_225_2500 xtg0l Email Addrms: rifle: Prcsidcnt C[:o pclmr:re{a;carecrsourceswfl.c.m l)atc of Requert: N'larch 11. 20:6 d4signariali,if" f*r thc 't rfttesflfY. Eerfor:med Successfull)' The term "Perfonned Sucr,essfully" means the local workforce development area lret ot'exceeded the identifixl levels of pefnmunce fur prirnary indicators of perfbnnance for the last tu'o c:onsecutive veam tbr whieh