DOCC Lakewood Ranch Southe

DOCC Lakewood Ranch Southeast 22-134868 GR
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Lakewood Ranch Southeast

Development of Critical Concern and
Village Transition Zone Master Plan
May 27, 2022
Prepared for:
LWR Communities, LLC
Prepared by:
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
6920 Professional Parkway
Sarasota, Florida 34240-8414
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION NARRATIVE & COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
SECTION 2: DEVELOPMENT OF CRITICAL CONCERN
SECTION 3: TRANSPORTATION
SECTION 4: ENVIRONMENTAL
SECTION 5: VILLAGE TRANSITION ZONE MASTER PLAN
SECTION 6: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RESPONSES
SECTION 7: SCHOOL IMPACT ANALYSIS
SECTION 8: HISTORICAL RESOURCES
SECTION 9: WILLINGNESS TO SERVE LETTERS
SECTION 10: NEIGHBORHOOD WORKSHOP
SECTION 11: FORMS
SECTION 12: SKETCH & LEGAL
APPENDIX A: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
APPENDIX B: ORDINANCE 2014-090
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 1:
INTRODUCTION
NARRATIVE & COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
1.1 Introduction
The Applicant, LWR Communities, LLC., seeks to develop its remaining lands, together with additional joint
venture lands, consistent with market-driven densities and housing types that have developed throughout
Lakewood Ranch over the past 25+ years. The subject property, known as “Lakewood Ranch Southeast”,
is located east of Waterside, north of Fruitville Road, and south of the Manatee/Sarasota County line.
The existing conditions of the subject property include the following:
x Acreage: 4,120± Acres

x Parcel IDs (18): 0179010020, 0515010010, 0515010001, 0514020001, 0514010001, 0512030001,
0517120001, 0517010002, 0519020001, 0519010001, 0521030001, A Portion of 0535030006,
0537010001, 0536020001, 0225001000, 0541010001, 0543010010, 0545002010
x Existing Land Uses: Agricultural (office, barns, sheds, etc.) and single family residential
x Future Land Use: Rural
x Zoning: Open Use Rural (OUR), Hamlet Planned Development (HPD), and Open Use Estate (OUE-
1)
x Resource Management Area (RMA): Hamlet and Greenway
x Closed Petitions: Rezone Petition 14-15 (Lakepark Estates – BCC Approved), Rezone Petition 04-
02 (Ranches at Bern Creek – BCC Denied), Rezone Petition 04-07 (Myakka Ranches – BCC Denied),
Rezone Petition 04-15 (Schwartz Farms Property – BCC Denied), Rezone Petition 02-57 (Ranch My
- Withdrawn)
The Applicant is requesting the following:
x Development of Critical Concern (DOCC) and Village Transition Zone (VTZ) Master Plan to plan
for a holistic approach to the proposed large-scale development
The Applicant is requesting approval of a DOCC and approval of a VTZ Master Plan for the subject property
to ensure orderly and resilient development with an increased focus on collaboration across varied
disciplines and the community. The purpose of the Applicant’s requests is to implement an alternative
form of development that supports and incorporates elements of existing Lakewood Ranch, encouraging
the extension of that form of development on the subject property, while preserving and maintaining
connected existing habitats and open space areas across the project area, balancing development with
land stewardship and preservation of open space.
As a part of this Lakewood Ranch Southeast project the Applicant is also concurrently processing a
Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to Chapter 8 – 2050 Resource Management Area to create a
“Village Transition Zone” (VTZ) Resource Management Area (RMA). Please see Appendix A of this
application package which includes the proposed text amendment language in strikethrough and
underline format. Additionally, as a part of this Lakewood Ranch Southeast project, the Applicant is
concurrently processing a Comprehensive Plan Large-Scale Map Amendment to reflect the VTZ RMA and
Greenway RMA for the subject property and to amend the Countryside Line east of the subject property
(See Appendix A of this application package). The Applicant submitted the application for the
Comprehensive Plan Amendments on May 5th, 2022. The Applicant will also collaboratively work with
staff during formal review to develop a Master Development Order (MDO) that sets forth mutually
acceptable conditions for approval for Lakewood Ranch Southeast.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
The land uses for the proposed project are envisioned to be primarily residential uses, as well as ancillary
support uses such as places of worship, public safety facilities, and other civic uses. Neighborhood
commercial is not proposed, as the needs for commercial uses are supplied elsewhere in locations more
conducive to the success of commercial and retail enterprise. In addition, the proposed project seeks to
support the existing commercial development of other areas, such as Waterside.
The proposed project seeks to provide a more compatible development form and density transition from
Village to Hamlet. The maximum base density will be 1 du/gross acre, including such portions of the
Greenway RMA located within the VTZ RMA. To achieve the desired development form, the dwelling units
to which the on-site Greenway RMA and required Open Space would otherwise be entitled will be
transferred into the Developed Area of the property. This base density may be increased by way of
incentives outlined in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment, however, the development
cannot exceed 5,000 dwelling units.
The proposed project will allow for a village edge community that serves as a midpoint between Village
and Hamlet and which includes residential densities and product types that are found in the nearby
neighborhoods of Lakewood Ranch (e.g., the Lake Club, Country Club East, the Isles, and eastern portions
of Waterside). The project includes the protection and incorporation of Open Space (43%-50%) and
environmental resources and incorporates the Greenway RMA. Open space areas connect to other
environmentally sensitive areas offsite, ensuring meaningful regional connectivity of open space and
protection and preservation of environmentally sensitive habitats. The project also includes provisions for
incentivized Community Housing. To support the development of Lakewood Ranch Southeast, future
roadway improvements include the construction of Bourneside Boulevard as a four-lane roadway
traversing the property and connecting University Parkway to Fruitville Road, creating a regional corridor.
Following approval of the Applicant’s request and consistent with the proposed Comprehensive Plan
Amendments, it is anticipated that the subject property will be rezoned to Residential Single Family –
2/Planned Unit Development (RSF-2/PUD) in several increments to allow for development in accordance
with the MDO/VTZ Master Plan as well as other relevant Unified Development Code (UDC) standards.
The Applicant held a Pre-Application meeting on April 7, 2022. A Neighborhood Workshop was also held
on April 7, 2022, to discuss the proposed project with the community.
A rezone was approved in 2015 (Ordinance 2014-090) for Parcels 0225001000, 0541010001, 0543010010,
and 0537010001 of the subject property known as Lakepark Estates. This rezone resulted in those
properties being zoned to Hamlet Planned Development (HPD). In the approved Development Concept
Plan (DCP) for Lakepark Estates, parcels 0225001000 and 0541010001 are identified as Greenway and
Open Space. The VTZ Master Plan for the Lakewood Ranch Southeast project proposes that these parcels
stay identified as Greenway and Open Space consistent with what has been approved. The HPD rezone
for the Lakepark Estates property is an implementing zoning district under the current Hamlet RMA and
Phase One of the approved project is under construction. The proposed Lakewood Ranch Southeast
Comprehensive Plan Amendments will change the Hamlet RMA of these parcels to VTZ RMA. The current
residential construction for Lakepark Estates will continue to develop as was approved in Site and
Development for Phase One. Phase One of the Lakepark Estates project includes single-family residential
which is consistent and compatible with the future single-family residential development proposed for
Lakewood Ranch Southeast. Phase One of Lakepark Estates is being developed under the HPD zoning
which has more restrictive standards than will be implemented by the VTZ RMA, therefore the Phase One
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
development (density, open space, etc.) will be compliant with the overall VTZ Master Plan and be able
to be incorporated seamlessly. Future Phases for Lakepark Estates will need to rezone to RSF-2/PUD
consistent with the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments to allow for development in accordance
with the MDO/VTZ Master Plan.
1.2 Adjacent Land Uses

The existing land uses on the subject property include Agricultural (office, barns, sheds, etc.) and Single
Family Residential. Adjacent existing land uses include the following (See also Map B in Section 2 of this
application package):
North: Water and Sewer Utility; Residential; Agriculture
West: Agriculture; Residential
South: Agriculture; Residential; Manufacturing or Scientific
East: Agriculture; Vacant; Residential
1.3 Comprehensive Plan Consistency Analysis

The DOCC and VTZ Master Plan recognize and address the unique location, characteristics, and features
of the Lakewood Ranch Southeast property. With the concurrent Comprehensive Plan Amendments
proposing the addition of the new VTZ RMA category and the corresponding policy language, it is
acknowledged that certain existing policies within Chapter 8 – 2050 Resource Management Area are no
longer applicable. Therefore, an evaluation of certain applicable goals, objectives, and policies in other
sections of the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan are provided below to demonstrate consistency
between existing and proposed language, consistent with Chapter 163 F.S.
The proposed development is consistent with the intent, goals, objectives, policies, guiding principles and
programs of the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan including but not limited to the following:
Chapter 1 – Environment
ENV Objective 1.2 Protection of Resources: Protect environmental resources during land use changes
and establishment of urban services.
The project proposes preservation of 43-50% Open Space including the general preservation of lands
designated as 2050 Greenway RMA, which have an existing conservation easement, wetlands, and other
native habitats.
ENV Objective 1.3 Habitat Connectivity: Preserve a network of habitat connectivity across the landscape
that ensures adequate representation of native habitats suitable to support the functions and values of
all ecological communities.
The project includes provisions for significant Open Space within the subject property. Residential
development will be clustered and designed in a manner to minimize the disruption of habitat connectivity
throughout and adjacent to the site. The location of areas designated for habitat preservation and Open
Space will be guided by the Sarasota County 2050 Greenway RMA map including attention to connectivity
between Greenway-designated areas across the subject property’s landscape.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Chapter 2 – Parks, Preserves, and Recreation
PARKS Objective 1.1 Recreation Level of Service (LOS): Acquire, develop, maintain, protect and enhance
parks, preserves and recreation facilities, consistent with the needs and interests of Sarasota County’s
population and based on financial feasibility to operate and maintain the parks.
The proposed VTZ Master Plan and information included as a part of the DOCC showcase how the project
will incorporate onsite recreational and preservation areas including the dedication of a 90-acre park to
Sarasota County.
PARKS Objective 1.2 Compatibility and Sustainability: Ensure that parks, preserves and facilities are
compatible with surrounding land uses, the Sarasota 2050 Plan, and the natural environment.
The project will provide for 43% - 50% of its gross acreage to Open Space. Uses within the Open Space
include, but are not limited to natural habitat, improved pastures, stormwater facilities, water storage
facilities, public or private park facilities, and trails. These uses will work to balance the preservation of
ecologically sensitive areas, specifically within the Greenway RMA, and recreational/park needs of the
community, residents, and surrounding neighbors.
Chapter 7 – Future Land Use
FLU Goal 3: Encourage development where public facilities are provided or scheduled to be available.
The Lakewood Ranch Southeast property will utilize the Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District to construct
needed public facilities, including roads, throughout the site.
Existing public facilities servicing the subject property include but are not limited to: educational facilities
(Tatum Ridge Elementary School, McIntosh Middle School, Booker High School; Fruitville library),
recreational facilities/parks (Old Miakka Preserve, Celery Fields Regional Stormwater Facility), and
emergency facilities (Fire Department – Station 10, Doctors Hospital).
FLU Goal 4: Promote orderly development through the establishment of innovative regulatory
platforms that meet the needs of a growing and changing population.
This project seeks to provide an appropriate development form and density transition between the
existing Village and Hamlet RMA overlay zones. The intent of this project is to establish development
parameters that are specific to the subject site only, given the unique characteristics of the site and the
needs of the County’s growing population. Proposed development is intended to be a balanced and
compatible extension of the existing Lakewood Ranch community. The proposed density that is
contemplated in the new policy language provides a thoughtful transition from higher density, more
urban development of Village, to the more rural density that exists further east. This transition is
consistent with limiting urban sprawl and preserving the rural character of the community. The subject
property is to undergo an extensive planning process, known as a Development Of Critical Concern (DOCC)
, in order to ensure orderly and resilient development with an increased focus on collaboration across
varied disciplines and the community.
Chapter 9 – Housing
HOU Objective 1.1 Housing Creation: Encourage the market to provide ample diversity in housing types
and affordability levels to accommodate present and future housing need of Sarasota County residents.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
This project will allow for Lakewood Ranch Southeast to be developed as an extension of the Lakewood
Ranch community; thus, the subject property will provide housing types that are complimentary to those
that exist in the surrounding area. Additionally, the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments being
processed concurrently for Lakewood Ranch Southeast offer an option to allow the inclusion of
Community Housing to accommodate individuals and families from diverse income levels and offer a
variety of housing types.
HOU Policy 1.1.4: Establish and maintain residential development standards that support housing
production while promoting the vitality of established neighborhoods.
The project will allow the subject property to be developed as a compatible and complementary extension
of the highly demanded Lakewood Ranch community. Lakewood Ranch Southeast will increase the
County’s housing production, while also promoting the vitality of established neighborhoods through
connected street and trail networks, open space, unified signage, wayfinding, and more.
HOU Objective 1.2 Community Housing: Community Housing: Increase the supply of housing affordable
to households with an income of 120 percent or less of the AMI.
The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments being processed concurrently for Lakewood Ranch
Southeast include language for incentivized Community Housing to accommodate individuals and families
from diverse income levels and offer a variety of housing types.
HOU Objective 1.5 Neighborhoods: Conserve and improve housing, neighborhoods and the health of
residents throughout Sarasota County.
Due to current and future population growth, housing in Sarasota County is in high demand. The
Lakewood Ranch Southeast property will act as an extension of the successful Lakewood Ranch
community and provide a maximum of 5,000 residential units to a highly demanded area; thus, improving
the County’s housing stock.
Chapter 10 – Transportation
TRAN Objective 1.3 Interconnected Transportation System: Sarasota County shall provide for a safe,
convenient, energy efficient, interconnected, multi-modal (land, air, water-based) transportation
system.
The proposed project will incorporate connected street and trail networks. To support the development
of Lakewood Ranch Southeast, future roadway improvements include the construction of Bourneside
Boulevard, a roadway traversing the property and connecting University Parkway to Fruitville Road.
TRAN Policy 1.4.4: Maintain provisions in the Zoning Ordinance to encourage unified developments to
provide for bicycle and pedestrian facilities in their plans consistent with guidelines and standards
contained in the Land Development Regulations.
The proposed project will incorporate bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including sidewalks and multi-
modal trails.
Chapter 11 – Economic Development

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ECON Objective 2.2: Support practices that encourage the attraction and development of a workforce
that is younger, inclusive and diverse.
The proposed project will encourage the Lakewood Ranch Southeast property to develop in a way that
positively contributes to the County’s housing stock, supporting the current and future local workforce
(Waterside, Lakewood Ranch Corporate Park, etc.).
Chapter 12 – Watershed Management
WATER Objective 1.3: Ensure that development and redevelopment provides for adequate stormwater
management.
At the time of development, the property will provide for adequate stormwater management including
the incorporation of stormwater ponds.
WATER Objective 2.5: Ensure that the issuance of development permits shall be conditioned upon
adequate sanitary sewer service capacity.
At the time of development, the property will provide for adequate sanitary sewer service capacity.
WATER Objective 3.5: Ensure that the issuance of development permits shall be conditioned upon
adequate potable water capacity.
At the time of development, the property will provide for adequate potable water capacity.
1.4 Summary
In summary, the proposed DOCC and VTZ Master Plan will allow for the Lakewood Ranch Southeast
property to support the County’s growing population in a development form that is a compatible
extension of the existing Lakewood Ranch community.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 2:
DEVELOPMENT OF CRITICAL CONCERN
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
See Section 11 of this application package for Owner

Disclosure Form and Owner Affidavits.
d. Attach the names, addresses, and phone numbers of any

consultants, agencies, or other persons who contributed to
or completed sections of this application.

6920 Professional Parkway, Sarasota, FL 34240-8414
(941) 907-6900
Scott Buttari, PLA, LEED AP, Landscape Architect

Amanda Brandon, AICP, Project Planner
Matt Crim, P.E., PTOE, Transportation
Robert A. Engel, P.E., Engineer
Grimes Hawkins Gladfelter & Galvano, P.L.

1023 Manatee Avenue West, Bradenton, FL 34205
(941) 748-0151
Caleb J. Grimes, Esq., Attorney

Kyle W. Grimes, Esq., Attorney
Ardurra
1523 8th Avenue West, Suite B
Palmetto, FL 34221
(941) 772-0901
Christopher J. Kennedy, Environmental Scientist
C. Development Information
a. Attach a legal description of the development site which

includes section, township and range. In addition, attach a
map suitable for legal purposes which depicts the
boundaries of the development site and its relationship to
the primary roadway network.
Response: See Section 12 of this application package for

legal description and survey.
b. Type and size of the Development of Critical Concern

Project.
Response: The Lakewood Ranch Southeast property is

approximately 4,120 +/- acres. The land uses of the
project are envisioned to be primarily residential. The
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
maximum base density will be 1 du/gross acre,

including such portions of the Greenway Resource
Management Area (RMA) located within the Village
Transition Zone (VTZ) RMA. To achieve the desired
development form, the dwelling units to which the on-
site Greenway RMA and required Open Space would
otherwise be entitled will be transferred into the
Developed Area of the property. This base density may
be increased by way of incentives outlined in the
proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments being
processed concurrently for Lakewood Ranch Southeast,
yet the development cannot exceed 5,000 dwelling units.
The intent of development is to be a continuation of the

existing Lakewood Ranch community and contain a
variety of housing types, including single-family
detached, semi-detached, villas, and attached
townhomes. The project also proposes the incorporation
of a minimum of 43% to 50% open space.
Ancillary support uses such as places of worship, public

safety facilities, and other civic uses are allowed within
the proposed project. Neighborhood commercial is not
proposed as the needs for commercial uses are supplied
elsewhere in locations more conducive to the success of
commercial and retail enterprise.
In order to support the development of Lakewood

Ranch Southeast, future roadway improvements
include the construction of Bourneside Boulevard, a
four-lane roadway traversing the property and
connecting University Parkway to Fruitville Road,
creating a regional corridor. Please see Section 1 of this
application package for more details of the proposed
project.
c. Have you requested a DRI binding letter of interpretation

or vested rights determination from the Bureau of State
Planning pursuant to Section 380.06 (4), Florida Statutes?
Response: Not Applicable.
d. List all local jurisdictions (i.e., other counties and

municipalities) which could be potentially impacted by the
proposed project.
Response:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
i. Manatee County, Florida
D. Permit Information
a. List all local governments with jurisdiction over the

proposed development.
Response:
i. Sarasota County, Florida
ii. Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District
b. List all agencies (local, state and federal) from which

approval and/or a permit must be obtained prior to
initiation of development. Indicate the permit or approval
for each agency.
Response:
i. Sarasota County
ii. Southwest Florida Water Management District
E. Statement of Purpose
The Development of Critical Concern (DOCC) Application is

intended to provide information to Sarasota County in assessing
potential impacts that could be created by the project. Just as the
DOCC process is not intended to supplant local, state, or federal
permitting procedures, neither is this application meant to be a
substitute for substantive or technical reports required pursuant to
such permits. Rather, the intent of this application is to provide a
comprehensive analysis of a proposed development and serve as
the basic data source for the preparation of the County Planning
Department’s report and recommendation to both the Sarasota
County Planning Commission and the Sarasota Board of County
Commissioners on the impact of the proposed development.
Sarasota County, in fulfilling its responsibilities under Ordinance
No. 89-77, will use this base information provided by a developer
to consider whether, and the extent to which:
a. The development will have a favorable or

unfavorable impact on the environment and natural
resources of Sarasota County and any other affected
jurisdictions;
Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will have a

favorable impact on the environment and natural
resources of Sarasota County through its
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
implementation of 43% to 50% open space as well as

through the project’s regional connectivity of green
space on-site and off-site, creating significant corridors
to the property and preserving valuable habitat areas
including but not limited to existing wetlands.
b. The development will have a favorable or

unfavorable impact on the economy of Sarasota
County and any other affected jurisdictions;
Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will have a

favorable impact on the economy of Sarasota County
with the creation of highly demanded housing stock.
With the proposed project, the subject property will
have the opportunity to construct up to 5,000 dwelling
units, including incentivized community housing. These
units may house workers from nearby
commercial/office areas including Lakewood Ranch
Corporate Park, Waterside, and University Parkway.
Additionally, individuals and families living within
Lakewood Ranch Southeast will be able to access and
contribute to the active commercial areas in the
surrounding area. As will be shown by the Fiscal
Neutrality Study which will be included under a
separate cover, the development will be fiscally neutral.
c. The development will efficiently use or unduly

burden water, sewer, solid waste disposal, or other
necessary public facilities;
Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will efficiently

use water, sewer, solid waste disposal, or other
necessary public facilities.
d. The development will efficiently use or unduly

burden public transportation facilities;
Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will efficiently

use public transportation facilities; See Section 3 of this
application package for the traffic analysis completed
for the proposed development.
e. The development will favorably or adversely affect

the ability of people to find adequate housing
reasonably accessible to their places of
employment; and
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will favorably

affect the ability of people to find adequate housing
reasonably accessible to their places of employment.
With the proposed project, up to 5,000 dwelling units
may be constructed, including incentivized community
housing. Additionally, a range of housing types,
including single-family detached, semi-detached, villas,
and attached townhomes, will be considered for
inclusion in the development.
f. The development complies or does not comply with

the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan and other
applicable land development regulations.
Response: See Section 1 of this application package for

the introduction narrative and Comprehensive Plan
consistency analysis, which demonstrates the proposed
development’s compliance with the Sarasota County
Comprehensive Plan and other applicable land
development regulations.
The completion of this application is the initial step in the

Development of Critical Concern process which establishes
the framework for a cooperative planning effort
between the developer and Sarasota County. Therefore, the
developer should contact the Sarasota County Planning
Department before beginning the preparation of this
application, to schedule a mutually acceptable time for a
pre-application meeting.
Response: The Applicant held a Pre-Application meeting on

April 7, 2022 and has addressed the Development Review
Committee comments provided (See Section 6 of this
application package).
F. Instructions
Response: Noted.
a. The pre-application meeting provides an opportunity for

the Applicant to introduce the proposed project to the
regulatory agency personnel in attendance of the meeting.
A summary of the project with a reproducible locality map
should be submitted by the Applicant to the Sarasota
County Planning Department two weeks prior to the pre-
application meeting to allow distribution to the other
regulatory agencies.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
b. Applicants proposing a Development of Critical Concern

(DOCC) process shall complete Part I and complete all
applicable questions contained in Parts II and III of this
questionnaire. The applicable questions for each project
are determined by the appropriate regulatory agencies at the
pre-application meeting. A summary sheet, attached as part
of the questionnaire, will be completed at the pre-
application meeting which indicates those questions that
have been deleted for the project. In addition, criteria
needed to integrate other local planning processes with the
DOCC application may be indicated on said summary
sheet.
c. The required maps are indicated in Section A of Part II of

this questionnaire. Additional maps may be required in
addressing individual questions and/or local planning
processes to be integrated into the DRI application.
Whenever possible, the scales of most maps should be 1”-
200’. However, scales for the required maps will be
determined at the pre-application meeting. Scales shall be
clearly indicated on each map and dates of preparation and
revision should be included. All maps should be reduced to
a 8 ½” x 11” in size, and incorporated into the application
document. To ensure legibility when a map is reduced for
inclusion into the application document, certain
components of that map such as summary tables, may be
placed on a separate page (s) following the map. The
number of map copies needed at scale (not reduced) will be
determined at the pre-application meeting. A summary
sheet, attached as part of the questionnaire, will be
completed at the pre-application meeting which indicates
the scale and number of required maps to be submitted by
the Applicant.
d. Methodology meeting(s) on issues such as drainage and

transportation are required, unless determined unnecessary
by the appropriate regulatory agencies. Ten (10) days prior
to the methodology meeting, the Applicant should submit a
proposed methodology statement to the Sarasota County
Planning Department. Following the methodology
meeting(s) and prior to submission of the Application, the
Applicant should submit to the Sarasota County Planning
Department written confirmation regarding the agreed upon
methodology in the form of a final methodology statement.
Prior to submission of the Application, the Applicant shall
coordinate submission of written confirmation to the
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Sarasota County Planning Department from the appropriate

review agencies regarding concurrence with the proposed
methodology and information contained within the
methodology statement.
e. A Development of Critical Concern includes all other

development customarily associated with the project.
Therefore, an Applicant proposing a DOCC with ancillary
land uses that are not of DOCC magnitude (for example, a
shopping center within a residential PUD) shall include
information regarding those ancillary used in the
appropriate portions of this application. (For example,
impervious surface area would be significant with regard to
the shopping center example given above, and the
information should be included in response to the Drainage
Questions).
f. All information supplied shall be accurate, up-to-date, and

complete. Responses to all questions shall be completely
contained in the body of the application. In order to
facilitate the review process, the applicant is requested to
include within the application all data sources,
methodologies, models, assumptions, and standards used in
obtaining or evaluating any information provided in the
application. Reports may be attached to the application as
appendices.
g. Applicants should be prepared to supply, upon request,

relevant background data used to obtain any information
contained in the application.
h. Any information pertinent to the development which has

been specifically requested in this questionnaire may be
incorporated by the Applicant within an appropriate section
of this questionnaire.
i. Where a format and units of measurement for information

are specified, these shall be followed by the Applicant. If
the specified format requires the provision of information
by development phases, each phase indicated shall relate to
those designated in Map C-4 (Development Phasing Plan),
and the final entries shall relate to development completion
and full operation or utilization as designated in Map C-3
(Master Development Plan).
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
j. All narrative responses and associated maps should be in an

8 ½” x 11” format. Each response should begin with
duplicating the appropriate question from this
questionnaire. A table of contents should also be included
in the application.
k. A bibliography of the information sources utilized in

answering this questionnaire should be included in the
application.
l. Fifty (50) copies shall be submitted to the Sarasota County

Planning Department, unless otherwise determined at the
pre-application meeting.
PART II. GENERAL DOCC INFORMATION
A. Maps
Response: All required maps, except for Map C-4

(Development Phasing Plan) and G-2 (Proposed
Drainage Map) are included as part of this DOCC. Map
C-4 (Development Phasing Plan) will not be included
because phasing of development is not proposed.
Individual rezone applications will follow for
incremental development and infrastructure will be
provided prior in order to support and dictate this
incremental development. Additionally, Map G-2
(Proposed Drainage Map) will be provided at the time
of the rezone(s) per the DRC comments received.
1. A locality map which illustrates the location of the

proposed development within the County, and includes
political boundaries (i.e., County and Municipal
boundaries). (Map A).
2. A recent vertical aerial photo of the site with prohect

boundaries delineated. Indicate date of aerial photo and
types of land uses within 500 feet of the project boundaries.
(Map B).
3. A map showing existing zoning within the development

area and adjacent land within 500 feet of the project
boundaries. (Map C-1).
4. An existing land use map showing existing on-site land

uses, recreational areas, utility and drainage easement,
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
wells, septic tanks, rights-of-ways, intensive agricultural

activities, historic, archaeological, scientific and
architecturally significant resource. Provide on this map a
general breakdown (acreage and percentages) in types of
existing land uses (e.g., residential, commercial, industrial)
within the development area. (Map C-2).
5. A master development plan for the site. Provide on this

map a breakdown (acreage and percentages) in types of
proposed land uses, easement, rights-of-way (including
major roads), on-site recreational areas, buffers, other open
space areas and general areas of Stormwater retention.
Each of the above-cited items should be depicted on the
master development plan for the site. In addition, for
residential uses, indicate on this maps acreage and number
of proposed residential units for each parcel. Indicate on
this map parcel acreage and size (square feet) of each non-
residential component of the project. Identify on this map
the location of any on-site potable water supply (e.g.,
wells), wastewater treatment facilities, internal roads and
access locations serving the proposed development.
Designate any proposed pedestrian and bikeway systems on
this map. (Map C-3).
Response: Map C-3 (VTZ Master Plan) is included

within the DOCC map series and also included
independently in Section 5 of this application package.
6. A development phasing plan. Provide on this map a

general breakdown in types of proposed land uses by
project phase (including acreage, number of residential
units and size of non-residential components). (Map C-4).
7. A topographic map with one-foot contour intervals. In

addition, show on this map the appropriate storm category
zone(s) for the project site as delineated by the current
SWFRPC Hurricane Evacuation Plan. (Map D).
8. A generalized soils map showing locations of excessively

drained, somewhat excessively drained to moderately well
drained, somewhat poorly drained, poorly to very poorly
drained soils. Identify all soils types as defined by the most
recent soils survey prepared by the U.S.D.A. Soil
Conservation Service (SCS). (Map E).
9. An existing native habitat map according to the

nomenclature found in the Environmental Plan Element of
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Apoxsee. Indicate on this map acreage for each native

habitat area lying within the project site. Provide on this
map a breakdown (combined acreage and percentages) in
types of native habitat areas. (Map F-1).
10. A native habitat preservation, alteration and mitigation

plan. Indicate on this map acreage of each native habitat
area to be preserved, conserved, altered or mitigated, if
applicable. Provide on this map a summary of native
habitat acreage to be preserved, conserved, and mitigated
by habitat type. (Map F-2).
11. An existing drainage map. Indicate on this map existing

basin/sub basin boundaries, drainage flow directions,
drainage easements, discharge points, natural creeks,
manmade canals, lakes, other water bodies, drainage
structures (both on-site and within 1 mile downstream),
coastal construction control lines, DER jurisdictional lines,
floodplains and floodways, as determined by FEMA and
any other studies available through the Engineering
Division of the Sarasota County Transportation
Department. Summarize in tabular form on this map the
following information:
a. Basin area(s), slope(s) and length(s);
b. Acreage and percent impervious coverage for each

basin;
c. Acreage and percent directly connected impervious

coverage for each basin;
d. Acreage and percent wetland/depression surface

coverage for each basin; and
e. Wetland/depression storage capacity within each

basin. (Map G-1).
12. A master drainage plan. Indicate proposed basin/sub basin

boundaries, drainage flow directions, general area for water
retention, drainage structures (both on-site and within 1
mile downstream), drainage easements, discharge points,
canals and other major drainage features. Summarize in
tabular form on this map the same criteria specified above
for Map G-1 reflecting post-development conditions. In
addition, indicate the total acreage and storage capacity of
proposed Stormwater retention areas within each basin.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Identify the design water level elevations for the proposed

Stormwater management facilities. Indicate all existing
and proposed surface and groundwater quality monitoring
stations on this map. (Map G-2).
13. A map of the roadway segments and intersections included

within the transportation impact area (as identified in the
transportation methodology statement required pursuant to
Part I, Section F(d) contained herein). Map H-1).
14. A map showing existing peak-hour peak-season traffic

volume and level of service conditions on the roadway
segments and intersections within the transportation impact
area [as required in Part II, Section E(1)(b)]. (Map H-2).
15. A map (or map series) showing projected development-

generated traffic (daily and peak-hour by development
phase) on the roadway segments and intersections within
the transportation impact area [as required in Part II,
Section E(1)(e)]. (Map H-3).
16. A map (or map series) showing projected peak-hour peak-

season traffic volume and level of service conditions on the
roadway segments and intersections within the
transportation impact area (by development phase),
excluding traffic generated by the proposed development
project [as required in Part II, Section E(1)(f)]. (Map H-4).
17 A map (or map series) showing projected peak-hour peak-

transportation impact are (by development phase),
including traffic generated by the proposed development
project [as required in Part II, Section E(1)(g)]. (Map H-5).
18. A map identifying the locations of existing public facilities

(e.g., water supply, wastewater treatment, transportation
facilities, emergency service facilities, recreational parks,
schools, etc.) which would serve the project site.
(Map I-1).
19. A map showing future improvements necessitated by the

proposed development (e.g., water supply, wastewater
treatment, transportation facilities, emergency service
facilities, recreational parks, schools, etc.) as indicated in
the Needed Improvements Summary Matrix presented in
Part II, Section G of this questionnaire. (Map I-2).
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: For Map I-2, please see the Utility Master

Plan and VTZ Master Plan.
B. General Project Description

(Refer to Maps C-3 and C-4)
a. Describe and discuss in general terms all major

elements of the proposed development in its
completed form. Include
in this discussion the proposed phases of
development, and expected beginning and
completion dates for construction. For non-
residential DRI’s also include target dates for
facility operation of utilization. If the development
will have a proposed buildout of 10 years or less,
phasing should be shown on an annual or bi-annual
basis. If the proposed buildout is greater than 10
years, phasing should be shown as appropriate.
Response: See attached narrative (Section 1 of this

application package) for the general project description
and information. The anticipated build out timing is 10
years. Roadway construction is expected to begin in Q2
of 2023.
C. Land Use
(Refer to Maps A, B, C-1, C-2, C-3, and C-4)
1. General Information and Analysis

x Existing Conditions
a. Identify the land use designation(s) of the development area

as presented on Apoxsee’s Future Land Use Plan Map.
Any proposed modifications to Apoxsee’s Future Land Use
Plan Map should be discussed and justified.
Response: The subject property’s land use designation

is Rural and the 2050 Resource Management Area
(RMA) designations are Hamlet and Greenway.
As a part of this Lakewood Ranch Southeast project the

Applicant is also processing concurrently a
Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to Chapter 8 –
2050 Resource Management Area to create a “Village
Transition Zone” (VTZ) Resource Management Area
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
(RMA). Please see Appendix A of this application

package which includes the proposed text amendment
language in strikethrough and underline. Additionally,
as a part of this Lakewood Ranch Southeast project the
Applicant is processing concurrently a Comprehensive
Plan Large-Scale Map Amendment to reflect the VTZ
RMA and Greenway RMA for the subject property and
to amend the Countryside Line to shift it to the east side
of the subject property (See Appendix A of this
application package). The Applicant submitted the
concurrent application for the Comprehensive Plan
Amendments on May 5th, 2022.
b. Describe the present zoning and land uses within the

development area and adjacent land within 500 feet of the
project boundaries. Indicate how existing zoning compares
with land use patterns presented in Apoxsee.
Response: The subject property’s zoning designations

include Open Use Rural (OUR), Hamlet Planned
Development (HPD), and Open Use Estate (OUE-1).
Zoning designations on adjacent land include OUR,
OUE-1, Government Use (GU), Planned Development
Residential (PD/R) (Manatee County), and Planned
Development Mixed Use (PD/MU) (Manatee County).
The subject property consists of existing agricultural,

vacant, and some low-density residential uses. Adjacent
areas consist of existing agricultural, residential,
manufacturing, vacant, and utility uses (See Map B for
more detailed information on existing land uses on
adjacent property).
The Future Land Use for the subject property is Rural.

This Future Land Use designation is consistent with the
listed zoning categories as they implement a range of
low density development. As the County population
continues to grow, the proposed VTZ RMA overlay for
the Lakewood Ranch Southeast property provides an
opportunity for moderate density development as an
alternative to large lot Urban Sprawl in order to
minimize infrastructure costs, traffic congestion, and
environmental degradation.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
x Post Development Conditions
c. Indicate any proposed or anticipated rezone requests for the

project.
Response: A rezone is not proposed with this

application.
Upon approval of the requested Comprehensive Plan

Map and Text Amendments, DOCC and VTZ Master
Plan, and Master Development Order (MDO) for
Lakewood Ranch Southeast, it is anticipated that the
subject property will be rezoned to RSF-2/PUD in
several increments to allow for development in
accordance with the MDO/VTZ Master Plan. The
rezone requests will be consistent with the approval of
the Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Master
MDO/VTZ Master Plan as well as other relevant
Unified Development Code standards.
d. Discuss the project’s relationship with local planning

programs (e.g., small-area planning studies, corridor plan).
Address any additional criteria determined at the pre-
application meeting which allows the integration of local
planning processes with the DRI application for the project.
Response: There is not a Critical Area Plan, Corridor

Plan, Community Plan, Special Planning Area, or DRI
associated with the subject property. This application
includes the criteria required as determined at the pre-
application meeting (See Section 6 of this application
package for DRC Responses).
e. Indicate the probable effects the proposed future land uses

will have on adjacent property. Discuss any proposed
measures (e.g., buffers) to mitigate any potential land use
conflicts.
Response: The proposed project is intended to integrate

seamlessly with adjacent properties. Proposed language
in the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment being
processed concurrently for Lakewood Ranch Southeast
offers a more context sensitive approach to preservation
of habitat and provision of Open Space. The VTZ
Master Plan illustrates appropriate greenbelts, buffers,
Greenway RMA, and other open space, including
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
preserved wetlands and native habitat, to encourage

compatibility between adjacent property.
f. Describe any potential land use compatibility conflicts

between mixed uses within the proposed project. Indicate
any proposed measures (e.g., buffers) to mitigate any
potential internal land use conflicts.
Response: The proposed development pattern is

predominately residential, with the option of residential
support uses, such as places of worship, public safety
facilities, or other civic uses. The VTZ Master Plan
illustrates appropriate greenbelts, buffers, Greenway
RMA, and other Open Space, including preserved
wetlands and native habitat, to encourage compatibility
between internal land uses. Potential land use
compatibility conflicts between residential support uses
within the project and mitigation will be analyzed
further at the time of rezone(s).
2. Residential Uses
a. For residential development, apply the appropriate Apoxsee

residential checklist and matrix. Submit copies of
worksheets and associated maps to the County Planning
Department.
Response: This does not apply any longer in Sarasota

County per the DRC comments received at the time of
the pre-application (See Section 6 of this application
package for DRC responses).
b. Project the number of on-site permanent full-time

employees with low or moderate incomes that could afford
to rent or purchase within the development. Specify if any
affordable housing provisions will be available to these
employees within the development. (Refer to the
Employment Information Table, Owner-occupied Housing
Information Table and Rental Housing Information Table
of the Economy Section of this questionnaire).
Response: Please see the Fiscal Neutrality Study, which

has been submitted under a separate cover.
Incentivized community housing provisions are
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
incorporated in the proposed Comprehensive Plan

Amendment language for the VTZ RMA.
c. If the proposed project would include low and moderate

income housing units, describe how these units would be
provided. Indicate what available mechanisms or
incentives the Applicant is seeking to achieve affordable
housing within the project.
Response: Please see the Fiscal Neutrality Study, which

has been submitted under a separate cover.
Incentivized community housing provisions are
incorporated in the proposed Comprehensive Plan
Amendment language for the VTZ RMA.
3. Commercial Uses
a. Describe the function and limits of the primary and

secondary retail trade areas which the proposed shopping
center will serve. Provide estimates of existing and
ultimate (build-out) populations residing within the primary
trade area. Estimate annual sales to customers within
primary trade area.
Response: Not applicable, commercial uses are not

proposed for the project at this time. The land uses for
the proposed project are envisioned to be primarily
residential uses and potentially ancillary support uses
such as places of worship, public safety facilities, and
other civic uses. Neighborhood commercial is not
proposed as commercial needs are supplied elsewhere in
locations more conducive to the success of commercial
and retail enterprise. In addition, the proposed project
seeks to support the existing commercial development
of the area such as Waterside.
b. If available, provide a market study which has been

prepared for the proposed commercial development. If
such a study has not been prepared, describe in general
terms how the overall demand for this project has been
determined.
Response: Not applicable, commercial uses are not

proposed for the project at this time.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
4. Office Uses
a. Indicate the type of anticipated operations that would

occupy the proposed office park (e.g., corporate
headquarters, direct customer service).
Response: Not applicable, office uses are not proposed

for the project at this time.
b. Describe the type of market (e.g., local, regional) to be

served by the major occupants of the proposed office park
and generally discuss the service area.

c. If available, indicate the vacancy rates of office complexes

of similar lease value and/or function in the surrounding
area and explain how they may affect the marketability of
the proposed office uses.

5. Industrial Uses
a. Indicate the type of anticipated operations that would

occupy the proposed industrial park (e.g., manufacturing).
Response: Not applicable, industrial uses are not

b. Describe the general service area of the major occupants of

the proposed industrial park.

c. Indicate supplier(s) and other supporting industry which

would be required within the region by the proposed
industrial development. Estimate to what degree these
linkages will require the location in the region of
supporting industrial and commercial activity.

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
d. Indicate whether proposed operations would require the

expansion of any transportation systems and facilities in the
region (e.g., rail, truck terminals).

D. Environmental Systems
1. Native Habitats
(Refer to Maps C-3, D, E, F-1, F-2, G-1 and G-2)
Response: See Section 4: Environmental of this

application package for information on Native Habitats
on the project site.
x Methodology
a. The Applicant shall use a methodology for determining on-

site hydro periods and flow conditions which has been
approved by the County Natural Resources Department
prior to submittal of this application (see Part I, Section
F(d) of this questionnaire).
b. Describe the acreage, species composition and degree of

disturbance for each habitat existing within the
development site, based on the Apoxsee Environmental
Plan Element. Identify the occurrence of any on-site
unique habitats such as those listed by the Florida Natural
Areas Inventory, and describe the ecological values and
functions of these unique habitats.
c. Provide an analysis of historic flow conditions and hydro

periods, with seasonal water elevations, of on-site wetlands.
x Post Development Conditions
d. Discuss how the project would not adversely affect the base
flow or the periodicity of flow in water courses.
e. Indicate all native habitats that will be preserved in their

natural or existing state.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
f. Indicate all native habitats that will be conserved. Discuss

how this proposal in consistent with the Apoxsee
Environmental Plan Element.
g. Provide a maintenance plan for all preserved and conserved

habitats. Specify in this plan how the existing hydro
periods and seasonal water elevations would be maintained
or enhanced in all preserved and conserved wetlands; and
what other measures would be taken during and after site
development to ensure preservation/conservation of the
habitat areas.
h. Indicate all wetland and mesic hammock areas, or portions

thereof, that are proposed for alteration. Discuss the
rationale for alteration, and indicate whether alternatives
were investigated to either limit or eliminate the need for
wetland alteration. Discuss how this proposal is consistent
with the Apoxsee Environmental Plan Element.
i. Provide a conceptual mitigation plan for any wetland

meeting the criteria for alteration found in Management
Guideline VI.A.2.b.(4) in the Environmental Plan Element
of Apoxsee, as amended. Ad part of this plan, provide
typical cross-section diagrams of wetland mitigation areas
including proposed side slopes, normal water levels and re-
vegetation.
j. Provide a maintenance and monitoring plan for all wetland

mitigation areas, if any. As part of this plan, identify the
proposed hydro periods and seasonal water elevations for
each wetland mitigation area.
k. Provide a creation, monitoring and maintenance program

for required littoral zones within the development site. As
part of this program, provide a typical cross-section
diagram of a littoral zone.
2. Rare and Endangered Species
Response: See Section 4: Environmental of this

application package for information on Rare and
Endangered Species on the project site.
a. Complete the following Rare and Endangered Species Table by

indicating the presence or likely occurrence of any species within
the development area listed as threatened, endangered, rare,
unique, or special concern.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Space held for Rare and Endangered Species Table
b. Identify what measures will be taken to protect the Species and

their habitats identified in the Rare and Endangered Species Table
above (also refer to Part II, Section D.1.g. regarding maintenance
plans for habitat areas).
3. Drainage
(Refer to Maps C-3, D, E, G-1 and G-2)
x Surface Waters – Methodology
a. The Applicant shall use a hydrologic methodology which

has been approved by the Engineering Division of the
County Transportation Department and any other
appropriate regulatory agency prior to submittal of
this application (see Part I, Section F(d) of this
questionnaire). The Applicant shall address the
following items, unless otherwise determined by the
appropriate regulatory agencies at the methodology
meeting:
What modeling methodology is proposed for determining

runoff hydrographs, peaks, and volumes from the existing
watershed(s)? How will this model be verified for
application to the proposed site? How will the model take
into account watershed depression storage, relationship of
contributing area to time, infiltration, and initial
abstractions in relating rainfall to runoff? What method is
proposed for determining the watershed time parameter
(lag, time to peak, or time of concentration)?
What modeling methodology is proposed for

determining runoff hydrographs, peaks, and volumes from
the proposed, developed drainage basins?
Response: The modeling methodology for the project

will be consistent with the County Unified Development
Code Sec 124-252 “Stormwater Management
Provisions”. This code requires the following:
Post-development peak discharges and

hydrographs shall be based on a 100-year, 24-
hour storm for the proposed conditions. Where
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
basin model updates are available, they must be

used as the basis of review for development
proposals equal to or exceeding a total area of 35
acres or impervious area of eight acres to
demonstrate no adverse increase in off-site flood
stages.
As most projects associated with this development area

will be greater than 35 Ac, the County’s “Basin Models”
must be utilized to analyze design such as no adverse
increase in off-site stages.
The specific watershed models for this project are the

2015 Dona Bay Watershed (approximately 43% of the
project area) and the 2017 Upper Myakka River
Watershed (approximately 57% of the project area). A
methodology meeting was held with County stormwater
staff on March 22, 2022 to discuss the status of updates
for these watersheds. County Staff anticipates
upgrading these watershed models to the latest version
of the modeling software called ICPR4. The Applicant
will utilize the latest model available and prepare a
Master Drainage Plan for each rezone application. An
overall Master Drainage Plan is not proposed given the
variability in development. Furthermore, individual
Master Drainage Plans will allow projects to move
forward without relying on one overall model for
tracking purposes.
The technical inputs to these models are consistent with

FEMA requirements for preparing a watershed study.
ICPR3 and 4 are FEMA approved stormwater
applications. Runoff hydrographs are calculated in the
model using the SCS Runoff method with inputs that
are appropriate for the project area. The Southwest
Florida Water Management District has guidance for
using the Type II Florida Modified Rainfall
Distribution which informs the intensity and shape of
the rainfall hydrograph. County Watersheds are
typically prepared with some level of calibration as
calibration is usually part of a watershed consultant’s
contract for model preparation. In response to a few
other items described above, please consider the
following:
How will this model be verified for application?

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: It already has been verified and used on

several County projects.
How will the model take into account depression storage,

impervious coverage, infiltration, and initial abstractions in
relating rainfall to runoff?
Response: Storage is an important input to ICPR.

Elevation vs area inputs are used to estimate available
volume using the average end method between data
points. Areas that are proposed for development will be
modeled such that all existing storage is removed and
only pond areas contain storage. Infiltration and initial
abstraction is dealt with by using an appropriate curve
number. An antecedent moisture condition of II is used
for this area which assumes the watershed is
substantially saturated prior to a storm event. In
general, the water table is so high in this area that
groundwater infiltration is usually negligible when
studying a 24 hour duration design storm event.
What method is proposed for determining the watershed

time parameter (lag, time to peak, or time to peak, or time
of concentration)?
Response: Time of concentration will be used to

determine this.
Additional information continued:

As part of the initial roadway project through the site,
the entire project area will be studied and updated with
site specific topographic information. It was decided
after meeting with Stormwater staff that preparing one
model that “clips” a portion of the other watershed
would be appropriate for this site. The preliminary plan
is to bring in a portion of the Dona Bay watershed into
the entire Upper Myakka River model to accomplish
this goal. The model that is developed as part of the
initial roadway project will be utilized for all
developments moving forward on this site as it will then
be “best available information” (aka Revised Existing
Conditions-Lakewood Ranch Southeast RECM-
LWRSE).
How will the model take into account depression storage,

impervious coverage, infiltration, and initial abstractions in
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
relating rainfall to runoff? What method is proposed for

determining the basin time parameter?
Response: See above. The model is a routing and has

storage inputs for elevation/area increments. The initial
abstraction is minimal and is not able to be modified in
ICPR3. Usually 0.1 ft for areas that are not DCIA is
utilized. The time of concentration will be used for basin
time using equations in TR-55.
The modeling methodology for the project will be

consistent with the County Unified Development Code
Sec 124-252.
What modeling methodology is proposed for hydrograph

channel and reservoir routing? How will this model(s) be
verified for application?
Response: The same program, namely ICPR 3 or 4, is

used for channel and reservoir routing. Channel links
with irregular cross sections can be utilized. Variable
manning’s n values can be used for channel slopes.
What rainfall distributions, durations, and volumes are

proposed for the various design storm events?
Response: The Florida Mod Type II rainfall

distribution will be utilized for the project as stated
above. The design storm event will be the 100 year
return period, 24 hour duration event which is
commonly accepted as the most appropriate storm
event to calculate the 1% annual chance of flooding due
to a riverine storm event. A unit hydrograph of UH256
will be utilized for developed basins and UH100C will
be utilized for undeveloped basins.
x Surface Waters – Existing Conditions:
b. Provide a general overview of existing drainage conditions

including any potential flooding and erosion problems.
Response: There are no known flooding issues

associated with the site. It is noted that above average
fall from east to west over the site exists with the
current site topography. This likely sheds flooding
issues away from the site.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
c. Provide detailed calculations on peak discharges, volumes

and hydrographs for the existing on-site basin(s).
Response: As noted above, this information will be

provided with the initial drainage study prior to or
concurrent with the main roadway project application
through the site (aka RECM-LWRSE).
x Surface Waters – Post Development Conditions
d. Describe the proposed water drainage system and discuss

the design capacity criteria to be used for the various
elements of that system. Include information as to what
design storm (e.g., 10 year-24 hour, 25 year-24 hour, etc.)
would be used for what portions of the system.
Response: The Unified Development Code provides

code requirements for storage capacity to meet Level of
Service criteria. Specifically, Appendix C14
“Stormwater Quantity Level of Service” shows
Flooding References (buildings, roads, and sites)
compared to their required design storm event return
period. Furthermore, allowable flooding of various
roadways (including parking areas) are listed in that
appendix.
e. Submit detailed calculations on post-development

conditions which provide the following:
Peak discharges, volume and hydrographs for the proposed

drainage basins/development;
Flood control (attenuation) design calculations which

demonstrate that the peak discharge for the existing
watershed would not be exceeded as a result of the
proposed site alterations; flooding up to that crated by the
25-year storm event would be adequately controlled within
the proposed development; upstream properties would not
experience an increase in the 25-year flood elevation; and
downstream drainage structure capacities (within 1 mile)
would not be exceeded;
Response: This information will be submitted on a

Master Plan level for each rezone. Furthermore, the
initial roadway project through the site will provide this
information related to itself as part of its application.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
f. Provide a mitigation plan for any proposed floodplain

encroachment.
Response: Floodplain encroachment will be analyzed

using the watershed models described above. Cup for
cup floodplain compensation shall not be utilized.
g. Identify any regional effects in drainage (1.e., runoff

characteristics, flow hydrographs, flood elevations) the
proposed development could have on property upstream
and downstream of the development area.
Response: The pre-development vs post-development

modeling approach described above will be used to
ensure adverse offsite impacts are not predicted.
h. If swales and retention lakes are proposed, provide a

typical cross section(s), showing dimensions, slopes and
control elevations.
i. Identify proposed design elements and covenants to ensure

maintenance of the Stormwater management system.
Indicate the entity responsible for operating and
maintaining the drainage system after completion of
development.
j. Indicate what steps will be taken during development

construction and maintenance to prevent or control soil
erosion caused by wind and/or water action.
Response: Items h through j above will be shown at the

time of Site and Development application.
x Groundwater – Historic, Existing and Post-Development

Conditions
k. Discuss historic, existing and post-development

groundwater levels and fluctuations. Include an
identification and discussion of any potential aquifer
recharge areas on and abutting the development site.
Response: Stantec has reviewed preliminary

geotechnical investigation reports that were performed
for the project area and the groundwater table is
typically between 0 ft and 2 ft below existing grade.
Typical fluctuations in groundwater associated with this
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
area are anticipated. Aquifer recharge areas have not

been studied in detail for this site.
4. Water Quality
(Refer to Map G-2)
Please see Section 4: Environmental of this application

package for additional information regarding Water
Quality if not addressed specifically below.
x Methodology (Surface and Groundwater Quality Monitoring

Programs)
a. The Applicant shall use methodologies for monitoring

surface and groundwater quality which have been approved
by the County Pollution Control Division and any other
appropriate regulatory agency prior to submittal of this
application (see Part I, Section F(d) of this questionnaire).
x Surface Water – Existing Conditions
b. Indicate any surface water quality monitoring stations

existing on and near the development site.
c. Describe in terms of appropriate water quality parameters

the existing surface water quality conditions on and
abutting the project site.
d. Provide the existing surface water pollutant loading rates

for the site based on site-specific data and/or literature
sources.
x Surface Water – Post-Development Conditions
e. Identify any potential sources and the significance of

pollution to the surface waters of the development area
which could adversely affect the quality of water resources.
Response: No notable sources are known.
f. Estimate post-development pollutant loading rates of the

surface waters and compare with the pre-development
loading rates.
Response: This will be done at the time of S&D

application if the basins are located in a waterbody that
is impaired for a nutrient related issue.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
g. Provide a surface water quality monitoring program for the

development which identifies proposed monitoring stations,
frequency of sampling, parameters and method for
reporting results.
h. Indicate what measures would be utilized in the proposed

drainage system to ensure acceptable water quality.
Response: All projects will need to show compliance

with SWFWMD and County Water Quality Design
Criteria. Alternative 3, Wet Detention is likely the main
nutrient removal BMP that will be used for this project.
x Groundwater – Existing Conditions
i. Indicate any groundwater quality monitoring stations

existing on and near the development site.
j. Describe in terms of appropriate water quality parameters

the existing groundwater conditions on and abutting the
project site.
Groundwater – Post-Development Conditions
k. Identify any potential sources and the significance of

pollution to the groundwater of the development area which
could adversely affect the quality of water resources.
l. Provide a groundwater quality monitoring program for the

development which identifies proposed monitoring stations,
frequency of sampling, parameters and method for
reporting results.
m. Indicate what measures would be taken to protect

groundwater quality.
5. Floodplains
(Refer to Maps C-3, D, G-1 and G-2)
a. If any structures and roadways are proposed within the 100-year

flood prone area as identified by FEMA, indicate what measures
will be taken to mitigate the potential flood hazard and to maintain
the 100-year floodplain storage volume.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: The 100 year floodplain storage volume will be offset

by using the County flood routing watershed models to examine
adverse offsite impacts. Structures within the 100 yr flood zone
will be designed in accordance with ASCE 24-14 which requires
the finished floor of inhabitable areas be a minimum of 1 ft
above the Base Flood Elevation or Design Flood Elevation.
Additional Comments:
As part of the DRC Pre-Application comments, the County
requested the applicant acknowledge that the project will be
consistent with the following elements of the Sarasota County
Comprehensive Plan. The project will in fact be consistent with
these items.
Public Utilities Element, Chapter 12 – Watershed

Management:
a. Water Policy 1.2.2 relating to treatment of

stormwater discharge
b. Water Policy 1.3.1 relating to bringing facilities up
to adopted level of service standards
c. Water Policy 1.3.2 relating to level of service
requirements for water quality and quantity
d. Water Policy 1.3.5 relating to maintenance of
outfalls for discharge of drainage
Future Land Use Element, Chapter 7:
a. Future Land Use Policy 1.2.5 relating to floodplain
encroachment and compensation
6. Historical and Archaeological Sites

Response: See Section 8 of this application package for the

letter from Department of State, Division of Historical
Resources (DHR).
a. Describe any known historical or archaeological sites on

the development site. Provide a letter from the Department
of State, Division of Historical Resources (DHR) which
includes:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
A list of archaeologic and historic sites located within the

development site;
The results of any site surveys; and
Whether a site survey is needed.
b. If available, indicate the results of any archaeological or

historical survey conducted for the development site.
x Post-Development Conditions
c. If historical or archaeological sites exist on-site, indicate

what measures would be taken to protect them and to
provide public access, where appropriate.
E. Public Facilities
1. Transportation
(Refer to Maps C-3, C-4, H-1, H-2, H-3, H-4, H-5, I-1 and I-2)
Response: See Section 3 of this application package for information on

Transportation for the project site.
x Methodology
a. The Applicant shall use a traffic impact assessment

methodology that has been approved the Sarasota County
Transportation and Planning Departments, Southwest
Florida Regional Planning Council, Florida Department of
Transportation, Department of Community and any other
appropriate regulatory agencies pursuant to Part I, Section
F(d) contained herein. The Applicant shall submit a
methodology statement to the appropriate review agencies.
At a minimum, the following issues shall be addressed
within the methodology statement, unless otherwise revised
by the review agencies:
transportation impact are; impact area identification

procedures, standards, and assumptions;
existing traffic volume counts; and counting procedures,

standards, assumptions, and sources;
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
projected non-development generated traffic; and traffic

generation procedures, standards, assumptions, and
adjustment factors;
projected development generated traffic; and traffic

generation procedures, standards, assumptions, and
adjustment factors;
traffic distribution procedures and assumptions;
transit/mode-split procedures and assumptions;
traffic assignment procedures and assumptions;
existing and projected traffic impact and level of service

conditions; and impact analysis and level of service
evaluation procedures, standards, and assumptions;
non-development related planned and programmed

transportation facility improvements and their funding
commitments and responsibilities;
mitigation thresholds for identification of development-

related transportation facility improvements; and
procedures for identifying the Applicant’s funding
responsibilities.
b. Using Map H-1 as a base, identify existing peak-hour peak-

transportation impact area (Map H-2). Present the
following information by roadway segment and intersection
in a tabular format:
existing laneage/geometrics and capacity;
existing traffic volume;
existing level of service.
c. Provide a general description of those planned and

programmed transportation facility improvements having
an impact on traffic patterns and/or levels of service on the
transportation impact area that have been assumed to be in
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
place for purposes of assessing existing and future levels of

service, include the following information:
location, type, and extent of improvement(s);
construction schedule or completion date;
funding source(s) and responsible entity(ies).
d. Provide a general description of the proposed development

project, including the following information:
location of proposed access points between the external and

internal roadway network as depicted on Map C-3;
location of the project relative to and relationship with

existing and planned mass transit routes, and aviation, port,
and rail transportation facilities. Indicate what
measures/facility improvements will be
implemented/constructed within the development project to
accommodate existing and future mass transit, aviation,
port, and rail transportation systems; and
location of proposed “on-site” non-vehicular transportation

facility improvements (e.g., pedestrian and bicycle systems
as shown in Map C-3). Indicate what measures/facility
improvements will be implemented/constructed within the
development project to accommodate existing and future
non-vehicular transportation systems. Indicate what land
uses would be served by non-vehicular transportation
systems.
e. Using Map H-1 as a base, identify projected development-

generated traffic on the roadway segments and intersections
within the transportation impact area by development phase
(Map H-3). Present the following information in tabular
format:
number and type of traffic generating units by development

phase (if applicable) and project build-out; and
traffic generation (daily and peak-hour) for each land use

type by development phase and project build-out.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
f. Using Map H-1 as a base, identify projected peak-hour

peak-season traffic volume and level of service conditions
on the roadway segments and intersections within the
transportation impact area (by development phase)
excluding traffic generated by the proposed development
project (Map H-4). Present the following information for
each roadway segment and intersection (by development
phase) in a tabular format:
projected laneage/geometrics and capacity;
projected traffic volume; and
projected level of service.
g. Using Map H-1 as a base, identify peak-hour peak-season

traffic volume and level of service conditions on the
transportation impact area (by development phase),
including traffic generated by the proposed development
project (as identified in sub-paragraph (e.) above)
(Map H-5). Present the following information for each
roadway segment and intersection (by development phase)
in a tabular format:
projected laneage/geometrics and capacity;
projected traffic volume;
projected level of service;
development traffic as a percentage of total traffic; and
development traffic as a percentage of the appropriate

County level of service standard for roadway segments and
intersections.
h. Based on the projected traffic volume and level of service

conditions identified in sub-paragraph (g.) above, identify
any transportation facility improvements (by development
phase) necessary to: (1) provide safe and adequate access
and service to the development project; and (2) mitigate
locally and regionally significant traffic impacts on the
transportation impact area resulting from the proposed
development. At a minimum, the following information
shall be provided for each of the improvements identified:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
location (as depicted on Map I-2), type, and extent of

improvement;
right-of-way availability and/or acquisition requirements;
cost estimate(s) (including construction, necessary right-of-

way acquisition, utility relocation);
funding source(s) and responsible entity(ies);
implementation/phasing schedule; and
consistency with State, Regional and local comprehensive

plans.
2. Water Supply
(Refer to Maps C-2, C-3, C-4, I-1 and I-2)
Response: As shown on Map I-1, only an 8” forcemain exists along the

southern frontage of the property. Stantec has met with the Utility
Department to discuss the project and utility service is planned as
follows:
Potable: A 12” potable line was recently permitted and is currently

being install to the frontage of this property. The County has a Capital
Improvement Project to build a storage tank with booster pumps and
chemical injection feeds towards the south west of the project area. This
system is designed to recirculate water to reduce the amount of stagnate
water during times of low demand. As part of a more detailed Utility
Master Plan that is to be submitted later, the Applicant will show sizing
and configuration of the potable pipe network within the spine road
only. Each Rezone application will require that a Utility Master Plan
be provided.
Sanitary Sewer: The existing 8” FM is not adequate for a development

of this size. A dedicated forcemain from the site to the Bee Ridge Water
Reclamation Facility is anticipated. Stantec has been in communication
with the County Utility department regarding this topic. Stantec will
size the forcemain described above using only the project demand. The
County may then upsize the line and pay for the upsizing. As part of a
more detailed Utility Master Plan that is to be submitted at a later date,
the Applicant will show sizing and configuration of the sanitary sewer
pipe network within the spine road only. Each Rezone application will
require that a Utility Master Plan be provided including an onsite lift
station analysis which is planned to reduce the number of onsite lift
stations.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
x Potable Water – Existing Conditions
a. Provide a general description of the type of potable water

system, or combination of systems, available within the
development area [e.g., private wells or central system(s)].
Identify any existing franchises within the development
area.
Response: There are no existing distribution facilities within the

subject site at this time.
x Potable Water – Post-Development Conditions
b. Project water usage for the proposed development by land

use classification. These projections are to be based on
average County date (e.g., 200GPD per equivalent dwelling
unit, see Attachment “A” for additional information) ,
unless more specific data is available for the development
area.
Response: Assuming 250 gpd per edu for a maximum of 5,000

units, the projected water usage for the proposed development
is 1.25 million gpd average daily flow.
c. Provide in the tabular format given below the projected

water usage at the end of each phase of development and
the proposed water sources. If significant seasonal demand
variations will occur, discuss anticipated peaks and
duration.
Response: Not applicable as phasing is not proposed as a part

of this project. Please see the response to 2.b. above for
information on projected water usage.
Space for Potable Water Demand And Supply Table
d. In on-site water supply is to be used, indicate the pumping

rates (average and maximum) for each existing well, if any,
that will continue to be used. Project the pumping rates
(average and maximum) for each proposed well, if any.
Discuss any plans for the eventual phase-out of the on-site
water supply system(s).
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: No wells are proposed.
e. Address any impacts to aquifers and/or off-site wells which

would result from on-site well usage (both potable and non-
potable).
Response: No impacts are expected.
f. Specify who will operate and maintain the on-site water

supply system during and after project development.
Response: Sarasota County Utilities.
g. If off-site water supply is to be used, provide a letter of

service availability and capacity from the appropriate utility
or utilities serving the development area including:
the present excess capacities of the water supply facilities;
any other commitments that have been made for this excess
capacity; and
a statement of the utility’s ability to provide service at all

times during and after development. (The utility must be
supplied with water demand and on-site supply estimates
given in paragraphs b, c, and d above).
Response: This information is pending as the Applicant

is in the process of coordinating with Sarasota County.
h. For each phase of development, discuss any needed

improvements to water supply capacities to meet project
demands (e.g., structural water facility modifications).
Identify any reasonable alternatives to satisfy project water
needs.
Response: There are no known capacity issues at this

time.
i. Identify any planned water conservation measures (both

potable and non-potable) in addition to those specified
under the Energy Conservation Section E.8. of Part II and
the appropriate Building Code. Indicate what percentage of
reduction is anticipated over conventional daily water use
estimates if conservation plans are implemented.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: Water Conservation measures may include,

but not be limited to the following:
a. Maximum flow rates and consumption to be in
accordance with Section 604.3 of the Florida
Building Code - 2014 Plumbing;
b. Flushing devices for water closets and urinals to
conform to Section 604.3 of the Florida Building
Code- 2014 Plumbing;
c. Water-Efficient Landscaping is proposed to be
provided in accordance with the water efficient
landscaping regulations of the Sarasota County
Unified Development Code;
d. Stormwater harvesting may be used as an
irrigation source;
e. Potable water is not proposed as an irrigation
source. Irrigation will be provided by reclaimed
water.
x Non-Potable Water – Existing Conditions
j. Provide a general description of the type of non-potable

water system (e.g., private wells) existing within the
development area.
Response: Irrigation water is planned to be obtained

from Braden River Utilities.
x Non-Potable Water – Post –Development Conditions
k. Project average daily non-potable water demands generated

by the proposed development. Indicate any large
consumers of water (e.g., domestic irrigation) and seasonal
peaks. Specify what consumption rates have been assumed
in this analysis.
Response: Demand is 2.43 MGD, assuming 31” of

application per year.
l. Identify the non-potable water sources to meet project

demands (e.g., proposed wells). Provide pumping rates
(average and maximum) for each existing and proposed
well within the development area.
Response: 1 MGD of reclaimed water from Sarasota

County; 1.5 MGD of reclaimed water from combination
of City of Sarasota and Braden River Utilities – all
reclaimed water is treated to Advanced Water
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Treatment Standards (AWT). No wells are

contemplated for irrigation at this time.
3. Wastewater Management
(Refer to Maps C-2, C-3, C-4, I-1, and 2)
a. Provide a general description of the wastewater treatment

and disposal system, or combination of systems available
within the development area [e.g., septic systems or central
system(s)]. Identify any existing franchises within the
development area. Indicate the number, location and
phase-out of septic tanks, if such facilities exist in the
development area (see Map C-2).
Response: The existing 8” FM is not adequate for a

development of this size. A dedicated forcemain from the
site to the Bee Ridge Water Reclamation Facility is
anticipated. Stantec has been in communication with the
County Utility department regarding this topic. Stantec
will size the forcemain described above using only the
project demand. The County may then upsize the line
and pay for the upsizing. As part of a more detailed
Utility Master Plan that is to be submitted at a later date,
the Applicant will show sizing and configuration of the
sanitary sewer pipe network within the spine road only.
Each Rezone application will require that a Utility
Master Plan be provided including an onsite lift station
analysis which is planned to reduce the number of onsite
lift stations.
b. Project wastewater generation for the proposed

development by land use classification. These projections
are to be based on average County Data (e.g., 200 GPD per
equivalent dwelling unit, see Attachment “A” for additional
information), unless more specific data is available for the
development area.
Response: Assuming 200 gpd per edu for a maximum of

5,000 units, the projected wastewater generation for the
proposed development is 1 million gpd average daily
flow.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
c. If applicable, generally describe the volumes,

characteristics and pre-treatment techniques of any
industrial or other effluents prior to discharge from
proposed industrial-related use(s).
Response: There are no anticipated industrial effluents

proposed.
d. Provide in the tabular format given below the projected

wastewater generation at the end of each phase of
development and proposed wastewater treatment.
Response: This project does not include a phasing plan.

Please see the response to 3.b. above for information on
wastewater generation.
Space for Wastewater Generation And Treatment Table
e. If an on-site wastewater treatment and/or disposal

system(s) is to be used, describe for each system its
capacity, expected flows, level of treatment, location and
volume of effluent discharge, and any plans for eventual
phase-out of the on-site system.
f. If on-site spray irrigation is to be used, specify location and

approximate area of spray fields, current water table
conditions, proposed rate of application and back-up
system capacity. Indicate the volume of sludge and the
proposed methods for its treatment and disposal.
g. Specify who will operate and maintain the on-site

wastewater treatment and/or disposal system(s) during and
after project development.
h. If an off-site wastewater treatment and disposal system(s) is

to be used, provide a letter of service availability and
capacity from the appropriate utility or utilities serving the
development area including:
the present excess capacities of the wastewater treatment

and disposal facilities;
any other commitments that have been made for this excess
capacity; and
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
a statement of the utility’s ability to provide service at all

times during and after development. (The utility must be
supplied with wastewater generation and on-site treatment
estimates given in paragraphs b, d, and e above).
i. For each phase of development, discuss any needed

improvements to both on-site and off-site wastewater
treatment and disposal capacities to meet project demands
(e.g., structural facility modifications).
j. Identify any planned measures to reduce the project’s

wastewater generation in addition to those specified under
the Energy Conservation Section E.8. of Part II and the
appropriate Building Code.
k. Identify any proposed uses that are potential generators of

hazardous effluents. Hazardous waste has been defined by
E.P.A. as any substance that exhibits ignitable, corrosive,
reactive and/or toxic properties. Discuss provisions that
will be made for the treatment and disposal of these
hazardous effluents.
Response: The summary of wastewater service above

adequately addresses all of these items.
4. Solid Waste Management

(Refer to Maps C-4 and I-1)
a. Provide a general description of the solid waste

management system, including methods of collection and
disposal, existing within the development area. Identify
any existing franchises within the development area.
Response: Sarasota County utilizes Waste Management,

Inc. of Florida for residential and commercial solid
waste management needs. Residential garbage,
recyclable materials, and yard waste are all included in
regular curbside collection procedures.
b. Provide in the tabular format given below the projected

industrial and other special solid waste generation at the
completion of each phase of development. Explain
methodology used in determining these figures.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: There will not be any industrial solid waste

generation at the completion of the proposed residential
development. Provided below is the projected solid
waste generation in tabular format including the
methodology used to determine these figures.
SOLID WASTE GENERATION TABLE
Land Use Number of People1 Waste Generation Total lbs./day
6.08 lbs. per

Residential 10,6502 64,7523
person per day
1Number of People = 2.13 people per dwelling unit (du) (Source: University of
Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research)
2 5,000 maximum du X 2.13 = 10,650 people
3 6.08 lbs. X 10,650 people = 64,752 lbs. per day
c. Identify any proposed uses that are potential generators of

hazardous waste. Hazardous waste has been defined by
E.P.A. as any substance that exhibits ignitable, corrosive,
reactive and/or toxic properties. Identify the proper on-site
handling and temporary storage procedures for any
hazardous waste that may be generated on site, in
accordance with local, regional, state and federal hazardous
waste programs. Discuss provisions that will be made for
disposal of these hazardous materials.
Response: Not applicable, there are no uses proposed

that are potential generators of hazardous waste.
d. Indicate any measures (e.g., recycling) that will be taken to

reduce the project’s solid waste generation volumes.
Response: The development will participate in

residential curbside recycling and yard waste collection
provided by Waste Management, Inc. of Florida.
Residents may access the County’s Solid Waste
webpage at scgov.net/government/public-utilities-
water/solid-waste for educational information on
recycling best practices.
5. Education
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
(Refer to Maps C-3, I-1 and I-2)
x Site Selection
a. If any school facilities and/or sites within the project

boundaries are proposed to be dedicated to the Sarasota
County School Board, the Applicant shall meet the
representatives from the School Board and the County
Planning Department prior to submittal of the application to
discuss site suitability and any other relevant issues.
Response: The Applicant will have further discussions

with representatives from the School Board and the
County Planning Department regarding the
appropriateness and need for a site within the project.
b. Indicate what existing public schools would serve the

development area. Identify any present excess student
capacities within these schools that would be available for
the proposed development.
Response: The following public schools would serve the

development area: Tatum Ridge Elementary School,
McIntosh Middle School, and Booker High School. See
Section 7: School Impact Analysis of this application
package.
c. Based on the Demographic Information Table given in the

Economy Section (Question F.a.), estimate the number of
school-aged children by development phase that would be
attending public schools. Provide this information in the
tabular format given below.
Response: Please see Section 7: School Impact Analysis

of this application package for information provided by
School Board representatives.
Space for Public School Student Projections Table

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
d. Attach a letter from the Sarasota County School Board,

acknowledging approval of the public school age
population estimates given in paragraph c above, and
providing a statement of what capital improvements would
be necessary to accommodate these students for each phase
of development.
Response: Please see Section 7: School Impact Analysis

of this application package for information provided by
School Board representatives.
e. Indicate any school facilities and/or sites within the project

boundaries which are proposed to be dedicated to the
Sarasota County School Board. Describe the suitability of
each proposed site dedication to support a school based on
size and configuration criteria and other aspects including
environmental, drainage, transportation and land use
compatibility. Discuss what measures will be taken to
reduce or eliminate any potential compatibility conflicts.
Response: The Applicant will have further discussions

with representatives from the School Board and the
County Planning Department regarding the
appropriateness for a site within the project.
f. Indicate any private and/or proprietary schools proposed

within the project boundaries. Identify type of school,
student capacity, schedule of facility utilization, and service
area. In addition, for each proposed school facility,
estimate the number and percentage of students drawn from
individual counties.
Response: Per the DRC comments received at the pre-

app meeting (See Section 6 of this application package)
this component will be addressed with future rezone(s).
6. Recreation
(Refer to Maps C-2, C-3, C-4, I-1 and I-2)
x Site Selection
a. If any park facilities and/or sites within the project

boundaries are proposed to be dedicated to the Sarasota
County, the Applicant shall meet with representatives from
the County Parks and Recreation Department and the
County Planning Department prior to submittal of the
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
application to discuss site suitability and any other relevant

issues.
Response: A 90-acre park is proposed and shown on the

VTZ Master Plan.
b. Inventory any existing passive and active recreation

facilities or open space areas within the development area.
Indicate whether public access to these areas is currently
provided.
Response: There are no existing passive or active

recreation facilities within the development area.
c. Indicate all existing off-site recreational areas (active and

passive) available to serve the development area. For the
public recreational areas, identify the name of each area
and type (i.e., neighborhood, community, metropolitan, and
regional parks) as classified by Sarasota County’s
Comprehensive Plan and/or any other appropriate
comprehensive plan.
Response: According to Sarasota County’s Park

Locator interactive map, there are five existing parks
within five miles of the project boundary, as follows:
i. Old Miakka Preserve; Natural Areas, Basic

ii. Rothenbach Park; Parks, Community
iii. Tatum Ridge Soccer Complex; Athletics
Facilities, Recreational
iv. Myakka River State Park; State land
v. Celery Fields Regional Stormwater Facility;
Natural Areas, Destination
These facilities may provide both active and passive

recreational opportunities for the proposed
development, including, but not limited to camping,
picnicking, birding, trails, wildlife viewing, bicycling,
and fishing.
d. Estimate the project’s demand for each type of public

recreational area (i.e., neighborhood, community,
metropolitan, and regional parks) based on Sarasota County
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
and State recreation standards. Discuss how the existing

and planned parks serving the development area would
meet the project’s demand.
Response: The VTZ Master Plan shows that the project

will have a minimum of 43% to 50% Open Space,
including a 90-acre park. Additionally, trails will be
provided as a private amenity. Other recreational
opportunities may be provided and described in greater
detail with the future rezone(s).
e. Indicate the location and acreage of any recreational park

facilities and/or sites within the project boundaries which
are proposed to be dedicated to Sarasota County. Describe
the suitability of each proposed site dedication to support a
recreational park based on environmental, drainage, land
use compatibility, and transportation aspects.
Response: A 90-acre park is proposed for dedication to

Sarasota County.
f. Indicate any proposed recreational areas within the

development that would not be dedicated to Sarasota
County. Provide information on each of these recreational
areas as follows:
type of recreational area (active vs. passive);
acreage of the recreational area;
the development stage in which the recreational area would

become operational;
the entity or entities responsible for the operation and

maintenance of the recreational area; and
the users (residents vs. open to the general public).
Response: Not Applicable. A 90-acre park is proposed

for dedication to Sarasota County. Private amenities
may be provided within individual communities to meet
residents’ needs and will be described in greater detail
with the future rezone(s).
g. For each phase of development, discuss any recreational

area improvements needed to meet project demands.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: A 90-acre park is proposed for dedication to

Sarasota County. Private amenities may be provided
within individual communities to meet residents’ needs
and will be described in greater detail with the future
rezone(s).
h. Discuss any effects the proposed development would have

on existing public access opportunities.
Response: Not applicable.
7. Emergency Services
(Refer to Maps C-3, C-4, D, I-1, and I-2)
x Emergency Medical Services
a. Provide a letter of service availability and capacity from the

appropriate ambulance service for the proposed project.
This letter should contain a statement of the ambulance
service’s ability to provide service with adequate
emergency response times as the project is currently
phased. (The ambulance service must be supplied with
copies of Maps C-3 and C-4 to perform this analysis).
Response: Please see Section 9 of this application

package for the letter of service availability and
capacity from the appropriate ambulance service for
the proposed project.
x Fire Protection
b. Provide correspondence from the appropriate fire

protection agency indicating: (1) whether or not the present
facilities and manpower of the department are capable of
serving the project with adequate emergency response
times as the project is currently phased and (2) what
additional manpower and equipment and project would
require. (The fire protection service must be supplied with
copies of Maps C-3 and C-4 and information provided
under paragraph c and d below to perform this analysis).
Response: Please See Section 9 of this application

package for correspondence from the appropriate fire
protection agency.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
c. Identify any proposed on-site facilities or services (e.g.,

land dedication for fire station, private fire protection
service, built-in fire protection systems) that would be
utilized to complement public protection and safety
services. Provide an estimated percentage of total service
that would be provided by private fire protection services.
Response: The project proposes the dedication of land

to provide on-site fire protection facilities.
d. Identify any proposed development that would create a

demand beyond present fire flow capabilities (sustained
and immediate). Indicate what steps (e.g., sprinkler
system) would be taken to ensure adequate fire protection
for this development.
Response: Per the DRC comments received at the pre-

app meeting (See Section 6 of this application package
for the DRC Responses), this component will be
addressed at the time of the rezone(s).
x Police Protection
e. Identify any proposed on-site facilities of services (e.g.,

private security service, built-in alarm systems) that would
be utilized to complement public protection and safety
services. Provide an estimated percentage of total service
that would be provided by private security protection
services.
Response: At this time there are no proposed on-site

facilities or services identified that would be utilized to
complement public protection and safety services. The
use of private security alarms may be utilized by the
individual property owners.
x Hurricane Evacuation
f. Provide a breakdown of proposed land uses to be located

within Category 1, 2, and/or 3 storm zones (see Map D).
Response: The subject property is not within a

Category 1, 2, or 3 storm zone.
g. Estimate the number of anticipated project residents that

would need to be evacuated in a worst case Category 3
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
storm. Explain the methodology used in determining this

estimate which includes the following information:
number of proposed mobile home units which require

100% evacuation; and
for each type of non-mobile residential units including any

transient accommodations, indicate an average occupancy
rate during hurricane season (June to November), and
number of first floor living units below the Category 3
storm elevation.
Response: Not applicable. The subject property is not

within a Category 3 storm zone.
h. Identify the routes proposed to be utilized for evacuation

purposes and proposed elevations of these roadways within
the project site. Indicate the potential impact that
additional (project) traffic would have on evacuation times.
Response: According to Sarasota County’s ‘Know Your

Level’ Interactive map, the subject property is
connected to one existing evacuation route, Fruitville
Road. Additionally, the proposed thoroughfare,
Bourneside Boulevard, will connect to University
Parkway and Fruitville Road, each of which provide
connectivity to I-75. The site is located in a non-
evacuation zone.
i. Estimate what percentage of the project’s evacuees (see

paragraph g above) would seek public emergency
evacuation shelter. Estimate the amount of public shelter
space needed to accommodate these evacuees.
Response: Not applicable. The subject property is not

within a Category 1, 2, or 3 storm zone.
j. Show on Map I-1 the locations for the off-site public

shelters proposed to be utilized by the project’s evacuees
and describe the remaining uncommitted capacities of these
off-site shelters.
Response: Not Applicable. The subject property is not

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
k. Indicate on Map I-2 any proposed on-site shelters. In

addition, provide information for each on-site shelter as
follows:
the timing on construction for each shelter according to the

development phase plan;
the building area in square feet available for evacuation

shelter;
proposed first floor elevation for the shelter building; and
the availability of emergency facilities (water supply,

power generation, waste storage, etc.).
In addition, indicate what efforts will be made to advise

and educate project residents concerning hurricane
preparation, evacuation routes and shelter space both on
and off site. SWFRPC staff will supply the Applicant,
upon request, information regarding SLOSH model results
relevant to the project site as well as the SWFRPC recent
Hurricane Evacuation Plan.
Response: Not Applicable. The subject property is not

8. Energy Conservation
Response: Per discussions held with Sarasota County

staff, this section is not applicable.
a. Indicate in the following table which energy conservation

measures that would be incorporated into the development,
where appropriate.
Space for Energy Conservation Measures Table
b. Provide a projected average daily demand for electric

power, gas, oil and other energy sources resulting from the
c. Identify any proposed energy conservation measures in

addition to those specified in the above table and the
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
appropriate Building Code which would be incorporated

into site planning, building design and/or deed restrictions
for this project.
d. Discuss what mechanisms (e.g., deed restrictions,

covenants) would be used to enforce the energy
conservation measures indicated in the table given in
paragraph s and paragraph c above. Identify the entity or
entities that would be responsible for the enforcement of
these measures.
F. Economy
Per discussions with Sarasota County staff, a narrative is the only

requirement for this section (F) of the DOCC.
The proposed project will encourage the Lakewood Ranch Southeast

property to develop in a way that positively contributes to the
County’s housing stock, supporting the current and future local
workforce (Waterside, Lakewood Ranch Corporate Park, etc.).
The proposed project will include a variety of residential unit types as

well as potentially ancillary support uses such as places of worship,
public safety facilities, and other civic uses. Other uses, such as
commercial, are not included due to the close proximity of existing
services in the surrounding areas. By developing the subject property
in such a manner, existing commercial corridors will continue to be
supported and remain successful.
x Demographic Information
a. Complete the following Demographic Information Table

for the proposed project and provide a brief summary of
methodology used.
Space for Demographic Information Table
x Employment Information
b. Complete the following Employment Information Table

regarding anticipated permanent, full-time employment
within the development.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Space For Employment Information Table
c. If known, indicate the total estimated annual payroll that

would be generated by the non-residential components of
the development.
x Housing Information
d. Complete the following Housing Information Tables as

appropriate, regarding anticipated owner-occupied and
rental units.
Space for Owner Occupied Housing Information Table
Space for Rental Housing Information Table
x Financial Information
e. Provide a projection of the estimated construction

expenditures by development phase. Break down by type
(labor, materials, professional services, administrative,
overhead, etc.) and estimate what percent of these
expenditures will be spent within the region.
f. Provide an analysis of the estimated average annual ad

Valorem and school board tax yields from each phase of
development. Indicate all assumptions and standards,
including assessed value, exemptions, millage rate, etc.
g. Indicate whether the development or any portion of the

development would receive assistance from federal, state or
other governmental funding programs. If so, indicate the
agency (ies) and amount of assistance.
G. Improvements Necessitated by the Project:
Response: For improvements necessitated by the project, please see

relevant sections of this application package as identified below:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
x Transportation: See Section 3 of this application package.

x Water Supply: See relevant DOCC Section E Public Facilities
above.
x Wastewater Treatment: See relevant DOCC Section E Public
Facilities above.
x Solid Waste Management: See relevant DOCC Section E
Public Facilities above.
x Public Schools: See relevant DOCC Section E Public Facilities
above.
x Public Recreational Parks: See relevant DOCC Section E
Public Facilities above.
x Emergency Services: See relevant DOCC Section E Public
Facilities above.
a. Complete the following Needed Improvements Summary

matrix by specifying any improvements needed prior to
initiating a phase of development or any other project
component such as number of CO’s issued. For additional
explanation of needed improvements, refer to specific
Public Facilities Sections and Maps I-1 and I-2.
Space for Needed Improvements Summary Matrix
H. Plan Summary and Analysis
a. Summarize in narrative form the major interrelationships

between the environment, drainage, open space, utilities,
transportation, land use, emergency services and
improvements necessitated by the project. In addition,
identify the most important factors to be considered to
ensure that development within the project site would be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plans of the affected
governmental jurisdictions (i.e., State, regional planning
councils, counties and municipalities).
Response: Please see Section 1 of this application

package for the project narrative and Comprehensive
Plan consistency.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ATTACHMENT A
Potable Water Demand Projections
For Purposes of estimating future water demand using County data (200 gallons per
equivalent dwelling unit), the following usage table should be used:
EQUIVALENT DWELLING UNITS TABLE
Single Family Residence 1.0

Duplex (master meter) 1.9
Apartment (master meter) .9
Mobile Home .5
Travel Trailer – per 2 lots .5
Motel/Hotel Room .5
Church, per 100 seats 1.2
Gas Station, per restroom facility 1.0
Self-Service Gas/Mini-Mart, per restroom facility 1.0
Commercial Car Wash – recycled water 15.0
Drive-Thru Car Wash 8.0
Self-Service Car Wash, per bay 2.0
Beauty/Barber Shop – per shampoo sink .4
Laundromat – per machine 1.1
Retail, per 1,000 square feet .3
Office, per 1,000 square feet .6
Hospital, per bed .6
Nursing Home/A.C.L.F. with common dining area, per bed .3
A.C.L.F. – separate kitchen in each living unit, per unit .9
School – toilets only, per 35 students 1.0
School – toilets and kitchen, per 35 students 1.3
School – toilets, kitchen and gym, per 35 students 2.0
Restaurant, per 10 seats 1.0
Bar and Cocktail Lounge, per 10 seats .6
Fast Food/Drive-In Restaurant, per 10 seats 1.0
Factory, Warehouse, per 10 employees .4
Theater, per 75 seats .6
Banquet Room, per 15 seats .5
Convenience Store 1.0
Light Industrial (within 1,500 square feet office space, remainder
Of space storage/work area), per 1,000 square feet 1.0
Commercial Pool 1.0
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
PART III. SPECIFIC USE INFORMATION
A. Airports
(Refer to Maps C-2, C-3, and C-4)
a. Describe any existing airport operation within the project

site which includes the following information:
airport classification;
size (square feet) of the existing terminal;
number of runways and lengths;
types of aircraft which presently use the facility;
type and annual tons of cargo;
number of annual enplaned passengers; and
if available, historical trends of the number of enplaned

passengers for each five-year interval of past airport
operation.
b. Provide a map showing the locations of the present flight

patterns, the existing aircraft noise contours (65,70, and 75
Ldn), and the existing land uses within these contours.
c. Describe the proposed airport facilities and services within

the project site (e.g., new structures, runways).
d. Provide projections for each five year interval through the

useful life of the project as follows:
airport classification;
size (square feet) of the proposed terminal;

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
number of runways and lengths;
types of aircraft which would use the facility;
type and annual tons of cargo;
annual number of enplaned passengers; and
if available, estimate of the number of enplaned passengers

without the project.
e. Provide a map showing the locations of the projected flight

patterns, the projected (through the useful life of the
project) aircraft noise contours (65, 70, and 75 Ldn), and
the existing and future land uses within these contours.
Indicate on this map the authorities and/or jurisdictions
which exercise land development controls over land uses
encompassed within all projected noise contours.
f. Within the existing and projected 65 and higher Ldn

contours, discuss short-term and long-term noise control
and land use compatibility strategies and programs.
g. If available, attach a copy of the application and approval,

if any, required under the Federal Airport and Airway
Development Act of 1970, title 49, United States Code,
Section 1701 et. seq. which authorizes the proposed
project.
B. Attractions and Recreational Facilities
a. Project daily attendance (high, low and average estimates)

at the facility and specify season if applicable.
b. If any transportation systems and facilities are to be owned,

operated, or managed by the Applicant, specify how these
would interface with other systems and facilities in the
region.
C. Electrical Transmission Lines

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
a. Identify the purpose of the proposed transmission line(s).

(For example: to tie into a regional grid, upgrade or replace
an existing facility, provide service to new customers, etc.).
b. Provide a map showing the proposed transmission line

corridor(s) in relation to the existing transmission system in
the region. Indicate on this map the total length, average
width for each proposed transmission corridor and acres
that need to be clear-cut. In addition, show on this map the
general areas proposed for clear-cutting.
c. Identify alternative corridors which have been investigated

for this transmission line(s). Specify reasons why these
corridors were discarded in favor of the proposed route(s).
State the reasons if plans do not call for the sharing of
existing transmission line corridors.
d. For each of the proposed transmission lines, indicate;
voltage and thermal/transfer capability (MW or MVA);
number of circuits; and
type and size of typical tower structure (attaché a sketch).
e. Describe any electromagnetic or electrostatic effects (TV

and radio interference, audible noise, production of ozone
and oxides of nitrogen, etc.) which would result from the
proposed transmission line(s). Identify what measures will
be taken to minimize these effects, if possible.
f. Describe any joint or multiple land uses that are proposed

within the transmission line corridor(s).
g. If the proposed transmission line corridor(s) will cross any

parks, recreation areas, national or state forests, wildlife
refuges or management areas, etc., describe the potential
impacts and steps which would be taken to alleviate these
potential impacts.
h. Describe maintenance procedures for the proposed

transmission line corridors(s) and any potential effects on
wildlife, water quality, etc. Identify what measures would
be taken to alleviate these potential impacts.
D. Hospitals
(refer to Maps C-2, C-3, and C-4)
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
a. Describe any existing medical facilities and services within

the project site which includes the following information:
design capacity;
service area (attach a map); and
types if medical services currently being provided (e.g.,

outpatient, emergency).
b. Describe the proposed medical facilities and services which

includes the following information:
design capacity;
service area (attach a map if different than existing

conditions);
types of medical services to be provided (e.g., outpatient,

emergency);
projected number of licensed beds by development phase;

and
other types of related facilities if the proposed facility is

part of a general medical complex.
c. If available, provide a copy of the application and approval,

if any, for a certificate of need under Section 381.494,
Florida Statutes, and any review comments from the
Areawide Health Planning Council of Health Services
Agency, and the Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services.
E. Marine and Boat Storage Facilities

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
a. Provide on a recent aerial photo a bathymetric survey of the

immediate area around the proposed marina and/or boat
storage facilities including any existing navigable channels.
b. Describe any existing boating facilities within the project

site (e.g., number of berths or slips, types and drafts of
boats using the on-site facilities).
c. Provide a conceptual layout of the proposed marina and/or

boat storage facilities which includes the following:
location and arrangement of docks;
number of wet storage facilities (e.g., berths, slips);
number of dry storage facilities (e.g., dry docks);
any supplemental anchorage areas to be designated beyond

the moorings provided in slips and dry storage;
types and drafts of boats which would use the proposed

facilities;
widths and depths of turning basins;
widths and depths of navigable channels to and from the

proposed boating facilities;
location and number of linear feet proposed for any

shoreline stabilization; and
any proposed ancillary marine facilities.
d. Discuss the requirements of the proposed project for any

dredging or filling during construction and any subsequent
maintenance dredging. Specify plans for disposal of spoil,
including amount and location of disposal sites. Attach
copies of applications or permits, if any, from local, state or
federal agencies which allow the proposed dredge and fill
activities.
e. Describe the basin’s flushing system and how it would

provide adequate circulation for cleaning and periodic
change of water.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
f. Indicate whether petroleum products would be handled on

site and what measures would be taken to reduce the risk of
spills. If spills should occur (e.g., leakage from boats),
explain what procedures would be used for clean-up.
g. Discuss how domestic waste disposal from boats using the

proposed facilities would be handled.
h. Discuss any potential impacts to the West Indian Manatee

caused by increased boat traffic from the proposed project
and what measures would be taken to reduce these impacts.
i. Explain how the proposed development is consistent with

the following plans and criteria regarding marina siting:
Southwest Florida Regional Plan;
Sarasota County’s Comprehensive Plan;
Sarasota County Water and Navigation Control Authority

standards; and
State, regional and local recommendations for marina

siting.
F. Mining Operations
a. Indicate whether the project site is located in an area of

known mineral deposits. If so, specify what mineral
deposits.
b. Describe any present or past mining operations which have

occurred within the project site.
x Extractions and Processing
c. Explain whether extraction of mineral resources is

proposed to occur on-site, including those cases where
extraction is ancillary to the operation of the project.
Provide a recent aerial photo showing areas proposed for
mineral extraction within the project site.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
d. In regards to the proposed on-site mining operation,

provide the following information:
projected number of years for the proposed mining

operation;
proposed annual area in acres to be mined;
total area in acres to be disturbed by roads, overburden

deposit, processing, etc. associated with the mining
operation;
estimated annual extraction of minerals (in tons); and
estimated amounts of spoils and overburden (in tons)

generated on an annual basis.
e. Specify what steps would be taken to ensure maximum

effective extraction of mineral resources.
f. Indicate whether on-site processing of ore or minerals is

planned. If so, describe the type and location of the
processing operation.
g. Discuss the water needs for the proposed mining operation

(including any on-site processing) in terms of daily
withdrawal, daily consumptive use and recycling.
Questions that have been deleted:
From Part II: ____________________________________________________________
From Part III: ____________________________________________________________
Additional criteria needed to address local planning processes:
Needed methodology meetings (specify dates and meeting places, if known):

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SR
70
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
VERNA ROAD
FRUITVILLE ROAD

Revised: 2022-04-28 By: adhoffman
L E G E N D
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\Location_APP_20220315.mxd
Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data

supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts
Map A - General Location Map

full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 0 2,000 4,000
¯
completeness of the data. The recipient releases 6900 Professional Pkwy E.
Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and Feet
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
agents, from any and all claims arising in any way
from the content or provision of the data. tel 941.907.6900
Notes:
April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Florida West FIPS 0902 Feet
2. Source data: Sarasota County GIS
3. Imagery: Sarasota Couny Aerial 2021
Rcv'd 5/31/2022 SR
Residential/Agriculture
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
Water and Sewer Utility
Agriculture
Agriculture/
Vacant/
Residential
Residential
FRUITVILLE ROAD
Agriculture/Residential/Manufacturing or Scientific
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\AdjacentUsesl_APP_20220406.mxd
L E G E N D

supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts 0 1,000 2,000
Map B - Aerial
full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Feet
¯
Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes:
April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
PD-MU PD-R PD-A
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
GU
OUR OUR OUR
OUR HPD OUR
OUE-1 HPD OUE-1 OUE-1
FRUITVILLE ROAD
L E G E N D
Lakewood Ranch Southeast OUE-1 A (Manatee County) OUE-1

U:\215616736\gis\mxd\Zoning_APP_20220315.mxd
GU OUR PD-A (Manatee County)
HPD VPD PD-MU (Manatee County)
OUA PD-R (Manatee County)

Map C-1 - Zoning

Feet
¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes:
April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Florida West FIPS 0902 Feet Prepared by: A.A.H 04/28/22
2. Source data: Sarasota County GIS Technical Review by: X.X.X MM/DD/YY
3. Imagery: Sarasota Couny Aerial 2021 Independent Review by: X.X.X MM/DD/YY
Rcv'd 5/31/2022 SR
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
Utility/Sidewalk/Slope/Drainage Easement
FRUITVILLE ROAD
L E G E N D
Lakewood Ranch Southeast 0100: Single Family Detached

U:\215616736\gis\mxd\C2_ExistingLandUse_20220426.mxd
Easements 5200: AG - Cropland Soil Capability Class 2
6200: AG- Grazing Land Soil Capability Class
9900: Acreage Not Ag

Map C-2 - Existing Land Use

full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 0 1,000 2,000
¯
Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and Feet
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes:
April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
2. Source data: Sarasota County GIS, SWFWMD GIS
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
LEGEND
Lakewood Ranch Southeast (~4,120 Acres)
(Maximum 5,000 dwelling units)
Developed Area (~2,348 Acres) (57%)
Open Space (~1,772 Acres) (43%)

UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
Greenway (Included in Open Space)
Greenbelt (Included in Open Space)
Approximate Location of County Park

(Final Land Area to be Determined)
No Greenbelt Buffer Required
50 ft.
500 ft.
50 ft.
50 ft.
FRUITVILLE ROAD

Map C-3:Village Transition Zone (VTZ)
¯
full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and
completeness of the data. The recipient releases
Stantec Consulting Services Inc
(
6900 Professional Pkwy E.
Master Plan
from the content or provision of the data.
Sarasota, FL 34240
tel 941.907.6900
$ $ 0 1,000 2,000
Feet
Notes: fax 941.907.6910
2. Source data: Sarasota County GIS, Stantec, Ardurra
3. Imagery: Sarasota Couny Aerial 2021 May 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022 SR
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY 55
55 58
57 59
55 58
55 58
56
57
54
58 60 62 74
58 69
53 55 63 70
56 59 64 75
62
51 54 61 64
54 60
57 65
51
61
50 61
49 55
64
55 60
50
55
51 50 62
52 52 62
51 51
51
56
51 56 61
58
47
48
59
52 55
54
52
47
51
50
48
48
48 54
47
48
52
49
49
40 44 48
38 40
41 43
44
38 39
44
FRUITVILLE ROAD
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\Topo_APP_20220317.mxd
L E G E N D

Map D - Topographic
Feet
¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes:
April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
Rcv'd 5/31/2022 SR
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY 10
40 45 30 15 38 30
22
15
10
8
22
22 22
8 22 15 22
22
15 8 22
7
10
10
22
22
15
22
22 22
15
99 31 22
22 22
15
22
4
8 22
31 22
15 8 22
8
22
15
99 22
8
22 22 10 32
8 38
22 99 7
12 7
22
17 22
12 22
22
22 22
12
12 22
15
22
8
33
22 22
12
22 22 12 10
8 15
15 22 22
21 10 17
31 8 15
22 26
15 12 15 25 22
15 22 15
33
33
FRUITVILLE ROAD 17
L E G E N D 41
Lakewood Ranch Southeast 26. Manatee loamy fine sand, frequently ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes 41 21
4. Bradenton fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes 30. Ona fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
7. Cassia fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes 31. Pineda-Pineda, wet, fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
8. Delray fine sand, frequently ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes 32. Pits and Dumps
10. EauGallie and Myakka fine sands, 0 to 2 percent slopes 33. Pomello fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
12. Felda fine sand, frequently ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes 38. Smyrna fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
15. Floridana and Gator soils, frequently ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\Soils_APP_20220315.mxd
40. Tavares fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes

17. Gator-Gator, drained mucks, frequently ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes 41. Wabasso fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
21. Ft. Green fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes 45. Tavares fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes
22. Holopaw fine sand, frequently ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes 99. Water
25. Malabar fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map E - NRCS Soils

Feet
¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes:
April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
2. Source data: Sarasota County GIS, NRCS Soil
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
_
_
_
_
_
_ _ _ _
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
\\US1226-F01\U:\215616736\gis\mxd\Drainage_G-1_20220421.mxd
L E G E N D
Lakewood Ranch Southeast Dona Bay & Upper Myakka River Basins Channel
Watershed Ridgeline Dona Bay Floodplains Drop Structure
_
Outflow Upper Myakka River Floodplains Culvert
_
Inflow Overland Weir
Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data 1,250 0 1,250

Feet
Map G-1 - Existing Drainage

¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes:
April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
2. Source data: Stantec Field Staff
3. Imagery: Sarasota County 2018 4" Orthoimagery
L E G E N D Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Lakewood Ranch Southeast Water Supply/Wastewater Treatment Facility
n Schools J
" Sewer Network Lift Station
Parks
5
" Water Network Pump Station
Sewer Gravity Mains ≥ 8" Diameter
County Facility
Sewer Pressurized Mains ≥ 8" Diameter
Cemetery Water Mains ≥ 8" Diameter
© Fire Rescue
g
$
" Law Enforcement
P
¥
£ Office - Administration
m Storage
LORRAINE ROAD
SR-
7 0E
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
n
n n
n
n
VERNA ROAD
n
n nn
n FRUITVILLE ROAD
n
n
nn
\\US1226-F01\U:\215616736\gis\mxd\MapI-1_ExistingPublicFac.mxd
n
4,000 0 4,000
Map I-1 - Existing Public Facilities

full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Feet
¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes: Lakewood Ranch Southeast fax 941.907.6910 $ $
2. Source data: Sarasota County GIS April 2022
3. Imagery: Sarasota County Aerial 2021
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
%RXUQHVLGH%OYG
65
]

^

8QLYHUVLW\3UNZ\
0$1$7((&2817<
6$5$627$&2817<

/RUUDLQH5G
9HUQD:HOO)LHOG

/$.(:22'5$1&+

6287+($67

0/6
9H U Q D 5 G

]

^

??XVSSIVV?ZRUNJURXS??DFWLYH??JLV?P[G?B/:56(B8WLOLWLHVBB9P[G5HYLVHG%\HVWXUP

)UXLWYLOOH5G

36
/RUUDLQH5G
)UXLWYLOOH5G

/(*(1'

0DVWHU6HZHU3XPS6WDWLRQ

:DWHU3XPS6WDWLRQ
'
( %HH5LGJH:DWHU5HFODPDWLRQ)DFLOLW\
3URSRVHG6HZHU/LQH
3URSRVHG:DWHU/LQH
:DWHU0DLQ
6HZHU)RUFH0DLQ
%HH5LGJH
]

^ :5)
9HUQD5DZ:DWHU/LQH
'
( /DNHZRRG5DQFK6RXWKHDVW%RXQGDU\
&RXQW\/LQH
%HH5LGJH5G
k
'LVFODLPHU6WDQWHFDVVXPHVQRUHVSRQVLELOLW\IRUGDWD
VXSSOLHGLQHOHFWURQLFIRUPDW7KHUHFLSLHQWDFFHSWV
/DNHZRRG5DQFK6RXWKHDVW
Utility Master Plan 6WDQWHF&RQVXOWLQJ6HUYLFHV,QF
)HHW

IXOOUHVSRQVLELOLW\IRUYHULI\LQJWKHDFFXUDF\DQG 3URIHVVLRQDO3NZ\
FRPSOHWHQHVVRIWKHGDWD7KHUHFLSLHQWUHOHDVHV
6WDQWHFLWVRIILFHUVHPSOR\HHVFRQVXOWDQWVDQG 1RWHV
8WLOLW\0DS
Lakewood Ranch Southeast 6DUDVRWD)/
WHO

DJHQWVIURPDQ\DQGDOOFODLPVDULVLQJLQDQ\ZD\
IURPWKHFRQWHQWRUSURYLVLRQRIWKHGDWD
&RRUGLQDWH6\VWHP1$'6WDWH3ODQH)ORULGD:HVW),36)HHW
6RXUFHGDWD6DUDVRWD0DQDWHH&RXQW\*,63RUWDO6WDQWHF6WDII
0DUFK ID[
,PDJHU\6DUDVRWD0DQDWHH&RXQW\$HULDO,PDJHU\
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 3:
TRANSPORTATION
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Lakewood
Ranch SE DOCC
Transportation Analysis
Prepared for:
LWR Communities, LLC
14400 Covenant Way
Sarasota, Florida 34240
Prepared by:
6920 Professional Parkway East
June 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Lakewood Ranch SE DOCC TIA
Lakewood Ranch SE
Development of Critical Concern
Transportation Impact Analysis
Table of Contents
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER’S CERTIFICATION ............................................................................. i
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
TRIP GENERATION ...................................................................................................................... 3
PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION ............................................................................................... 3
STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................................... 6
ANALYSIS PROCEDURES ............................................................................................................ 9
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ............................................................................................... 9
SCHEDULED IMPROVEMENTS ................................................................................................... 12
2035 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 12
2035 IMPROVED BACKGROUND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ........................................................ 15
2035 TOTAL TRAFFIC CONDITIONS.......................................................................................... 17
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS......................................................................................................... 20
SITE ACCESS ANALYSIS............................................................................................................ 23
CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 24
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Location ...................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2: Project Traffic Distribution........................................................................................5
Figure 3: Study Area ............................................................................................................... 8
Figure 4: Existing Traffic Congestion .................................................................................... 11
Figure 5: 2035 Background Traffic Congestion................................................................... 14
Figure 6: 2035 Total Traffic Congestion ............................................................................... 18
Figure 7: 2035 Total Traffic Intersection Volumes ................................................................ 21
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: PM Peak Hour Trip Generation ............................................................................... 3
Table 2: 2015 Socioeconomic Data ..................................................................................... 3
Table 3: 2045 Socioeconomic Data ..................................................................................... 4
Table 4: Modified 2045 Socioeconomic Data..................................................................... 4
Table 5: Study Area Determination ...................................................................................... 7
Table 6: Sarasota/Manatee MPO Congestion Criteria ...................................................... 9
Table 7: Existing Traffic Roadway Analysis ......................................................................... 10
Table 8: Growth Rate Calculations .................................................................................... 12
Table 9: 2035 Background Traffic Roadway Analysis........................................................ 13
Table 10: 2035 Background Capacity Requirements for Deficient Roadways ................ 16
Table 11: 2035 Background Traffic Roadway Analysis (with Improvements).................... 16
Table 12: 2035 Total Traffic Roadway Analysis .................................................................... 17
Table 13: 2035 Total Traffic Capacity Requirements for Deficient Roadways .................. 19
Table 14: 2035 Total Traffic Roadway Analysis (with Improvements) ................................ 19
Table 15: Fiscal Neutrality Roadway Proportionate Fair Share .......................................... 20
Table 16: 2035 Total Traffic Approach Volumes .................................................................. 20
Table 17: 2035 Total Traffic Intersection Operations ........................................................... 22

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A .................................................................. METHODOLOGY CORRESPONDENCE
APPENDIX B................................................................. PEAK-SEASON CONVERSION FACTORS

TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
APPENDIX C ............................................................................................ HISTORICAL VOLUMES

D1RPM VOLUMES
HI-HAT RANCH VOLUMES
APPENDIX D ..................................................................................................... FDOT LRE PAGES
APPENDIX E .................................................................................................DIRECTIONAL SPLITS

2035 TURNING MOVEMENT CALCULATIONS
TRAFFIC VOLUMES AT STUDY INTERSECTIONS
APPENDIX F .............................................................................. SIDRA SUMMARY WORKSHEETS

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Professional Engineer’s Certification
I hereby certify that I am a Licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Florida practicing with
Stantec Consulting Services Inc. and that I have supervised the preparation of and approve the
evaluations, findings, opinions, conclusions, and technical advice hereby reported for:
PROJECT: Lakewood Ranch SE

Development of Critical Concern
Transportation Impact Analysis
215616736
LOCATION: East of Lorraine Road between University Parkway and

Fruitville Road in Sarasota County, Florida
This document titled Lakewood Ranch SE Development of Critical Concern Transportation

Impact Analysis was prepared by Stantec Consulting Services Inc. for the account of LWR
Communities, LLC. The material in it reflects Stantec’s best judgment in light of the information
available to it at the time of preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any
reliance on or decisions made based on it, are the responsibilities of such third parties. Stantec
Consulting Services Inc. accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party
as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report.
Prepared by:
Digitally
signed by
Matthew Crim
Date:
2022.06.01
10:52:27 -04'00'
i
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to document the transportation impacts for the proposed Lakewood
Ranch SE Development of Critical Concern (DOCC) in Sarasota County, Florida. The proposed
development is located on +/- 4,120 acres and will construct 5,000 dwelling units. Build-out is
expected to be in 2035. The project is generally located east of Lorraine Road between
University Parkway and Fruitville Road. As part of the development North-South Roadway B (also
known as Bourneside Boulevard), which is shown on Sarasota County’s Future Thoroughfare Plan,
will be constructed through the development. The location of Lakewood Ranch SE is shown in
Figure 1.
A generalized roadway analysis of project traffic impacts to roadway segments within the study
network was performed in support of the fiscal neutrality analysis. In addition, an operational
analysis of the Bourneside Boulevard connections with University Parkway and Fruitville Road was
performed, and an access management plan was prepared to establish the spacing of the site
access points along Bourneside Boulevard to ensure that they meet Sarasota County’s access
management standards.
Prior to undertaking the report, a transportation methodology statement was submitted to

Sarasota County on May 5, 2022. A copy of the approved methodology and correspondence
are attached in Appendix A.
1
Rcv'd 5/31/2022 SR
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
FRUITVILLE ROAD
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\PropROWAlign_SarCou_20220407.mxd
EastWestB_ROW
L E G E N D
Proposed ROW Alignment

)LJXUH3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ
Feet
¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes: fax 941.907.6910 $ $
2. Source data: Sarasota County GIS, Stantec Technical Review by: X.X.X MM/DD/YY

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Trip Generation
Traffic volumes generated by the proposed development were estimated using the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation – the 11th Edition (2021). Land Use Code (LUC) 270
(Residential Planned Unit Development) was used to estimate the trip generation potential. The
PM peak-hour trip generation is summarized in Table 1 and indicates that the proposed
development will generate 3,367 new PM peak-hour trips.
Table 1: PM Peak Hour Trip Generation

Enter Exit PM Peak Total Trips
ITE Land Use Category Variable Size Trip Rate/ Equation
Split Split Total Enter Exit
Residential Planned Unit
Per Unit 5,000 ln(T) = 0.97ln(x) - 0.14 65% 35% 3,367 2,189 1,178
Development - 270
Project Traffic Distribution
The project traffic was distributed based on the current version of the FDOT D1 Districtwide
Regional Planning Model (D1RPM) v2.0 2045 Cost Feasible network. The four-lane widening of
Fruitville Road from Sarasota Center Boulevard to Lorraine Road and the addition of Sarasota
County’s Future Thoroughfare Roadways not currently in the model were added to the model.
The added thoroughfare roads include:
x Bourneside Boulevard/North-South Roadway B from University Parkway to Lorraine Road

x The Bee Ridge Extension from Lorraine Road to North-South Roadway B
x East-West Roadway B from Bourneside Boulevard to Verna Road
In addition, the socioeconomic (SE) data for Hi-Hat Ranch, which incorporates all/parts of
TAZ 5537, TAZ 5692, and TAZ 5693, were reviewed. TAZ boundaries were not adjusted, only a
review of the SE data was conducted. Hi-Hat Ranch is approved for 13,081 dwelling units,
300,000 square feet of commercial, and 150,000 square feet of office. Table 2 shows the 2015 SE
data and Table 3 shows the 2045 SE data in TAZs 5537, 5692, and 5693.
Table 2: 2015 Socioeconomic Data

ZONE SFDU MFDU RESDHHLD IND COMM SERV TOT
EMP EMP EMP EMP
5537 364 72 436 41 27 53 121
5692 13 3 16 0 3 16 19
5693 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 377 75 452 41 30 69 231
3
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

EMP EMP EMP EMP
5537 2979 1510 4489 338 176 53 567
5692 1756 962 2718 324 219 16 559
5693 3051 1678 4729 297 149 0 446
Total 7786 4150 11936 959 544 69 1572
As shown in Table 2 and Table 3, the 2045 SE data underestimates the approved residential units,
commercial employees, and service employees while overestimating the number of industrial
employees. The 2045 SE data was adjusted to incorporate the Hi-Hat Ranch approvals. The Hi-
Hat Ranch SE data was added on top of the 2015 SE data in TAZ 5537 in which Hi-Hat Ranch only
incorporates a portion of the TAZ. The resulting modified SE data is shown in Table 4.
Table 4: Modified 2045 Socioeconomic Data

EMP EMP EMP EMP
5537 2979 1510 4489 41 27 53 121
5692 1756 962 2718 0 3001 3002 600

5693 4632 1678 6310 0 3001 3002 600
Total 9367 4150 13517 41 627 653 1321

1. Assumed 1 employee per 500 square feet.
00 = Updated SE Data
The distribution of project traffic from the site is shown in Figure 2. A manual adjustment was
made to reduce the amount of traffic interacting with TAZ 5539, located east of the project on
the south of Fruitville Road, from 4.2% to 1%. The 3.2% of traffic interacting with that TAZ was
redistributed to the west on Fruitville Road to interact with areas west of I-75 (2.2%) and south on
I-75 (1%).
4

Rcv'd 5/31/2022

[[[ 3HUFHQW3URMHFW7UDIILF

ODQHSHUGLUHFWLRQ
ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ

ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ

ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ
&HQWURLG&RQQHFWRU
3URMHFW7$=

7$=V

)LJXUH3URMHFW7UDIILF'LVWULEXWLRQ
&RVW)HDVLEOH1HWZRUN
/LFHQVHGWR6WDQWHF&RQVXOWLQJ/WG

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Study Area
The study area used for the fiscal neutrality analysis consists of arterial and collector roads in
which project traffic equals or exceeds five percent of the adopted two-way peak-hour service
volume. Service volumes were obtained from Sarasota County’s 2020 Generalized LOS Analysis
Tables and FDOT’s Generalized LOS Tables. The results of the study area determination are
summarized in Table 5 and a map of the roadway segments within the study area is shown in
Figure 3. A total of 20 roadway segments meet the study area criteria and will be included in the
analysis.
6
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Table 5: Study Area Determination

Adopted LOS Percent Net New Traffic Significant
Road Name and Segment LOS Number Service Project Net New Impact?
Traffic % Impact ( >5%)
Standard of Lanes Volume Trips
Bee Ridge Road
Bent Tree Blvd to Lorraine Rd D 2 1,440 0.9% 30 2.1% No
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B D 2 1,440 0.9% 30 2.1% No
East-West Roadway B
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd C 2 1,560 4.5% 152 9.7% Yes
Fruitville Road
Cattlemen Road to I-75 D 6 5,660 7.5% 253 4.5% No
I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 4 3,401 7.3% 246 7.2% Yes
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to East Rd C 4 3,078 6.4% 215 7.0% Yes
East Rd to Tatum Rd C 4 3,078 7.6% 256 8.3% Yes
Tatum Rd to Sarasota Center Blvd C 4 3,249 7.9% 266 8.2% Yes
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd C 2 1,360 10.9% 367 27.0% Yes
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B C 2 1,560 10.8% 364 23.3% Yes
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd C 2 1,560 18.5% 623 39.9% Yes
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd C 2 1,560 1.6% 54 3.5% No
I-75
University Ave to Fruitville Rd D 6 11,860 5.8% 195 1.6% No
Fruitville Rd to Bee Ridge Rd D 6 10,060 5.8% 195 1.9% No
Lakewood Ranch Boulevard
University Pkwy to Professional Pkwy D 4 3,401 2.5% 84 2.5% No
Lorraine Road
University Ave to Fruitville Rd C 4 3,249 1.4% 47 1.4% No
Fruitville Rd to Palmer Blvd D 2 1,200 0.9% 30 2.5% No
Palmer Blvd to Bee Ridge Rd D 2 1,200 0.7% 24 2.0% No
North-South Roadway B (Bourneside Blvd)
University Pkwy to Fruitville Rd C 2 1,435 74.9% 2,522 175.7% Yes
Fruitville Rd to Bee Ridge Rd C 2 1,435 5.4% 182 12.7% Yes
Bee Ridge Rd to Clark Rd C 2 1,435 1.4% 47 3.3% No
University Parkway
Conservatory Dr to Whitfield Ave D 6 5,121 7.5% 253 4.9% No
Whitfield Ave to Longwood Run Blvd D 6 5,121 8.4% 283 5.5% Yes
Longwood Run Blvd to Medici Ct D 6 5,121 9.5% 320 6.2% Yes
Medici Ct to Honore Ave D 6 5,121 9.7% 327 6.4% Yes
Honore Ave to Cooper Creek Blvd D 6 5,121 11.2% 377 7.4% Yes
Cooper Creek Blvd to I-75 D 8 7,570 14.9% 502 6.6% Yes
I-75 to Lake Osprey Dr D 8 7,570 22.6% 761 10.1% Yes
Lake Osprey Dr to Town Center Pkwy D 6 5,120 23.4% 788 15.4% Yes
Town Center Pkwy to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 6 5,120 26.2% 882 17.2% Yes
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd D 4 3,400 33.4% 1,125 33.1% Yes
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd D 2 1,600 41.2% 1,387 86.7% Yes
Bourneside Blvd to County Line D 2 1,600 0.8% 27 1.7% No
Verna Road/Myakka State Park Road
County Line to E-W Rdwy B C 2 1,560 2.2% 74 4.7% No
E-W Rdwy B to Fruitville Rd C 2 1,560 1.2% 40 2.6% No
Fruitville Rd to Clark Rd C 2 1,560 1.1% 37 2.4% No
7
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Revised: 2022- 05-18 By : est urm
\\us02 27-ppfss01 \shared_pro je cts\21 56167 36\gis\mxd\Fig3 _StudyArea_2 02205 18_v01.mxd
L E G E N D
Study Area Road

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China
Lakewood Ranch Southeast (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User
Community
0 0.75 1.5
¯
Figure 3 – Study Area
Miles
(
Sarasota, FL 34240 $ $
agents, from any and all claims arising in any way tel 941.907.6900
fax 941.907.6910

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Analysis Procedures
Because this analysis only looks at roadway needs from a generalized perspective, the criteria
used by the Sarasota-Manatee MPO in their long-range transportation plan was used to
determine if improvements are anticipated to be required. The MPO’s criteria are listed in
Table 6. Roadway improvements were assumed to be needed once the volume-to-capacity
(v/c) ratio of a roadway segment was greater than 1.05
Table 6: Sarasota/Manatee MPO Congestion Criteria
v/c Ratio Congestion Level Typical Improvements
v/c ≤ 0.86 Not Congested No improvements required

0.86 < v/c ≤ 1.05 Borderline Congested No improvements required
1.05 < v/c ≤ 1.20 Congested Operational and minor improvements required
v/c > 1.20 Severely Congested Major capacity improvements required
Existing Traffic Conditions
Existing segment volumes were obtained from Sarasota County’s 2020 Generalized LOS Analysis
Tables and turning movement counts conducted within the study area in the spring of 2022. The
turning movement counts were adjusted by Sarasota County’s peak-season conversion factors.
The peak-season conversion factors and turning movement counts are attached in Appendix B.
The results of the existing level-of-service analysis are summarized in Table 7 and indicate that
Fruitville Road from Sarasota Center Boulevard to Lorraine Road has a v/c ratio of greater than
1.05 and is currently operating above Sarasota County’s adopted level-of-service standards. The
remaining segments are operating within Sarasota County’s adopted level-of-service standards.
A map showing the existing traffic congestion levels within the study area is shown in Figure 4.
9
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Table 7: Existing Traffic Roadway Analysis

Adopted LOS
Exisiting v/c Exceeds
Road Name and Segment LOS Number Service Traffic Ratio LOS?
Standard of Lanes Volume
East-West Roadway B
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd C 2 1,560 0 0.00 No
Fruitville Road
I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 4 3,401 2,991 0.88 No
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to East Rd C 4 3,078 2,750 0.89 No
East Rd to Tatum Rd C 4 3,078 2,383 0.77 No
Tatum Rd to Sarasota Center Blvd C 4 3,249 2,290 0.70 No
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd C 2 1,360 1,756 1.29 Yes
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B C 2 1,560 1,051 0.67 No
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd C 2 1,560 1,051 0.67 No
University Pkwy to Fruitville Rd C 2 1,435 0 0.00 No
Fruitville Rd to Bee Ridge Rd C 2 1,435 0 0.00 No
University Parkway
Whitfield Ave to Longwood Run Blvd D 6 5,121 4,453 0.87 No
Longwood Run Blvd to Medici Ct D 6 5,121 4,545 0.89 No
Medici Ct to Honore Ave D 6 5,121 4,671 0.91 No
Honore Ave to Cooper Creek Blvd D 6 5,121 4,640 0.91 No
Cooper Creek Blvd to I-75 D 8 7,570 5,661 0.75 No
I-75 to Lake Osprey Dr D 8 7,570 4,584 0.61 No
Lake Osprey Dr to Tow n Center Pkwy D 6 5,120 3,369 0.66 No
Town Center Pkwy to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 6 5,120 3,073 0.60 No
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd D 4 3,400 2,107 0.62 No
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd D 2 1,600 318 0.20 No
Data Source:
x 2020 volumes from Sarasota Generalized LOS Analysis Tables were used for Fruitville Road from I-75
to Tatum Road and University Parkway from Whitfield Avenue to I-75.
x 2022 turning movement counts were used for Fruitville Road from Tatum Road to Bourneside
Boulevard and University Parkway from I-75 to Bourneside Boulevard.
10
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Revised: 20 22-05 -18 By: esturm
L E G E N D

\\us02 27-ppfss01 \shared_pro je cts\21 56167 36\gis\mxd\FIg 4_Existing Co ng est io n_202 20518 _v 01.mxd
Existing Traffic Congestion

N/A - Not Constructed
Not Congested
Borderline Congested Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China
Severely Congested (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User
Community
0 0.75 1.5
¯
Figure 4 – Existing Traffic Congestion
Miles
(
Sarasota, FL 34240 $ $
agents, from any and all claims arising in any way tel 941.907.6900
fax 941.907.6910

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Scheduled Improvements
The current Sarasota County Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and the FDOT Five Year Work
Program were reviewed to identify any improvements scheduled for construction in the first
three years. No improvements were identified.
2035 Background Traffic Conditions
The background traffic conditions were analyzed for the build-out year of 2035. The exiting traffic
volumes were grown to 2035 volumes using a combination of historical growth rates from
Sarasota County’s Generalized LOS Analysis Tables, Manatee County Count Stations, FDOT
Count Stations, and projected growth rates from the D1RPM. Using these sources, growth rates
for each segment within the study area were calculated. At a minimum, a 1.0% annual growth
rate was used to forecast future background traffic. The growth rate calculations are shown in
Table 8 and the supporting data is attached in Appendix C.
Table 8: Growth Rate Calculations

Historical Growth D1RPM Projected Growth
Overall Proposed
5-Year 10-Year Average
Road Name and Segment 2010 2015 2020 2015 2045 Growth Average Growth
Growth Growth Historical Growth Rate
AADT AADT AADT AADT AADT Rate
Rate Rate Growth
East-West Roadway B
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd n/a
Fruitville Road
I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd 20,886 27,247 30,831 2.6% 4.8% 3.7% 31,700 63,700 3.4% 3.6% 3.5%
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to East Rd 20,886 27,247 28,059 0.6% 3.4% 2.0% 25,000 36,400 1.5% 1.9% 2.0%
East Rd to Tatum Rd 17,258 23,887 23,139 -0.6% 3.4% 1.4% 18,600 31,200 2.3% 1.7% 2.0%
Tatum Rd to Sarasota Center Blvd 22,804 18,024 23,002 5.5% 0.1% 2.8% 18,300 30,400 2.2% 2.6% 2.5%
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd 8,099 7,858 16,154 21.1% 9.9% 15.5% 6,000 19,300 7.4% 12.8% 6.0%
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B 6,456 6,758 5,523 -3.7% -1.4% -2.6% 3,700 7,400 3.3% -0.6% 1.0%
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd 6,456 6,758 5,523 -3.7% -1.4% -2.6% 3,700 7,400 3.3% -0.6% 1.0%
University Pkwy to Fruitville Rd n/a
Fruitville Rd to Bee Ridge Rd n/a
University Parkway
Whitfield Ave to Longwood Run Blvd 42,124 51,174 53,011 0.7% 2.6% 1.7% 44,000 59,900 1.2% 1.5% 1.5%
Longwood Run Blvd to Medici Ct 43,748 53,178 57,675 1.7% 3.2% 2.4% 49,800 65,400 1.0% 2.0% 1.5%
Medici Ct to Honore Ave 45,502 54,024 56,275 0.8% 2.4% 1.6% 50,300 66,000 1.0% 1.4% 1.5%
Honore Ave to Cooper Creek Blvd 48,737 55,091 55,234 0.1% 1.3% 0.7% 49,300 60,600 0.8% 0.7% 1.0%
Cooper Creek Blvd to I-75 49,058 64,014 68,208 1.3% 3.9% 2.6% 66,300 90,300 1.2% 2.1% 1.0%
I-75 to Lake Osprey Dr 40,943 48,714 45,665 -1.3% 1.2% 0.0% 62,900 84,800 1.2% 0.4% 1.0%
Lake Osprey Dr to Town Center Pkwy n/a 28,000 38,500 1.3% 1.3% 1.5%
Town Center Pkwy to Lakewood Ranch Blvd n/a 31,123 32,710 1.0% n/a 1.0% 29,800 44,700 1.7% 1.3% 1.5%
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd 13,600 18,000 20,500 2.8% 5.1% 3.9% 18,700 41,300 4.0% 4.0% 4.0%
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd n/a 2,600 6,200 4.6% 4.6% 4.5%
TOTAL 386,557 461,974 488,799 1.2% 2.6% 1.9% 508,700 753,500 1.6% 1.8% 1.8%
12
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Future traffic on East-West Roadway B and North-South Roadway B was assumed to be 10% of
the maximum service volume. Without the subject project or Hi-Hat Ranch, traffic on both
roadways is expected to be minimal. In addition, reserved traffic from the Hi-Hat Ranch
development was included on top of the background growth rate. Hi-Hat Rach is anticipated to
be built-out in 2050. To estimate the amount of Hi-Hat Ranch traffic at the time Lakewood Ranch
SE is built-out in 2035, the build-out Hi-Hat Ranch reserved traffic volumes were multiplied by
13/28 ((2035-2022)/(2050-2022). An adjustment to the reserved Hi-Hat Ranch volumes using
North-South Roadway B between University Parkway and Fruitville Road, which is now offset
further to the east compared to the alignment assumed in the Hi-Hat Ranch traffic study, was
made. Given the shift to the west, a portion of that traffic was shifted to the Lorraine Road
corridor which is a more direct way to get to University Parkway. The Hi-Hat Ranch reserved
traffic volumes used in the analyses are documented in Appendix C.
The results of the 2035 background level-of-service analysis are summarized in Table 9 and
indicate that 12 significantly impacted segments in the study area have a v/c ratio of greater
than 1.05 and are anticipated to operate above Sarasota County’s adopted level-of-service
standards. The remaining eight segments are operating within Sarasota County’s adopted level-
of-service standards. A map showing the 2035 background traffic congestion levels within the
study area is shown in Figure 5.
Table 9: 2035 Background Traffic Roadway Analysis

Adopted LOS Bkgd 2035
Exisiting Bkgd Hi-Hat v/c Exceeds
Road Name and Segment LOS Number Service Growth Bkgd
Traffic Growth Traffic Ratio LOS?
Standard of Lanes Volume Rate Traffic
East-West Roadway B
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd C 2 1,560 0 0.0% 156 105 261 0.17 No
Fruitville Road
I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 4 3,401 2,991 3.5% 1,570 365 4,926 1.45 Yes
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to East Rd C 4 3,078 2,750 2.0% 825 374 3,949 1.28 Yes
East Rd to Tatum Rd C 4 3,078 2,383 2.0% 715 392 3,490 1.13 Yes
Tatum Rd to Sarasota Center Blvd C 4 3,249 2,290 2.5% 744 456 3,490 1.07 Yes
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd C 2 1,360 1,756 6.0% 1,370 547 3,673 2.70 Yes
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B C 2 1,560 1,051 1.0% 137 602 1,790 1.15 Yes
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd C 2 1,560 1,051 1.0% 137 461 1,649 1.06 Yes
University Pkwy to Fruitville Rd C 2 1,435 0 0.0% 144 249 393 0.27 No
Fruitville Rd to Bee Ridge Rd C 2 1,435 0 0.0% 144 821 965 0.67 No
University Parkway
Whitfield Ave to Longwood Run Blvd D 6 5,121 4,453 1.5% 1,002 155 5,610 1.10 Yes
Longwood Run Blvd to Medici Ct D 6 5,121 4,545 1.5% 1,023 182 5,750 1.12 Yes
Medici Ct to Honore Ave D 6 5,121 4,671 1.5% 1,051 182 5,904 1.15 Yes
Honore Ave to Cooper Creek Blvd D 6 5,121 4,640 1.0% 696 210 5,546 1.08 Yes
Cooper Creek Blvd to I-75 D 8 7,570 5,661 1.0% 849 319 6,829 0.90 No
I-75 to Lake Osprey Dr D 8 7,570 4,584 1.0% 596 269 5,449 0.72 No
Lake Osprey Dr to Town Center Pkwy D 6 5,120 3,369 1.5% 657 279 4,305 0.84 No
Town Center Pkwy to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 6 5,120 3,073 1.5% 599 310 3,982 0.78 No
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd D 4 3,400 2,107 4.0% 1,096 370 3,573 1.05 Yes
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd D 2 1,600 318 4.5% 186 105 609 0.38 No
13
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
??XV SSIVV ?VKDUHGBSUR MH FWV? ?JLV?P[G?)LJ B%DFNJURXQG&RQJHVWLRQB BYP[G5HYLVHG %\ HVW XUP
L E G E N D

2035 Background Traffic Congestion
Not Congested
Borderline Congested
Congested Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China
Community

¯
6WDQWHF&RQVXOWLQJ6HUYLFHV,QF
Figure 5 – 2035 Background Traffic Congestion
0LOHV
3URIHVVLRQDO3NZ\(
(
IXOOUHVSRQVLELOLW\IRUYHULI\LQJWKHDFFXUDF\DQG
6WDQWHFLWVRIILFHUVHPSOR\HHVFRQVXOWDQWVDQG
6DUDVRWD)/ $ $
DJHQWVIURPDQ\DQGDOOFODLPVDULVLQJLQDQ\ZD\ WHO
ID[

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
2035 Improved Background Traffic Conditions
Prior to evaluating the project traffic on the adjacent roadway network, the necessary
improvements to allow the failing roadway segments to operate within acceptable level-of-
service standards were assumed to be in place. State law requires a developer to only correct
those transportation deficiencies that are directly created by the addition of their project traffic.
Chapter 163.3180 Florida Statutes and Chapter 2011-139, Laws of Florida as amended by HB 319
both state; “If any road is determined to be transportation deficient without the project traffic
under review, the costs of correcting that deficiency shall be removed from the project's
proportionate-share calculation and the necessary transportation improvements to correct that
deficiency shall be considered to be in place for purposes of the proportionate-share
calculation. The improvement necessary to correct the transportation deficiency is the funding
responsibility of the entity that has maintenance responsibility for the facility. The development's
proportionate share shall be calculated only for the needed transportation improvements that
are greater than the identified deficiency.”
The required background improvements represent what is required to correct the background
deficiencies. In some instances, roadway segments may be right-of-way or policy constrained
and cannot be widened. These occurrences were still shown as theoretically being improved so
that a fiscal neutrality calculation of project specific impacts, if required beyond the
background improvements, could be determined.
In order for the deficient roadway segments to operate within Sarasota County’s adopted level-
of-service standards, additional capacity is required. Table 10 shows the existing and required
laneage and capacity for the 12 deficient roadway segments prior to the addition of project
traffic.
15
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Table 10: 2035 Background Capacity Requirements for Deficient Roadways

Existing Required Service
Road Name and Segment Number Service Number Service Volume
of Lanes Volume of Lanes Volume Increase
Fruitville Road
1
I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd 4 3,401 6 5,390 1,989
2
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to East Rd 4 3,078 6 4,990 1,912
2
East Rd to Tatum Rd 4 3,078 6 4,990 1,912
2
Tatum Rd to Sarasota Center Blvd 4 3,249 6 4,990 1,741
2
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd 2 1,360 6 4,990 3,630
2
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B 2 1,560 4 3,250 1,690
2
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd 2 1,560 4 3,250 1,690
2
University Parkway
Whitfield Ave to Longwood Run Blvd 6 5,121 8 6,850 1,729
Longwood Run Blvd to Medici Ct 6 5,121 8 6,850 1,729
Medici Ct to Honore Ave 6 5,121 8 6,850 1,729
Honore Ave to Cooper Creek Blvd 6 5,121 8 6,850 1,729
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd 4 3,400 6 5,120 1,720
1. Required service volume obtained from the FDOT Generalized Service Volume Table 4, Class I Signalized Arterial.
2. Required service volume obtained from the FDOT Generalized Service Volume Table 4, Class I Signalized Arterial
with non-state roadway and exclusive right turn lane adjustments.
When the required capacity improvements identified in Table 10 are implemented, all deficient
roadway segments in the study area will operate within the Sarasota County’s adopted level-of-
service standards. Table 11 summarizes the results of the 2035 background roadway level-of-
service analysis with improvements.
Table 11: 2035 Background Traffic Roadway Analysis (with Improvements)

Adopted LOS Bkgd 2035
Exisiting Bkgd Hi-Hat v/c Exceeds
Road Name and Segment LOS Number Service Growth Bkgd
Traffic Growth Traffic Ratio LOS?
Standard of Lanes Volume Rate Traffic
Fruitville Road
I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 6 5,390 2,991 3.5% 1,570 365 4,926 0.91 No
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to East Rd C 6 4,990 2,750 2.0% 825 374 3,949 0.79 No
East Rd to Tatum Rd C 6 4,990 2,383 2.0% 715 392 3,490 0.70 No
Tatum Rd to Sarasota Center Blvd C 6 4,990 2,290 2.5% 744 456 3,490 0.70 No
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd C 6 4,990 1,756 6.0% 1,370 547 3,673 0.74 No
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B C 4 3,250 1,051 1.0% 137 602 1,790 0.55 No
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd C 4 3,250 1,051 1.0% 137 461 1,649 0.51 No
University Parkway
Whitfield Ave to Longwood Run Blvd D 8 6,850 4,453 1.5% 1,002 155 5,610 0.82 No
Longwood Run Blvd to Medici Ct D 8 6,850 4,545 1.5% 1,023 182 5,750 0.84 No
Medici Ct to Honore Ave D 8 6,850 4,671 1.5% 1,051 182 5,904 0.86 No
Honore Ave to Cooper Creek Blvd D 8 6,850 4,640 1.0% 696 210 5,546 0.81 No
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd D 6 5,120 2,107 4.0% 1,096 370 3,573 0.70 No
16
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
2035 Total Traffic Conditions
Project traffic was added to the improved background traffic conditions to determine any
project-related impacts. The total traffic consists of the background traffic plus the proposed
project traffic. The results of the 2035 total traffic roadway level-of-service analysis are
summarized in Table 12 and indicate that two significantly impacted segments in the study area
are anticipated to operate above Sarasota County’s adopted level-of-service standards. The
remaining segments within the study area are anticipated to operate within Sarasota County’s
adopted level-of-service standards. A map showing the 2035 total traffic congestion levels within
the study area is shown in Figure 6.
Table 12: 2035 Total Traffic Roadway Analysis

Adopted LOS 2035 2035
Project v/c Exceeds
Road Name and Segment LOS Number Service Bkgd Total
Traffic Ratio LOS?
Standard of Lanes Volume Traffic Traffic
East-West Roadway B
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd C 2 1,560 261 152 413 0.26 No
Fruitville Road
I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 6 5,390 4,926 246 5,172 0.96 No
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to East Rd C 6 4,990 3,949 215 4,164 0.83 No
East Rd to Tatum Rd C 6 4,990 3,490 256 3,746 0.75 No
Tatum Rd to Sarasota Center Blvd C 6 4,990 3,490 266 3,756 0.75 No
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd C 6 4,990 3,673 367 4,040 0.81 No
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B C 4 3,250 1,790 364 2,154 0.66 No
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd C 4 3,250 1,649 623 2,272 0.70 No
University Pkwy to Fruitville Rd C 2 1,435 393 2,522 2,915 2.03 Yes
Fruitville Rd to Bee Ridge Rd C 2 1,435 965 182 1,147 0.80 No
University Parkway
Whitfield Ave to Longwood Run Blvd D 8 6,850 5,610 283 5,893 0.86 No
Longw ood Run Blvd to Medici Ct D 8 6,850 5,750 320 6,070 0.89 No
Medici Ct to Honore Ave D 8 6,850 5,904 327 6,231 0.91 No
Honore Ave to Cooper Creek Blvd D 8 6,850 5,546 377 5,923 0.86 No
Cooper Creek Blvd to I-75 D 8 7,570 6,829 502 7,331 0.97 No
I-75 to Lake Osprey Dr D 8 7,570 5,449 761 6,210 0.82 No
Lake Osprey Dr to Town Center Pkwy D 6 5,120 4,305 788 5,093 0.99 No
Town Center Pkwy to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 6 5,120 3,982 882 4,864 0.95 No
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd D 6 5,120 3,573 1,125 4,698 0.92 No
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd D 2 1,600 609 1,387 1,996 1.25 Yes
17
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
??XV SSIVV ?VKDUHGBSUR MH FWV? ?JLV?P[G?)LJ B7R WDO&RQJHVWLRQB BYP[G5HYLVHG %\HVWXUP
L E G E N D

2035 Total Traffic Congestion
Not Congested
Borderline Congested Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China
Community

¯
6WDQWHF&RQVXOWLQJ6HUYLFHV,QF
Figure 6 – 2035 Total Traffic Congestion
0LOHV
3URIHVVLRQDO3NZ\(
(
IXOOUHVSRQVLELOLW\IRUYHULI\LQJWKHDFFXUDF\DQG
6WDQWHFLWVRIILFHUVHPSOR\HHVFRQVXOWDQWVDQG
6DUDVRWD)/ $ $
DJHQWVIURPDQ\DQGDOOFODLPVDULVLQJLQDQ\ZD\ WHO
ID[

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
In order for the deficient roadway segments to operate within Sarasota County’s adopted level-
of-service standards, additional capacity is required. Table 13 shows the existing and required
laneage and capacity for the two deficient roadway segments with the addition of project
traffic.
Table 13: 2035 Total Traffic Capacity Requirements for Deficient Roadways
Existing Required Service
Road Name and Segment Number Service Number Service Volume
of Lanes Volume of Lanes Volume Increase
1
University Pkwy to Fruitville Rd 2 1,435 4 3,250 1,815
1
University Parkway
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd 2 1,600 4 3,400 1,800
1. Required service volume obtained from the FDOT Generalized Service Volume Table 4, Class I Signalized Arterial
with non-state roadway and exclusive right turn lane adjustments.
When the required capacity improvements identified in Table 13 are implemented, all deficient
roadway segments in the study area will operate within the Sarasota County’s adopted level-of-
service standards. Table 14 summarizes the results of the 2035 total traffic roadway level-of-
service analysis with improvements.
Table 14: 2035 Total Traffic Roadway Analysis (with Improvements)

Adopted LOS 2035 2035
Project v/c Exceeds
Road Name and Segment LOS Number Service Bkgd Total
Traffic Ratio LOS?
Standard of Lanes Volume Traffic Traffic

University Pkw y to Fruitville Rd C 4 3,250 393 2,522 2,915 0.90 No
University Parkway
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd D 4 3,400 609 1,387 1,996 0.59 No
For the purposes of fiscal neutrality, the project’s proportionate share for the two project related
deficiencies was calculated. The proportionate fair share was calculated based on the following
formula:
‫ݏ݌݅ݎܶݐ݊݁݉݌݋݈݁ݒ݁ܦ‬௜
ܲ‫ ݁ݎ݄ܽܵݎ݅ܽܨ݁ݐܽ݊݋݅ݐݎ݋݌݋ݎ‬ൌ ෍ ൈ ‫ݐݏ݋ܥ‬௜ ൈ ‫݄ݐ݃݊݁ܮ‬௜
ܵ݁‫݁ݏܽ݁ݎܿ݊ܫ݁݉ݑ݈݋ܸ݁ܿ݅ݒݎ‬௜
Improvement costs were taken from FDOT’s Cost per Mile Models for Long Range Estimating. The
costs data used for the analysis is provided in Appendix D. Table 15 shows that the project’s
estimated roadway proportionate fair share is $14,298,000 for impacts to significantly impacted
roadways.
19
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Table 15: Fiscal Neutrality Roadway Proportionate Fair Share

Project
Improvement Length Trips 2-Lane 4-Lane Prop
Road Name and Segment 1
Cost per Mile (miles) Over Capacity Capacity Share
Capacity
University Pkwy to Fruitville Rd $3,046,554 5.0 1,480 1,435 3,250 $12,421,000
University Parkway
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd $3,046,554 2.8 396 1,600 3,400 $1,877,000
TOTAL PROPORTIONATE SHARE $14,298,000
1. From FDOT’s LRE for adding two lanes/bike lanes with C&G to an existing roadway.
Operational Analysis
An operational analysis of the two new intersections of North-South Roadway B (Bourneside

Boulevard) with University Parkway and Fruitville Road was conducted for the 2035 total traffic
volumes to determine the required geometry and intersection treatment. Table 16 summarizes
the 2035 total traffic volumes at the intersection approaches. For Bourneside Boulevard, which
currently terminates south of The Masters Avenue and north of Ganton Avenue, the existing
traffic volume are the sum of the seasonally adjusted volumes from the Bourneside Boulevard at
The Masters Avenue and at University Parkway turning movement counts. The existing volumes
on Bourneside Boulevard were grown at the same 4.5% annual growth rate as the adjacent
segment on University Parkway. The Bourneside Boulevard/The Masters Avenue turning
movement count is attached in Appendix B.
Table 16: 2035 Total Traffic Approach Volumes
Bkgd 2035
Exisiting Bkgd Hi-Hat Bkgd Project
Road Name and Segment Growth Total
Traffic Growth Traffic Traffic Traffic
Rate Traffic
Fruitville Road
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd 1,051 1.0% 137 461 1,649 623 2,272
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd 1,051 1.0% 137 110 1,298 71 1,369
Bourneside Boulevard
The Masters Ave to University Pkwy 352 4.5% 222 91 665 1,094 1,759
University Pkwy to Site n/a 144 183 327 2,522 2,849
Site to Fruitville Rd n/a 144 315 459 694 1,153
University Parkway
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd 318 4.5% 186 92 596 1,428 2,024
At the Bourneside Boulevard/University Parkway intersection, the background traffic segment

volumes were split 57% northbound/westbound and 43% southbound/eastbound based on the
existing directional traffic split at the Lorraine Road/University Parkway intersection. At the
20
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Bourneside Boulevard/Fruitville Road intersection, the background traffic segment volumes were
split 67% northbound/eastbound and 33% southbound/westbound based on the existing
directional traffic split at the Lorraine Road/Fruitville Road intersection.
Background turning movement counts were estimated using the ratio of traffic north, south, east,
and west of the intersection to estimate how much of an approach’s background traffic would
be left/through/right movements. Once the background traffic turning movements were
estimated, the project traffic was added to the turning movements based on the distribution
shown in Figure 2. The resulting 2035 PM peak-hour traffic volumes at the intersection are shown
in Figure 7. The directional splits at the Bourneside Boulevard/University Parkway and Bourneside
Boulevard/Fruitville Road intersections, the turning movement calculations, and 2035 intersection
volumes are attached in Appendix E.
Figure 7: 2035 Total Traffic Intersection Volumes
21
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Given the large amount of left turning vehicles at the intersections, two-way stop control
intersections will not be able to handle the volumes. The intersections were evaluated as
roundabouts using the Sidra Software. Below is the geometry that was evaluated at each
intersection.
Bourneside Boulevard/University Parkway Intersection

x Eastbound Left Turn
x Eastbound Right Turn Bypass
x Northbound Through/Left Turn
x Northbound Through
x Southbound Through
x Southbound Right Turn
Bourneside Boulevard/Fruitville Road Intersection

x Eastbound Left Turn
x Eastbound Through
x Westbound Through/Right Turn
x Westbound Through
x Southbound Left Turn
x Southbound Right Turn
The results of the intersection analysis are summarized in Table 17 and indicates that both
intersections are anticipated to operate within acceptable level-of-service standards as
roundabouts. The 2035 total traffic Sidra intersection worksheets are provided in Appendix F.
Additional analysis of the Bourneside Boulevard intersections with University Parkway and Fruitville
Road shall be completed with each rezone when development plans are prepared.
Table 17: 2035 Total Traffic Intersection Operations

Overall Intersection LOS Max Approach LOS
Delay
Intersection Type v/c
Standard Total (sec/veh) EB WB NB SB
Ratio
Bourneside Blvd
Roundabout D C 16.0 0.99 A A E
& University Pkwy
Bourneside Blvd
Roundabout D A 8.1 0.59 A A A
& Fruitville Rd
22
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Site Access Analysis
The site will have access to North-South Roadway B (Bourneside Boulevard). Operational
analyses at the site access points were not evaluated as part of this analysis. Analysis of the site
access points will be evaluated with each rezone when development plans are prepared.
Two future thoroughfare plan roadways will run through the property, Bourneside Boulevard from
University Parkway to Fruitville Road and the western end of East-West Roadway B. Bourneside
Boulevard will be a minor arterial running north-south through the property. Based on traffic
volumes projected to be generated at the build-out of the development, Bourneside Boulevard
will need to be a four-lane divided roadway. It is recommended that Bourneside Boulevard
have an Access Classification of 5. This will require development connecting to Bourneside
Boulevard to conform to the following access management spacing requirements:
x Full median opening spacing of 1,320 feet,

x Directional median opening spacing of 660 feet, and
x Connection spacing of 245 feet.
Similar to the proposed intersection treatments at the Bourneside Boulevard/University Parkway

and Bourneside Boulevard/Fruitville Road intersections, roundabouts will be used at major
intersections along the Bourneside Boulevard corridor for access to the various neighborhoods.
Roundabouts will need to be spaced at a minimum of 1,320 feet, but will likely be spaced a half-
mile to a mile apart.
Right-of-Way will also be dedicated for western end of East-West Roadway B. East-West
Roadway B will be a minor arterial and connect to Bourneside Boulevard. The western end of
East-West Roadway B runs through the property for approximately 0.4 miles.
At this time, no additional thoroughfare plan roadways are proposed. As the overall
development plan for the property becomes more clear, additional thoroughfare plan
roadways may be proposed and would likely be classified as collector roadways.
23
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Conclusion
The Lakewood Ranch SE DOCC proposes to construct 5,000 dwelling units to be built out by
2035. At build out of the project, it is estimated that the project will generate 3,367 new PM
peak-hour external trip ends (2,189 entering; 1,178 exiting).
network was performed in support of the fiscal neutrality analysis. Currently there is one deficient
roadway segment within the study area. By 2035, the background traffic causes 11 additional
roadway segments to become deficient in the study area. Once the necessary improvements
to correct the background traffic deficiencies are in place, consistent with Chapter 163.3180
Florida Statutes, project traffic will require improvements to two roadway segments within the
study area. The following roadway improvements were identified as project related deficiencies:
x North-South Roadway B (Bourneside Boulevard) from University Parkway to Fruitville Road:

Widen from two to four lanes.
x University Parkway from Lorraine Road to Bourneside Boulevard: Widen from two to four
lanes.
The estimated proportionate fair share for project related impacts to study area roadways is
$14,298,000 and will be used as part of the fiscal neutrality analysis.
In addition, an operational analysis of the Bourneside Boulevard connections with University

Parkway and Fruitville Road was performed. Both intersections will need to be constructed as
roundabouts to allow them to operate within acceptable level-of-service standards. Additional
analysis of the Bourneside Boulevard intersections with University Parkway and Fruitville Road shall
be completed with each rezone, as well as any site access points to Bourneside Boulevard
subject to the specific rezone, when development plans are prepared.
Two future thoroughfare plan roadways will run through the property, Bourneside Boulevard from
University Parkway to Fruitville Road and the western end of East-West Roadway B. Bourneside
Boulevard will be a minor arterial running north-south through the property. Based on traffic
volumes projected to be generated at the build-out of the development, Bourneside Boulevard
will need to be a four-lane divided roadway. It is recommended that Bourneside Boulevard
have an Access Classification of 5. Right-of-Way will be dedicated for the 0.4-mile stub of East-
West Roadway B located within the property.
24
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
APPENDIX A
METHODOLOGY CORRESPONDENCE
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
6920 Professional Parkway East
Sarasota FL 34240-8414
Tel: (941) 907-6900
Fax: (941) 907-6910
May 5, 2022
Paula Wiggins, P.E. Via email: pwiggins@scgov.net

Manager, Transportation Planning
Sarasota County Mobility
1001 Sarasota Center Boulevard
Reference: Lakewood Ranch SE Development of Critical Concern (DOCC)

Transportation Methodology Statement
Dear Ms. Wiggins,
This letter serves to summarize the Transportation Methodology for the subject project for your
approval. The applicant proposes to construct 5,000 residential units east of Lorraine Road
between University Parkway and Fruitville Road. The project boundary is attached.
The applicable questions contained to the DOCC Questionnaire pertaining to transportation will
be provided in graphic or narrative form as part of the traffic analysis. A generalized roadway
analysis of project traffic impacts to roadway segments within the study network will be
performed in support of the fiscal neutrality analysis and an operational analysis of the
Bourneside Boulevard connections with University Parkway and Fruitville Road will be performed.
A buildout of 2035 will be evaluated as part of the analysis. The following is a summary of the
methodology.
Trip Generation
The transportation analysis will be based on the PM peak-hour time period. Traffic volumes
generated by the project will be estimated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE),
Trip Generation – the 11th Edition (2021). Land Use Code (LUC) 270 (Residential Planned Unit
Development) will be used to estimate the trip generation potential. Table 1 summarizes the PM
peak-hour trip generation.
Table 1: PM Peak-Hour Trip Generation

Enter Exit PM Peak Total Trips
ITE Land Use Category Variable Size Trip Rate/ Equation
Split Split Total Enter Exit
Residential Planned Unit
Per Unit 5,000 ln(T) = 0.97ln(x) - 0.14 65% 35% 3,367 2,189 1,178
Development - 270
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
May 5, 2022
Paula Wiggins, P.E.
Page 2 of 7
Reference: Lakewood Ranch SE DOCC

Trip Distribution
The project traffic will be distributed based on the current version of the FDOT D1 Districtwide
Regional Planning Model (D1RPM) v2.0 2045 Cost Feasible network. The four-lane widening of
Fruitville Road from Sarasota Center Boulevard to Lorraine Road and the addition of Sarasota
County’s Future Thoroughfare Roadways not currently in the model will be added to the model.
The added thoroughfare roads include:
x Bourneside Boulevard/North-South Roadway B from University Parkway to Lorraine Road

x The Bee Ridge Extension from Lorraine Road to North-South Roadway B
x East-West Roadway B from Bourneside Boulevard to Verna Road
In addition, the socioeconomic (SE) data for Hi-Hat Ranch, which incorporates all/parts of
TAZ 5537, TAZ 5692, and TAZ 5693, were reviewed. Hi-Hat Ranch is approved for 13,081 dwelling
units, 300,000 square feet of commercial, and 150,000 square feet of office. Table 2 shows the
2015 SE data and Table 3 shows the 2045 SE data in TAZs 5537, 5692, and 5693.

EMP EMP EMP EMP
5537 364 72 436 41 27 53 121
5692 13 3 16 0 3 16 19
5693 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 377 75 452 41 30 69 231

EMP EMP EMP EMP
5537 2979 1510 4489 338 176 53 567
5692 1756 962 2718 324 219 16 559

5693 3051 1678 4729 297 149 0 446
Total 7786 4150 11936 959 544 69 1572

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
May 5, 2022
Paula Wiggins, P.E.
Page 3 of 7

As shown in Table 2 and Table 3, the 2045 SE data underestimates the approved residential units,
commercial employees, and service employees while overestimating the number of industrial
employees. The 2045 SE data will be adjusted to incorporate the Hi-Hat Ranch approvals. The Hi-
Hat Ranch SE data will be added on top of the 2015 SE data in TAZ 5537 in which Hi-Hat Ranch
only incorporates a portion of the TAZ. The resulting modified SE data is shown in Table 4.
Table 4: Modified 2045 Socioeconomic Data

EMP EMP EMP EMP
5537 2979 1510 4489 41 27 53 121
5692 1756 962 2718 0 3001 3002 600

5693 4632 1678 6310 0 3001 3002 600
Total 9367 4150 13517 41 627 653 1321

00 = Updated SE Data
The distribution of project traffic from the site is shown in the attached Figure. A manual
adjustment was made to reduce the amount of traffic interacting with TAZ 5539, located east of
the project on the south of Fruitville Road, from 4.2% to 1%. The 3.2% of traffic interacting with
that TAZ was redistributed to the west on Fruitville Road to interact with areas west of I-75 (2.2%)
and south on I-75 (1%).
Study Area
The study area will consist of the arterial and collector roads where:
x Project traffic equals or exceeds five percent of the adopted service volume as specified
in Sarasota County’s Generalized Level of Service Volume Tables, for all applicable
county and state roads.
x Any thoroughfare road segment to which the development has a direct access or which
the development accesses via local and private roads.
It is anticipated that 20 regulated roadway segments will meet the aforementioned criteria and
will be included in the study area for the fiscal neutrality analysis. A preliminary study area
determination is shown in Table 5.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
May 5, 2022
Paula Wiggins, P.E.
Page 4 of 7

Table 5: Study Area Determination

Adopted LOS Percent Net New Traffic Significant
Road Name and Segment LOS Number Service Project Net New Impact?
Bee Ridge Road
Bent Tree Blvd to Lorraine Rd D 2 1,440 0.9% 30 2.1% No
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B D 2 1,440 0.9% 30 2.1% No
East-West Roadway B
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd C 2 1,560 4.5% 152 9.7% Yes
Fruitville Road
Cattlemen Road to I-75 D 6 5,660 7.5% 253 4.5% No
I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd D 4 3,401 7.3% 246 7.2% Yes
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to East Rd C 4 3,078 6.4% 215 7.0% Yes
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd C 2 1,360 10.9% 367 27.0% Yes
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd C 2 1,560 18.5% 623 39.9% Yes
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd C 2 1,560 1.6% 54 3.5% No
I-75
University Ave to Fruitville Rd D 6 11,860 5.8% 195 1.6% No
Fruitville Rd to Bee Ridge Rd D 6 10,060 5.8% 195 1.9% No
Lorraine Road
Palmer Blvd to Bee Ridge Rd D 2 1,200 0.7% 24 2.0% No
University Pkwy to Fruitville Rd C 2 1,510 74.9% 2,522 167.0% Yes
University Parkway
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd D 4 3,400 31.9% 1,074 31.6% Yes
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd D 2 1,600 41.2% 1,387 86.7% Yes
Bourneside Blvd to County Line D 2 1,600 0.8% 27 1.7% No
County Line to E-W Rdwy B C 2 1,560 2.2% 74 4.7% No
E-W Rdwy B to Fruitville Rd C 2 1,560 1.2% 40 2.6% No
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
May 5, 2022
Paula Wiggins, P.E.
Page 5 of 7

Existing and Future Traffic
1. Existing Traffic:
Will be based on the PM peak-hour volumes listed in Sarasota County’s Generalized
Level of Service Volume Tables.
2. Future Traffic (Non-Project):

Will use a combination of historical growth rates from Sarasota County’s Generalized
Level of Service Volume Tables and projected growth rates from the D1RPM to develop
growth rates for each segment within the study area to grow the existing traffic volumes
to 2035 traffic volumes. At a minimum, a 1.0% annual growth rate will be used to forecast
future background traffic. Future traffic on East-West Roadway B and North-South
Roadway B will be assumed to be 10% of the maximum service volume.
In addition, vested traffic from the Hi-Hat Ranch development will be included on top of
the background growth rate. Hi-Hat Rach is anticipated to be built-out in 2050. To
estimate the amount of Hi-Hat traffic at the time Lakewood Ranch SE is built-out in 2035,
the Hi-Hat vested traffic volumes will be multiplied by 13/28 ((2035-2022)/(2050-2022).
Analysis Scenarios
network will be performed in support of the fiscal neutrality analysis. The analysis will be
undertaken for the following scenarios:
1. Existing traffic will be evaluated within the established study area.
2. Existing traffic plus Future traffic will be evaluated for 2035.
3. Existing traffic plus Future traffic plus improvements will be evaluated for 2035 (if
necessary).
4. Existing traffic plus Future traffic plus Project traffic will be evaluated for 2035.
5. Existing traffic plus Future traffic plus Project traffic plus improvements will be
evaluated for 2035 (if necessary).
In addition, an operational analysis of the Bourneside Boulevard & University Parkway and
Bourneside Boulevard & Fruitville Road intersections will be conducted for the PM peak-hour to
determine the appropriate intersection control at each location.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
May 5, 2022
Paula Wiggins, P.E.
Page 6 of 7

Fiscal Neutrality Proportionate Share Analysis
Consistent with Chapter 2011-139, Laws of Florida and Chapter 163.3180 of the Florida Statutes,
as amended by HB 319, a proportionate fair share impact will be provided for only those
transportation deficiencies created by project traffic. If transportation improvements are
needed to maintain the adopted level of service standards for Scenario 2 (Existing plus Future
traffic), the necessary improvements will be identified and will be considered in place for
Scenario 4 (Existing plus Future plus Project traffic). The project’s proportionate fair share will be
calculated only for any needed transportation improvements greater than those improvements
required to remedy any deficiencies identified in Scenario 2. If a deficiency is created by project
traffic in Scenario 4, the proportionate fair share will be calculated based upon the PM peak-
hour two-way trip generation and the following formula:
Proportionate Fair Share (Roadway) = σ[(Two-Way Project Trips)/(Two-Way SV Increase)]
Site Access Analysis
Operational analyses at the site access points along Bourneside Boulevard will not be evaluated
as part of this analysis. That analysis will be deferred and evaluated during each rezone when
development plans are prepared. An access management plan will be prepared to establish
the location of the site access points along Bourneside Boulevard to ensure that they meet
Sarasota County’s access management standards.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
May 5, 2022
Paula Wiggins, P.E.
Page 7 of 7

Analysis Procedures
All analyses for study area intersections and roadways will be conducted in a manner consistent
with the procedures and assumptions utilized by Sarasota County and contained in Resolution
No. 2019-106. Specifically, the subject analyses will utilize the ITE Rates (the 11 th Edition), Sarasota
County’s Generalized Level of Service Tables, and the Synchro Software.
If the above methodology is acceptable, please send written confirmation so we can proceed
with the study. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Matthew R. Crim, P.E., PTOE

Transportation Engineer
Ph: 832-523-9111
matt.crim@stantec.com
Attachments: Project Boundary

Project Traffic Distribution
Rcv'd 5/31/2022 SR
7
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
FRUITVILLE ROAD
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\PropROWAlign_SarCou_20220407.mxd
EastWestB_ROW
L E G E N D
Proposed ROW Alignment

3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ
Feet
¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes:
April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
2. Source data: Sarasota County GIS, Stantec Technical Review by: X.X.X MM/DD/YY

Rcv'd 5/31/2022

[[[ 3HUFHQW3URMHFW7UDIILF

ODQHSHUGLUHFWLRQ
ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ

ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ

ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ
&HQWURLG&RQQHFWRU
3URMHFW7$=

7$=V

3URMHFW7UDIILF'LVWULEXWLRQ
&RVW)HDVLEOH1HWZRUN
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
APPENDIX B
PEAK-SEASON CONVERSION FACTORS
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Turning Movement Count Summary

Location: Sarasota Center Blvd & Fruitville Rd
Date: 5/25/2022
Count Period: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM
676 110
0.9% 0.0% 0.8%

550 0 126
Peak 15 Min
1204 0.0% 0 4:30 PM 26 3 8%
3.8% 670
2.6% 870 0 Peak Hour 1 644 4.7%

4:15 PM
870 0.0% 0 PH Factor 0 0.0% 1002

93.1%
10 84 6
40.0% 8.3% 0.0%
0 100
Fruitville Rd Sarasota Center Blvd

Time Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Totals
Period :15 Hour
4:00 PM 0 0 199 0 0 0 141 5 0 4 28 0 0 32 0 172 581
4:15 PM 0 0 203 0 0 0 167 10 0 3 17 0 0 24 0 143 567
4:30 PM 0 0 224 0 0 0 199 9 0 5 21 1 0 25 0 138 622
4:45 PM 0 0 218 0 0 0 133 6 0 2 27 1 0 28 0 96 511 2281
5:00 PM 0 0 225 0 0 0 145 1 0 0 19 4 0 49 0 173 616 2316
5:15 PM 0 0 246 0 0 0 120 7 0 0 23 0 0 32 0 80 508 2257
5:30 PM 0 0 231 0 0 0 116 4 0 3 21 0 0 13 0 77 465 2100
5:45 PM 0 0 197 0 0 0 119 6 0 0 29 0 0 12 0 64 427 2016
Total 0 0 1743 0 0 0 1140 48 0 17 185 6 0 215 0 943 4297
www.besinceng.com | 5328 Primrose Lake Cir, Suite B, Tampa, FL 33647 | Certified DBE/MBE/SBE
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Location: Lorraine Rd & Fruitville Rd
Date: 5/25/2022
263 470
5.7% 0.0% 9.8%

212 0 51
Peak 15 Min
482 0.5% 433 5:00 PM 37 0 0%
0.0% 307
3.7% 594 0 Peak Hour 0 270 3.0%

4:30 PM
1027 0.0% 0 PH Factor 0 0.0% 645

94.2%
0 0 0
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
0 0
Fruitville Rd Lorraine Rd
Period :15 Hour
4:00 PM 0 74 121 0 0 0 66 14 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 39 327
4:15 PM 0 77 139 0 0 0 70 8 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 65 376
4:30 PM 0 101 146 0 0 0 70 10 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 56 396
4:45 PM 0 88 146 0 0 0 59 9 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 44 361 1460
5:00 PM 0 104 164 0 0 0 78 15 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 56 424 1557
5:15 PM 0 140 138 0 0 0 63 3 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 56 416 1597
5:30 PM 0 103 156 0 0 0 48 7 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 48 377 1578
5:45 PM 0 89 99 0 0 0 70 11 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 38 323 1540
Total 0 776 1109 0 0 0 524 77 0 0 0 0 0 112 0 402 3000
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Location: Lake Osprey Dr & University Pkwy
Date: 5/25/2022
633 563
0.2% 0.0% 0.0%

545 24 64
Peak 15 Min
2414 0.2% 463 5:00 PM 54 0 0%
0.0% 1739
1.2% 1169 0 Peak Hour 1 1628 1.2%

4:45 PM
1738 0.0% 106 PH Factor 57 0.0% 1304

94.6%
234 51 73
0.9% 0.0% 1.4%
187 358
University Pkwy Lake Osprey Dr

Period :15 Hour
4:00 PM 2 102 295 26 0 16 385 6 0 53 10 15 0 14 6 118 1048
4:15 PM 4 85 290 31 0 13 323 17 1 33 11 16 0 12 4 140 980
4:30 PM 3 99 255 19 1 5 386 14 0 45 12 9 0 10 8 178 1044
4:45 PM 3 118 279 27 0 19 411 14 0 55 7 14 0 15 2 125 1089 4161
5:00 PM 2 119 294 29 0 9 409 12 0 85 16 30 1 16 7 152 1181 4294
5:15 PM 1 95 295 25 0 17 442 14 0 54 12 14 1 17 7 151 1145 4459
5:30 PM 1 124 301 25 0 12 366 14 0 40 16 15 0 14 8 117 1053 4468
5:45 PM 4 109 258 33 0 18 270 15 0 39 6 13 0 7 8 112 892 4271
Total 20 851 2267 215 1 109 2992 106 1 404 90 126 2 105 50 1093 8432
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Location: Town Center Pkwy & University Pkwy
Date: 5/25/2022
273 188
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

207 4 62
Peak 15 Min
1748 0.0% 74 5:00 PM 80 0 0%
0.0% 1481
1.1% 1221 0 Peak Hour 1 1393 1.5%

4:45 PM
1313 0.0% 18 PH Factor 8 0.0% 1300

92.7%
144 38 15
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
28 197
University Pkwy Town Center Pkwy

Period :15 Hour
4:00 PM 3 14 307 5 0 1 316 15 0 41 3 2 0 17 1 37 762
4:15 PM 3 29 298 4 0 0 325 17 0 19 2 6 0 12 3 31 749
4:30 PM 1 12 273 6 0 1 315 18 0 44 6 3 0 18 0 45 742
4:45 PM 2 19 286 3 0 2 366 15 0 42 8 4 0 16 1 47 811 3064
5:00 PM 1 17 312 6 1 2 373 20 0 49 18 5 0 19 2 55 880 3182
5:15 PM 0 15 308 3 1 1 314 26 0 30 10 3 0 15 1 55 782 3215
5:30 PM 1 19 315 6 0 1 340 19 0 23 2 3 0 12 0 50 791 3264
5:45 PM 1 25 259 5 0 1 263 14 0 10 5 4 0 11 1 43 642 3095
Total 12 150 2358 38 2 9 2612 144 0 258 54 30 0 120 9 363 6159
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Location: Lakewood Ranch Blvd & University Pkwy
Date: 5/25/2022
512 838
1.0% 1.1% 3.5%

304 94 114
Peak 15 Min
1486 0.3% 356 5:00 PM 164 0 0%
0.0% 1006
1.5% 810 0 Peak Hour 1 823 1.6%

4:45 PM
1300 0.7% 134 PH Factor 19 0.0% 993

93.3%
354 323 69
1.1% 0.0% 0.0%
247 746
University Pkwy Lakewood Ranch Blvd

Period :15 Hour
4:00 PM 0 108 217 24 0 3 186 42 0 76 46 12 0 29 20 82 845
4:15 PM 0 84 195 25 0 4 220 35 0 46 43 9 0 33 29 72 795
4:30 PM 1 88 186 25 1 3 186 57 0 85 74 13 1 27 15 83 845
4:45 PM 0 92 221 30 0 4 240 45 0 75 55 15 0 29 14 72 892 3377
5:00 PM 3 84 195 28 0 7 230 46 0 105 101 20 0 35 30 71 955 3487
5:15 PM 0 91 193 43 0 4 171 38 0 95 97 15 0 25 23 72 867 3559
5:30 PM 2 84 201 33 0 4 182 35 0 79 70 19 0 25 27 89 850 3564
5:45 PM 0 84 181 32 0 3 169 31 0 61 59 11 0 29 33 81 774 3446
Total 6 715 1589 240 1 32 1584 329 0 622 545 114 1 232 191 622 6823
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Location: Lorraine Rd & University Pkwy
Date: 3/3/2022
974 1199
0.4% 3.7% 0.0%

735 216 23
Peak 15 Min
1026 0.3% 687 4:45 PM 50 0 0%
0.0% 321
2.8% 141 2 Peak Hour 3 191 2.1%

4:45 PM
933 1.9% 105 PH Factor 80 1.3% 207

95.6%
98 463 40
3.1% 1.3% 5.0%
397 601
University Pkwy Lorraine Rd

Period :15 Hour
4:00 PM 0 172 39 24 1 22 46 17 0 22 82 10 0 7 42 128 612
4:15 PM 0 147 38 24 1 19 29 17 2 26 94 5 0 5 63 126 596
4:30 PM 1 142 20 35 0 15 51 16 0 32 84 8 0 10 47 175 636
4:45 PM 1 168 29 29 1 22 49 10 0 23 111 14 0 7 60 216 740 2584
5:00 PM 1 132 44 24 1 18 53 18 0 40 110 3 0 5 64 204 717 2689
5:15 PM 0 176 37 26 1 21 58 15 0 22 113 5 0 4 47 161 686 2779
5:30 PM 0 209 31 26 1 15 31 7 0 13 129 18 1 6 45 154 686 2829
5:45 PM 0 143 31 19 0 19 42 8 0 19 122 6 0 9 30 137 585 2674
Total 3 1289 269 207 6 151 359 108 2 197 845 69 1 53 398 1301 5258
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Location: Bourneside Blvd & University Pkwy
Date: 5/25/2022
48 33
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

48 0 0
Peak 15 Min
50 0.0% 35 4:00 PM 0 0 0%
0.0% 0
0.0% 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0.0%

4:00 PM
35 0.0% 0 PH Factor 0 0.0% 0

83.0%
0 0 0
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
0 0
University Pkwy Bourneside Blvd

Period :15 Hour
4:00 PM 1 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 25
4:15 PM 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 15
4:30 PM 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 20
4:45 PM 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 23 83
5:00 PM 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 21 79
5:15 PM 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 13 77
5:30 PM 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 64
5:45 PM 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 15 56
Total 9 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 139
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Location: Bourneside Blvd & The Masters Ave
Date: 7/22/2021
76 150
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

75 1 0
Peak 15 Min
77 0.7% 150 5:30 PM 0 0.0%
0 0% 0
0.0% 0 1 Peak Hour 0 0 0.0%

4:45 PM
150 0.0% 0 PH Factor 0 0.0% 0

95.0%
1 1 0
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
1 2
The Masters Ave Bourneside Blvd

Period :15 Hour
4:00 PM 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 54
4:15 PM 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 19 65
4:30 PM 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 20 43
4:45 PM 1 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 49 211
5:00 PM 0 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 59 216
5:15 PM 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 60 211
5:30 PM 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 60 228
5:45 PM 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 14 51 230
Total 1 285 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 0 1 0 1 146 441
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
APPENDIX C
HISTORICAL VOLUMES
D1RPM VOLUMES
HI-HAT RANCH VOLUMES

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
6/29/2011
SARASOTA COUNTY 9:26 AM
2010 GENERALIZED LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Road Segments Segment Attributes Existing Traffic Conditions Minimum
Analysis Traffic Counts Adjusted Adopted
Juris- # of Segm Sgmnt Post Ref Volume to 2010 Standards
ID # Roadway Name Limits diction Lns Length Length Spd No. Source Date AADT AADT DHV LOS LOS Srv Vol
102 Fruitville (SR 780) Lockwood Ridge Beneva FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 0.50 45 42 FDOT Jan-10 41,500 41,500 3,735 C D 4,400
103 Fruitville (SR 780) Beneva McIntosh FDOT/Sar 6 1.00 1.00 45 48 FDOT Jan-10 43,500 43,500 3,915 B D 4,920
104 Fruitville (SR 780) McIntosh Honore FDOT 6 1.00 1.00 45 48 FDOT Jan-10 43,500 43,500 3,915 B D 4,920
105 Fruitville (SR 780) Honore Arthur Andersen Pkwy FDOT 6 0.40 0.40 45 42 FDOT Jan-10 49,000 49,000 4,165 D D 4,400
105.5 Fruitville (SR 780) Arthur Andersen Pkwy Cattlemen FDOT 6 0.30 0.30 45 42 FDOT Jan-10 49,000 49,000 4,165 D D 4,400
106 Fruitville (SR 780) Cattlemen I-75 FDOT 6 0.35 0.35 45 42 FDOT Jan-10 49,000 49,000 4,165 D D 4,400
107 Fruitville I-75 Coburn S County 4 0.59 0.59 45 44 SC Mar-09 20,337 20,886 2,151 B C 3,000
107 Fruitville Coburn S East Road County 4 0.62 0.62 45 44 SC Mar-09 20,337 20,886 2,151 B C 3,000
107.3 Fruitville East Road Tatum County 4 0.64 0.64 45 44 SC Mar-09 16,804 17,258 1,795 B C 3,000
107.5 Fruitville Tatum Sarasota Center Blvd County 4 0.61 0.61 45 44 SC Mar-09 22,204 22,804 2,349 C C 3,000
107.6 Fruitville Sarasota Center Blvd Dog Kennel Rd County 2 1.40 8.50 55 52 SC Mar-09 7,886 8,099 883 A C 1,840
107.7 Fruitville Dog Kennel Rd Verna Road County 2 7.10 8.50 55 83 SC Mar-09 6,286 6,456 704 C C 880
108 Gantt Road Proctor Ashton County 2 0.50 0.50 35 69 SC May-07 10,256 11,109 1,211 E C 800
108.5 Gantt Road Ashton Clark County 2 0.50 0.50 35 69 SC May-07 10,328 11,187 1,219 E C 800
112 Gulf Gate Drive U.S. 41 Gateway Ave County 4 0.29 0.29 30 70 SC Jul-10 5,605 5,605 617 C C 1,640
113 Gulf Gate Drive Gateway Markridge County 2 0.58 0.58 30 71 SC Jul-10 5,424 5,424 597 C C 1,120
113 Gulf Gate Drive Markridge Bispham County 2 0.17 0.17 30 69 SC Jul-10 5,424 5,424 597 C C 800
114 Gulf Gate Drive Bispham Curtiss County 2 0.44 0.44 30 69 SC Jul-10 5,639 5,639 620 C C 800
114 Gulf Gate Drive Curtiss Beneva County 2 0.11 0.11 30 69 SC Jul-10 5,639 5,639 620 C C 800
115 Gulf Mexico Dr.(SR 789) Co Line New Pass Bridge FDOT/LBK 2 5.35 5.35 35 34 FDOT Jan-10 16,400 16,400 1,706 C D 1,960
116 Harbor Drive Venice Ave Beach Rd Co./Ven 2 1.40 1.40 30 75 SC Sep-10 2,766 2,766 307 B C 1,300
117 Harbor Drive Beach Rd South of Beach Rd Co./Ven 2 1.70 1.70 30 77 SC Sep-10 3,009 3,009 334 B C 1,400
1046 Hatchet Creek Boulevard Pinebrook Rd Jacaranda Blvd Co./Ven 2 1.76 1.48 25 63 SC Sep-10 3,077 3,077 342 C C 1,280
118 Higel Avenue (SR 758) Siesta Midnight Pass Rd FDOT 2 0.85 1.85 40 34 FDOT Jan-10 16,900 16,900 1,758 C D 1,960
119 Higel Ave/Treasure Boat Midnight Pass Rd Ocean County 2 0.12 0.62 35 71 SC Jul-10 852 852 95 C C 1,120
119.5 Honore Avenue University Desoto County 2 0.50 0.50 45 40 SC Mar-10 13,805 13,805 1,436 D C 1,240
119.5 Honore Avenue Desoto Longmeadow County 2 0.54 0.50 45 40 SC Mar-10 13,805 13,805 1,436 D C 1,240
119.7 Honore Avenue Longmeadow Taywood County 2 1.20 1.20 30 75 SC Mar-10 12,088 12,088 1,257 C C 1,300
120 Honore Avenue Taywood 17th County 2 0.60 0.60 30 71 SC Mar-10 13,109 13,109 1,363 E C 1,120
121 Honore Avenue 17th Richardson County 2 0.55 0.55 35 71 SC Mar-10 19,436 19,436 2,002 F F > 1,420
121.5 Honore Avenue Richardson Fruitville County 2 0.45 0.45 35 69 SC Mar-10 17,893 17,893 1,861 F F > 1,320
122 Honore Avenue Fruitville Palmer County 2 0.67 1.01 35 75 SC Apr-10 15,049 15,049 1,565 E C 1,300
122.6 Honore Avenue Palmer Bahia Vista County 2 0.34 0.34 35 69 SC Apr-10 5,967 5,967 656 C C 800
122.7 Honore Avenue Bahia Vista Colonial Oaks County 2 0.80 0.80 30 73 SC Apr-10 2,987 2,987 332 C C 1,220
122.75 Honore Avenue Bee Ridge Wilkinson County 2 0.50 0.50 45 40 SC Jun-09 6,531 6,707 731 C C 1,240
122.76 Honore Avenue Wilkinson Proctor County 2 0.50 0.50 40 40 SC Jun-09 6,469 6,644 724 C C 1,240
5 of 13
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
6/29/2011
Juris- # of Segm Sgmnt Post Ref Volume to 2010 Standards
ID # Roadway Name Limits diction Lns Length Length Spd No. Source Date AADT AADT DHV LOS LOS Srv Vol
231 Tuttle Avenue 12th 8th St City/Sar 4 0.40 0.40 40 41 SC Feb-09 42,864 44,021 3,962 F C 2,540
231.5 Tuttle Avenue 8th St Fruitville City/Sar 4 0.40 0.40 40 41 SC Feb-09 34,345 35,272 3,210 E C 2,540
233 Tuttle Avenue Fruitville Ringling City/Sar 4 0.10 0.10 40 70 SC Mar-10 33,379 33,379 3,204 F D 2,320
233 Tuttle Avenue Ringling Browning St City/Sar 4 0.65 0.65 40 44 SC Mar-10 33,379 33,379 3,204 D C 3,000
233.5 Tuttle Avenue Browning St Bahia Vista City/Sar 4 0.25 0.25 40 41 SC Mar-10 28,469 28,469 2,790 D D 3,020
234 Tuttle Avenue Bahia Vista Hyde Co./Sar 4 0.50 0.50 40 41 SC Mar-10 30,874 30,874 2,995 D D 3,020
235 Tuttle Avenue Hyde Webber County 4 0.50 0.50 40 41 SC Mar-10 28,800 28,800 2,822 D D 3,020
236 Tuttle Avenue Webber South Gate Circle County 4 0.15 0.65 40 44 SC Mar-10 24,941 24,941 2,444 C C 3,000
237 Tuttle Avenue South Gate Circle TJ Maxx Ent. County 4 0.35 0.65 40 44 SC Mar-10 23,346 23,346 2,405 C C 3,000
238 Tuttle Avenue TJ Maxx Ent. Bee Ridge County 4 0.15 0.65 40 44 SC Mar-10 21,227 21,227 2,186 B C 3,000
239.5 University Parkway U.S.41 Airport Entrance County 4 0.24 45 41 SC Jan-10 19,541 19,541 2,013 C C 2,540
239.6 University Parkway Airport Entrance Old Bradenton Rd County 4 0.35 45 41 SC Jan-10 20,075 20,075 2,068 C C 2,540
239.7 University Parkway Old Bradenton Rd Desoto County 4 0.30 45 41 SC Jan-10 23,465 23,465 2,417 C C 2,540
239.8 University Parkway Desoto West University Pkwy County 4 0.65 45 44 SC Jan-10 19,129 19,129 1,970 B C 3,000
239.9 University Parkway West University Pkwy U.S. 301 County 4 0.30 45 41 SC Jan-10 23,663 23,663 2,437 C C 2,540
240 University Parkway U.S. 301 Tuttle Av County 6 1.08 50 51 SC Jan-10 33,279 33,279 3,195 A C 4,820
240.5 University Parkway Tuttle Av Lockwood Ridge County 6 0.47 50 42 SC Jan-10 34,280 34,280 3,257 C C 3,740
241 University Parkway Lockwood Ridge Conservatory County 6 0.59 0.59 50 45 SC Jan-10 39,793 39,793 3,621 C C 4,360
241.3 University Parkway Conservatory Whitfield County 6 0.57 0.57 50 45 SC Jan-10 41,823 41,823 3,764 C C 4,360
241.5 University Parkway Whitfield Longwood Run Blvd County 6 0.47 0.47 50 42 SC Jan-10 42,124 42,124 3,791 D C 3,740
242 University Parkway Longwood Run Blvd Medici County 6 0.40 0.40 50 42 SC Jan-10 43,748 43,748 3,937 D C 3,740
242.5 University Parkway Medici Honore County 6 0.33 0.33 50 42 SC Jan-10 45,502 45,502 4,095 D C 3,740
242.6 University Parkway Honore Cooper Creek County 6 0.35 0.35 50 42 SC Jan-10 48,737 48,737 4,143 D C 3,740
242.7 University Parkway Cooper Creek I-75 County 6 0.50 0.50 50 42 SC Jan-10 49,058 49,058 4,170 D C 3,740
243 U.S. 301 (SR 683) University Desoto FDOT 4 0.51 0.51 50 44 FDOT Jan-10 32,500 32,500 3,120 D D 3,240
244 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Desoto 47th FDOT 4 0.45 0.45 50 41 FDOT Jan-10 32,500 32,500 3,120 E D 3,020
244.5 U.S. 301 (SR 683) 47th Northgate FDOT 4 0.17 0.17 50 41 FDOT Jan-10 32,500 32,500 3,120 E D 3,020
244.6 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Northgate Myrtle FDOT 4 0.38 0.38 50 41 FDOT Jan-10 39,000 39,000 3,549 F D 3,020
245 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar 4 0.50 0.50 45 41 FDOT Jan-10 39,000 39,000 3,549 F D 3,020
246 U.S. 301 (SR 683) 27th 17th FDOT/Sar 4 0.50 0.50 45 41 FDOT Jan-10 39,000 39,000 3,549 F D 3,020
247 U.S. 301 (SR 683) 17th 12th FDOT/Sar 4 0.25 0.25 45 41 FDOT Jan-10 39,000 39,000 3,549 F D 3,020
248 U.S. 301 (SR 683) 12th Fruitville (SR 780) FDOT/Sar 4 0.65 0.65 35 26 FDOT Jan-10 31,500 31,500 3,024 D F > 3,440
249 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Fruitville Main FDOT/Sar 4 0.15 0.15 35 23 FDOT Jan-10 31,500 31,500 3,024 E E 3,240
250 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Main Ringling FDOT/Sar 4 0.08 0.08 35 23 FDOT Jan-10 31,500 31,500 3,024 E E 3,240
251 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Ringling U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar 4 0.45 0.45 35 23 FDOT Jan-10 31,500 31,500 3,024 E E 3,240
252 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) U.S. 41 Bird Bay FDOT/Ven 6 0.25 0.25 45 42 FDOT Jan-10 34,500 34,500 3,278 C E 4,680
10 of 13
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
10/17/2016
Juris- # of Sgmnt Post Ref Volume to 2015 Standards
ID # Roadway Name Limits diction Lns Length Spd No. Source Date AADT AADT DHV LOS LOS Srv Vol
91 Old Englewood Road S.R. 776 Bay Vista Blvd County 2 2.20 45 52 SC Oct-15 2,302 2,302 256 A C 1,840
92 Old Englewood Road Bay Vista Dearborn County 2 2.20 45 52 SC Oct-15 1,964 1,964 218 A C 1,840
1042 Edmondson Road Albee Farm Rd Pinebrook County 2 1.01 35 75 SC Aug-15 2,933 2,933 326 B C 1,300
679 Edmondson Road Pinebrook Rd Capri Isles Blvd Co./Ven 2 0.45 30 69 SC - - N/A C 800
680 Edmondson Road Capri Isles Blvd Auburn Rd Co./Ven 2 0.56 30 71 SC - - N/A C 1,120
93 Englewood Road (SR 776) U.S. 41 Jacaranda Blvd FDOT 6 0.75 45 45 FDOT Jan-15 20,000 20,000 2,060 B D 4,700
93.3 Englewood Road (SR 776) Jacaranda Blvd Rutgers Rd FDOT 6 0.38 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 20,000 20,000 2,060 C D 4,400
93.6 Englewood Road (SR 776) Rutgers Rd Manasota Bch. Rd FDOT 6 1.30 45 51 FDOT Jan-15 20,000 20,000 2,060 A D 5,160
94 Englewood Road (SR 776) Manasota Bch. Overbrook Rd FDOT 6 1.30 45 51 FDOT Jan-15 24,500 24,500 2,401 A D 5,160
94.5 Englewood Road (SR 776) Overbrook Rd Englwd. I. Pkwy FDOT 4 0.35 45 41 FDOT Jan-15 24,500 24,500 2,401 C D 3,020
95 Englewood Road (SR 776) Englewood Isle Pkwy Dearborn FDOT 4 3.10 45 53 FDOT Jan-15 24,500 24,500 2,401 A D 3,820
96 Fruitville (SR 780) U.S. 301 East Ave FDOT/Sar 6 0.15 35 24 FDOT Jan-15 35,000 35,000 3,185 C D 4,380
97 Fruitville (SR 780) East Ave School FDOT/Sar 6 0.15 40 42 FDOT Jan-15 35,000 35,000 3,185 C D 4,400
98 Fruitville (SR 780) School Lime FDOT/Sar 6 0.15 40 42 FDOT Jan-15 35,000 35,000 3,185 C D 4,400
99 Fruitville (SR 780) Lime Shade FDOT/Sar 6 0.15 40 42 FDOT Jan-15 35,000 35,000 3,185 C D 4,400
100 Fruitville (SR 780) Shade Tuttle FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 40 42 FDOT Jan-15 49,500 49,500 4,208 D D 4,400
101 Fruitville (SR 780) Tuttle Lockwood Ridge FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 47,500 47,500 4,038 D D 4,400
102 Fruitville (SR 780) Lockwood Ridge Beneva FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 47,500 47,500 4,038 D D 4,400
103 Fruitville (SR 780) Beneva McIntosh FDOT/Sar 6 1.00 45 48 FDOT Jan-15 52,500 52,500 4,463 C D 4,920
104 Fruitville (SR 780) McIntosh Honore FDOT 6 1.00 45 48 FDOT Jan-15 52,500 52,500 4,463 C D 4,920
105 Fruitville (SR 780) Honore Paramount Dr FDOT 6 0.40 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 57,000 57,000 4,731 F D 4,400
105.5 Fruitville (SR 780) Paramount Dr Cattlemen FDOT 6 0.30 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 57,000 57,000 4,731 F D 4,400
106 Fruitville (SR 780) Cattlemen I-75 FDOT 6 0.35 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 57,000 57,000 4,731 F D 4,400
107 Fruitville I-75 Coburn S County 4 0.59 45 44 SC Mar-15 27,247 27,247 2,670 C C 3,000
107 Fruitville Coburn S East Road County 4 0.62 45 44 SC Mar-15 27,247 27,247 2,670 C C 3,000
107.3 Fruitville East Road Tatum County 4 0.64 45 44 SC Mar-15 23,887 23,887 2,460 C C 3,000
107.5 Fruitville Tatum Sarasota Center Blvd County 4 0.61 45 44 SC Mar-15 18,024 18,024 1,856 B C 3,000
107.6 Fruitville Sarasota Center Blvd Dog Kennel Rd County 2 8.50 55 52 SC Mar-15 7,858 7,858 857 A C 1,840
107.7 Fruitville Dog Kennel Rd Verna Road County 2 8.50 55 83 SC Mar-14 6,580 6,758 737 C C 880
108 Gantt Road Proctor Ashton County 2 0.50 35 69 SC Aug-14 8,264 8,487 925 D C 800
108.5 Gantt Road Ashton Clark County 2 0.50 35 69 SC Aug-14 8,783 9,020 983 D C 800
112 Gulf Gate Drive U.S. 41 Gateway Ave County 4 0.29 30 70 SC Jul-15 7,761 7,761 846 C C 1,640
113 Gulf Gate Drive Gateway Markridge County 2 0.58 25 59 SC Jul-15 5,748 5,748 632 C C 1,060
113 Gulf Gate Drive Markridge Bispham County 2 0.17 25 69 SC Jul-15 5,748 5,748 632 C C 800
114 Gulf Gate Drive Bispham Curtiss County 2 0.44 25 57 SC Feb-15 6,500 6,500 709 D C 660
114 Gulf Gate Drive Curtiss Beneva County 2 0.11 25 57 SC Feb-15 6,500 6,500 709 D C 660
115 Gulf Mexico Dr.(SR 789) Co Line New Pass Bridge FDOT/LBK 2 5.35 35 34 FDOT Jan-15 17,400 17,400 1,810 D D 1,960
116 Harbor Drive Venice Ave Beach Rd Co./Ven 2 1.40 30 75 SC Sep-15 3,072 3,072 341 B C 1,300
117 Harbor Drive Beach Rd South of Beach Rd Co./Ven 2 1.70 30 77 SC Sep-15 3,656 3,656 406 B C 1,400
1046 Hatchet Creek Boulevard Pinebrook Rd Jacaranda Blvd Co./Ven 2 1.48 25 63 SC Aug-15 2,660 2,660 295 B C 1,280
118 Higel Avenue (SR 758) Siesta Midnight Pass Rd FDOT 2 1.85 40 34 FDOT Jan-15 16,200 16,200 1,685 C D 1,960
119 Higel Ave/Treasure Boat Midnight Pass Rd Ocean County 2 0.62 35 71 SC Mar-15 1,806 1,806 200 C C 1,120
119.5 Honore Avenue University Desoto County 2 0.50 40 40 SC Mar-15 17,394 17,394 1,809 F C 1,240
4
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
10/17/2016
Juris- # of Sgmnt Post Ref Volume to 2015 Standards
ID # Roadway Name Limits diction Lns Length Spd No. Source Date AADT AADT DHV LOS LOS Srv Vol
235 Tuttle Avenue Hyde Webber County 4 0.50 40 41 SC Feb-15 27,457 27,457 2,691 D C 2,540
236 Tuttle Avenue Webber South Gate Circle County 4 0.65 40 44 SC Feb-15 23,861 23,861 2,458 C C 3,000
237 Tuttle Avenue South Gate Circle TJ Maxx Ent. County 4 0.65 40 44 SC Feb-15 21,400 21,400 2,204 B C 3,000
238 Tuttle Avenue TJ Maxx Ent. Bee Ridge County 4 0.65 40 44 SC Feb-15 21,400 21,400 2,204 B C 3,000
239.5 University Parkway U.S.41 Airport Entrance County 4 0.24 45 41 SC Jan-15 21,126 21,126 2,176 C C 2,540
239.6 University Parkway Airport Entrance Old Bradenton Rd County 4 0.35 45 41 SC Jan-15 22,952 22,952 2,364 C C 2,540
239.7 University Parkway Old Bradenton Rd Desoto County 4 0.30 45 41 SC Jan-15 26,798 26,798 2,626 D C 2,540
239.8 University Parkway Desoto West University Pkwy County 4 0.65 45 44 SC Jan-15 21,853 21,853 2,251 C C 3,000
239.9 University Parkway West University Pkwy U.S. 301 County 4 0.30 45 41 SC Jan-15 28,306 28,306 2,774 D C 2,540
240 University Parkway U.S. 301 Tuttle Av County 6 1.08 50 51 SC Jan-15 40,536 40,536 3,689 B C 4,820
240.5 University Parkway Tuttle Av Lockwood Ridge County 6 0.47 50 42 SC Jan-14 42,512 43,660 3,929 D C 3,740
241 University Parkway Lockwood Ridge Conservatory County 6 0.59 50 45 SC Jan-15 25,335 25,335 2,483 B C 4,360
241.3 University Parkway Conservatory Whitfield County 6 0.57 50 45 SC Jan-15 48,805 48,805 4,148 C C 4,360
241.5 University Parkway Whitfield Longwood Run Blvd County 6 0.47 50 42 SC Jan-15 51,174 51,174 4,350 D C 3,740
242 University Parkway Longwood Run Blvd Medici County 6 0.40 50 42 SC Jan-15 53,178 53,178 4,467 E C 3,740
242.5 University Parkway Medici Honore County 6 0.33 50 42 SC Jan-15 54,024 54,024 4,538 E C 3,740
242.6 University Parkway Honore Cooper Creek County 6 0.35 50 42 SC Jan-15 55,091 55,091 4,628 E C 3,740
242.7 University Parkway Cooper Creek I-75 County 6 0.50 50 42 SC Jan-15 64,014 64,014 5,313 F C 3,740
243 U.S. 301 (SR 683) University Desoto FDOT 6 0.51 50 45 FDOT Jan-15 39,000 39,000 3,549 C D 4,700
244 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Desoto 47th FDOT 6 0.45 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 39,000 39,000 3,549 C D 4,400
244.5 U.S. 301 (SR 683) 47th Northgate FDOT 6 0.17 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 39,000 39,000 3,549 C D 4,400
244.6 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Northgate Myrtle FDOT 6 0.38 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 41,500 41,500 3,735 C D 4,400
245 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 41,500 41,500 3,735 C D 4,400
246 U.S. 301 (SR 683) 27th 17th FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 41,500 41,500 3,735 C D 4,400
248 U.S. 301 (SR 683) 12th Fruitville (SR 780) FDOT/Sar 4 0.65 35 26 FDOT Jan-15 35,000 35,000 3,185 D D 3,220
249 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Fruitville Main FDOT/Sar 4 0.15 35 23 FDOT Jan-15 35,000 35,000 3,185 E D 3,020
250 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Main Ringling FDOT/Sar 4 0.08 35 23 FDOT Jan-15 35,000 35,000 3,185 E D 3,020
251 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Ringling U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar 4 0.45 35 23 FDOT Jan-15 35,000 35,000 3,185 E D 3,020
252 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) U.S. 41 Bird Bay FDOT/Ven 6 0.25 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 39,500 39,500 3,595 C D 4,400
253 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Bird Bay TJ Maxx Ent. FDOT/Ven 6 0.25 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 39,500 39,500 3,595 C D 4,400
254 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) TJ Maxx Ent. Albee Farm Rd FDOT/Ven 6 0.30 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 39,500 39,500 3,595 C D 4,400
255 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Albee Farm Rd Venice Ave FDOT/Ven 6 0.30 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 39,500 39,500 3,595 C D 4,400
256 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Venice Ave Center Rd FDOT 6 1.60 45 54 FDOT Jan-15 39,500 39,500 3,595 A D 5,480
257 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Center Rd S. U.S. 41 FDOT 6 0.35 45 42 FDOT Jan-15 39,500 39,500 3,595 C D 4,400
258 U.S.41 (SR 45) Co Line Spaatz FDOT 4 0.20 45 41 FDOT Jan-15 40,500 40,500 3,686 F D 3,020
259 U.S.41 (SR 45) Spaatz University FDOT/Sar 4 0.30 45 41 FDOT Jan-15 40,500 40,500 3,686 F D 3,020
260 U.S.41 (SR 45) University Myrtle FDOT/Sar 4 1.00 45 47 FDOT Jan-15 37,500 37,500 3,413 D D 3,420
261 U.S.41 (SR 45) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar 4 0.50 45 41 FDOT Jan-15 38,500 38,500 3,504 F D 3,020
262 U.S.41 (SR 45) 27th 10th FDOT/Sar 4 1.00 40 47 FDOT Jan-15 38,500 38,500 3,504 E D 3,420
263 U.S.41 (SR 45) 10th Blvd of Arts FDOT/Sar 4 0.25 40 41 FDOT Jan-15 38,500 38,500 3,504 F D 3,020
264 U.S.41 (SR 45) Blvd of Arts Fruitville Rd FDOT/Sar 4 0.15 40 41 FDOT Jan-15 38,500 38,500 3,504 F D 3,020
265 U.S.41 (SR 45) Fruitville Rd Ringling FDOT/Sar 4 0.25 40 41 FDOT Jan-15 38,500 38,500 3,504 F D 3,020
9
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SARASOTA COUNTY
Road Segments Segment Attributes Existing Traffic Conditions
Traffic Counts
Minimum
ID # Roadway Name Limits Jurisdiction # of Segm Post Ref Date Volume Adjusted DHV LOS LOS
68.6 Center Road Rockley Blvd River Rd County 4 1.60 45 44 SC Sep-20 8,750 8,986 979 C D 3,401
68.7 Central Sarasota Parkway U.S. 41 Potter Park Dr County 2 0.26 45 47 SC Jul-20 9,381 9,635 1,050 C D 1,600
68.7 Central Sarasota Parkway Potter Park Dr McIntosh County 2 0.49 45 26 SC Jul-20 9,381 9,635 1,050 C D 1,520
68.8 Central Sarasota Parkway McIntosh Honore County 2 1.30 45 47 SC Jul-20 9,342 9,594 1,046 C D 1,600
69 Clark Road (SR 72) Swift Lockwood Ridge FDOT 6 0.50 40 66 FDOT Jan-20 34,500 36,388 3,311 C D 5,660
70 Clark Road (SR 72) Lockwood Ridge Beneva FDOT 6 0.50 40 66 FDOT Jan-20 34,500 36,388 3,311 C D 5,660
71 Clark Road (SR 72) Beneva Sawyer FDOT 6 0.50 40 3 FDOT Jan-20 42,000 44,299 3,987 C D 5,390
72 Clark Road (SR 72) Sawyer McIntosh FDOT 6 0.50 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 42,000 44,299 3,987 C D 5,390
73 Clark Road (SR 72) McIntosh Honore FDOT 6 1.00 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 42,000 44,299 3,987 C D 5,660
73.5 Clark Road (SR 72) Honore Gantt FDOT 6 0.50 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 42,000 44,299 3,987 C D 5,390
74 Clark Road (SR 72) Gantt Catamaran FDOT 6 0.15 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 42,000 44,299 3,987 C D 5,660
74.5 Clark Road (SR 72) Catamaran I-75 FDOT 6 0.30 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 42,000 44,299 3,987 C D 5,660
75 Clark Road (SR 72) I-75 Proctor FDOT 2 1.70 55 64 FDOT Jan-20 10,000 10,547 1,150 C D 1,680
76 Clark Road (SR 72) Proctor Bee Ridge Ext. FDOT 2 1.45 45 64 FDOT Jan-20 10,000 10,547 1,150 C D 1,680
77 Clark Road (SR 72) Bee Ridge Ext. Co Line FDOT 2 22.40 55 207 FDOT Jan-20 6,200 6,539 713 C C 976
0 Coburn Road Richardson Rd Fruitville Rd County 2 0.43 30 130 SC Apr-20 3,951 4,058 446 C D 931
0 Coburn Road Fruitville Rd Palmer Blvd County 2 1.10 30 122 SC Apr-20 6,596 6,774 738 D D 1,197
78 Colonia Lane U.S. 41 Albee Farm Rd County 2 1.10 30 143 SC Jul-20 4,154 4,266 469 C D 1,264
81 De Leon Drive Ortiz U.S. 41 Co./NPt 2 1.30 30 130 SC Oct-20 590 606 67 C D 931
82 Dearborn Street Old Englewood Rd S.R. 776 County 2 0.80 30 122 SC Oct-20 4,157 4,269 470 C D 1,197
83 Dearborn Street S.R. 776 Pine Street County 4 1.00 40 44 SC Oct-20 9,459 9,715 1,059 C D 3,401
86 Desoto Road University Pkway U.S. 301 County 2 0.80 35 143 SC Feb-20 7,870 8,082 881 D D 1,264
87 Desoto Road U.S. 301 Shade County 2 0.50 35 143 SC Feb-20 5,757 5,913 650 D D 1,264
88 Desoto Road Shade Tuttle County 2 0.50 35 122 SC Feb-20 5,757 5,913 650 D D 1,197
89 Desoto Road Tuttle Lockwood Ridge County 2 0.50 35 122 SC Feb-20 4,970 5,104 561 C D 1,197
90 Desoto Road/Longwood Run Lockwood Ridge University Pkwy County 2 2.05 35 122 SC Feb-20 3,498 3,593 399 C D 1,197
818 Desoto Road Honore N Cattlemen Rd County 2 0.49 30 147 SC Feb-20 8,286 8,510 928 D D 1,330
91 Old Englewood Road S.R. 776 Bay Vista Blvd County 2 0.60 45 30 SC Oct-20 2,196 2,255 250 C D 1,120
92 Old Englewood Road Bay Vista Dearborn County 2 1.60 45 30 SC Oct-20 1,946 1,999 222 C D 1,120
1042 Edmondson Road Albee Farm Rd Pinebrook County 2 1.01 35 143 SC Jul-20 3,208 3,294 366 C D 1,264
679 Edmondson Road Pinebrook Rd Capri Isles Blvd Co./Ven 2 0.45 30 122 SC Jul-20 5,422 5,569 613 D D 1,197
680 Edmondson Road Capri Isles Blvd Auburn Rd Co./Ven 2 0.56 30 130 SC Jul-20 5,422 5,569 613 D D 931
93 Englewood Road (SR 776) U.S. 41 Jacaranda Blvd FDOT 6 0.75 40 66 FDOT Jan-20 17,500 18,458 1,901 C D 5,660
93.3 Englewood Road (SR 776) Jacaranda Blvd Rutgers Rd FDOT 6 0.38 45 165 FDOT Jan-20 17,500 18,458 1,901 D D 3,066
93.6 Englewood Road (SR 776) Rutgers Rd Manasota Bch. Rd FDOT 6 1.30 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 17,500 18,458 1,901 C D 5,660
94 Englewood Road (SR 776) Manasota Bch. Overbrook Rd FDOT 6 1.30 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 17,800 18,774 1,934 C D 5,660
94.5 Englewood Road (SR 776) Overbrook Rd Englwd. I. Pkwy FDOT 6 0.35 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 17,800 18,774 1,934 C D 5,660
95 Englewood Road (SR 776) Englewood Isle Pkwy Dearborn FDOT 4 3.10 45 65 FDOT Jan-20 17,800 18,774 1,934 C D 3,759
96 Fruitville (SR 780) U.S. 301 East Ave FDOT/Sar 4 0.15 35 2 FDOT Jan-20 29,000 30,587 2,967 C D 3,580
97 Fruitville (SR 780) East Ave School FDOT/Sar 6 0.15 40 3 FDOT Jan-20 29,000 30,587 2,967 C D 5,390
98 Fruitville (SR 780) School Lime FDOT/Sar 6 0.15 40 3 FDOT Jan-20 29,000 30,587 2,967 C D 5,390
99 Fruitville (SR 780) Lime Shade FDOT/Sar 6 0.15 40 3 FDOT Jan-20 29,000 30,587 2,967 C D 5,390
100 Fruitville (SR 780) Shade Tuttle FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 40 3 FDOT Jan-20 37,000 39,025 3,551 C D 5,390
101 Fruitville (SR 780) Tuttle Lockwood Ridge FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 45,500 47,990 4,079 C D 5,390
102 Fruitville (SR 780) Lockwood Ridge Beneva FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 45,000 47,463 4,034 C D 5,390
103 Fruitville (SR 780) Beneva McIntosh FDOT/Sar 6 1.00 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 45,000 47,463 4,034 C D 5,390
104 Fruitville (SR 780) McIntosh Honore FDOT 6 1.00 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 45,000 47,463 4,034 C D 5,660
105 Fruitville (SR 780) Honore Paramount Dr FDOT 6 0.40 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 53,500 56,428 4,684 C D 5,660
105.5 Fruitville (SR 780) Paramount Dr Cattlemen FDOT 6 0.30 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 53,500 56,428 4,684 C D 5,660
106 Fruitville (SR 780) Cattlemen I-75 FDOT 6 0.35 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 53,500 56,428 4,684 C D 5,660
107 Fruitville I-75 Lakewood Ranch Blvd County 4 0.59 45 44 SC Feb-20 30,021 30,831 2,991 C D 3,401
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SARASOTA COUNTY
Traffic Counts
Minimum
ID # Roadway Name Limits Jurisdiction # of Segm Post Ref Date Volume Adjusted
j DHV LOS LOS
107.1 Fruitville Lakewood Ranch Blvd East Road County 4 0.62 45 23 SC Feb-20 27,321 28,059 2,750 C C 3,078
107.2 Fruitville East Road Tatum County 4 0.64 45 23 SC Feb-20 22,530 23,139 2,383 C C 3,078
107.2 Fruitville Tatum Sarasota Center Blvd County 4 0.61 45 44 SC Feb-20 22,397 23,002 2,369 C C 3,249
107.5 Fruitville Sarasota Center Blvd Lorraine Rd County 2 1.40 55 30 SC Feb-20 15,729 16,154 1,680 F C 1,057
107.6 Fruitville Lorraine Rd Verna Road County 2 7.10 55 30 SC Feb-20 5,378 5,523
, 608 C C 1,057
108 Gantt Road Proctor Ashton County 2 0.50 35 151 SC May-20 7,297 7,494 817 D D 998
108.5 Gantt Road Ashton Clark County 2 0.50 35 122 SC May-20 7,774 7,984 870 D D 1,197
112 Gulf Gate Drive U.S. 41 Gateway Ave County 4 0.29 30 152 SC Jul-20 6,110 6,275 684 C D 2,044
113 Gulf Gate Drive Gateway Markridge County 2 0.58 25 126 SC Jul-20 2,151 2,209 245 C D 1,264
113.5 Gulf Gate Drive Markridge Bispham County 2 0.17 25 126 SC Jul-20 2,151 2,209 245 C D 1,264
114 Gulf Gate Drive Bispham Curtiss County 2 0.44 25 126 SC Jul-20 4,515 4,637 510 C D 1,264
114.5 Gulf Gate Drive Curtiss Beneva County 2 0.11 25 126 SC Jul-20 4,515 4,637 510 C D 1,264
115 Gulf Mexico Dr.(SR 789) Co Line New Pass Bridge FDOT/LBK 2 5.35 35 102 FDOT Jan-20 19,700 20,778 2,140 D D 2,920
116 Harbor Drive Venice Ave Beach Rd Co./Ven 2 1.40 30 126 SC Sep-20 3,049 3,131 348 C D 1,264
117 Harbor Drive Beach Rd South of Beach Rd Co./Ven 2 1.70 30 130 SC Sep-20 3,787 3,890 432 C D 931
0 Hatchet Creek Boulevard Pinebrook Rd Jacaranda Blvd Co./Ven 2 1.76 25 143 SC Aug-20 2,395 2,459 273 C D 1,264
118 Higel Avenue (SR 758) Siesta Midnight Pass Rd County 2 0.85 40 30 FDOT Jan-20 15,000 15,821 1,645 F D 1,120
119 Higel Ave/Treasure Boat Midnight Pass Rd Ocean County 2 0.12 35 130 SC Jul-20 941 967 107 C D 931
119.5 Honore Avenue University Desoto County 2 0.50 40 47 SC Apr-20 14,043 14,423 1,500 C D 1,600
0 Honore Avenue Desoto Longmeadow County 2 0.54 40 47 SC Apr-20 5,764 5,920 651 C D 1,600
120 Honore Avenue Longmeadow Taywood County 2 1.20 30 143 SC Apr-20 8,912 9,153 998 D D 1,264
120.5 Honore Avenue Taywood 17th County 2 0.60 30 143 SC Apr-20 9,954 10,222 1,114 D D 1,264
121 Honore Avenue 17th Richardson County 2 0.55 35 143 SC Apr-20 15,936 16,366 1,702 F D 1,264
121.5 Honore Avenue Richardson Fruitville County 2 0.45 35 143 SC Apr-20 14,041 14,420 1,500 F D 1,264
122 Honore Avenue Fruitville Antoinette County 2 0.29 35 147 SC Apr-20 12,759 13,103 1,363 E D 1,330
122 Honore Avenue Antoinette Sawgrass County 2 0.09 35 147 SC Apr-20 12,759 13,103 1,363 E D 1,330
122 Honore Avenue Sawgrass Palmer County 2 0.39 35 126 SC Apr-20 12,759 13,103 1,363 F D 1,264
122.6 Honore Avenue Palmer Bahia Vista County 2 0.34 35 147 SC Apr-20 11,128 11,429 1,246 D D 1,330
122.7 Honore Avenue Bahia Vista Colonial Oaks County 2 0.80 30 147 SC Apr-20 8,921 9,162 999 D D 1,330
122.7 Honore Avenue Colonia Oaks Webber County 2 0.25 30 126 SC Apr-20 8,972 9,215 1,004 D D 1,264
122.7 Honore Avenue Webber Brookmeade County 2 0.28 30 126 SC Apr-20 9,105 9,351 1,019 D D 1,264
122.7 Honore Avenue Brookmeade Bee Ridge County 2 0.37 30 147 SC Apr-20 9,105 9,351 1,019 D D 1,330
122.75 Honore Avenue Bee Ridge Wilkinson County 2 0.50 45 26 SC Jun-20 9,713 9,976 1,087 C D 1,520
122.76 Honore Avenue Wilkinson Proctor County 2 0.50 40 26 SC Jun-20 8,601 8,833 963 C D 1,520
122.81 Honore Avenue Proctor Ashton County 2 0.50 30 122 SC Jun-20 8,982 9,225 1,005 D D 1,197
122.82 Honore Avenue Ashton Clark County 2 0.50 30 143 SC Jun-20 9,623 9,882 1,077 D D 1,264
122.85 Honore Avenue Clark Northridge County 4 0.25 45 44 SC Jun-20 14,791 15,190 1,580 C D 3,401
122.86 Honore Avenue Northridge Palmer Ranch Pkwy County 4 1.30 45 44 SC Jun-20 13,369 13,730 1,428 C D 3,401
122.87 Honore Avenue Palmer Ranch Pkwy Central Sarasota Pkwy County 4 1.79 45 44 SC Jun-20 8,396 8,622 940 C D 3,401
122.885 Honore Avenue Central Sarasota Pkwy Bay St County 4 0.60 45 23 SC Jun-20 7,493 7,695 839 C D 3,222
122.87 Honore Avenue Bay St SR 681 County 2 2.80 45 47 SC Jun-20 7,051 7,242 789 C D 1,600
122.9 Honore Avenue SR 681 Ranch Rd County 2 1.92 45 47 SC Jun-20 4,959 5,093 560 C D 1,600
122.9 Honore Avenue Ranch Rd Laurel County 2 1.82 45 43 SC Jun-20 4,959 5,093 560 C D 1,520
123 Indiana Avenue (SR 776) Dearborn Virginia Ct FDOT 4 0.45 35 165 FDOT Jan-20 17,800 18,774 1,934 D D 3,066
123.5 Indiana Avenue (SR 776) Virginia Ct Co Line (Bay Heights) FDOT 4 0.65 35 165 FDOT Jan-20 17,800 18,774 1,934 D D 3,066
124 I-75 (SR 93) University Fruitville FDOT 6 3.45 70 307 FDOT Jan-20 119,000 125,513 10,418 D D 11,860
125 I-75 (SR 93) Fruitville Bee Ridge FDOT 6 2.65 70 302 FDOT Jan-20 123,000 129,732 10,768 E D 10,060
126 I-75 (SR 93) Bee Ridge Clark (SR 72) FDOT 6 2.00 70 302 FDOT Jan-20 102,659 108,277 8,987 D D 10,060
127 I-75 (SR 93) Clark SR 681 FDOT 6 5.50 70 302 FDOT Jan-20 98,000 103,363 8,579 D D 10,060
128 I-75 (SR 93) SR 681 Laurel FDOT 6 4.30 70 302 FDOT Jan-20 84,500 89,125 7,397 C D 10,060
128.5 I-75 (SR 93) Laurel Jacaranda FDOT 6 2.20 70 302 FDOT Jan-20 86,000 90,707 7,529 C D 10,060
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SARASOTA COUNTY
Traffic Counts
Minimum
ID # Roadway Name Limits Jurisdiction # of Segm Post Ref Date Volume Adjusted DHV LOS LOS
239.7 University Parkway Old Bradenton Rd Desoto County 4 0.17 45 44 SC Jan-20 29,210 29,999 2,940 C D 3,401
239.8 University Parkway Desoto West University Pkwy County 4 0.60 45 23 SC Jan-20 23,217 23,844 2,456 C D 3,222
239.9 University Parkway West University Pkwy U.S. 301 County 4 0.30 45 44 SC Jan-20 30,943 31,779 3,051 C D 3,401
240 University Parkway U.S. 301 Tuttle Av County 6 1.08 50 45 SC Jan-20 46,373 47,625 4,048 C D 5,121
240.5 University Parkway Tuttle Av Lockwood Ridge County 6 0.47 50 45 SC Jan-20 46,373 47,625 4,048 C D 5,121
241 University Parkway Lockwood Ridge Conservatory County 6 0.59 50 45 SC Jan-20 50,320 51,679 4,393 C D 5,121
241.2 University Parkway Conservatory Whitfield County 6 0.57 50 45 SC Jan-20 49,881 51,228 4,354 C D 5,121
241.5 University Parkway Whitfield Longwood Run Blvd County 6 0.47 50 45 SC Jan-20 51,617 53,011 4,453 C D 5,121
242 University Parkway Longwood Run Blvd Medici County 6 0.40 50 45 SC Jan-20 26,947 27,675 2,712 C D 5,121
242.3 University Parkway Medici Honore County 6 0.33 50 45 SC Jan-20 54,796 56,275 4,671 C D 5,121
242.5 University Parkway Honore Cooper Creek County 6 0.35 50 45 SC Jan-20 53,782 55,234 4,640 C D 5,121
242.7 University Parkway Cooper Creek I-75 County 6 0.50 50 45 SC Jan-20 66,415 68,208 5,661 F D 5,121
243 U.S. 301 (SR 683) University Desoto FDOT 6 0.51 50 66 FDOT Jan-20 38,500 40,607 3,695 C D 5,660
244 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Desoto 47th FDOT 6 0.45 50 66 FDOT Jan-20 38,500 40,607 3,695 C D 5,660
244.5 U.S. 301 (SR 683) 47th Northgate FDOT 6 0.17 50 66 FDOT Jan-20 38,500 40,607 3,695 C D 5,660
244.6 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Northgate Myrtle FDOT 6 0.38 50 66 FDOT Jan-20 40,000 42,189 3,797 C D 5,660
245 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar 6 0.50 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 40,000 42,189 3,797 C D 5,390
248 U.S. 301 (SR 683) 12th Fruitville (SR 780) FDOT/Sar 4 0.65 35 165 FDOT Jan-20 35,500 37,443 3,407 F D 3,066
249 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Fruitville Main FDOT/Sar 4 0.15 35 102 FDOT Jan-20 35,500 37,443 3,407 F D 2,920
250 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Main Ringling FDOT/Sar 4 0.08 35 102 FDOT Jan-20 35,500 37,443 3,407 F D 2,920
251 U.S. 301 (SR 683) Ringling U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar 4 0.45 35 165 FDOT Jan-20 35,500 37,443 3,407 F D 3,066
252 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) U.S. 41 Bird Bay FDOT/Ven 6 0.25 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 37,000 39,025 3,551 C D 5,660
253 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Bird Bay TJ Maxx Ent. FDOT/Ven 6 0.25 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 37,000 39,025 3,551 C D 5,660
254 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) TJ Maxx Ent. Albee Farm Rd FDOT/Ven 6 0.30 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 37,000 39,025 3,551 C D 5,660
255 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Albee Farm Rd Venice Ave FDOT/Ven 6 0.30 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 37,000 39,025 3,551 C D 5,660
256 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Venice Ave Center Rd FDOT 4 1.60 45 2 FDOT Jan-20 37,000 39,025 3,551 D D 3,580
257 U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Center Rd S. U.S. 41 FDOT 6 0.35 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 37,000 39,025 3,551 C D 5,660
258 U.S.41 (SR 45) Co Line Spaatz FDOT 4 0.20 45 2 FDOT Jan-20 32,500 34,279 3,256 C D 3,580
259 U.S.41 (SR 45) Spaatz University FDOT/Sar 4 0.30 45 2 FDOT Jan-20 32,500 34,279 3,256 C D 3,580
260 U.S.41 (SR 45) University Myrtle FDOT/Sar 4 1.00 45 2 FDOT Jan-20 28,500 30,060 2,916 C D 3,580
261 U.S.41 (SR 45) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar 4 0.50 45 2 FDOT Jan-20 30,500 32,169 3,088 C D 3,580
262 U.S.41 (SR 45) 27th 10th FDOT/Sar 4 1.00 40 2 FDOT Jan-20 30,500 32,169 3,088 C D 3,580
263 U.S.41 (SR 45) 10th Blvd of Arts FDOT/Sar 4 0.25 40 2 FDOT Jan-20 25,500 26,896 2,636 C D 3,580
264 U.S.41 (SR 45) Blvd of Arts Fruitville Rd FDOT/Sar 4 0.15 40 65 FDOT Jan-20 25,500 26,896 2,636 C D 3,759
265 U.S.41 (SR 45) Fruitville Rd Ringling FDOT/Sar 4 0.25 40 65 FDOT Jan-20 25,500 26,896 2,636 C D 3,759
266 U.S.41 (SR 45) Ringling Orange FDOT/Sar 4 0.75 40 2 FDOT Jan-20 31,000 32,697 3,139 C D 3,580
267 U.S.41 (SR 45) Orange Osprey FDOT/Sar 6 0.30 40 66 FDOT Jan-20 31,000 32,697 3,139 C D 5,660
268 U.S.41 (SR 45) Osprey US 301 FDOT/Sar 4 0.20 35 102 FDOT Jan-20 30,000 31,642 3,038 E D 2,920
269 U.S.41 (SR 45) U.S. 301 Bay Street FDOT/Sar 6 0.33 35 165 FDOT Jan-20 59,000 62,229 5,165 F D 3,066
269.5 U.S.41 (SR 45) Bay Street Bahia Vista FDOT/Sar 6 0.33 35 165 FDOT Jan-20 59,000 62,229 5,165 F D 3,066
270 U.S.41 (SR 45) Bahia Vista Waldemere FDOT/Sar 6 0.25 40 3 FDOT Jan-20 59,000 62,229 5,165 C D 5,390
271 U.S.41 (SR 45) Waldemere Hillview FDOT/Sar 6 0.20 40 66 FDOT Jan-20 59,000 62,229 5,165 C D 5,660
272 U.S.41 (SR 45) Hillview Webber FDOT/Sar 6 0.55 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 59,000 62,229 5,165 C D 5,390
273 U.S.41 (SR 45) Webber Siesta Dr FDOT/Sar 6 0.40 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 46,000 48,518 4,124 C D 5,390
274 U.S.41 (SR 45) Siesta Dr Bee Ridge FDOT/Sar 6 0.25 45 66 FDOT Jan-20 46,000 48,518 4,124 C D 5,660
275 U.S.41 (SR 45) Bee Ridge Glengary FDOT 6 0.25 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 43,000 45,353 4,082 C D 5,390
275.2 U.S.41 (SR 45) Glengary Worrington FDOT 6 0.25 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 43,000 45,353 4,082 C D 5,390
275.4 U.S.41 (SR 45) Worrington Field FDOT 6 0.25 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 43,000 45,353 4,082 C D 5,390
275.6 U.S.41 (SR 45) Field Proctor FDOT 6 0.22 45 3 FDOT Jan-20 43,000 45,353 4,082 C D 5,390
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS OFFICE
2020 HISTORICAL AADT REPORT
COUNTY: 13 - MANATEE
SITE: 4999 - UNIVERSITY PKWY, E OF LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD
YEAR AADT DIRECTION 1 DIRECTION 2 *K FACTOR D FACTOR T FACTOR
---- ---------- ------------ ------------ --------- -------- --------
2020 20500 E 0 0 9.00 59.30 5.90
2019 20500 C E 0 W 0 9.00 59.60 5.90
2018 19100 C E 9600 W 9500 9.00 58.60 5.90
2017 20800 T 9.00 63.20 6.60
2016 19400 S E 9800 W 9600 9.00 63.00 5.80
2015 18000 F E 9100 W 8900 9.00 64.20 5.80
2014 16800 C E 8500 W 8300 9.00 63.60 5.80
2013 15200 S E 7600 W 7600 9.00 64.40 5.70
2012 14800 F E 7400 W 7400 9.00 62.00 5.70
2011 14600 C E 7300 W 7300 9.00 63.50 5.70
2010 13600 S E 6900 W 6700 12.13 64.11 5.40
2009 13600 F E 6900 W 6700 11.36 61.18 5.40
2008 13600 C E 6900 W 6700 14.25 66.71 5.40
AADT FLAGS: C = COMPUTED; E = MANUAL ESTIMATE; F = FIRST YEAR ESTIMATE

S = SECOND YEAR ESTIMATE; T = THIRD YEAR ESTIMATE; R = FOURTH YEAR ESTIMATE
V = FIFTH YEAR ESTIMATE; 6 = SIXTH YEAR ESTIMATE; X = UNKNOWN
*K FACTOR: STARTING WITH YEAR 2011 IS STANDARDK, PRIOR YEARS ARE K30 VALUES
Manatee County GIS Map Rcv'd 5/31/2022
OBJECTID 470 C2002 29397

SHAPE Point C2003 32107
STATION_ID 07-48 C2004 41150
ROUTE_NAME University Pkwy. C2005 45780
DIR E C2006 46322
DIST 600 C2007 43822
CROSS_ROUTE_NAME I-75 C2008 38837
C86 No Data C2009 42837
C87 No Data C2010 40943
C88 No Data C2011 43787
C89 No Data C2012 43022
C90 No Data C2013 40532
C91 No Data C2014 49958
C92 No Data C2015 48714
C93 No Data C2016 Null
C94 2539 C2017 53053
C95 1174 C2018 49649
C96 5109 C2019 56543
C97 6777 C2020 45665
C98 10396 C2021 1XOO
C99 12877 C2022 Null
C2000 21017 C2023 Null
C2001 26602 C2024 Null
This map was developed by the Manatee County Geographic Information Systems division. It is provided for general reference, is subject to change,
and is not warranted for any particular use or purpose. Errors from non-coincidence of features from different sources may be present.
Printed on 5/30/2022, 10:02:38 AM
Manatee County GIS Map Rcv'd 5/31/2022
OBJECTID 471 C2002 Null

SHAPE Point C2003 Null
STATION_ID 11-09 C2004 Null
ROUTE_NAME University Pkwy C2005 Null
DIR E C2006 Null
DIST 500 C2007 Null
CROSS_ROUTE_NAME Town Center Pkwy C2008 Null
C86 Null C2009 Null
C87 Null C2010 Null
C88 Null C2011 Null
C89 Null C2012 26327
C90 Null C2013 29966
C91 Null C2014 29717
C92 Null C2015 31123
C93 Null C2016 29722
C94 Null C2017 29216
C95 Null C2018 32862
C96 Null C2019 33257
C97 Null C2020 32710
C98 Null C2021 1XOO
C99 Null C2022 Null
C2000 Null C2023 Null
C2001 Null C2024 Null
This map was developed by the Manatee County Geographic Information Systems division. It is provided for general reference, is subject to change,
and is not warranted for any particular use or purpose. Errors from non-coincidence of features from different sources may be present.
Printed on 5/30/2022, 10:03:44 AM
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

ODQHSHUGLUHFWLRQ

ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ

ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ
ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ

&HQWURLG&RQQHFWRU

7$=V
$$'7
%DVH1HWZRUN
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

ODQHSHUGLUHFWLRQ

ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ

ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ

ODQHVSHUGLUHFWLRQ

&HQWURLG&RQQHFWRU

7$=V
$$'7
&RVW)HDVLEOH1HWZRUN
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
HI-HAT RANCH RESERVED TRAFFIC

2050
2035
Hi-Hat
Road Name and Segment Hi-Hat
Traffic
Traffic
(From Report)
East-West Roadway B
Bourneside Blvd to Verna Rd 226 105
Fruitville Road
I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd 786 365
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to East Rd 806 374
East Rd to Tatum Rd 845 392
Tatum Rd to Sarasota Center Blvd 983 456
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd 1,179 547
1
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B 1,297 602
N-S Rdwy B to Bourneside Blvd2 993 461
University Pkwy to Fruitville Rd3 5 2
Fruitville Rd to Bee Ridge Rd 1,769 821
University Parkway
Whitfield Ave to Longwood Run Blvd 334 155
Longwood Run Blvd to Medici Ct 393 182
Medici Ct to Honore Ave 393 182
Honore Ave to Cooper Creek Blvd 452 210
Cooper Creek Blvd to I-75 688 319
I-75 to Lake Osprey Dr 580 269
Lake Osprey Dr to Town Center Pkwy 600 279
Town Center Pkwy to Lakewood Ranch Blvd 668 310
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd 796 370
4
Lorraine Rd to Bourneside Blvd 226 105
1. Increased percent project traffic distribution from 7% to 13.2% due to N-S Roadway B being offset north of Fruitville Road
2. Decreased percent project traffic distribution from 16.3% to 10.1% due to N-S Roadway B being offset north of Fruitville Road
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

0DWFK/LQH

[[[ 3HUFHQW3URMHFW'LVWULEXWLRQ

/DQH'LUHFWLRQ

/DQHV'LUHFWLRQ

/DQHV'LUHFWLRQ

&HQWURLG&RQQHFWRU

3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ

2WKHU7$=V
+L+DW5DQFK3URMHFW7UDIILF'LVWULEXWLRQ
'530&RVW)HDVLEOH1HWZRUN
7LQGDOH2OLYHU$OWHUQDWLYH
(Licensed to Stantec Inc)
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Hi-Hat Ranch

Table 3: Study Area Determination (Continued)
Adopted LOS Percent New Project Traffic Significant
Road Name and Segment LOS Number Service Project Buildout Impact?
Coburn Road
Richardson Rd to Fruitville Rd D 2 931 0.1% 10 1.1% No
East-West Roadway B
N-S Rdwy B to Verna Rd C 2 1,530 2.3% 226 14.8% Yes
Fruitville Road (SR 780)
School Ave to Lime Ave D 6 5,390 2.5% 246 4.6% No
Lime Ave to Shade Ave D 6 5,390 3.1% 305 5.7% Yes
Shade Ave to Tuttle Ave D 6 5,390 3.2% 315 5.8% Yes
Tuttle Ave to Lockwood Ridge Rd D 6 5,390 4.0% 393 7.3% Yes
Lockwood Ridge Rd to Beneva Rd D 6 5,390 4.6% 452 8.4% Yes
Beneva Rd to McIntosh Rd D 6 5,390 5.7% 553 10.3% Yes
McIntosh Rd to Honore Ave D 6 5,660 6.0% 590 10.4% Yes
Honore Ave to Paramount Dr D 6 5,660 7.3% 718 12.7% Yes
Paramount Dr to Cattlemen Rd D 6 5,660 8.0% 786 13.9% Yes
Cattlemen Rd to I-75 D 6 5,660 8.7% 855 15.1% Yes
Fruitville Road
I-75 to Coburn Rd S D 4 3,401 8.0% 786 23.1% Yes
Coburn Rd S to East Rd C 4 3,078 8.2% 806 26.2% Yes
Sarasota Center Blvd to Lorraine Rd C 2 1,057 12.0% 1,179 111.6% Yes
N-S Rdwy B to Verna Rd C 2 1,530 2.4% 236 15.4% Yes
Gantt Road
Proctor Rd to Ashton Rd D 2 998 0.2% 20 2.0% No
Ashton Rd to Clark Rd D 2 1,197 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Honore Ave
University Ave to Desoto Rd D 2 1,600 0.2% 20 1.2% No
Desoto Rd to 17th St D 2 1,264 0.4% 39 3.1% No
17th St to Richardson Rd D 2 1,264 1.1% 108 8.6% Yes
Richardson Rd to Fruitville Rd D 2 1,264 1.1% 108 8.6% Yes
Palmer Blvd to Bahia Vista St D 2 1,330 0.0% 0 0.0% No
Bahia Vista St to Colonial Oaks Blvd D 2 1,330 0.1% 10 0.7% No
Colonial Oaks Blvd to Webber St D 2 1,264 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Webber St to Bee Ridge Rd D 2 1,264 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Bee Ridge Rd to Wilkinson Rd D 2 1,520 0.8% 79 5.2% Yes
Wilkinson Rd to Proctor Rd D 2 1,520 0.5% 49 3.2% No
Proctor Rd to Ashton Rd D 2 1,197 0.5% 49 4.1% No
Ashton Rd to Clark Rd D 2 1,264 0.2% 20 1.6% No
Clark Rd to Northridge Rd D 4 3,401 1.6% 157 4.6% No
I-75
Clark Rd to SR 681 B 6 6,130 1.1% 108 1.8% No
SR 681 to Laurel Rd B 6 6,130 1.6% 157 2.6% No

7

Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Hi-Hat Ranch

Ibis Street
Clark Rd to N-S Rdwy A C 2 1,359 0.6% 59 4.3% No
Professional Pkwy to I-75 Crossing D 4 3,401 0.1% 10 0.3% No
I-75 Crossing to Fruitville Rd D 2 1,440 0.1% 10 0.7% No
Lime Avenue
Aspinwall St to Fruitville Rd D 2 1,197 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Fruitville Rd to Main St D 2 1,197 0.4% 39 3.3% No
Lockwood Ridge Road
12th St to Fruitville Rd D 2 1,197 0.4% 39 3.3% No
Webber St to Bee Ridge Rd D 2 1,197 0.3% 29 2.5% No
Bee Ridge Rd to Wilkinson Rd D 2 931 0.0% 0 0.0% No
Lorraine Road
University Ave to Fruitville Rd C 4 3,420 5.3% 521 15.2% Yes
Fruitville Rd to Palmer Blvd C 4 3,420 6.2% 609 17.8% Yes
Palmer Blvd to Bee Ridge Rd D 4 3,580 13.0% 1,278 35.7% Yes
Bee Ridge Rd to Clark Rd D 4 3,580 5.3% 521 14.6% Yes
McIntosh Road
Fruitville Rd to Bahia Vista St D 2 1,264 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Bahia Vista St to Linwood St D 4 2,628 0.4% 39 1.5% No
Linwood St to Webber St D 2 1,330 0.5% 49 3.7% No
Webber St to Bee Ridge Rd D 2 1,330 0.7% 69 5.2% Yes
Bee Ridge Rd to Wilkinson Rd D 4 2,628 0.7% 69 2.6% No
Proctor Rd to Ashton Rd D 2 1,197 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Ashton Rd to Clark Rd D 2 931 0.0% 0 0.0% No
Clark Rd to East Sawyer Loop Rd D 2 1,440 0.1% 10 0.7% No
North-South Roadway A
Clark Rd to N-S Rdwy B C 4 3,420 2.7% 265 7.8% Yes
N-S Rdwy B to Ibis St C 4 3,420 3.8% 374 10.9% Yes
Ibis St to SR 681 Ext C 4 3,420 3.0% 295 8.6% Yes
SR 681 Ext to Knights Trail Rd C 4 3,420 0.2% 20 0.6% No
North-South Roadway B
University Pkwy to E-W Rdwy B C 2 1,510 10.1% 993 65.7% Yes
E-W Rdwy B to Fruitville Rd C 2 1,510 13.1% 1,288 85.3% Yes
Fruitville Rd to Bee Ridge Rd C 2 1,510 18.0% 1,769 117.2% Yes
Bee Ridge Rd to Clark Rd C 2 1,510 16.0% 1,573 104.1% Yes
Clark Rd to N-S Rdwy A C 2 1,510 2.9% 285 18.9% Yes
Palmer Boulevard
Porter Rd to Apex Rd D 2 1,264 0.2% 20 1.6% No
Apex Rd to Debrecen Rd D 2 1,520 2.7% 265 17.5% Yes
Debrecen Rd to Lorraine Rd D 2 931 5.7% 560 60.2% Yes
Proctor Road
Gantt Rd to Cattlemen Rd D 4 3,401 1.6% 157 4.6% No
Cattlemen Rd to I-75 D 2 1,440 0.9% 88 6.1% Yes
I-75 to Hand Rd D 2 1,440 1.0% 98 6.8% Yes
Hand Rd to Clark Rd D 2 1,200 1.2% 118 9.8% Yes
8

Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Hi-Hat Ranch

Sawyer Road
Bee Ridge Rd to Helene St D 2 1,264 0.4% 39 3.1% No
Helene St to Wilkinson Rd D 2 1,197 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Proctor Rd to Clark Rd D 2 1,197 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Siesta Drive
School Ave to Shade Ave D 2 1,197 0.3% 29 2.5% No
Shade Ave to South Gate Cir D 2 1,197 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Shade Avenue
Fruitville Rd to Main St D 2 1,197 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Webber St to Siesta Dr D 2 1,197 0.3% 29 2.5% No
Siesta Dr to Bee Ridge Rd D 2 1,197 0.6% 59 4.9% No
Bee Ridge Rd to Roselawn St D 2 1,197 0.5% 49 4.1% No
SR 681
Honore Ave to I-75 D 4 3,759 1.8% 177 4.7% No
I-75 to N-S Rdwy A C 4 3,591 2.4% 236 6.6% Yes
Swift Road
Bee Ridge Rd to Wilkinson Rd D 4 3,222 0.1% 10 0.3% No
Tuttle Avenue
8th St to Fruitville Rd D 4 3,222 0.4% 39 1.2% No
Fruitville Rd to Ringling Blvd D 4 3,222 0.2% 20 0.6% No
South Gate Cir to Bee Ridge Rd D 4 3,222 0.9% 88 2.7% No
University Parkway
Lakewood Ranch Blvd to Lorraine Rd D 4 3,580 8.1% 796 22.2% Yes
Lorraine Rd to N-S Rdwy B D 4 3,580 9.4% 924 25.8% Yes
US 41
Siesta Dr to Bee Ridge Rd D 6 5,660 2.3% 226 4.0% No
Bee Ridge Rd to Glengary St D 6 5,390 0.2% 20 0.4% No
Webber Street
RR to McIntosh Rd D 4 2,628 0.2% 20 0.7% No
McIntosh Rd to Honore Ave D 2 1,600 0.3% 29 1.8% No
Honore Ave to Cattlemen Rd D 2 1,600 0.4% 39 2.5% No
Wilkinson Road
McIntosh Rd to Honore Ave D 2 1,197 0.2% 20 1.6% No
Honore Ave to Center Gate Blvd D 2 1,197 0.1% 10 0.8% No
Center Gate Blvd to Cattlemen Rd D 2 1,264 0.2% 20 1.6% No
County Line to E-W Rdwy B C 2 1,530 1.7% 167 10.9% Yes
E-W Rdwy B to Fruitville Rd C 2 1,530 1.1% 108 7.1% Yes
9

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
APPENDIX D
FDOT LRE PAGES

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
FDOT Long Range Estimating System - Production

R4: Project Details Composite Report
By Version
Project: WDSU46-S-04-BB Letting Date: 01/2099
Description: Add 2 Lanes/bike lanes with C&G to Existing 4 Lane Suburban Roadway. Include closed drainage
system.
District: 09 County: 99 DISTRICT/STATE WIDE
Project Manager: Cost-Per-Mile Template
Version 15-P Project Grand Total $3,046,554.11

Description: October 2021 Update
Pay Items
Pay Item Description Total Quantity Unit Weighted Avg. Total Amount
Unit Price
102-1 MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC 10.00 $247,649.10

101-1 MOBILIZATION 10.00 $272,414.01
104-10-3 SEDIMENT BARRIER 10,560.00 LF $1.70 $17,952.00
104-11 FLOATING TURBIDITY BARRIER 100.00 LF $8.90 $890.00
104-12 STAKED TURBIDITY BARRIER- NYL 100.00 LF $7.50 $750.00
REINF PVC
104-15 SOIL TRACKING PREVENTION 1.00 EA $2,400.00 $2,400.00
DEVICE
104-18 INLET PROTECTION SYSTEM 26.00 EA $114.00 $2,964.00
107-1 LITTER REMOVAL 1.90 AC $22.00 $41.80
107-2 MOWING 1.90 AC $35.00 $66.50
110-1-1 CLEARING & GRUBBING 7.27 AC $19,000.00 $138,130.00
120-2-2 BORROW EXCAVATION, TRUCK 4,224.00 CY $19.00 $80,256.00
MEASURE
160-4 TYPE B STABILIZATION 15,053.87 SY $5.30 $79,785.51
285-709 OPTIONAL BASE,BASE GROUP 09 12,413.87 SY $19.00 $235,863.53
327-70-5 MILLING EXIST ASPH PAVT, 2" AVG 37,546.67 SY $2.40 $90,112.01
DEPTH
334-1-13 SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, 4,751.27 TN $97.00 $460,873.19
TRAFFIC C
337-7-83 ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC- 4,059.73 TN $110.00 $446,570.30
12.5,PG 76-22
425-1-351 INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-5, 36.00 EA $5,200.00 $187,200.00
425-1-451 INLETS, CURB, TYPE J-5, 10.00 EA $7,000.00 $70,000.00
430-175-112 PIPE CULV, OPT MATL, ROUND, 552.00 LF $83.00 $45,816.00
12"S/CD
430-175-130 PIPE CULV, OPT MATL, ROUND, 160.00 LF $120.00 $19,200.00
30"S/CD
430-515-100 STRAIGHT CONC ENDW 15", 2.00 EA $3,200.00 $6,400.00
SINGLE, 0 ROUND
430-530-100 STRAIGHT CONC ENDW 30", 2.00 EA $4,600.00 $9,200.00
SINGLE, 0 ROUND
520-1-10 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, 10,560.00 LF $24.00 $253,440.00
TYPE F
\\codata\shares\CO\ProgMgt\Est\00_BusinessOperations\02_SystemsSupport\LRECostPerMile\2021\S04.xls1 of 2
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
FDOT Long Range Estimating System - Production

R4: Project Details Composite Report
By Version
Project: WDSU46-S-04-BB Letting Date: 01/2099
Description: Add 2 Lanes/bike lanes with C&G to Existing 4 Lane Suburban Roadway. Include closed drainage
system.
District: 09 County: 99 DISTRICT/STATE WIDE
Project Manager: Cost-Per-Mile Template

Description: October 2021 Update
522-1 CONCRETE SIDEWALK AND 5,866.67 SY $42.00 $246,400.14
DRIVEWAYS, 4"
570-1-2 PERFORMANCE TURF, SOD 16,437.33 SY $2.80 $46,024.52
700-1-11 SINGLE POST SIGN, F&I GM, 22.00 AS $350.00 $7,700.00
700-1-12 SINGLE POST SIGN, F&I GM, 12-20 2.00 AS $1,000.00 $2,000.00
SF
700-1-50 SINGLE POST SIGN, RELOCATE 2.00 AS $190.00 $380.00
700-1-60 SINGLE POST SIGN, REMOVE 22.00 AS $34.00 $748.00
700-2-14 MULTI- POST SIGN, F&I GM, 31-50 2.00 AS $4,700.00 $9,400.00
SF
700-2-60 MULTI- POST SIGN, REMOVE 2.00 AS $700.00 $1,400.00
706-1-1 RAISED PAVMT MARK, TYPE B W/O 675.00 EA $4.10 $2,767.50
FINAL SURF
710-11-101 PAINTED PAVT 8.00 GM $1,000.00 $8,000.00
MARK,STD,WHITE,SOLID,6"
710-11-131 PAINTED PAVT 8.00 GM $470.00 $3,760.00
MARK,STD,WHITE,SKIP, 6"
999-25 INITIAL CONTINGENCY AMOUNT 1.00 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00
(DO NOT BID)
Project Unknowns 0.00 % $0.00

Design/Build 0.00 % $0.00
\\codata\shares\CO\ProgMgt\Est\00_BusinessOperations\02_SystemsSupport\LRECostPerMile\2021\S04.xls2 of 2
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
APPENDIX E
DIRECTIONAL SPLITS
2035 TURNING MOVEMENT CALCULATIONS
TRAFFIC VOLUMES AT STUDY INTERSECTIONS

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DIRECTIONAL SPLITS
NB/WB SB/EB Total NB/WB SB/EB

Intersection and Approach
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Lorraine Road & University Parkway

Eastbound Approach 1,026 933 1,959 52% 48%
Westbound Approach 321 207 528 61% 39%
Northbound Approach 601 397 998 60% 40%
Southbound Approach 1,199 974 2,173 55% 45%
Total 2,121 1,578 3,699 57% 43%
NB/EB SB/WB Total NB/EB SB/WB

Intersection and Approach
Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume
Lorraine Road & Fruitville Road

Eastbound Approach 1,027 482 1,509 68% 32%
Westbound Approach 645 307 952 68% 32%
Southbound Approach 470 263 733 64% 36%
Total 2,142 1,052 3,194 67% 33%
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
TURNING MOVEMENT CALCULATIONS
Bourneside Boulevard/University Parkway

2035 Conditions
Approach 2035 PM % of Percent Turns
Peak-Hour Total
Volume Vol. Left Thru Right
Northbound 327 21% 47% 53% 0%
Southbound 665 42% 0% 35% 65%
Eastbound 596 38% 67% 0% 33%
Total 1,588
Bourneside Boulevard/Fruitville Road

2035 Conditions
Approach 2035 PM % of Percent Turns
Peak-Hour Total
Volume Vol. Left Thru Right
Southbound 459 13% 44% 0% 56%
Eastbound 1,649 48% 26% 74% 0%
Westbound 1,298 38% 0% 78% 22%
Total 3,406
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
TRAFFIC VOLUME AT STUDY INTERSECTIONS
Intersection: Bourneside Boulevard & University Parkway

P.M. Peak Time Period: Between 4:00 & 6:00 PM
Peak Hour Factor: 0.95
University Pkwy Bourneside Blvd Bourneside Blvd

2035 Traffic Conditions EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
2035 Two-Way Peak-Hour Volume 596 327 665
D Factor 43% 57% 43%
Peak-Hour Volume 256 186 286
Turn Percentage 67% 0% 33% 47% 53% 0% 0% 35% 65%
Background Traffic 172 84 87 99 100 186
Background Balancing 25 -10 -30 40 -40 80
Lakewood Ranch SE Traffic 928 500 383 711
2035 Total Traffic Volumes 200 0 1000 0 0 0 560 520 0 0 770 270
Intersection: Bourneside Boulevard & Fruitville Road

P.M. Peak Time Period: Between 4:00 & 6:00 PM
Peak Hour Factor: 0.95
Fruitville Road Fruitville Road Bourneside Blvd

2035 Traffic Conditions EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
2035 Two-Way Peak-Hour Volume 1,649 1,298 459
D Factor 67% 33% 33%
Peak-Hour Volume 1,105 428 151
Turn Percentage 26% 74% 0% 0% 78% 22% 44% 0% 56%
Background Traffic 287 818 334 94 66 85
Background Balancing -20 30 65 -60 -40 50
Lakewood Ranch SE Traffic 405 46 25 218
2035 Total Traffic Volumes 670 850 0 0 400 80 0 0 0 50 0 350
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
APPENDIX F
SIDRA SUMMARY WORKSHEETS

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
LANE LEVEL OF SERVICE

Lane Level of Service
Site: 3 [Bourneside Blvd & University Pkwy - 2035 Total Traffic]
Site Category: PM Peak-Hour

Roundabout
Approaches Intersection
South North West
LOS A E A C
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).
Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.
Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane.
LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).
Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).
HCM Delay Formula option is used. Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies.
SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com
Organisation: STANTEC | Processed: Monday, May 30, 2022 9:39:23 PM
Project: C:\Users\mcrim\OneDrive - Stantec Office 365\Documents\Projects\SMR\myakka_ranch\docc\sidra\bourneside_university_roundabout.sip8
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 3 [Bourneside Blvd & University Pkwy - 2035 Total Traffic]

Roundabout
Movement Performance - Vehicles

Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average
ID Total HV Satn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed
veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Bourneside Blvd
3 L2 589 2.0 0.488 8.2 LOS A 3.0 76.0 0.49 0.35 0.49 31.4
8 T1 547 2.0 0.455 7.8 LOS A 2.7 67.9 0.47 0.34 0.47 34.4
Approach 1137 2.0 0.488 8.0 LOS A 3.0 76.0 0.48 0.35 0.48 32.8
North: Bourneside Blvd

4 T1 811 2.0 0.993 52.2 LOS F 31.2 792.9 1.00 2.16 4.26 20.6
12 R2 284 2.0 0.353 8.7 LOS A 1.6 40.8 0.63 0.64 0.66 32.4
Approach 1095 2.0 0.993 40.9 LOS E 31.2 792.9 0.90 1.76 3.32 22.7
West: University Pkwy

3 L2 211 2.0 0.321 9.7 LOS A 1.4 34.4 0.67 0.69 0.73 30.8
12 R2 1053 2.0 0.641 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.3
Approach 1263 2.0 0.641 1.8 LOS A 1.4 34.4 0.11 0.11 0.12 36.0
All Vehicles 3495 2.0 0.993 16.0 LOS C 31.2 792.9 0.48 0.71 1.24 29.6
Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.
LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).
Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).
Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.
Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.
HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.
Project: C:\Users\mcrim\OneDrive - Stantec Office 365\Documents\Projects\SMR\myakka_ranch\docc\sidra\bourneside_university_roundabout.sip8
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
LANE LEVEL OF SERVICE

Lane Level of Service
Site: 3 [Bourneside Blvd & Fruitville Rd - 2035 Total Traffic]

Roundabout
Approaches Intersection
East North West
LOS A A A A
Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane.
LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).
Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).
Project: C:\Users\mcrim\OneDrive - Stantec Office 365\Documents\Projects\SMR\myakka_ranch\docc\sidra\bourneside_fruitville_roundabout.sip8
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 3 [Bourneside Blvd & Fruitville Rd - 2035 Total Traffic]

Roundabout
Movement Performance - Vehicles

Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average
ID Total HV Satn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed
veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
East: Fruitville Rd
4 T1 421 3.0 0.352 9.5 LOS A 1.6 40.7 0.65 0.68 0.74 33.4
14 R2 84 2.0 0.352 9.4 LOS A 1.6 40.7 0.66 0.68 0.74 32.2
Approach 505 2.8 0.352 9.5 LOS A 1.6 40.7 0.65 0.68 0.74 33.2
North: Bourneside Blvd

5 L2 53 2.0 0.059 4.6 LOS A 0.2 5.4 0.45 0.35 0.45 33.1
12 R2 368 2.0 0.383 7.9 LOS A 1.8 44.7 0.55 0.51 0.55 32.9
Approach 421 2.0 0.383 7.5 LOS A 1.8 44.7 0.54 0.49 0.54 32.9
West: Fruitville Rd
3 L2 705 2.0 0.468 6.8 LOS A 3.1 79.7 0.23 0.09 0.23 32.0
8 T1 895 3.0 0.592 8.7 LOS A 4.9 125.5 0.29 0.12 0.29 33.9
Approach 1600 2.6 0.592 7.9 LOS A 4.9 125.5 0.26 0.11 0.26 33.0
All Vehicles 2526 2.5 0.592 8.1 LOS A 4.9 125.5 0.39 0.29 0.40 33.1
Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.
LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).
Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).
Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.
Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.
HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.
Project: C:\Users\mcrim\OneDrive - Stantec Office 365\Documents\Projects\SMR\myakka_ranch\docc\sidra\bourneside_fruitville_roundabout.sip8
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 4:
ENVIRONMENTAL
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
4.1 Preliminary Listed Species Assessment

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Lakewood Ranch Southeast Development of Critical Concern (DOCC)
Preliminary Listed Species Assessment
May 2022
INTRODUCTION
The Lakewood Ranch Southeast Development of Critical Concern (DOCC) is approximately

4117.53 acres in size located in Sections 4, 9, 16, 19, and 20, Township 36 South, Range 19 and
20 East in northern Sarasota County. Habitats found within the project area primarily consist
altered habitats including low density residential, agricultural land, improved pasture, unimproved
pasture, woodland pasture, row crops, and shrub and brushland. Native upland habitats within
the project area consist of pine flatwoods, live oak hammock, temperate mesic hammock, and
hardwood-coniferous mixed. Wetland and surface water habitats within the project area consist
of agricultural ditches, excavated ponds, stream and lake swamps, exotic wetland hardwoods,
and freshwater marshes. Please see the attached F1 Existing Conditions Map for the locations of
habitats described below.
METHODOLOGY
The following methods were employed to assess the referenced parcel:
Field inspection of the site for evidence of wetlands, protected species, or other sensitive
environmental features.
Recent and historical aerial photograph interpretation of the subject property.
Review of the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps.
Review of the NRCS Web Soil Survey for Sarasota County, Florida and documentation of the
soil characteristics on site.
Research of Sarasota County, and various State and Federal databases regarding protected
wildlife species.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Wetland, upland, and other surface water habitats within the project area are categorized below
using the Florida Department of Transportation “Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification
System (FLUCCS)” as shown on the 'FLUCCS Habitat Map' (attached).
Description of On-Site Habitats:
A. Wetland and Other Surface Water Habitats
FLUCCS Code 510, Streams and Waterways

There are numerous agricultural ditches and canals are present throughout the project area.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
FLUCCS Code 534, Reservoirs

There are numerous small (less than 1 acre) excavated agricultural ponds were scattered
throughout the proposed project limits and classified as "other surface waters". The excavated
ponds are mostly open water with vegetation being dominated by floating water lettuce (Pista
statiotes).
FLUCCS Code 615, Stream and Lake Swamps

This stream hardwood habitat consists of a mixed canopy of laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), water
oak (Quercus nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum), black gum (Nyssa silvatica), Carolina willow (Salix
caroliniana), swamp bay (Persea palustris), and sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana). The understory
and groundcover strata include buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), primrose willow
(Ludwigia peruviana), saw-grass (Cladium jamaicense), Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia
virginica), and shield fern (Thelypteris spp.). The hydrologic regime within the swamps range from
seasonally flooded to saturated.
FLUCCS Code 619, Exotic Wetland Hardwoods

Several wetland areas are dominated by a monoculture of Brazilian pepper (Schinus
terebinthifolius).
FLUCCS Code 641 Freshwater Marsh

Freshwater herbaceous wetlands are the most common wetlands throughout the property. These
wetlands display a variety of historical disturbance (i.e., agricultural ditches. cattle grazing), which
has resulted in the alteration of vegetation and hydroperiods from natural conditions. The least
disturbed systems consist of desirable obligate wetland plants as the dominant species within the
interior zones including pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), duck potato (Sagittaria lancifolia), soft
rush (Juncus effusus), smartweed (Polygonum spp.), waterhyssops (bacopa spp.), hairgrass
(Eleocharis baldwinii), maidencane (Panicum hemitomon), buttonbush, St. John's wort
(Hypericum spp.). yellow-eyed grass (Xyris spp.). and water pennywort (Hydrocotyle umbellata).
These wetlands also contain tickseed (Coreopsis spp.), meadow beauty (Rhexia spp.), blue flag
iris (Iris virginica), blue maidencane (Amphicarpum muhlenbergianum), bushy bluestem
(Andropogon glomeratus), coinwort (Centella asiatica), primrose willow (Ludwigia peruviana),
wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), and salt bush (Baccharis halimifolia). The most disturbed systems
are dominated by scrub/shrub vegetation including Carolina willow, primrose willow, and cattail
(Typha spp.). Generally, these areas historically functioned as herbaceous marsh, but due to
historical disturbances associated with past agricultural and mining activities have converted to a
more scrub/shrub character.
These systems have hydroperiods ranging from semi-permanently flooded to seasonally flooded.
B. Upland Habitats
FLUCCS Code 110, Residential Low Density

One single family home site located near the southwestern portion of the project.
FLUCCS Code 200, Agricultural

There is an area of land in the southern portion of the project area used to store agricultural
equipment.
FLUCCS Code 210, Crop and Pastureland

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
There are areas in the southern portion of the project area on which crops and pasture grasses
are grown in rotation with one another.
FLUCFCS Code 211, Improved Pasture

Areas of improved pasture located throughout the project area. The vegetative composition within
areas of improved pasture is characterized primarily by Bahia grass (Paspalum notatum) with
lesser intermixed areas of limpo grass (Hemarthria altissima), dog fennel, broom sedge
(Andropogon spp.), flat-topped sedge (Euthamia minor), thistle (Cirsium spp.), and tropical soda
apple (Solanum capsicoides). Sprawling shrubs of blackberry (Rubus spp.) and isolated areas of
cogon grass (lmperata cylindrica) form moderately dense thickets along fence rows, edges of
wetlands, mesic hammocks, sloughs, and agricultural drainage ditches.
FLUCCS Code 212, Unimproved Pastures

These areas are currently being utilized for cattle grazing but are not managed sufficiently to be
considered improved pasture. Native canopy and understory vegetation are present along with
pasture forages.
FLUCCS 213, Woodland Pasture

There is an area of woodland pasture in the northern portion of the project area. Vegetation in this
area is dominated by Bahia grass with scattered live oaks and slash pine.
FLUCCS Code 411, Pine Flatwoods
There is a small area of pine flatwoods located in the southwestern portion of the project. The
canopy within this habitat type contains slash pine (Pinus elliottii), with a sub-canopy of live oak
(Quercus virginiana), gallberry (Ilex glabra), winged sumac (Rhus copallina), and wax myrtle. The
groundcover stratum is primarily covered by saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), with lesser areas of
wiregrass (Aristida spp.), and pawpaw (Asimina spp.).
FLUCCS Code 434, Hardwood Conifer Mixed Xeric Hammock

Canopy species include an equal mix of live oak and slash pine. Understory vegetation is
dominated by saw palmetto but also includes gallberry and beautyberry (Calicarpa americana).
FLUCCS Code 425, Temperate Hardwoods

There is one area of temperate hardwoods adjacent to Indian Creek in the southwestern portion
of the project area. The habitat type contains a canopy of live oak and cabbage palm (Sabal
palmetto) with understory dominated by beautyberry and Caesar weed (Urena lobata). This
habitat type is similar to the FLUCCS 427 habitat, but more mesic in nature.
FLUCCS Code 427, Live Oak

There are several areas of live oak located throughout the project area. The habitat type contains
a canopy of live oak understory dominated by saw palmetto. This habitat type is similar to the
FLUCCS 425 habitat, but more xeric in nature.
FLUCCS Code 814, Roads and Highways

A small portion of paved roadway is in/adjacent to the project area.
PROTECTED SPECIES
Preliminary on-site evaluations and database searches for the presence of state or federally listed
species within the project area have been completed. Subsequent to the online database searches,
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
preliminary listed species surveys were conducted by scientists with Ardurra between April 2021 to
May 2022. Listed species surveyed for during these site visits include wood stork (Mycteria
americana), Florida sandhill crane (Antigone canadensis pratensis), burrowing owl (Athene
cunicularia), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais
couperi), Florida Bonneted Bat (Eumops floridanus), and gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus). The
project is within the Core Foraging Area (CFA) of several wood stork nesting colonies, the closest of
which being the Ayers Point rookery located approximately 13 miles northwest of the project area near
the mouth of the Braden River. We found no evidence of Wood Stork or any other wading birds nesting
in any of the onsite wetlands or other habitats. The nearest FWC documented bald eagle nest (SA063)
is located 1.3 miles southwest of the project area. The project area is not located within any bald eagle
management protection zones. The subject parcel is also within the USFWS consultation area for the
Florida bonneted bat. No bonneted bats were observed roosting or foraging within any of the onsite
habitats during the preliminary listed species survey. Several potentially occupied gopher tortoise
burrows were observed during the preliminary listed species survey. Prior to development activities, a
formal 100% survey of suitable habitat within the project area will be conducted to identify the locations
of potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows. If potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows are
identified during this survey, the applicants Authorized Gopher Tortoise Agent will obtain a Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) gopher tortoise relocation permit. The gopher tortoises
will then be captured and relocated to an approved off-site long-term protection recipient area. Two
(2) burrowing owl burrows were observed within the improved pasture habitat of the project area as
shown on the attached Listed Wildlife Observation F-3 Map. Prior to construction, a Florida Burrowing
Owl Incidental Take Permit will be obtained from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission (FWC) for any burrows onsite that will be impacted by the project and appropriate
mitigation will be provided. No other protected species were observed nesting, denning, or utilizing the
onsite habitats.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
213 213 434

615 210
434 615
510 241
615
213 641
434 434
213 641 241

211 641
534
641 510 641
427
534
510
510 510
641 534 641 641
641 641
213 434 615 534
641
534 213 510
427 434 434 434 510
641 211 641
641 641
641 434 615 641
641 510 510
211 641 510
510 641 641 211 212 641
641 641
213 615
434
534 641 641
534
434 641 615
510 641 534
534 534 510 641 615
641 510
641 641
211 534 510
534 641 641 211 510 641
641 534
534 641
510 534 641 214
641 534 641
510 641 510 641
534 641 211
641
641 641 641
534 510 641 427 641

641 510
510
641 510 427 615
534 619
641 427
427
641 641
212
641
212
641 641 641 641
534 510
641 615 510
641 641
641 641
641 510 434
641 534
641 641
641 434
641 615 615
434
641
641
641
641
641
214
615
641
641
641 641
641 641
434
210 210 200

534
641 641 641

641
641
214 211
641
110 510
510
641 411 615 641 641
434 641 641 641 615
615 211 434 641 425 615
320 211 641
641 510
641
615 641 211 615 641
615 615 110
615
615
615
425
FLUCCS Code Descriptions ± Acreage 425 615
110 Residential, Low Density 4.96

200 Agriculture 20.36
210 Cropland and Pastureland 462.35
211 Improved Pasture 1650.35
212 Unimproved Pasture 283.63
213 Woodland Pasture 27.44
214 Row Crops 628.67
241 Tree Nurseries 71.15
320 Shrub and Brushland 5.60
411 Pine Flatwoods 15.01
425 Temperate Hardwood 5.49
D:\1 Palmetto\SMR\Myakka Ranch\GIS\LWRSoutheast_FLUCCS_REV_052522.mxd
427 Live Oak 42.74

434 Hardwood Coniferous Mixed 80.95
510 Streams and Waterways 86.18
534 Reservoirs less than 10 Acres 8.09
615 Stream and Lake Swamps 144.86 - LEGEND -
619 Exotic Wetland Hardwood 2.82
Approximate Project Boundary
641 Freshwater Marshes 576.86
Total Project Acreage 4117.53 Approximate FLUCCS Habitat Lines
±
Client: LWR Developments Drawn By: KS
Project: Lakewood Ranch Southeast Date: 5/26/2022
Location: Sarasota County, Florida Sheet: 1
TRS: 36S 20E 04-09,16,19,20,21; 36S 19E 24
FLUCCS Habitat Map SCALE: 1'' = 1800'
Title:
1523 8th Ave W, Suite B
Palmetto, FL 34221 Source: Sarasota County Imagery (2021) 0 1,800 3,600
G R A P H I C R E P R E S E N TAT I O N S A R E G E N E R A L I N N AT U R E A N D S H O U L D B E U S E D F O R P L A N N I N G P U R P O S E S O N LY
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Burrowing Owl Burrow 3

!
.

!!
..
po2 po4
[
¶
[¶
¶ [
[¶
po1 po5
po3
D:\1 Palmetto\SMR\Myakka Ranch\GIS\LWRSoutheast_ListedSpecies_052722.mxd
- LEGEND -
[
¶ Potentially Occupied Gopher Tortoise Burrow Location
!
. Approximate Burrowing Owl Burrow Location
Approximate Potential Gopher Tortoise Habitat
±
TRS: 36S 20E 04-09,16,19,20,21; 36S 19E 24
Listed Species Map SCALE: 1'' = 1800'
Title:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
4.2 Baseline Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
BASELINE SURFACE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM

LAKEWOOD RANCH SOUTHEAST
MASTER DEVELOPMENT ORDER
1.0 OVERVIEW
The Baseline Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program for the Lakewood Ranch
Southeast Development will commence one year in advance of anticipated initiation of
site development activities.
2.0 MONITORING STATIONS/LOCATIONS:
The project occupies approximately 4002.66± acres and includes three water bodies
within two drainage basins. Cow Pen Slough, Howard Creek, and Indian Creek within
the Sarasota Bay and Upper Myakka River drainage basins.
The specific locations for the stations are identified on the attached exhibit for the
monitoring program is anticipated to commence.
3.0 MONITORING COMMENCEMENT and FREQUENCY:
Surface water sampling will commence one year in advance of anticipated initiation of
site development activities. The surface water sampling as outlined in the Baseline Water
Quality Monitoring Program will cease once construction begins and the Ongoing
Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program commences.
Samples shall be collected monthly at the designated monitoring locations, as described

under Section 2.0 above. The baseline monitoring program will be considered complete
and sufficiently satisfied under FDEP’s data sufficiency provision, referenced in Chapter
62-303.320(4) Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The provision indicates that at least
10 independent samples be collected with at least one sample from three of the four
calendar seasons from each WBID lying wholly or partially within the project.
4.0 SAMPLE COLLECTION METHODS, ANALYSIS and QUALITY ASSURANCE
Sample collection methods shall be consistent with Florida Department of Environmental

Protection Standard Operating Procedures for Field Activities, DEP-SOP-001/01.Per the
SOP, grab samples will be collected within the top 12 inches of the water column,
however, skimming the surface will be avoided in order to minimize collection of surface
scum or other unrepresentative contaminants.
Analytical Parameters:
1. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/l) MDL = 0.1

2. Total Ammonia (mg/l) MDL = 0.02
3. Total Nitrate + Nitrite (mg/l) MDL = 0.025
4. Total Phosphorus (mg/l) MDL = 0.1
5. Specific Conductance (umhos/cm) MDL = 100
6. Fecal Coliform Bacteria (cfu/100ml) MDL = 100
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
7. Escherichia Coli Bacteria (cfu/100ml) MDL = 10

8. Dissolved Oxygen Saturation (%) MDL = 2.0
9. Turbidity (NTU) MDL = 2.0
10. Water Temperature (F) MDL = 2.0
11. BOD5 (mg/l) MDL = 2.0
12. Chlorophyll A – Corr. for Pheo (mg/m3) MDL = 0.5
13. Water Velocity (ft/sec)
14. Water Depth (ft)
15. Sample Depth (inches below surface)
Laboratory analysis of samples will be performed by NELAP certified laboratories. Data

shall not have qualifiers that prohibit the use of the data for evaluation of water quality
conditions or regulatory compliance.
5.0 REPORTING:
Reporting of the monitoring results will be required as follows:
1. The monitoring data from the previous year shall be reported to Sarasota County
annually in April of each year in a single excel spreadsheet.
2. Sarasota County will post the reported information on the Sarasota Water Atlas
website
3. A full set of water quality data for the previous year shall be uploaded to Florida’s
Watershed Information Network (WIN) data system annually in April of each year
4. Total Nitrogen shall be reported as the sum of TKN and Total Nitrate + Nitrite
6.0 MODIFICATION OF THE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM:
The Baseline Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program may be revised upon request
of the Sarasota County Stormwater Environmental Utility (or its successor) to reflect
unforeseen changes to on-site and off-site conditions. The Owner shall continue
sampling until a formal request has been submitted to the County and subsequently
approved.
7.0 INCORPORATION INTO MASTER DEVELOPMENT ORDER:
The terms of this monitoring program will be incorporated into any Master Development
Order approved by Sarasota County for the project as the monitoring program may be
modified by Sarasota County and the developer at the time of adoption of the Master
Development Order.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Manatee River
CYPRESS BANKS EAST CREEK
Sampling
Location #1
!
.
Sampling
Location #2
!
.
Sampling Sampling
Location #3 Location #5
!
. !
.
Sarasota Bay
COW PEN SLOUGH
!
. !
.
Sampling Sampling
Location #9 Location #4
Upper Myakka River

HOWARD CREEK
Sampling
Location #7
!
.
!
.
Sampling
Location #6
Upper Myakka River
INDIAN CREEK !
.
Sampling
D:\1 Palmetto\SMR\Myakka Ranch\GIS\LWRSoutheast_WBID_WaterSample_032922.mxd
Location #8
- LEGEND -
!
. Water Quality Sampling Station Location
Approximate Wetland Boundary
Approximate OSW Boundary
Approximate Waterbody IDs
±
TRS: 36S 20E 04-09,16,19,20,21; 36S 19E 24
Water Quality Sampling Station Map SCALE: 1'' = 1800'
Title:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
4.3 Resource Management Plan

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Lakewood Ranch Southeast Development of Critical Concern (DOCC)
Resource Management Plan
May 2022
Introduction
The following land management plan is proposed to address the use and maintenance of the
Open Space Preservation Areas for the Lakewood Ranch Southeast project, as required in
Section 11.2.9.7 of the Sarasota County Zoning Regulations. The proposed project is located in
Sections 4, 9, 16, 19, and 20, Township 36 South, Range 19 and 20 East in northern Sarasota
County. Habitats found within the project area primarily consist of altered habitats including low
density residential, agricultural land, improved pasture, unimproved pasture, woodland pasture,
row crops, and shrub and brushland. Native upland habitats within the project area consist of pine
flatwoods, live oak hammock, temperate mesic hammock, and hardwood-coniferous mixed.
Wetland and surface water habitats within the project area consist of agricultural ditches,
excavated ponds, stream and lake swamps, exotic wetland hardwoods, and freshwater marshes.
Please see the attached F1 Existing Conditions Map, and F2 Post Habitat Map for the locations
of habitats described below.
I. Ownership
The Open Space areas associated with Lakewood Ranch Southeast are currently owned by SMR
Myakka LLC, Schwartz Farms Inc., and John Cannon Homes- Eastmoore LLC. Maintenance
activities will initially be the responsibility of the developer/owner, until an active Homeowners
Association (HOA) has been established. Upon establishment, maintenance responsibilities will
then be delegated to the HOA.
II. Baseline Environmental Assessment
Preservation and conservation areas within the Open Space component of Lakewood Ranch
Southeast project area consist of natural and improved habitats, as depicted on the attached F1
and F2 maps. Wetlands and upland habitats identified on this parcel are categorized below using
nomenclature found in the most recent edition of the Florida Department of Transportation's
Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS).
A. Native Wetland Habitats
FLUCCS Code 615, Stream and Lake Swamps

This stream hardwood habitat consists of a mixed canopy of laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), water
oak (Quercus nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum), black gum (Nyssa silvatica), Carolina willow (Salix
caroliniana), swamp bay (Persea palustris), and sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana). The understory
and groundcover strata include buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), primrose willow
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
(Ludwigia peruviana), saw-grass (Cladium jamaicense), Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia

virginica), and shield fern (Thelypteris spp.). The hydrologic regime within the swamps range from
seasonally flooded to saturated.
FLUCCS Code 619, Exotic Wetland Hardwoods

Several wetland areas are dominated by a monoculture of Brazilian pepper (Schinus
terebinthifolius).
FLUCCS Code 641 Freshwater Marsh

Freshwater herbaceous wetlands are the most common wetlands throughout the property. These
wetlands display a variety of historical disturbance (i.e., agricultural ditches. cattle grazing), which
has resulted in the alteration of vegetation and hydroperiods from natural conditions. The least
disturbed systems consist of desirable obligate wetland plants as the dominant species within the
interior zones including pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), duck potato (Sagittaria lancifolia), soft
rush (Juncus effusus), smartweed (Polygonum spp.), waterhyssops (bacopa spp.), hairgrass
(Eleocharis baldwinii), maidencane (Panicum hemitomon), buttonbush, St. John's wort
(Hypericum spp.). yellow-eyed grass (Xyris spp.). and water pennywort (Hydrocotyle umbellata).
These wetlands also contain tickseed (Coreopsis spp.), meadow beauty (Rhexia spp.), blue flag
iris (Iris virginica), blue maidencane (Amphicarpum muhlenbergianum), bushy bluestem
(Andropogon glomeratus), coinwort (Centella asiatica), primrose willow (Ludwigia puruviana),
wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), and salt bush (Baccharis halimifolia). The most disturbed systems
are dominated by scrub/shrub vegetation including Carolina willow, primrose willow, and cattail
(Typha spp.). Generally, these areas historically functioned as herbaceous marsh, but due to
historical disturbances associated with past agricultural and mining activities have converted to a
more scrub/shrub character.
These systems have hydroperiods ranging from semi-permanently flooded to seasonally flooded.
B. Native Upland Habitats
FLUCCS Code 411, Pine Flatwoods

There is a small area of pine flatwoods located in the southwestern portion of the project. The
canopy within this habitat type contains slash pine (Pinus elliottii), with a sub-canopy of live oak
(Quercus virginiana), gallberry (Ilex glabra), winged sumac (Rhus copallina), and wax myrtle. The
groundcover stratum is primarily covered by saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), with lesser areas of
wiregrass (Aristida spp.), and pawpaw (Asimina spp.).
FLUCCS Code 434, Hardwood Conifer Mixed Xeric Hammock

Canopy species include an equal mix of live oak and slash pine. Understory vegetation is
dominated by saw palmetto but also includes gallberry and beautyberry (Calicarpa americana).
FLUCCS Code 425, Temperate Hardwoods

There is one area of temperate hardwoods adjacent to Indian Creek in the southwestern portion
of the project area. The habitat type contains a canopy of live oak and cabbage palm (Sabal
palmetto) with understory dominated by beautyberry and Caesar weed (Urena lobata). This
habitat type is similar to the FLUCCS 427 habitat, but more mesic in nature.
FLUCCS Code 427, Live Oak

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
There are several areas of live oak located throughout the project area. The habitat type contains
a canopy of live oak understory dominated by saw palmetto. This habitat type is similar to the
FLUCCS 425 habitat, but more xeric in nature.
C. Transitional Areas
FLUCCS Code 110, Residential Low Density

One single family home site located near the southwestern portion of the project.
FLUCCS Code 200, Agricultural

There is an area of land in the southern portion of the project area used to store agricultural
equipment.
FLUCCS Code 210, Crop and Pastureland

There are areas in the southern portion of the project area on which crops and pasture grasses
are grown in rotation with one another.
FLUCFCS Code 211, Improved Pasture

Areas of improved pasture located throughout the project area. The vegetative composition within
areas of improved pasture is characterized primarily by Bahia grass (Paspalum notatum) with
lesser intermixed areas of limpo grass (Hemarthria altissima), dog fennel, broom sedge
(Andropogon spp.), flat-topped sedge (Euthamia minor), thistle (Cirsium spp.), and tropical soda
apple (Solanum capsicoides). Sprawling shrubs of blackberry (Rubus spp.) and isolated areas of
cogon grass (lmperata cylindrica) form moderately dense thickets along fence rows, edges of
wetlands, mesic hammocks, sloughs, and agricultural drainage ditches.
FLUCCS Code 212, Unimproved Pastures

These areas are currently being utilized for cattle grazing but are not managed sufficiently to be
considered improved pasture. Native canopy and understory vegetation are scattered along with
pasture forages.
FLUCCS 213, Woodland Pasture

There is an area of woodland pasture in the northern portion of the project area. Vegetation in this
area is dominated by Bahia grass with scattered live oaks and slash pine.
FLUCCS Code 510, Streams and Waterways

There are numerous agricultural ditches and canals are present throughout the project area.
FLUCCS Code 534, Reservoirs

There are numerous small (less than 1 acre) excavated agricultural ponds scattered throughout
the proposed project limits and classified as "other surface waters". The excavated ponds are
mostly open water with vegetation being dominated by floating water lettuce (Pista statiotes).
FLUCCS Code 814, Roads and Highways

A small portion of paved roadway is in/adjacent to the project area.
III. Land Management Action Plan

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Management of the Open Space areas over the first +10 years will focus on enhancing native
habitats by removing nuisance and exotic vegetation, hydrologic enhancement of some wetlands
and supplemental planting of wetlands and wetland buffers with native vegetation where
necessary. Nuisance/exotic vegetation including woody species will be removed from all native
habitat preservation/conservation and restoration areas consistent with UDC Section 124-177.
Management efforts will be phased according to priority sensitive areas, and in accordance with
phases of construction. If necessary, a revised and updated Resource Management Plan will be
proposed during the ninth or final year of this plan. Preservation and conservation areas within
the Open Space component consist of natural and improved habitats as depicted on the F2 post-
FUCCS habitat map.
A. Prohibited and Permissible Activities
Prohibited activities within the preservation and conservation areas include those filling,
excavating, well drilling, altering or trimming vegetation (except as part of an approved
management plan), storing of materials shall be prohibited within preservation areas. Low impact
and/or passive use activities that are compatible with the sustainability of the natural communities
are permissible. Such activities may include removal of vegetation in preservation areas in
compliance with an approved maintenance plan and includes passive recreational and
educational activities including nature trails as depicted on the plan drawings, including
observational/shade structures. All permissible activities within preservation and conservation
areas, currently not shown on the design plan drawings, must be approved by Sarasota County
Environmental Protection Division prior to implementation.
On-going agricultural uses, such as cattle grazing will be continued prior to site development. Use
of the site for grazing cattle or farming, at the appropriate stocking or planting densities, will not
impact the ecology of the site because proper management practices and oversight are provided
by the Farm/Ranch Land Manager.
B. Wildlife Protection
Any maintenance occurring in preservation and conservation areas will be conducted with
consideration of listed species or wildlife utilization. Such protective measures may include pre-
management censuses to identify the location of any listed species and their nests and/or burrows
to avoid impacting them. Other measures may include the timing of maintenance activities to
avoid any potential disturbance during an active breeding or nesting season for a listed species
known to utilize the preservation or conservation areas. If a listed species is observed nesting
and/or denning during maintenance activities, the maintenance activities in that area will cease
until the species in question vacates the area or an appropriate environmental professional or
regulatory agency is contacted to provide additional guidance.
C. Proposed Management Activities
1. Wetlands
Enhancement will be accomplished through a combination of vegetative and hydrologic

techniques. Nuisance and exotic vegetation will be removed to the greatest extent practicable,
unless removal attempts would result in damage to wetlands, and controlled according to the
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
methodology described below. Hydrologic enhancement will be accomplished by back-filling

selective agricultural ditches that have historically altered wetland hydrology.
Nuisance and exotic vegetation will be removed from the preserved wetland areas to the greatest
extent practicable. An initial eradication of nuisance and exotic vegetation will be performed with
the intent to remove as much biomass as possible without further impacting the wetlands.
Nuisance and exotic vegetation will be controlled and removed if the cover of the species exceeds
the levels outlined in UDC Section 124-177. Invasive vegetation, such as primrose willow and
cattails, will be treated in place with aquatic approved herbicides, and larger woody species, such
as Brazilian pepper, will be removed by hand-clearing methods. This will include stump cutting,
herbicide treatment of the stump, and removal of the above ground biomass from the area. No
machinery will be used within the wetland areas. All herbicide applications will be done under the
supervision of a state-certified herbicide applicator with appropriate natural areas or aquatic
certifications.
Subsequent maintenance events will occur semi-annually for the first three years and annually
thereafter. Management goals for the wetland preservation areas include 85 percent coverage by
desirable wetland vegetation and no more than 5 percent coverage by upland vegetation.
Management goals and maintenance levels for percent coverage of nuisance/exotic vegetation
are described above and are consistent with UDC Section 124-177.
2. Forested Uplands
a. Xeric Hammock and Pine Flatwoods

Xeric hammock and pine flatwoods within the Open Space areas of the project, including within
the wetland buffers found in the Open Space areas, will be preserved and placed within
conservation and preservation tracts. Prescribed fire is the optimal tool to manage pine flatwoods
and xeric hammock communities. These communities are fire-dependent ecosystems and require
regular burning to maintain an open plant community. These frequent fires control vegetation and
prevent the community structure from being overgrown or recipients of altered community types.
Where feasible, prescribed fire will continue to be utilized as a management tool prior to the
residential construction. All prescribed burning will be performed by a certified burn agent. In
concert with prescribed fire, or after build-out in each development phase, brush control measures
will be implemented within areas of dense saw palmetto through mechanical means such as roller
chopping to control understory growth. Prescribed burns and/or roller-chopping will occur on a
three to five (3-5) year cycle as needed. Roller chopping events are to be approved by the
Environmental Protection Division. These habitat communities within the project area have some
encroachment and infestation by nuisance and/or invasive species. Invasive vegetation will be
removed by both mechanical and hand clearing methods. If extraction methodologies will result
in significant alteration of natural soils, vegetation or elevations within the Open Space areas, the
invasive vegetation will be stump cut. The cut stumps will be treated with herbicide and the above
ground biomass will be removed from the area for disposal. Chemical control will be used
annually to treat nuisance and exotic species, which is primarily Brazilian pepper, if the cover of
the species exceeds 5 percent. All herbicide applications will be done under the supervision of a
state-licensed herbicide applicator with appropriate natural areas or aquatic certifications.
Management as described in this section will occur in preservation and conservation areas as
appropriate.
b. Wetland Buffers
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Wetland buffers will be placed in preservation tracts. Wetland buffers within the project boundary
are in various states of condition. Some buffers have retained native vegetation, while others
have been infested with nuisance / exotic vegetative species. Invasive vegetation will be removed
by hand clearing methods and chemical treatment. If extraction methodologies will result in
significant alteration of natural soils, vegetation or elevations, the invasive vegetation will be
treated with appropriate herbicide and either stump cut or killed in place. Chemical control will be
used annually to treat nuisance and exotic species, which is primarily Brazilian pepper, if the cover
of this species exceeds 5 percent. All herbicide applications will be done under the supervision
of a state-licensed herbicide applicator with appropriate natural areas or aquatic certifications.
Where deemed necessary, supplemental plantings to restore/enhance buffer areas that are
adjacent to wetlands will occur, if required, and will consist of an appropriate mix of trees, shrubs,
herbs and grasses and will be determined based on adjacent or historical communities, and soil
type. Planted buffers will mimic natural systems and most likely consist of an oak or pine overstory
at a density of 60 percent with an understory including subcanopy and groundcover at a density
of 40 percent. A typical buffer planting plan for these areas is included within Section VIII of this
document. Routine maintenance will occur semi-annually for the first three years and annually
thereafter via chemical control if nuisance and exotic coverage exceeds the levels outlined in
UDC Section 124-17.
3. Non-forested Uplands
Open Space areas outside of natural habitats or wetland buffers will be routinely maintained by
mowing, and will be sodded if necessary.
D. Hydroperiod Maintenance Plan
The pre-development watershed to the wetlands will be maintained by discharge from the
proposed stormwater treatment and conveyance system. All water entering the wetlands from
the development will be pre-treated in the stormwater management system. In order to ensure
the hydroperiods of on-site wetlands are maintained within an acceptable range, the applicant
proposes to place staff gauges within all wetlands with an indicator showing the seasonal high
water elevation of the wetland (as approved through the ERP Permit process). The staff gauges
will be read once during the dry season and once during the wet season of each year. A report
will be submitted to Sarasota County once each year containing this data. The monitoring will
continue for a minimum of two years or until the County agrees to cease the monitoring
requirement.
E. Priority of Preservation/Conservation Land Management
Management efforts will first focus on habitats that serve as wildlife corridors. Priority will be
afforded to the main wildlife corridor that runs through the center of the project area and areas of
greenway that connect to offsite conservation areas. Priority will then be given to wildlife corridors
that provide internal connectivity within each development area between wetland systems and/or
native upland habitats. After priority habitats have been initially visited, they will be placed on an
annual maintenance schedule, or more frequently if needed, to provide routine maintenance to
limit regrowth of nuisance and exotic vegetation.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Management efforts will then focus on isolated wetland systems and their associated 30 or 50
foot buffers based upon future build-out. As construction is anticipated to occur from west to east,
management of natural habitats will follow the same course of action.
IV. Compatibility with Environmental Lands Master Land Management Plan
This plan has not been adopted as of the amended creation date of this document (March 2022).
V. Connectivity of Open Space
All Open Space areas will be placed within Conservation Easements or separate tracts to provide
protection of lands in perpetuity. Within sections of the development, lands located between
natural habitats will also be similarly protected to provide a connection from on-site preservation
and conservation areas and off-site natural habitats, thus providing internal and external corridors
throughout the project area.
Conceptual wildlife corridors have been proposed through the project area to provide a larger
scale connection between undeveloped land to the north of the project, open space, conservation
land to the east of the project, and greenway in the southwestern portion of the project. These
corridors consists of an existing series of freshwater marshes, forested wetlands, agricultural
ditches, and native and improved uplands. Where the corridor crosses proposed roadways, box
culverts, rumble strips, or wildlife crossing signs will be utilized to facilitate safe passage for
wildlife.
Open Space areas outside of the central wildlife corridor can also provide connectivity to off-site
conservation lands. Selected natural systems located internally within development areas will be
connected to off-site areas with 50' wide easements.
VI. Compliance with National Fire Protection Association Standards
Fire protection measures will be consistent with those contained within Sarasota County's building
and development regulations as the authority having jurisdiction over these matters.
VII. Monitoring
Wetland preservation, upland preservation and conservation areas will be monitored semi-
annually for at least three years. Representative photographic stations will be established at
locations to be determined in the field. A photograph will be recorded with every monitoring event
to document current conditions. Qualitative observations will be made in each preservation or
conservation area noting overall species diversity, percent cover of all species, an estimate of the
cover by nuisance and/or invasive species and general observations regarding the quality of the
preservation area. Any maintenance that has occurred within the past year will be noted and
plans for future maintenance and management will be included. Any wildlife utilizing the
preservation or conservation areas will be documented. An annual monitoring report will be
submitted to Sarasota County Environmental Protection Division.
As noted in Section III, during the ninth or final year of monitoring a revised and updated land
Management Plan will be submitted for approval to Sarasota County Environmental Protection
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Division detailing the future management practices of Open Space preservation/conservation

areas.
VIII. Restoration of Native Habitats
Nuisance/exotic species coverage will be eradicated as described above with natural recruitment
of desirable wetland vegetation to occur.
Wetland buffers within the project boundary are in various states of use and condition. Some
buffers have retained native vegetation, while others have been or will be cleared of nuisance /
exotic species. Supplemental planting to restore/enhance wetlands and upland areas that are
adjacent to wetlands will occur if required concurrent with each phase of development and will
consist of an appropriate mix of trees, shrubs, herbs, and grasses and will be determined based
on adjacent or historical communities, soil type, and hydrologic regime. Planted buffers will mimic
natural systems and most likely consist of an oak or pine overstory at a density of 60 percent with
an understory, including subcanopy and groundcover, at a density of 40 percent.
The following table depicts a typical planting plan that may be utilized to restore xeric hammock,
wetland buffers, and native habitat areas impacted for slopes/grading, utility installation, and other
minor impacts.
Community Scientific Name Common Name Sizing On-Center

Structure Spacing
Pine Flatwoods Pinus elliotti Slash pine 7-gal/15-gal 20'
(FLUCCS 411) Quercus virginiana Live oak 7-gal/15-gal 20'
Myrica cerifera Wax myrtle 3-gal 20'
Serenoa repens Saw palmetto 7-gal 10'
Tripsacum- floridanum Florida gamagrass 1 qt equiv. 3'
Xeric Hammock Pinus elliottii Slash pine 7-gal/15-gal 20’
(FLUCCS 427 and Quercus virginiana Live oak 7-gal/15-gal 20'
434) Callicapra americana Beautyberry 3-gal 10'
Myrica cerífera Wax myrtle 3-gal 10'
Serenoa repens Saw palmetto 3-gal 10'
Spartina bakeri Sand cordgrass 4” equiv. 3’
Tripsacum Dactyloides Fakahatchee grass 4” equiv. 3’
IX. Fortuitous Finds Policy
Land management activities will adhere to federal, state and local regulations regarding any
historic resources found on site.
If evidence of the existence of historic resources is discovered or observed at development sites

or during development activities after final approval, all work shall cease in the area of effect as
determined by the Sarasota County Director of Historical Resources. The developer, owner,
contractor, or agent thereof shall notify the Director of Historical Resources within two working
days of finding any artifact of historical significance. Examples of such evidence include human
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
remains, whole or fragmentary stone tools, shell tools, aboriginal or historic pottery, historic glass,
historic bottles, bone tools, historic building foundations, shell mounds, shell middens, or sand
mounds. The Director shall assess the significance of the finds within three working days of
notification and suggest methods to mitigate any adverse effects so as to minimize delays in
development activities.
If any human skeletal remains or associated burial artifacts are discovered at development sites
or during development activity, all work in the area must cease, and the permittee must notify the
nearest law enforcement office immediately and notify the Director of Historical Resources within
two working days.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
213 213 434

615 210
434 615
510 241
615
213 641
434 434
213 641 241

211 641
534
641 510 641
427
534
510
510 510
641 534 641 641
641 641
213 434 615 534
641
534 213 510
427 434 434 434 510
641 211 641
641 641
641 434 615 641
641 510 510
211 641 510
510 641 641 211 212 641
641 641
213 615
434
534 641 641
534
434 641 615
510 641 534
534 534 510 641 615
641 510
641 641
211 534 510
534 641 641 211 510 641
641 534
534 641
510 534 641 214
641 534 641
510 641 510 641
534 641 211
641
641 641 641
534 510 641 427 641

641 510
510
641 510 427 615
534 619
641 427
427
641 641
212
641
212
641 641 641 641
534 510
641 615 510
641 641
641 641
641 510 434
641 534
641 641
641 434
641 615 615
434
641
641
641
641
641
214
615
641
641
641 641
641 641
434
210 210 200

534
641 641 641

641
641
214 211
641
110 510
510
641 411 615 641 641
434 641 641 641 615
615 211 434 641 425 615
320 211 641
641 510
641
615 641 211 615 641
615 615 110
615
615
615
425
FLUCCS Code Descriptions ± Acreage 425 615
110 Residential, Low Density 4.96

200 Agriculture 20.36
210 Cropland and Pastureland 462.35
211 Improved Pasture 1650.35
212 Unimproved Pasture 283.63
213 Woodland Pasture 27.44
214 Row Crops 628.67
241 Tree Nurseries 71.15
D:\1 Palmetto\SMR\Myakka Ranch\GIS\LWRSoutheast_FLUCCS_REV_052522.mxd
427 Live Oak 42.74

434 Hardwood Coniferous Mixed 80.95
615 Stream and Lake Swamps 144.86 - LEGEND -
619 Exotic Wetland Hardwood 2.82
Total Project Acreage 4117.53 Approximate FLUCCS Habitat Lines
±
TRS: 36S 20E 04-09,16,19,20,21; 36S 19E 24
FLUCCS Habitat Map SCALE: 1'' = 1800'
Title:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
510 510 434

615
434 615
510 510
615
641 510
434 194
641 641
427 510 534 510
641 641
510 534
510
641 641 641 641 641
641 510 641 615
434 510
510 427 434 434
641 641 510 641
641 434
641 615 641
641 427
641
641 641 641
641 641
615
534 641 510 641 434
434
641 615
641
641 615
641 510 641 510
641
641 641 510 641
510
510
641 641
510 641 510 641
641
641 641
534 510 641
510 641
510
641 641 641
510 641 641 510
427 510 641 510
641 427 615 427
510
534 619
641
641 510 641
641 510 427
510
641 510 641 641 427 641
534
641 510 641 615
641
641 641
641 434
641 534 510 510
510 510
641 641
641 434
641 615 615
641
641
641
641
641 641
641
615
641
434
641
641 641 641
641
434
641 641 641

641
641 641
510
641
615 510
641 641 641
641 641 615
615 434 194 434 641
641 425 615
320 194 641
641
411 641
641 615 641
615 615 615
510
615
510 510
510 615
425
510
615
FLUCCS Code Descriptions ± Acreage

194 Other Open Land 926.81
411 Pine Flatwoods 15.01 - LEGEND -
427 Live Oak 28.66 Approximate Project Boundary 434: Hardwood Coniferous Mixed
D:\1 Palmetto\SMR\Myakka Ranch\GIS\LWRSoutheast_FLUCCS_F2_052622.mxd
434 Hardwood Coniferous Mixed 59.25 FLUCCS Descriptions 510: Streams and Waterways
510 Streams and Waterways 21.89 194: Other Open Land 534: Reservoirs less than 10 Acres
320: Shrub and Brushland 615: Stream and Lake Swamps
615 Stream and Lake Swamps 144.86
619 Exotic Wetland Hardwood 2.82 411: Pine Flatwoods 619: Exotic Wetland Hardwood
641 Freshwater Marshes 576.72 425: Temperate Hardwood 641: Freshwater Marshes
Development Area 2326.83
Total Project Acreage 4117.53 427: Live Oak Development Area
±
TRS: 36S 20E 04-09,16,19,20,21; 36S 19E 24
FLUCCS F2 Habitat Map SCALE: 1'' = 1800'
Title:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
510 510 434

615
434 615
510 510
615
641 510
434 194
641 641
427 510 534 510
641 641
510 534
510
641 641 641 641 641
641 510 641 615
434 510
510 427 434 434
641 641 510 641
641 434
641 615 641
641 427
641
641 641 641
641 641
615
534 641 510 641 434
434
641 615
641
641 615
641 510 641 510
641
641 641 510 641
510
510
641 641
510 641 510 641
641
641 641
534 510 641
510 641
510
641 641 641
510 641 641 510
427 510 641 510
641 427 615 427
510
534 619
641
641 510 641
641 510 427
510
641 510 641 641 427 641
534
641 510 641 615
641
641 641
641 434
641 534 510 510
510 510
641 641
641 434
641 615 615
641
641
641
641
641 641
641
615
641
434
641
641 641 641
641
434
641 641 641

641
641 641
510
641
615 510
641 641 641
641 641 615
615 434 194 434 641
641 425 615
320 194 641
641
411 641
641 615 641
615 615 615
510
615
510 510
510 615
425
510
615

194 Other Open Land 926.81
320 Shrub and Brushland 5.60 - LEGEND -
D:\1 Palmetto\SMR\Myakka Ranch\GIS\LWRSoutheast_FLUCCS_F2_WildlifeCorridor_052722.mxd

Approximate Wildlife Corridor 434: Hardwood Coniferous Mixed
427 Live Oak 28.66 Approximate Project Boundary 510: Streams and Waterways
434 Hardwood Coniferous Mixed 59.25 FLUCCS Descriptions 534: Reservoirs less than 10 Acres
194: Other Open Land 615: Stream and Lake Swamps
615 Stream and Lake Swamps 144.86 320: Shrub and Brushland 619: Exotic Wetland Hardwood
619 Exotic Wetland Hardwood 2.82 411: Pine Flatwoods 641: Freshwater Marshes
425: Temperate Hardwood Development Area
Development Area 2326.83
Total Project Acreage 4117.53 427: Live Oak
±
TRS: 36S 20E 04-09,16,19,20,21; 36S 19E 24
FLUCCS F2 Habitat & Wildlife Corridor Map SCALE: 1'' = 1800'
Title:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
510 510 434

615
434 615
510 510
615
641 510
434 194
641 641
427 510 534 510
641 641
510 534
510
641 641 641 641 641
641 510 641 615
434 510
510 427 434 434
641 641 510 641
641 434
641 615 641
641 427
641
641 641 641
641 641
615
534 641 510 641 434
434
641 615
641
641 615
641 510 641 510
641
641 641 510 641
510
510
641 641
510 641 510 641
641
641 641
534 510 641
510 641
510
641 641 641
510 641 641 510
427 510 641 510
641 427 615 427
510
534 619
641
641 510 641
641 510 427
510
641 510 641 641 427 641
534
641 510 641 615
641
641 641
641 434
641 534 510 510
510 510
641 641
641 434
641 615 615
641
641 641
Proposed
Proposed Wetland Impact
641
Wetland Impact
641
641 Proposed
615 Wetland Impact
641
434 641
641 641 641
641
434
641 641 641

Proposed 641
641 Wetland Impact 641
510
641
615 510
641 641 641
641 641 615
615 434 194 434 641
641 425 615
320 194 641
641
411 641
641 615 641
615 615 615
510
615
510 510
510 615
425
510
615

194 Other Open Land 926.81 - LEGEND -
Approximate Proposed 434: Hardwood Coniferous
Wetland Impacts Mixed
D:\1 Palmetto\SMR\Myakka Ranch\GIS\LWRSoutheast_FLUCCS_F2_Impacts_052622.mxd
427 Live Oak 28.66 Approximate Project Boundary 510: Streams and Waterways
434 Hardwood Coniferous Mixed 59.25 FLUCCS Descriptions 534: Reservoirs less than 10
510 Streams and Waterways 21.89 Acres
194: Other Open Land
534 Reservoirs less than 10 Acres 3.59 615: Stream and Lake Swamps
615 Stream and Lake Swamps 144.86 320: Shrub and Brushland
619: Exotic Wetland Hardwood
619 Exotic Wetland Hardwood 2.82 411: Pine Flatwoods
641 Freshwater Marshes 576.72 641: Freshwater Marshes
425: Temperate Hardwood
Development Area 2326.83 Development Area
Total Project Acreage 4117.53 427: Live Oak
±
TRS: 36S 20E 04-09,16,19,20,21; 36S 19E 24
FLUCCS F2 Habitat & Proposed Wetland Impact Map SCALE: 1'' = 1800'
Title:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 5:
VTZ MASTER PLAN
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
LEGEND
Lakewood Ranch Southeast (~4,120 Acres)
(Maximum 5,000 dwelling units)
Developed Area (~2,348 Acres) (57%)
Open Space (~1,772 Acres) (43%)

UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
Greenway (Included in Open Space)
Greenbelt (Included in Open Space)
Approximate Location of County Park

(Final Land Area to be Determined)
50 ft.
500 ft.
50 ft.
50 ft.
FRUITVILLE ROAD

Map C-3:Village Transition Zone (VTZ)
¯
Stantec Consulting Services Inc
(
Master Plan
Sarasota, FL 34240
tel 941.907.6900
$ $ 0 1,000 2,000
Feet
Notes: fax 941.907.6910
2. Source data: Sarasota County GIS, Stantec, Ardurra
3. Imagery: Sarasota Couny Aerial 2021 May 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 6:
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
RESPONSES
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
To: Sarasota County Planning and From: Katie LaBarr, AICP

Development Services Stantec
Project/File: 215616736 Lakewood Ranch Southeast Date: May 27, 2022

Application No.: 22-116179 PA
Reference: Development Review Committee (DRC) - Response to Comments
The Lakewood Ranch Southeast Pre-Application meeting occurred on 4/7/2022. We are in receipt of the
Preapplication Conference Report – Staff Comments. Please find our responses to comments below
sectioned by discipline and written in bold.
Air and Water Quality
1. Please note, per the Unified Development Code Section 124-272(f)(3) 2050 PLAN REGULATIONS,
states that the large developments, more than one Village or Hamlet, that seek development approval
of a Master Development Order through the Development of Critical Concern (DOCC) process has a
water quality monitoring plan requirement.
Response: A water quality monitoring plan is included as a part of this application, please see Section 4:
Environmental of this application package.
2. Please also note, some of the subject properties have been used for agricultural operations (row
crops, sod, and/or citrus fields). Please review the requirements of Article 9, Section 124-174(a)(1-2)
of the Unified Development Code regarding historic uses of the site for agricultural reasons. These
requirements will be due at the time of a new Site and Development submittal.
UDC Section 124-174(a)(1-2)
“(1) Provide the results of any Environmental Assessments or Audits of the property, along with a
narrative of the measures needed to remediate if required by Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (FDEP).
(2) Soil or ground water sampling shall be required at the time of first development order submittal for
sites where historical uses include, agricultural operations (fields and groves, cattle operations [cattle
dipping vats or pens where animals were concentrated for the purposes of applying chemical treatments],
chemical mixing areas, fuel storage and dispensing areas), golf courses, railroad rights- of-way, landfills,
junkyards, or for facilities regulated as hazardous waste generators under the Resource Conservation
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Recovery Act (RCRA). The Applicant and County shall coordinate with the FDEP where contamination
exceeding applicable FDEP standards is identified on site.”
Response: Thank you for your comment. It is noted that these requirements will be due at the time of a
new Site and Development submittal.
Environmental Protection Division (EDP)
Items to be address within a Development of Critical Concern formal application for EPD are found below.
Please contact Planning and Environmental Protection to set up a methodology meeting/s should they be
needed.
1. The formal application will need to include an environmental report prepared by an appropriate
professional. The report should contain the following:
a. A complete color native habitat map based on Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms
Classification System nomenclature (FLUCFCS) and overlaid on a recent aerial photograph,
b. Preliminary listed species information,
c. Information on how the proposed petition will be consistent with native habitat protection
policies, ENV Policy 1.1.1 and ENV Policy 1.2.1 of the Comprehensive Plan.
Response: An environmental report has been prepared by Chris Kennedy with Ardurra. Please see
Section 4 of this application package.
2. Please contact staff (Bryan Beard – 941-915-7717) for a site visit to confirm on site habitats before
submittal of a formal application.
Response: A site visit has been conducted to confirm on-site habitats.
3. During the review of the submitted petition, Environmental Protection Division staff will inspect the
site for the presence of Grand Trees, in accordance with the County’s Tree Code, Chapter 54, Article
XVIII – Section-54-586(2)(c), development applications shall be designed to protect Grand Trees. Any
existing Grand Trees (including their dripline) will need to be shown on concept plans as protected.
Please contact Darren Semones (941-840-2411) for the Grand Tree assessment before an application
is submitted.
Response: Any existing Grand Trees (including their dripline) are shown as protected.
4. The proposed zoning designation has a 50% open space requirement and will need to satisfy this
requirement first with Native Habitats consistent with UDC Article 9, Sec. 124-173.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: The proposed project will be subject to alternative requirements associated with the
proposed VTZ RMA and will comply with those requirements of 43%-50% Open Space. This requirement
will be satisfied first with Native Habitats consistent with the UDC.
5. Site needs to verify whether Watercourses (UDC Article 13, Section 124-251) exist on-site. Existing
Watercourses shall show a 50-ft buffer, from top of banks on each side of the watercourse, on the
DCP.
Response: Please see Section 4: Environmental of this application package regarding watercourses.
6. Include the proposed Restrictive Covenant spelling out uses allowed.
Response: The proposed Restrictive Covenant, spelling out uses allowed, will be provided at time of
rezone or another phase of development such as plat approval.
7. Include the location of the Greenway on-site and any proposed Alternative Greenway Buffer.
Response: The location of the Greenway on-site and any proposed Alternative Greenway Buffer is
shown on the VTZ Master Plan (See Section 5 of this application package).
8. Include the proposed Greenbelt/s located on the DCP.
Response: The proposed Greenbelt/s are included on the VTZ Master Plan (See Section 5 of this
application package).
9. Identify proposed Wildlife Corridors/Crossings showing them on the DCP, along with examples of
types of crossings expected to be constructed.
Response: The proposed Wildlife Corridors/Crossings are shown on Map F-4 Conceptual Wildlife
Corridor Plan (See Section 4 of this application package). The proposed project is committed to
providing 43% - 50% open space that is logically connected throughout the site. Examples of the types
of crossings expected to be constructed may include but are not limited to wildlife crossing signs and
rumble strips. Specific details will be provided at the time of rezone(s).
10. Identify all proposed Native Habitat Preservation Areas, Impacts and proposed mitigation (AKA: F-2
Map).
Response: All proposed Native Habitat Preservation Areas, impacts, and proposed mitigation are
included in Section 4: Environmental of this application package and included in Map F-2.
11. Provide a Resource Management Plan for all preservation and mitigation within the DOCC.
Response: A Resource Management Plan for all preservation and mitigation is included within this
application (See Section 4: Environmental of this application package).
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Fire/EMS
Fire / EMS has no objection to the DOCC Application.
The proposed plan appears to show one access point in the northwest corner of this project at University
Pkwy and three in close proximity to one another at Fruitville Road. With the narrow vertical shape of this
property, and considering there are many more residences in the uppermost part of the parcel, please
plan for a minimum of two full access points onto University and two onto Fruitville.
Additional comments regarding development will be provided at PS/DS submittal.
Response: Thank you, it is noted that Fire/EMS has no objection to this application. Bourneside
Boulevard is proposed as a four-lane arterial roadway. Multiple access points are proposed along
Bourneside Boulevard. Details regarding individual site access will be provided with future rezone
applications.
Florida Department of Health in Sarasota County
1. Approved Well and OSTDS (septic) abandonment permit applications with Florida Department of
Health in Sarasota County are required to be submitted concurrent with demolition permit.
Response: It is noted that Approved Well and OSTDS (septic) abandonment permit applications with
Florida Department of Health in Sarasota County are required to be submitted concurrent with
demolition permit.
Historical Resources
1. The proposed DOCC and Master Development Plan application will have no effect on the historical
review process under Chapter 66.
Response: Thank you for your comment.
Land Development Services
1. Please include this letter with responses to comments with your formal plan submittal.
Response: The Applicant has included this letter with responses to comments with the formal
application.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
2. Please note that during Site and Development review, you must submit requests for address
assignment and/or street name approval to the Sarasota County Address Coordinator. Construction
authorization will not be granted until this process has been completed. Contact: Tara Dickerson,
Address Coordinator/Public Safety Communications, tdickers@scgov.net, 6050 Porter Way, Sarasota,
FL 34232, Office 941/861-5510, Fax 941/861-5577.
Response: This requirement is noted and will be addressed at the time of site and development review.
3. Please provide a boundary and topographic survey of the site which has been prepared with a current
title search for easements, encumbrances and encroachments (Article 12, Section 124-230.a.4 of the
UDC).
Response: Article 12, Section 124-230 of the UDC includes standards for application requirements for
subdivision plans or site development plans. A boundary and topographic survey will be included at
time of site and development review.
4. Please include any applicable Rezone Petition and/or Special Exception stipulations on the plans. To
obtain a copy of a rezone petition or special exception, please contact the Planning Services “Planner
of the day” at 861-5244. (Article 12, Section 124-231.a.20 of the UDC)
Response: Article 12, Section 124-231 of the UDC includes subdivision plan or site development plan
requirements. This comment will be addressed at the time of site and development review.
5. Please provide a preliminary plat type plan with the subdivision submittal outlining right-of-way and
easement lines, lot lines, tract areas, private roadways, etc. without infrastructure superimposed on
the plan. (Article 12, Section 124-230.a.5 of the UDC)
Response: Article 12, Section 124-230 of the UDC includes standards for application requirements for
subdivision plans or site development plans. This comment will be addressed at the time of site and
development review.
6. Please include a note on the plans stating the requirements for "lot line easements" (8’ front, 8’ rear,
5’ side, 20’ or more for water/sewer if off travelway, i.e. through a tract, etc.) as called for in the first
paragraph of Appendix B11. (Article 12, Section 124-230.a.5.e of the UDC) (Article 18, Appendix B11)
Response: This comment will be addressed at the time of site and development review.
7. Structures cannot be placed within easements absent permission or a subordination agreement from
the easement beneficiary. If the easement is to be released or vacated, please provide final
documentation once completed prior to construction authorization. (Article 13, Section 124-255.c.4.d
of the UDC)
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
8. Please provide a typical roadway section which is consistent with Appendix F of the UDC.
9. Response: This comment will be addressed at the time of site and development review.
10. If phasing is considered or proposed for this development, please provide a phasing plan including
clearly delineated phases. Each phase must be independent from a functional infrastructure
perspective. (Article 12, Section 124-231.a.18 of the UDC)
11. If a temporary sales facility or model homes are anticipated, please include it on the site and
development plans.
12. Please comply with all Unified Development Code (UDC) submittal standards outlined in Article 12,
Section 124-230 for Site and Development Plan submittals.
Landscape
1. No comment at this stage.
Response: It is noted that Landscape has no comment at this stage.
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
1. Please meet with the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Department to discuss the opportunity
of establishing a 100–150-acre regional public park, potentially containing athletic facilities,
playgrounds, picnic facilities, trails, etc., in this development.
Response: The Applicant has met with the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Department. The
project proposes a 90-acre park for dedication to Sarasota County.
Planning
DOCC
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
The following assessments are statements of purpose (Section I.E. a through f) (pg. 3) in the DOCC
Questionnaire), and serve as the basic data source in preparation of the Planning Department’s report and
recommendation to both the County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. The
assessments will analyze the potential impacts that could be created by the project, for each of the
following:
1. Development Of Critical Concern (DOCC)
a) Whether the development will have a favorable impact on the environment and natural
resources of Sarasota County,
b) Whether the development of the subject property will have a favorable fiscal impact of
the subject property on the budget of Sarasota County,
c) Whether the development will efficiently use water, sewer, solid waste disposal, and
public felicities,
d) The analysis as to whether the development will efficiently use public transportation
facilities will be analyzed at the time of the VPD rezone,
e) Whether the development will favorably affect the ability of people to find adequate
housing reasonable accessible of their places of employment, and
f) Whether the development complies with the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan and
other applicable land development regulations.
a. Methodology meetings
Individual Methodology statements have been prepared by discipline.
b. Applicable questions contained in the DOCC questionnaire:
Land Use
1. Question #II.C.1.a. (pg. 9) will be provided in narrative form. Provide the proposed intensity
(number of total units) and densities (developed area), as well as the conceptual location of
uses. Demonstrate that all lands included in the MDO are under unified legal control of the
Applicant.
2. Question #IIC.1.b. will be provided in narrative form. In addition, a map will be provided
demonstrating the land uses within 500 feet of the project boundaries (see Map B).
3. Question #IIC.1.c. will be provided in narrative form.

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
4. Question #IIC.1.d. (see Section 3 below, relative to the MDO and 2050 plan requirements).
5. Question #IIC.1.e. will be provided in narrative form.
6. Question #IIC.1.f. will be addressed at the time of the rezone(s).
7. Question #IIC.2.a. does not apply any longer in Sarasota County.
8. Question #IIC.2.b.and c. (see Fiscal Neutrality report).
9. Question #IIC.3.a. and b. – N/A – no commercial uses proposed.
10. Question #IIC.4 – N/A – no office uses proposed.
11. Question #IIC.5 – N/A – no Industrial uses proposed.
12. Provide a Fiscal Neutrality analysis, as required by Section 11.2.14 of the Zoning Ordinance
13. Provide a Fiscal Neutrality analysis, as required by Section 11.2.14 of the Zoning Ordinance
Schools
14. Question #II.E.5.a.
15. Question #II.E.5.c. will address, in tabular form the estimated number of school-aged children
that will be attending public schools. This information will be as provided by School Board
representatives.
16. Question #II.E.5.d. - the application will include a letter from the Sarasota County School
Board, acknowledging approval of the school age population estimates given and provide a
statement of what improvements, if any, would be necessary to accommodate these students
for the development.
17. Question #II.E.5.e. will be addressed per the requirements in 2050 and fiscal neutrality. Any
required elementary school will be located in a developable area on a parcel that is suitable to
support a school based on the size and configuration criteria and other aspects relating to
environment, drainage, transportation and land use compatibility. The applicant will
acknowledge in its application the current requirement in the 2050 regulations with regard to
public elementary schools. Our analysis will also discuss, with the district’s input, whether
there is additional acreage needed to satisfy the need generated by the project at full build-
out.
18. Question #II.E.5.f. will be addressed at the rezone.

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Emergency Services/Fire Protection
19. Question #II.E.7.a. and b. - the application will provide correspondence from the appropriate
agency addressing the current ability to provide adequate service to the subject property.
20. Question #7.d. will be addressed at the rezone.
Response: Please see Section 2: DOCC of this application package that addresses the above required and
applicable questions.
2. MAPS
a. Map A - General Location map – illustrates the location of the proposed

development within the County;
b. Map B - Aerial – illustrates the types of land uses within 500 feet of the boundaries
c. Map C-1 - Existing Zoning – illustrates existing zoning within 500 feet of the boundaries
d. Map C-2 – Existing Land Use – illustrates existing on-site land uses
e. Map C-3 - Master Development Plan – illustrates proposed land uses (Developed
Area/Open Space)
f. Map C-4 – a conceptual Phasing Plan that will provide a conceptual
demonstration of how the project spatially build-out from west to east, and
north to south.
g. Map D - Topographic Conditions – map with one-foot contour intervals
h. Map E – Soils – showing locations of soil types
i. F-1 Map – Preliminary Existing Native Habitat Map
j. F-2 Map – Conceptual Native Habitat Preservation, Alteration and Mitigation Areas Map
k. F-3 Map – Listed Wildlife Incidental Observations Map
l. F-4 Map – Conceptual Wildlife Corridor Plan Map
m. G-1 Map – Existing Drainage Map
n. Archeological Site Potential Map
o. Mobility Plan
p. TDR Plan
q. Open Space Plan areas will be illustrated on the Conceptual Master Land Use Plan
r. Public Facilities Plan
s. Existing Utility Facilities
Response: The required and applicable maps are included as a part of this application package. Please
see Section 2 of this application package.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Standard Planning Comments:
1. A neighborhood workshop is required as stated in the Sarasota County Unified

Development Code (UDC) Article 5 Section 124-39(c)(2). The neighborhood workshop
request form and related documents are available online @
https://www.scgov.net/government/planning-and-development-services/pds-
documents/-folder-467#docan7346_11284_6990.
Response: A neighborhood workshop was held on April 7th, 2022. Please See Section 10
of this application package.
2. Submit Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application and DOCC Application.
Applications forms and instructions are available online @
https://www.scgov.net/government/planning-and-development- services/pds-
documents/-folder-464#docan7346_11284_6990.
Response: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application was submitted on May 5th,
2022. A DOCC Application is included as a part of this application package.
3. Provide signature(s) of the current owner(s) or appropriate signature authority and
disclosure on the Ownership Disclosure forms. Provide contract purchaser information
and signature(s).
Response: This formal application package includes signature(s) of the current owner(s)
or appropriate signature authority, disclosure on the Ownership Disclosure forms, and
contract purchaser information and signature(s) (See Section 11).
4. Applicants may request an appointment to review the application materials before submittal.
Response: Thank you, it is noted that Applicants may request an appointment to review the application
materials before submittal.
5. Submit complete application as follows:
x One (1) paper copy with Section divides
x Electronically (PDF and Word files)
x Entire application as one document, except for Neighborhood Workshop
x Individual files, as deemed necessary
x Ensure the legal description is provided as a stand-alone file in Microsoft Word
Response: The Applicant will submit the formal application as required.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
6. Schedule an appointment to submit application and provide electronic file sharing in advance of the
meeting by calling the Planning office at 941-861-5244 or emailing planner@scgov.net. Applications
cannot be accepted without an appointment.
Response: Thank you, your comment is acknowledged.
7. All pages within an application and any corresponding appendices must be electronically-oriented to a
horizontal page position, meaning that all pages submitted are to be facing straight-forward in a
horizontal, or Western printing fashion, which will allow any viewer to keep their head oriented in a
normal fashion for reading purposes. Any submissions containing pages not aligning with the above
criteria will be returned to the applicant for correction.
Response: Thank you, your comment is acknowledged.
Public Utilities
1. Project will be processed as a DOCC and will need to comply with all requirements proffered by Public
Utilities during the DOCC process, including the preparation of a Utility Master Plan for the overall
project development area.
Response: This application package complies with all requirements proffered by Public Utilities during
the DOCC process, including the preparation of a Utility Master Plan for the overall project development
area.
Sarasota County Area Transit
1. Sarasota County Area Transit (SCAT) does not provide fixed route bus service to the proposed
development. Nearest bus service is at the University Town Center, SCAT Transfer Station, located on
N. Cattlemen Road at DeSoto Road.
2. See https://www.scgov.net/government/scat-bus-service/schedules-and-route-maps for route

information and schedules.
Stormwater
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
1. Please acknowledge that the proposed project is located in the following FEMA Flood Hazard Area.
Zone X (unshaded) designated as areas of minimal flood hazard or areas outside of the 0.2 % annual
chance flood (500-year).
Response: The Applicant acknowledges that the proposed project is located in the following FEMA Flood
Hazard Area: Zone X (unshaded) designated as areas of minimal flood hazard or areas outside of the 0.2
% annual chance flood (500-year).
2. The proposed project is approximately 43% located in the Cow Pen Slough Drainage Basin within the
Dona Bay Watershed and approximately 57% located in the Upper Myakka River/Howard Creek
Drainage Basin within the Charlotte Harbor Watershed. Please acknowledge.
Response: The Applicant acknowledges that the proposed project is approximately 43% located in the
Cow Pen Slough Drainage Basin within the Dona Bay Watershed and approximately 57% located in the
Upper Myakka River/Howard Creek Drainage Basin within the Charlotte Harbor Watershed.
3. Please acknowledge that this site is located in the following community flood hazard areas (CFHA).
Zone AE designated as areas in the 100-year (1% annual chance flood), BFE determined (varies from
40 feet to 64 feet NAVD88) (approximately 18% of site within the 100-year floodplain).
Response: The Applicant acknowledge that this site is located in the following community flood hazard
areas (CFHA): Zone AE designated as areas in the 100-year (1% annual chance flood), BFE determined
(varies from 40 feet to 64 feet NAVD88) (approximately 18% of site within the 100-year floodplain).
4. Per the Sarasota County DOCC Questionnaire, please continue working and meeting with Stormwater
staff to develop a methodology statement that summarizes / defines the existing drainage conditions
including any potential flooding and erosion problems for the Project. The detailed methodology
statement should also describe / define the proposed drainage system for the Project and summarize
how the stormwater management requirements for the site will be met for attenuation, water quality
treatment, and if applicable, floodplain compensation. Please acknowledge in the narrative that at the
time of Site Development Review, a completed stormwater report with stormwater calculations and
required supportive documentation will be provided to demonstrate that the proposed development
(including existing development, if applicable) and associated stormwater management system is
consistent with the requirements in the Sarasota County Unified Development Code (UDC), Article 13,
Section 124-252 and the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 12 – Watershed
Management). Please include discussion of any proposed LID Techniques being proposed for the
development and how they are consistent with the Sarasota County Low Impact Development (LID)
Guidance Document (Updated May 2015) in your detailed drainage narrative if applicable. The
drainage narrative should also explain / define any Floodplain protection measures required for the
Project.
Response: Please see Section 2 of this application package.

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
5. Please provide acknowledgement in the drainage methodology and narrative that the project will be
consistent with the following elements of the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan:
Public Utilities Element, Chapter 12 – Watershed Management:
a. Water Policy 1.2.2 relating to treatment of stormwater discharge
b. Water Policy 1.3.1 relating to bringing facilities up to adopted level of service standards
c. Water Policy 1.3.2 relating to level of service requirements for water quality and quantity
d. Water Policy 1.3.5 relating to maintenance of outfalls for discharge of drainage
Future Land Use Element, Chapter 7:
e. Future Land Use Policy 1.2.5 relating to floodplain encroachment and compensation
Response: Please see Section 2 of this application package.
6. Please be aware that Article 13, Section 124-252.(a)(2)a. of the UDC states: “A master stormwater
management system, including attenuation and treatment facilities, will be required for all properties
that are the subject of the same Rezoning or Special Exception application. The master stormwater
management system shall fully accommodate and benefit all lots, parcels or tracts within the rezoned
property. The master stormwater management system shall be approved prior to or concurrent with
the first site and development plan for each PUD rezone.” At time of first site development submittal,
stormwater staff will anticipate greater detail on timing/phasing for each development area (i.e.,
neighborhood) and each corresponding stormwater management system, including any required
floodplain compensation. Consistency with the latest updated County Watershed models, along with
providing additional site-specific information regarding impervious and pervious surfaces, shall be
required during the Site Development Plan/Master Stormwater Management System Plan process.
Please acknowledge this requirement in the drainage narrative.
Response: Thank you for your comment, this requirement is acknowledged and discussed in more detail
in Section 2 of this application package in the Drainage Section.
7. The site will need to be incorporated into Sarasota County’s representative Watershed Model (either
Dona Bay or Upper Myakka River, or both) at the time of Site Development Review showing no
adverse impacts for the 100-year/24-hour storm per Article 13, Section 124-252 of the Unified
Development Code and Sarasota County Stormwater Manual. Please include acknowledgement of
these requirements in the detailed drainage narrative and methodology statement.
Response: Thank you for your comment, these requirements are acknowledged.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
8. Please acknowledge that at the time of the MDO, a Map G-1 (Existing Drainage) indicating basin / sub-
basin boundaries, drainage flow directions, drainage easements, discharge points, natural creeks,
manmade canals, other water bodies, floodplains and floodways will be provided.
Response: Map G-1 (Existing Drainage) indicating basin / subbasin boundaries, drainage flow
directions, drainage easements, discharge points, natural creeks, manmade canals, other water bodies,
floodplains and floodways is provided within this application package.
9. Please acknowledge that at the time of each PUD rezone, a proposed drainage map (Map G-2) will
need to be provided. These maps should include basin/subbasin boundaries, drainage flow directions,
general areas for water retention/detention, discharge points (historic inflow & outflow points),
drainage easements (if any), natural creeks, manmade lakes and canals, onsite drainage structures,
and floodplains as determined by the Sarasota County Stormwater Division by use of the Sarasota
County’s representative Watershed Model (Dona Bay and/or Upper Myakka River, or both) and by
FEMA.
Response: The Applicant acknowledges that at the time of each PUD rezone, a proposed drainage map
(Map G-2) will need to be provided.
10. For any County identified Greenway Resource Management Areas (RMA) on the subject site which is
overlapping/adjoining to County 100-year floodplain designated as “AE”, please include discussion of
this in the drainage narrative. Consistent with UDC, Article 14, Section 124-271, 2050 Plan Regulations
for Greenway Resource Management Area Designation, Greenway RMA boundaries may be adjusted
based upon the presence of overlapping or adjoining County 100-year floodplain designated as “AE.”
Please revise the Development Concept Plan to include any Greenway RMA limits including the
overlapping or adjoining County 100-year floodplain designated as “AE” as necessary. Stormwater
staff is available to meet with you to discuss the location of floodplains designated as “AE.” Please
coordinate with stormwater and planning staff as needed.
Response: See Section 2 of this application package for the drainage narrative.
11. Please provide all proposed PUD waivers and modifications (variances) with justifications related to
this petition for Stormwater Division’s review and comment.
Response: This comment will be addressed at the time of the rezone(s).
12. SWFWMD should be contacted for a permit.
Response: Noted, thank you for your comment.
13. Please provide a written response to all Stormwater Pre-Application comments provided here and
provide a drainage narrative and revised DCP addressing all relative comments listed above at time of
Completeness Review submittal. Please be aware that submitting for Completeness Review without a
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
written response to these Stormwater comments and without a narrative and revised DCP will result in
an “Incomplete” review and may cause additional delays with this rezone petition.
Response: The Applicant has provided a written response to all Stormwater Pre-Application comments
provided here and provided a drainage narrative and VTZ Master Plan addressing all relative comments
listed above. Please see also below for Drainage/Stormwater:
A. Conditions for Development Approval.
1. The stormwater management system shall be designed to maintain wetland hydroperiods and
drainage flow patterns as permittable by the Southwest Florida Water Management District and
Sarasota County.
2. The Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District shall establish an Annual Stormwater Facilities Monitoring
Program which shall include, without limitation:
a. For the Annual Monitoring Reporting Period, a list with all substantial local, state and federal
permits which have been obtained, applied for, or denied during this reporting period and past
reporting periods for stormwater management, flood protection or drainage shall be provided.
The agency, permit number, type of permit, duty for each, the date obtained and the date to
expire shall be specified.
b. Documentation for any outstanding “Requests For Additional Information (RAI)” for
stormwater management, flood protection or drainage for all substantial local, state and federal
permits which have been obtained to show that they are in compliance and approved.
c. Information to substantiate that the stormwater management facilities have been certified
and accepted by the applicable local, state and federal permitting agencies during each
reporting period. If the stormwater management facilities have not been accepted by the
applicable permitting agencies, information related to the inspection dates, with identified
deficiencies, required maintenance, the schedule of the required maintenance or repair, and
final acceptance letter must be provided to Sarasota County. If the Stormwater management
facilities have not been certified and accepted by the applicable permitting agencies, and in lieu
of the requirement set forth in the immediately preceding sentence, Master Developer may
perform an independent review and certification of the said Stormwater Management Facilities
to Sarasota County by a registered professional engineer verifying the following components of
the Stormwater Management System are functioning properly and consistent with the
permitted system:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
1) Include a specific reporting section for “Stormwater Facility Monitoring and

Maintenance” that includes documentation of the stormwater facility inspections and
include determination of the following:
2) Document the presence of any obstruction or impediments to flow contained in or

around control structures. This could include sediment deposited within or surrounding
the structure, unauthorized alterations to the structure, or vegetation, debris, trash, or
litter impeding flow into or out of the structure.
3) Document the condition and presence of baffles and / or skimmers on structures for
wet ponds to ensure proper function and presence where originally installed. For dry
ponds or swales, check the clearance under the skimmer (between skimmer and bottom
of dry pond or swale).
4) Document the condition of lake and drainageway banks including appropriate slope
and erosional problems, including the condition of the vegetation/sod.
5) Document the condition of lakes and littoral shelves to ensure the presence and
health of the specified quantity of littoral vegetation as well as observation of any
sedimentation which has occurred within the lakes.
6) Document the condition of pipes and structures including corrosion, cracking, and/or
crushing (No TV inspection of pipes is required).
7) Document the presence of sediment, vegetative, and / or debris obstructions within

pipes and drainageways, and checking for settling / sinking above and / or next to the
pipe (indicative of a leaking joint).
8) Provide a description of specific actions to be taken by the applicant to address

deficiencies identified during the reporting period inspections and the specific
timeframes to complete necessary actions for the reporting period.
3. An overall Assessment of Pre-Development Conditions (Map G-1) shall be included herein.
B. Issues Subject to Further Review in RSF-2/PUD Rezone Applications.
1. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall, if necessary, contain the Existing Drainage Plan Map
(Map G-1), to be administratively approved, which reflects the existing drainage in the Project
Area to be rezoned.
2. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall contain a Post-Development Drainage Plan Map
(Map G-2), to be administratively approved, for the Project Area to be rezoned that must be
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
consistent with conditions identified in the Assessment of Pre-Development Conditions

together with the following for the area being rezoned:
a. the total impervious area allowed in each basin/catchment area;
b. conceptual pond sizes and conceptual pond locations;
c. incorporates the attenuation and treatment facilities planned for the property being
rezoned to fully accommodate and benefit all lots, parcels or tracts within the property.
This Plan shall be consistent with, to the extent applicable, the Cow Pen Slough Basin
Master Plan (Donna Bay Water Shed) and the Howard Creek/Myakka River Basin Master
Plan, or other applicable watershed management plans; and
d. required conveyance of appropriate rights to the Lakewood Ranch Stewardship

District to carry out the Annual Monitoring functions listed in Section 8. A. 2 above.
3. Prior to approval of the first Site Development Plan for an approved rezone, a Detailed
Stormwater Management Plan shall be submitted and administratively approved for the area of
the rezoned Project Area within which the Site Development Plan is located. In addition to items
required by the UDC, the detailed Stormwater Management Plan shall include the following:
a. a project boundary that includes the facilities within the Detailed Stormwater
Management Plan and specific delineation and labeling of all the contributing areas (i.e.,
basins) draining to and being managed by the facilities;
b. illustration of the components of the Detailed Stormwater Management Plan

(existing and proposed) – including the lakes, ponds, wetland areas that are part of the
stormwater management facilities, floodplain compensation areas and their respective
stormwater controls and/or interconnecting conveyance systems. A detailed Node-
Basin-Reach graphical exhibit (both hardcopy and digital format, such as ArcGIS or
CADD) should also be included that is consistent with the corresponding Hydrodynamic
modeling, stormwater calculations, stormwater report, Master Stormwater
Management Plan, and other supportive documentation;
c. details for the control structures, weirs, and or conveyance system must also be
included;
d. all lakes, ponds, and floodplain compensation areas should have the typical
stormwater data called out (SHWL, CWL, design high water level, TOB elevation, TOS
elevation, etc.);
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
e. pre- and post-hydrographs to confirm that natural hydroperiods will be sustained

after development within the area to be rezoned; and
f. Spreadsheet or tabulation within a plan sheet that defines what is the allowable
impervious area for specific areas called out on the Detailed Stormwater Management
Plan (i.e. square feet per lot, per phase, or per modeled catchment/basin);
g. Whenever a Detailed Stormwater Management Plan is being revised or updated,

additional information should be added to the allowable impervious area callout that
identifies how much of the impervious area has been permitted, how much has been
built, and how much allowable impervious remains. This should be in the form of a
tracking log or instrument for use during the life of the Detailed Stormwater
Management Plan and project. The tracking log shall be consistent with the tabulation
in part e above; and
h. Should the Detailed Stormwater Management Plan for an individual Site

Development Plan application identify any downstream or offsite Stormwater
infrastructure (outside of the Site Development Plan area) required to ensure the proper
functionality of the Detailed Stormwater Management system for that Project Area,
these downstream or offsite facilities shall be included as part of the initial phase of the
Site and Development Application and shall be constructed as part of the first phase
horizontal construction for the area being rezoned.
Transportation Planning
1. The proposed development is estimated to generate over 100 PM peak hour trips. Therefore, an
operational traffic analysis is required. Please contact Transportation Planning at 941-861-0925 to set
up a methodology meeting before conducting the analysis.
Response: An operational traffic analysis is included as a part of this application package (See Section 3).
A transportation methodology meeting was conducted on 4/25/2022 prior to conducting the analysis.
2. The DOCC application requires the following transportation-related items: conceptual trails system,
conceptual number of villages, conceptual transportation plan, location of major roads, access
management plan, conceptual village center locations and land uses. (Article 14, Section 124-272, f3)
Response: The DOCC application requirements have been included as a part of this application package.
3. A DOCC questionnaire needs to also be provided as basis for the DOCC. (Article 14, Section 124-272,
h.2.a)
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: A DOCC questionnaire has been provided as basis for the DOCC (See Section 2 of this
application package.
4. Please indicate future interconnectivity to the east with East-West Roadway B will be made on the
development concept plan.
Response: Future interconnectivity to the east with East-West Roadway B is indicated on the VTZ
Master Plan (See Section 5).
5. Site improvements involving road and driveway connections along University Parkway must be
coordinated with Manatee County.
Response: Noted, thank you for your comment.
Zoning
1. No comments.
Response: It is noted that Zoning has no comments, thank you.
Best regards,
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
Katie LaBarr AICP

Senior Associate, Community Development
Phone: (941) 907-6900
Mobile: 941-374-2854
katie.labarr@stantec.com
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 7:
SCHOOL IMPACT ANALYSIS
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
THE SCHOOL BOARD OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA

PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SCHOOL IMPACT ANALYSIS APPLICATION
LETTER OF RECEIPT
TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STAFF:
The School District has received a residential development application to be reviewed

for school concurrency. The project has been assigned the following school
concurrency application number:
SCHOOL CONCURRENCY APPLICATION NUMBER: 22-053
DATE OF RECEIPT May 25, 2022 (Expires May 25, 2024)
DELIVERY METHOD FEDEX
REVIEWING GOVERNMENT Sarasota County
PROJECT NAME Lakewood Ranch Southeast – DOCC & VTZ Master

Plan – 5,000 SF DU
PROJECT LOCATION South of University, North of Fruitville Rd, East of

Lorraine Rd, Sarasota
OWNER/AGENT Katie LaBarr, AICP, Stantec, Agent
OWNER/AGENT PLEASE NOTE:
This letter of receipt must be included as part of the development review package for
submittal to the appropriate local governmental agency for all residential development,
including comprehensive plan amendments, rezones and subdivision plats. School
concurrency capacity is not reserved nor guaranteed for comprehensive plan
amendments or rezones. A School Concurrency Determination will be required at
the time of the submittal for the final site plan or plat. All subdivision plats for this
project must be approved within two years of the original date of the letter or a new letter
of receipt will need to be issued by school district staff.
Upon receipt of notice from the appropriate local government’s Case Planner, a letter of
the final results of the School Impact Analysis for comprehensive plan amendments or
rezones shall be provided to the local government planner within the time frames set by
each local government for their respective development review processes.
For information regarding the school concurrency review process, please contact the
School District’s Planning Department at 941-927-9000 extension 69052.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 8:
HISTORICAL RESOURCES
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a

project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master
Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical
Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical
Resources at CompliancePermits@dos.MyFlorida.com for project review information.

$SULO

$GLQD+RIIPDQ
8UEDQ3ODQQHU
'LUHFWH[W
$GLQD+RIIPDQ#VWDQWHFFRP

,QUHVSRQVHWR\RXUUHTXHVWRQ$SULOWKH)ORULGD0DVWHU6LWH)LOHOLVWVILYHDUFKHRORJLFDOVLWHV
WZRVWDQGLQJVWUXFWXUHVDQGWKUHHUHVRXUFHJURXSVUHFRUGHGIRUDFUHSURSHUW\ORFDWHGJHQHUDOO\
VRXWKRI8QLYHUVLW\3DUNZD\DQGQRUWKRI)UXLWYLOOH5RDGZLWKLQ6DUDVRWD&RXQW\)ORULGD

:KHQLQWHUSUHWLQJWKHUHVXOWVRIRXUVHDUFKSOHDVHFRQVLGHUWKHIROORZLQJLQIRUPDWLRQ

x 7KLVVHDUFKDUHDPD\FRQWDLQunrecordedDUFKDHRORJLFDOVLWHVKLVWRULFDOVWUXFWXUHV
RURWKHUUHVRXUFHVHYHQLISUHYLRXVO\VXUYH\HGIRUFXOWXUDOUHVRXUFHV
x %HFDXVHYDQGDOLVPDQGORRWLQJDUHFRPPRQDW)ORULGDVLWHVZHDVNWKDW\RXOLPLW
WKHGLVWULEXWLRQRIORFDWLRQLQIRUPDWLRQRQDUFKDHRORJLFDOVLWHV
x :KLOHPDQ\RIRXUUHFRUGVGRFXPHQWKLVWRULFDOO\VLJQLILFDQWUHVRXUFHVWKH
GRFXPHQWDWLRQRIDUHVRXUFHDWWKH)ORULGD0DVWHU6LWH)LOHGRHVQRWQHFHVVDULO\
PHDQWKHUHVRXUFHLVKLVWRULFDOO\VLJQLILFDQW
x )HGHUDOVWDWHDQGORFDOODZVUHTXLUHIRUPDOHQYLURQPHQWDOUHYLHZIRUPRVW
SURMHFWV7KLVVHDUFK'2(6127FRQVWLWXWHVXFKDUHYLHZ,I\RXUSURMHFWIDOOV
XQGHUWKHVHODZV\RXVKRXOGFRQWDFWWKH&RPSOLDQFHDQG5HYLHZ6HFWLRQRIWKH
'LYLVLRQRI+LVWRULFDO5HVRXUFHVDW&RPSOLDQFH3HUPLWV#GRV0\)ORULGDFRP

3OHDVHGRQRWKHVLWDWHWRFRQWDFWXVLI\RXKDYHDQ\TXHVWLRQVUHJDUGLQJWKHUHVXOWVRIWKLVVHDUFK

6LQFHUHO\

(PDQ09RYVL3K'
)ORULGD0DVWHU6LWH)LOH
(PDQ9RYVL#'260\)ORULGDFRP
6RXWK%URQRXJK6WUHHW7DOODKDVVHH)/ZZZIOKHULWDJHFRPSUHVHUYDWLRQVLWHILOH
SK_ID[_6LWH)LOH#GRVVWDWHIOXV

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 9:
WILLINGNESS TO SERVE LETTERS
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
May 13, 2022
Project/File: 215616736/260
Sarasota County Fire Department

5875 Hummingbird Avenue
Attn: Anita Black, Fire Marshall
Reference: Fire and EMS Service Availability
This letter serves as our request for information outlining the availability of Fire Protection and EMS Service
for the proposed Lakewood Ranch Southeast development, located generally south of University Parkway
and north of Fruitville Road, in Sarasota County, Florida. The project is proposing primarily residential uses
with a maximum of 5,000 dwelling units and potentially ancillary support uses such as places of worship and
other civic uses.
A letter of service availability and capacity is a requirement of our Development of Critical Concern (DOCC)
application submittal to Sarasota County for the development. As part of this letter, we request the following:
x Whether or not the present facilities and manpower of the department can serve the project with
adequate emergency response times
x What, if any, additional manpower and equipment the project would require
A property location map is attached for your reference.
Thank you for your timely attention to this request. Please contact our office if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Katie LaBarr AICP

Phone: 941-907-6900
Mobile: 941-374-2854
katie.labarr@stantec.com
Attachment: Location Map

Rcv'd 5/31/2022 SR
PID 0179010020
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
PID 0515010010
PID 0515010001 PID 0514020001 PID 0514010001 PID 0512030001
PID
PID 0517010002 PID 0519020001 PID 0519010001 PID 0521030001
0517120001
PID
0535030006
PID 0537010001 PID 0536020001
PID 0545002010
PID 0225001000 PID 0541010001 PID 0543010010
FRUITVILLE ROAD
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\Aerial2_PreApp_v02_20220406.mxd
L E G E N D

Aerial
Feet
¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
Notes:
April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 10:
NEIGHBORHOOD WORKSHOP
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
10.1 Legal Proof of Ad Publication

2UGHU&RQILUPDWLRQ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
1RWDQ,QYRLFH
$FFRXQW1XPEHU 'DWH

&XVWRPHU1DPH 6WDQWHF&RQVXOWLQJ6YFV,QF 2UGHU1XPEHU
&XVWRPHU 6WDQWHF&RQVXOWLQJ6YFV,QF 3UHSD\PHQW
$GGUHVV 3URIHVVLRQDO3.:< $PRXQW
-DQLFH5REELQV
/DNHZRRG5DQFK)/
&RQWDFW1DPH 6WDQWHF&RQVXOWLQJ6YFV,QF
&ROXPQ&RXQW
&RQWDFW3KRQH
/LQH&RXQW
&RQWDFW(PDLO
+HLJKWLQ,QFKHV
321XPEHU
3ULQW
3URGXFW ,QVHUWLRQV 6WDUW(QG &DWHJRU\
6$5+HUDOG7ULEXQH 3XEOLF1RWLFHV
6$5KHUDOGWULEXQHFRP 3XEOLF1RWLFHV
7RWDO2UGHU&RQILUPDWLRQ

$G3UHYLHZ Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
10.2 Copy of the Mailing List & Buffer Map

Notification Labels Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Buffer: 1,529 Feet (1,500 Feet Plus ROW)
UNIVERSITY PKWY
0515010001
0514010001
0514020001 0512030001
0519010001
0517120001
0517010002 0521030001
0519020001
0535030006
Path: N:\Growth Management\Labels\LakewoodRanchSoutheast\LakewoodRanchSoutheast_1500Ft.mxd

COWPEN LN
0537010001
0536020001
VIC EDWARDS RD
0225001000 0541010001 0543010010

0545002010
ANNIE LAURIE LN
SHALLOW RUN RD
UTOPIA RD
FRUITVILLE RD
Legend
1,529 Ft. Buffer of Mailing List Request Parcels
NOTIFY: BERN CREEK
Mailing Label Request Parcels IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION,
Area To Notify Parcels MIAKKA COMMUNITY CLUB INC
Incorporated Areas
μ
Map published using ArcGIS 10.x by gschells on Thursday, March 24, 2022
Draft: For discussion
purposes only. This map is produced from Sarasota County GIS,
and is representative information only.
The County does not warrantee, guarantee, or
assume any responsibility for geographic
1 0.5 0 1 Miles information completeness and/or accuracy.
This map should not be used as guide for navigation.
Copyright © SCGIS 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
BARTLETT, DEAN STUART

1950 BERN CREEK LOOP LLC ADAMS DIANE L
WEST HILL DORMANS PARK
1601 BERN CREEK LOOP 172 COWPEN LN
SURREY RH19 2ND,
SARASOTA, FL 34240-9244 SARASOTA, FL 34240
UNITED KINGDOM
ANGELORO ELISE A ANTHONY MATHUSON ARSENAULT DAVID A

11708 MARSH HEAD RD 1806 MOCCASIN HOLLOW RD 1350 BERN CREEK LOOP
SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8659 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8771
ATHA JACOB W BARTON, CRAIG W BAUGHER KENNETH L

4425 PARNELL DR PO BOX 781780 1403 PINE PRAIRIE RD
SARASOTA, FL 34232 WICHITA, KS 67278-1780 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8301
BAYLIS JOHN E BECK, JAMILYN L BELLAN ERIC E

12001 BACKWATER RD 19408 BEACON PARK PL 2503 TUTTLE WAY
SARASOTA, FL 34240-9235 BRADENTON, FL 34202-4613 SARASOTA, FL 34239-4743
BERN CREEK IMPROVEMENT BERN CREEK IMPROVEMENT

ASSOCIATION INC/C/O MICHAEL ASSOCIATION INC/MICHAEL BEST GREGORY
HUTCHINSON HUTCHINSON 901 SHALLOW RUN RD
1550 BERN CREEK LOOP 3307CLARK RD. STE 201 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9148
SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34231
BHEG LAKEPARK LLC BIG HEART RANCH LLC BISET ROGER

1140 VIRGINIA DR 3656 SAN REMO TER 7856 SADDLE CREEK TRL
FORT WASHINGTON, PA 19034 SARASOTA, FL 34239 SARASOTA, FL 34241
BOWLING MICHELE S BRADSHAW, TERRY BROWN, EBER E JR

1101 BERN CREEK LOOP 8346 FARINGTON CT 8325 FARINGTON CT
SARASOTA, FL 34240 BRADENTON, FL 34202 BRADENTON, FL 34202-4620
CALLAGHAN, DANIEL C CHAPLE CINDY CLOWS LOUIS G

5066 18TH AVE W 12026 SLOUGH RIM RD 1600 BERN CREEK LOOP
BRADENTON, FL 34209-5125 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9358 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8868
COBLE II SAMUEL E COPALO LLC CORE AZURE LLC

1028 SHALLOW RUN RD 2059 58TH AVENUE CIR E 9916 E HARRY ST STE 104
SARASOTA, FL 34240-7631 BRADENTON, FL 34203-5060 WICHITA, KS 67207
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
COUTSOLIOUTSOS, TERRY D CRIST KURT R DAVIS DONALD G

19404 BEACON PARK PL 2350 BERN CREEK LOOP 1307 OAK HAMMOCK RD
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DAVIS, JEFFREY M DAY CHARLIE H DECKER DAVID G JR

19418 BEACON PARK PL 1182 COWPEN LN 11801 CREEK SHED PL
DECKER KATHERINE DETWILER HENRY J DICHILLO, RICHARD A

11801 CREEK SHED PL 13104 FRUITVILLE RD 19426 BEACON PARK PL
SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9064 BRADENTON, FL 34202
DIMARE, SCOTT M DOBBERT JAMES W DOLAN, MICHAEL K

19004 GANTON AVE 12020 SLOUGH RIM RD 212 KINLOCH RD
BRADENTON, FL 34202-4602 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9358 MANAKIN SABOT, VA 23103
DONALD E MILLER REVOCABLE LIVING

EISINGER BARBARA L ESPINO, RICARDO A
TRUST
2406 MOCCASIN HOLLOW RD 18916 GANTON AVE
13411 FRUITVILLE RD
SARASOTA, FL 34240-9349 BRADENTON, FL 34202-4601
SARASOTA, FL 34240-9294
FELDHACKER, KEITH D FITZGERALD EILEEN M (E LIFE EST) FOWLER FREDERICK J

8341 FARINGTON CT 1550 BERN CREEK LOOP 2151 BERN CREEK LOOP
GARY A DAHL AND JUDY L DAHL LIVING

FUNK FRANK E GILBERT STEVEN P
TRUST
2301 BERN CREEK LOOP 12016 SLOUGH RIM RD
1751 BERN CREEK LOOP
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8605 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9358
GILES JOHN B GILLICK ADAM GIRARD JEFFREY D

1101 PINE PRAIRIE RD 1503 PINE PRAIRE RD 2107 MOCCASIN HOLLOW RD
SARASOTA, FL 34240-9314 SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9320
GIUFFRE FRANK GODOFSKY, ELIOT W GOMEZ ZOILA Y

1750 BERN CREEK LOOP 15815 CLEARLAKE AVE 3740 NE 16TH AVE
SARASOTA, FL 34240 BRADENTON, FL 34202 POMPANO BEACH, FL 33064-6622
GOODMAN PAUL ROBERT GREEN CHRISTY D GREGORY TOMMY E

4563 HIDDEN FOREST LN 164 COWPEN LN 2505 MOCCASIN HOLLOW RD
SARASOTA, FL 34235-5105 SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
GUSTAFSON BENJAMIN HAMMOND, JAMES H HAWKINS JAMES B

2001 BERN CREEK LOOP 19423 BEACON PARK PL 1250 BERN CREEK LOOP
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8870 BRADENTON, FL 34202-4614 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8770
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
HEIDENBERGER, THOMAS HERITAGE RANCH LLC HERSCHBERGER SCOTT L

7841 BIRDIE BEND WAY 14400 COVENANT WAY 13611 FRUITVILLE RD
SARASOTA, FL 34241 LAKEWOOD RANCH, FL 34202-8900 SARASOTA, FL 34240
HI HAT RANCH LLLP HICKMAN, CHRISTOPHER HIERHOLZER, DANNY MICHAEL

11708 FRUITVILLE RD 19450 BEACON PARK PL 18912 GANTON AVE
SARASOTA, FL 34240-9372 BRADENTON, FL 34202 BRADENTON, FL 34202
HOPE, MICHAEL R HOWARD JR WILLIAM O HUBBARD JR DONALD (TTEE)

16813 BERWICK TER 1051 BERN CREEK LOOP PO BOX 2606
LAKEWOOD RANCH, FL 34202 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9237 SARASOTA, FL 34230-2606
HURST HUGH D ISAACSON, KIRK J JANE BRIM REVOCABLE TRUST

1300 PINE PRAIRIE RD 1110 FOX GLEN DR 11902 BACKWATER RD
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8662 SAINT CHARLES, IL 60174 SARASOTA, FL 34240
JEANROY, ALEXANDRA M JENSEN JOINT TRUST JIMENEZ ADOLFO

19408 NEWLANE PL 195 VIC EDWARDS RD 2888 MICHIGAN ST
BRADENTON, FL 34202 SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34237
JOHN CANNON HOMES EASTMOOR LLC JOHN CANNON HOMES INC JOHNSON DONALD R
6710 PROFESSIONAL PKWY STE 100 6710 PROFESSIONAL PKWY W 100 10880 LANNOM LN
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8588 SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9138
JOHNSON, BRIAN K JOHNSTON CHARLES W KATHRYN M DEVLIN REVOCABLE TRUST

19416 NEWLANE PL 960 SPRINGBROOK FARM RD 1060 SPRINGBROOK FARM RD
BRADENTON, FL 34202 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9093 SARASOTA, FL 34240-2003
KEESECKER CHRIS KEPLER MATHEW V KESTREL HOLDINGS LLC

12700 FRUITVILLE RD 1407 OAK HAMMOCK RD 319 WEST PORTAL AVE
SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94127
KHAW REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST KING, DAREN A KIRIAKO, JOHN E

2150 BERN CREEK LOOP 202 WOODVIEW WAY 5819 WAKE FOREST RUN UNIT 101
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8871 BRADENTON, FL 34212 BRADENTON, FL 34211
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
LAMBERT RONALD P LATREILLE, LUCIEN C LAURA E STRICKLAND REVOCABLE TRUST

812 SHALLOW RUN RD 19406 BEACON PARK PL 12996 FRUITVILLE RD
SARASOTA, FL 34240-7629 BRADENTON, FL 34202 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9281
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
LELAND C WETHERINGTON TRUST

LAZARIS, FAY LEASK, GRAEME WALLACE
AGREEMENT
19414 BEACON PARK PL 18909 GANTON AVE
7590 FRUITVILLE RD STE 200
BRADENTON, FL 34202-4613 BRADENTON, FL 34202-4607
SARASOTA, FL 34237
MANATEE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY

LLAMA TRUST PARTNERS LLC MACHTEL KENNETH J
COMMISSIONERS
8430 ENTERPRISE CIR STE 210 12087 BACKWATER RD
PO BOX 1000
LAKEWOOD RANCH, FL 34202 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9235
BRADENTON, FL 34206
MARTELLO JOANN MARTINELLI KYM MC CABE LEWIS B

1801 SLOUGH RD 13090 FRUITVILLE RD 1212 COWPEN LN
SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8866
MC MURRY MICHAEL A MEISSNER, JEFFREY R MESSENGER RONALD W

10750 LANNOM LN 19442 BEACON PARK PL 4411 BEE RIDGE RD PMB 136
SARASOTA, FL 34240 BRADENTON, FL 34202 SARASOTA, FL 34233-2514
MIAKKA COMMUNITY CLUB INC/BECKY

MILLER MONROE J MONSEREZ, MILENA O
AYECH
650 SHALLOW RUN RD 8338 FARINGTON CT
421 VERNA ROAD
SARASOTA, FL 34240-7636 BRADENTON, FL 34202
SARASOTA, FL 34240
MORGAN, FRANK P MORRISON GEORGE LOWE MOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC

19452 BEACON PARK PL 1807 MOCCASIN HOLLOW RD 1600 KEN THOMPSON PKWY
BRADENTON, FL 34202-4613 SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34236-1004
MURCHIE, TUNNEY S MURPHY MATHEW F MURPHY MICHAEL B

8342 FARINGTON CT 13744 FRUITVILLE RD 13704 FRUITVILLE RD
BRADENTON, FL 34202 SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9293
MURPHY MICHAEL R MURPHY WILLIAM F MYAKKA RANCH HOLDINGS LLC

13704 FRUITVILLE RD 2050 BERN CREEK LOOP 7507 S TAMIAMI TRL
SARASOTA, FL 34240-9293 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8799 SARASOTA, FL 34231-6901
NAGY, JANE L NASTAN RICHARD G NORMAN COLLEEN

8307 FARINGTON CT 11808 MARSH HEAD RD 1208 OAK HAMMOCK RD
BRADENTON, FL 34202 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8883 SARASOTA, FL 34240
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
NULTY, CLAUDIA LYNN ORO MARTINA OSBORN LESLIE J

8533 EAGLE PRESERVE WAY 1051 SPRINGBROOK FARM RD 2118 147TH CT E
SARASOTA, FL 34241-8505 SARASOTA, FL 34240-2002 BRADENTON, FL 34212
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
OSBORNE MICHAEL PAGE LAURENCE H PATRICK, ROBERT W

10635 FRUITVILLE RD 1210 COWPEN LN 19420 NEWLANE PL
SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8866 BRADENTON, FL 34202-4611
PATTI C STEPHEN PEPPER LLOYD R PETRIL, ROBERT D SR

1207 OAK HAMMOCK RD 2100 BERN CREEK LOOP 19415 BEACON PARK PL
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8878 SARASOTA, FL 34240 BRADENTON, FL 34202
POMMENVILLE DAVID S PRESLEY RODNEY W PRICE ROBERT R

1606 MOCCASIN HOLLOW RD 2400 BERN CREEK LOOP 10687 FRUITVILLE RD
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8845 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8873 SARASOTA, FL 34240
RESILIENT RETREAT INC RESNICK MICHAEL L RICE, WILLIAM ADAM JR

1207 SARASOTA CENTER BLVD 2300 BERN CREEK LOOP 19110 GANTON AVE
SARASOTA, FL 34240 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8872 BRADENTON, FL 34202
RICHARD TAUGNER REVOCABLE TRUST RICKERT ADAM A ROSEN JOSHUA H

1800 BERN CREEK LOOP 2405 COWPEN LN 2601 MOCCASIN HOLLOW RD
ROSSITER ERIK F ROUNTREE JAMES B & ANNE W RUBIN, KEVIN A

1150 BERN CREEK LOOP 1000 ANNIE LAURIE LN 8309 FARINGTON CT
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8769 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9744 BRADENTON, FL 34202-4620
SARASOTA CITY OF/C/O CITY AUDITOR

SALTZMAN, BARRY STEVEN SARASOTA COUNTY PLANNING SERVICES
AND CLERK
8306 FARINGTON CT 1660 RINGLING BLVD
1565 1ST ST RM 110
BRADENTON, FL 34202-4619 SARASOTA, FL 34236
SARMIENTO JEFFREY P SCHAUB KYLE M SCHMIDT, DAVID

2250 BERN CREEK LOOP 1308 OAK HAMMOCK RD 8305 FARINGTON CT
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8768 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8300 BRADENTON, FL 34202
SCHOETTLE SUSAN P SCHROEDER-MANATEE RANCH INC SCHROEDER-MANATEE RANCH INC

18099 DEER PRAIRIE DR 14400 COVENANT WAY 14400 COVENANT WAY
SARASOTA, FL 34240-5845 BRADENTON, FL 34202 LAKEWOOD RANCH, FL 34202-8900
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SCHWARTZ FARMS INC SCHWARTZ JAMIE LEE SCHWARTZ JARED M

13011 FRUITVILLE RD 25216 65TH AVE E 13311 FRUITVILLE RD
SARASOTA, FL 34240-9292 MYAKKA CITY, FL 34251 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9292
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SCHWARTZ MICHAEL D SCOGGINS PAMELA SERRANO, GEORGE

13211 FRUITVILLE RD 2401 BERN CREEK LOOP 19427 BEACON PARK PL
SARASOTA, FL 34240-9360 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8606 BRADENTON, FL 34202-4614
SIGURDSSON FAMILY REVOCABLE LIVING

SMITH ALEXANDER G SMITH JEFFREY L
TRUST
1100 PINE PRAIRIE RD 1200 BERN CREEK LOOP
9910 GARVETT
LIVONIA, MI 48150
SMR 2050 LLC SMR/MYAKKA LLC SNOKE JAMES

14400 COVENANT WAY 14400 COVENANT WAY 2000 BERN CREEK LOOP
LAKEWOOD RANCH, FL 34202-8900 LAKEWOOD RANCH, FL 34202-8900 SARASOTA, FL 34240
SNYDER JOSEPH A SRQ LAND LLC STANLEY, GREGG A

1500 PINE PRAIRIE RD 1952 FIELD RD STE B 900 BELDEN WAY
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8660 SARASOTA, FL 34231 NASHVILLE, TN 37221
STARNELL, PETER J STEPHEN E WOEBER REVOCABLE TRUST SUNFIELD HOMES INC

19446 BEACON PARK PL 140 COWPEN LN 3600 GALILEO DR STE 104
BRADENTON, FL 34202-4613 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9704 TRINITY, FL 34655
THE CONCESSION COMMUNITY

SWAIN THOMAS E THOMAS ROBERT B
ASSOCIATION INC
95 VIC EDWARDS RD 12008 SLOUGH RIM RD
4654 SR 64 E STE 503
BRADENTON, FL 34208
THOMAS, JOHN L THUM JESSICA LYNN TKACHUK OLEG

8334 FARINGTON CT 13251 FRUITVILLE RD 1450 BERN CREEK LOOP
BRADENTON, FL 34202-4619 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9292 SARASOTA, FL 34240
TOLER CAROL L TOLL FL XIII LIMITED PARTNERSHIP TOZZO CHRISTINE M

1650 BERN CREEK LOOP 250 GIBRALTAR RD 1901 BERN CREEK LOOP
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8868 HORSHAM, PA 19044 SARASOTA, FL 34240-9246
URFER DONALD URFER DONALD R VIGLIONE JENNIFER

5278 STATION WAY 1251 BERN CREEK LOOP 10800 LANNOM LN
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
WAGLER JAMES W WATTERS, BRIAN WEERTS, JAMES F

1801 BERN CREEK LOOP 40 DALE ST W 160 COVERED BRIDGE LN
SARASOTA, FL 34240-8798 WEST BABYLON, NY 11704 CHERRY LOG, GA 30522-2057
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
WEIPPERT, DON WEIPPERT, DON W WELCH JR WILLIAM M

18826 GANTON AVE 8432 LINDRICK LN 1010 COWPEN LN
BRADENTON, FL 34202-4600 BRADENTON, FL 34202 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8949
WELCH LOIS B (E LIFE EST) WENDELL GARY WESSEL KEVIN R

1110 COWPEN LN 1400 BERN CREEK LOOP 1400 PINE PRAIRIE RD
WESSEL THOMAS J WILLIAMS MARK WILLIAMS ROBERT D

2200 BERN CREEK LOOP 867 SHALLOW RUN RD 1601 MOCCASIN HOLLOW RD
WILMA WEAVER REVOCABLE LIVING

WOLCOTT, JAMES B WOLF RICK A
TRUST
8835 BROOKFIELD TER 1700 BERN CREEK LOOP
1701 BERN CREEK LOOP
BRADENTON, FL 34212-6302 SARASOTA, FL 34240-8766
WYATT, JANE YARUSS ALAN

1200 PINE PRAIRIE RD
8337 FARINGTON CT 2101 BERN CREEK LOOP
BRADENTON, FL 34202-4620 SARASOTA, FL 34240
2405 MOCCASIN HOLLOW RD


Rcv'd 5/31/2022
,' 1$0( 1$0(B$'' &,7< 67$ =,3 &28175<
%$57/(77'($1 :(67+,// 6855(<5+ 81,7('
678$57 '250$16 1' .,1*'20
%(51&5((. %(51
/223//& &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
$'$06',$1(/ 6$5$627$ )/
$1*(/252(/,6($ 6$5$627$ )/
$17+21<
0$7+8621 02&&$6,1 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
$56(1$8/7'$9,'$ &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
$7+$-$&2%: 6$5$627$ )/
32%2;
%$5721&5$,*: :,&+,7$ .6
%$8*+(5.(11(7+ 3,1(
/ 35$,5,(5' 6$5$627$ )/

%$</,6-2+1( %$&.:$7( 6$5$627$ )/

%(&.-$0,/<1/ %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/

%(//$1(5,&( 7877/( 6$5$627$ )/
%(51&5((. %(51
,03529(0(17 &5((.
$662&,$7,21 /223 6$5$627$ )/
%(51&5((. &/$5.
,03529(0(17 5'67(
$662&,$7,21 6$5$627$ )/

%(67*5(*25< 6+$//2: 6$5$627$ )/
%+(*/$.(3$5. )257
//& 9,5*,1,$ :$6+,1*721 3$
%,*+($575$1&+ 6$1 6$5$627$ )/

%,6(752*(5 6$''/( 6$5$627$ )/
%2:/,1*0,&+(/( %(51
6 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
%5$'6+$:7(55< %5$'(1721 )/

%52:1(%(5(-5 )$5,1*72 %5$'(1721 )/
&$//$*+$1'$1,(/ 7+
& $9(: %5$'(1721 )/

&+$3/(&,1'< 6/28*+ 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
&/2:6/28,6* &5((. 6$5$627$ )/

&2%/(,,6$08(/( 6+$//2: 6$5$627$ )/
7+
&23$/2//& $9(18( %5$'(1721 )/
(
&25($=85(//& +$55<67 :,&+,7$ .6
&28762/,287626
7(55<' %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
%(51
&5,67.8575 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
2$.
'$9,6'21$/'* +$002&. 6$5$627$ )/

'$9,6-())5(<0 %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
/DNHZRRG5DQFK6RXWKHDVWB[OV[

Rcv'd 5/31/2022

'$<&+$5/,(+ &2:3(1 6$5$627$ )/

'(&.(5'$9,'*-5 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
'(&.(5.$7+(5,1( 6$5$627$ )/

'(7:,/(5+(15<- )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/
',&+,//25,&+$5'
$ %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/

',0$5(6&2770 *$1721 %5$'(1721 )/

'2%%(57-$0(6: 6/28*+ 6$5$627$ )/
0$1$.,1
'2/$10,&+$(/. .,1/2&+ 6$%27 9$
'21$/'(0,//(5
5(92&$%/(/,9,1* )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/
(,6,1*(5%$5%$5$
/ 02&&$6,1 6$5$627$ )/

(63,125,&$5'2$ *$1721 %5$'(1721 )/
)(/'+$&.(5.(,7+
' )$5,1*72 %5$'(1721 )/
),7=*(5$/'(,/((1 %(51
0(/,)((67 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
)2:/(5)5('(5,&. %(51
- &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
)81.)5$1.( &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
*$5<$'$+/$1' %(51
-8'</'$+//,9,1* &5((. 6$5$627$ )/

*,/%(5767(9(13 6/28*+ 6$5$627$ )/
3,1(
*,/(6-2+1% 35$,5,(5' 6$5$627$ )/
*,//,&.$'$0 3,1( 6$5$627$ )/

*,5$5'-())5(<' 02&&$6,1 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
*,8))5()5$1. &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
*2'2)6.<(/,27 %5$'(1721 )/
1( 3203$12
*20(==2,/$< 7+$9( %($&+ )/
*22'0$13$8/
52%(57 +,''(1 6$5$627$ )/
*5((1&+5,67<' 6$5$627$ )/

*5(*25<7200<( 02&&$6,1 6$5$627$ )/
*867$)621 %(51
%(1-$0,1 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/

+$0021'-$0(6+ %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
%(51
+$:.,16-$0(6% &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
+(,'(1%(5*(5 6$5$627$ )/
+(5,7$*(5$1&+ /$.(:22'
//& &29(1$17 5$1&+ )/
+(56&+%(5*(5 6$5$627$ )/

+,+$75$1&+///3 )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
+,&.0$1
&+5,6723+(5 %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
+,(5+2/=(5 %5$'(1721 )/
/$.(:22'
+23(0,&+$(/5 %(5:,&. 5$1&+ )/
+2:$5'-5 %(51
:,//,$02 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
+8%%$5'-5 32%2;
'21$/'77(( 6$5$627$ )/
3,1(
+8567+8*+' 35$,5,(5' 6$5$627$ )/
)2; 6$,17
,6$$&621.,5.- */(1'5 &+$5/(6 ,/
-$1(%5,0
5(92&$%/(75867 %$&.:$7( 6$5$627$ )/
-($152< %5$'(1721 )/
-(16(1-2,17 9,& 6$5$627$ )/
-,0(1(=$'2/)2 6$5$627$ )/
-2+1&$1121
+20(6($670225 352)(66, 6$5$627$ )/
-2+1&$1121
+20(6,1& 352)(66, 6$5$627$ )/

-2+1621'21$/'5 /$1120 6$5$627$ )/
-2+1621%5,$1. %5$'(1721 )/
-2+16721
&+$5/(6: 635,1*%5 6$5$627$ )/
.$7+5<10'(9/,1
5(92&$%/(75867 635,1*%5 6$5$627$ )/
.((6(&.(5&+5,6 6$5$627$ )/
2$.
.(3/(50$7+(:9 +$002&. 6$5$627$ )/
.(675(/+2/',1*6 :(67 6$1
//& 3257$/ )5$1&,6&2 &$
.+$:5(92&$%/( %(51
/,9,1*75867 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
.,1*'$5(1$ %5$'(1721 )/
:$.(
.,5,$.2-2+1( )25(67 %5$'(1721 )/

/$0%(57521$/'3 6+$//2: 6$5$627$ )/
/$75(,//(/8&,(1
& %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
/$85$(
675,&./$1' )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/

/$=$5,6)$< %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
/($6.*5$(0(
:$//$&( *$1721 %5$'(1721 )/
/(/$1'&
:(7+(5,1*721 )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/
//$0$75867 /$.(:22'
3$571(56//& (17(535,6 5$1&+ )/
0$&+7(/.(11(7+
- %$&.:$7( 6$5$627$ )/
0$1$7((&2817< 32%2;
%2$5'2)&2817< %5$'(1721 )/
0$57(//2-2$11 6$5$627$ )/
0$57,1(//,.<0 6$5$627$ )/

0&&$%(/(:,6% &2:3(1 6$5$627$ )/

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
0&0855<0,&+$(/ 6$5$627$ )/
0(,661(5-())5(<
5 %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
0(66(1*(5 %((
521$/': 5,'*(5' 6$5$627$ )/
0,$..$&20081,7< 9(51$
&/8%,1&%(&.< 52$' 6$5$627$ )/

0,//(502152(- 6+$//2: 6$5$627$ )/
0216(5(=0,/(1$ %5$'(1721 )/

025*$1)5$1.3 %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
0255,621*(25*(
/2:( 02&&$6,1 6$5$627$ )/
027(0$5,1( .(1
/$%25$725<,1& 7+20362 6$5$627$ )/
085&+,(7811(<6 %5$'(1721 )/
0853+<0$7+(:) 6$5$627$ )/

0853+<0,&+$(/% )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/

0853+<0,&+$(/5 )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
0853+<:,//,$0) &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
0<$..$5$1&+ 6
+2/',1*6//& 7$0,$0, 6$5$627$ )/
1$*<-$1(/ %5$'(1721 )/

1$67$15,&+$5'* 0$56+ 6$5$627$ )/
2$.
1250$1&2//((1 +$002&. 6$5$627$ )/
18/7<&/$8',$
/<11 ($*/( 6$5$627$ )/

2520$57,1$ 635,1*%5 6$5$627$ )/
26%251/(6/,(- 7+ %5$'(1721 )/
26%251(0,&+$(/ 6$5$627$ )/

3$*(/$85(1&(+ &2:3(1 6$5$627$ )/

3$75,&.52%(57: 1(:/$1( %5$'(1721 )/
2$.
3$77,&67(3+(1 +$002&. 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
3(33(5//2<'5 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
3(75,/52%(57'
65 %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
3200(19,//(
'$9,'6 02&&$6,1 6$5$627$ )/
35(6/(<52'1(< %(51
: &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
35,&(52%(575 6$5$627$ )/
5(6,/,(175(75($7
,1& 6$5$627$ 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
5(61,&.0,&+$(// &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
5,&(:,//,$0$'$0 %5$'(1721 )/
5,&+$5'7$8*1(5 %(51
5(92&$%/(75867 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
5,&.(57$'$0$ 6$5$627$ )/

Rcv'd 5/31/2022

526(1-26+8$+ 02&&$6,1 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
5266,7(5(5,.) &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
528175((-$0(6% $11,(
$11(: /$85,(/1 6$5$627$ )/

58%,1.(9,1$ )$5,1*72 %5$'(1721 )/
6$/7=0$1%$55<
67(9(1 )$5,1*72 %5$'(1721 )/
6$5$627$&,7< 67
2)&2&,7< 6750 6$5$627$ )/
6$5$627$&2817<
3/$11,1* 5,1*/,1* 6$5$627$ )/
6$50,(172 %(51
-())5(<3 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
2$.
6&+$8%.</(0 +$002&. 6$5$627$ )/
6&+0,'7'$9,' %5$'(1721 )/
6&+2(77/(686$1
3 '((5 6$5$627$ )/
6&+52('(5
0$1$7((5$1&+ &29(1$17 %5$'(1721 )/
6&+52('(5 /$.(:22'
0$1$7((5$1&+ &29(1$17 5$1&+ )/
6&+:$57=)$506
,1& )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/
6&+:$57=-$0,( 7+ 0<$..$&,7< )/

6&+:$57=-$5('0 )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/
6&+:$57=0,&+$(/
' )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
6&2**,163$0(/$ &5((. 6$5$627$ )/

6(55$12*(25*( %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
6,*85'6621
)$0,/<5(92&$%/( *$59(77 /,921,$ 0,
60,7+$/(;$1'(5 3,1(
* 35$,5,(5' 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
60,7+-())5(</ &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
/$.(:22'
605//& &29(1$17 5$1&+ )/
/$.(:22'
6050<$..$//& &29(1$17 5$1&+ )/
%(51
612.(-$0(6 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
3,1(
61<'(5-26(3+$ 35$,5,(5' 6$5$627$ )/
654/$1'//& ),(/' 6$5$627$ )/
67$1/(<*5(**$ 1$6+9,//( 71

67$51(//3(7(5- %($&21 %5$'(1721 )/
67(3+(1(
:2(%(5 &2:3(1 6$5$627$ )/
681),(/'+20(6
,1& *$/,/(2 75,1,7< )/
9,&
6:$,17+20$6( (':$5'6 6$5$627$ )/

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
7+(&21&(66,21 65
&20081,7< (67( %5$'(1721 )/

7+20$652%(57% 6/28*+ 6$5$627$ )/

7+20$6-2+1/ )$5,1*72 %5$'(1721 )/

7+80-(66,&$/<11 )58,79,//( 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
7.$&+8.2/(* &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
72/(5&$52// &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
72//)/;,,,/,0,7('
3$571(56+,3 *,%5$/7$5 +256+$0 3$
%(51
72==2&+5,67,1(0 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
85)(5'21$/' 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
85)(5'21$/'5 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/

9,*/,21(-(11,)(5 /$1120 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
:$*/(5-$0(6: &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
'$/(67 :(67
:$77(56%5,$1 : %$%</21 1<

:((576-$0(6) &29(5(' &+(55</2* *$

:(,33(57'21 *$1721 %5$'(1721 )/
:(,33(57'21: %5$'(1721 )/
:(/&+-5:,//,$0
0 &2:3(1 6$5$627$ )/
:(/&+/2,6%(
/,)((67 &2:3(1 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
:(1'(//*$5< &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
3,1(
:(66(/.(9,15 35$,5,(5' 6$5$627$ )/
%(51
:(66(/7+20$6- &5((. 6$5$627$ )/

:,//,$060$5. 6+$//2: 6$5$627$ )/

:,//,$0652%(57' 02&&$6,1 6$5$627$ )/
:,/0$:($9(5 %(51
5(92&$%/(/,9,1* &5((. 6$5$627$ )/

:2/&277-$0(6% %522.),( %5$'(1721 )/
%(51
:2/)5,&.$ &5((. 6$5$627$ )/

:<$77-$1( )$5,1*72 %5$'(1721 )/
%(51
<$5866$/$1 &5((. 6$5$627$ )/
3,1(
35$,5,(5' 6$5$627$ )/

02&&$6,1 6$5$627$ )/
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
10.3 Copy of Letter Mailed to Surrounding Property Owners

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD WORKSHOP NOTICE
Date: Thursday, April 7, 2022

Time: 6:00 pm
Place: Virtual via Microsoft Teams – Link - https://bit.ly/3D333ja
Contact: Katie LaBarr, AICP, Stantec, 941-907-6900
A virtual workshop will be held to discuss an Application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to
modify the Resource Management Area (RMA) Map and associated policy and an Application for
a Development of Critical Concern (DOCC), to support the Lakewood Ranch Southeast property,
totaling approximately 3,900± gross acres, located south of University Parkway and north of Fruitville
Road in Sarasota County, Florida.
Applications to be filed for this project include:
x An Application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Resource Management
Area (RMA) Map from Hamlet to Village, relocate the Countryside Line, and propose new
policy language that will outline development of the subject property in a manner that will
offer a more meaningful transition to Hamlet development, to the east.
x An amendment to Element 4, Chapter 10, Maps 10-8 and 10-9, and other maps and/or
sections of Chapter 10, as applicable, to ensure internal consistency, to adjust North-South
Roadway B and East-West Roadway B, to ensure consistency between proposed
development and the Thoroughfare Plan.
x An application for a Development of Critical Concern (DOCC) with a Master Development
Plan.
To watch and participate in the virtual workshop at 6:00 pm on April 7, 2022, please visit:
https://bit.ly/3D333ja. You can also listen in by phone by dialing (833)-436-6264, Conference ID: 541
697 069#.
This is not a public hearing. The purpose of the workshop is to inform neighboring residents of the
nature of the proposal, to discuss the concept plan, and to seek comments. We look forward to
seeing you there, virtually. If you have questions, please contact Katie LaBarr, at 941-907-6900 or by
email: Katie.LaBarr@stantec.com.
For more information, please also feel free to visit http://bit.ly/2C6XKPK.
Attachments:
Existing RMA Map
Proposed RMA Map
Proposed Development Concept Plan
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
L E G E N D
Existing Countryside Line
Resource Management Area
Greenway
Hamlet
Public Lands
Rural Heritage Estate
Village
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
LORRAINE ROAD
FRUITVILLE ROAD
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\RMA_Existing_APP_20220316.mxd
Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data 0 2,500 5,000

Feet
RMA Land Use Map - Existing

¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
tel 941.907.6900
Notes:
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Florida West FIPS 0902 Feet March 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
3. Imagery: ESRI Basemap
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
L E G E N D
Proposed Countryside Line
Resource Management Area
Greenway
Hamlet
Public Lands
Rural Heritage Estate
Village
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY
LORRAINE ROAD
FRUITVILLE ROAD
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\RMA_Proposed_APP_20220316.mxd

Feet
RMA Land Use Map - Proposed

¯
Sarasota, FL 34240
(
tel 941.907.6900
Notes:
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Florida West FIPS 0902 Feet March 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Manatee County
Sarasota County
Legend
Project Boundary
Residential
Open Space
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\DCP_PreApp_20220311.mxd
Stormwater
Wetlands
Proposed ROW
0 1,000 2,000
Development Concept Plan Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Feet

¯
supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts 6900 Professional Pkwy E.
full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and Sarasota, FL 34240
(
completeness of the data. The recipient releases Lakewood Ranch Southeast tel 941.907.6900
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
from the content or provision of the data. March 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
10.4 PowerPoint Presentation

Rcv'd 5/31/2022

Neighborhood Workshop
Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments &
Development of Critical Concern and Master Plan
Public Workshop Meeting

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Introductions
ConIerence ID: 7 0
Representing LWR Communities, LLC
Kyle Grimes, Esq., Attorney – Grimes Hawkins Gladfelter & Galvano, P.L.
Katie LaBarr, AICP, Planner – Stantec
Scott Buttari, PLA, LEED AP, Landscape Architect – Stantec
Matt Crim, PE, PTOE, Traffic Engineer - Stantec
Christopher Kennedy, Environmental Scientist – Ardurra
Representing Sarasota Count\
Hannah Sowinski, AICP, Planner II – Planning & Development Services

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Agenda
ConIerence ID: 7 0
Workshop Participation Procedures

Sarasota County Procedures
Project Background
Details of Proposed Requests
Next Steps
4&A
Wrap up

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Workshop Presentation Procedures

ConIerence ID: 7 0
8RL ATTENDEES:
PARTICIPANTS ARE UNABLE TO
COMMENT VERBALLY
2 PHONE ATTENDEES:
PLEASE MUTE YOUR PHONE
3 PRESENTATION
SHORT BREAK )OR PARTICIPANTS
TO S8BMIT 48ESTIONS
RESPOND TO T<PED 48ESTIONS
TAKE CALL-IN 48ESTIONS
7 AD-O8RN
S8BMIT 48ESTIONS IN THE CHAT

BO; A)TER THE PRESENTATION

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Sarasota Count\ Procedures

ConIerence ID: 7 0
dŚŝƐǁŽƌŬƐŚŽƉŝƐĂƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͘dŚĞƉƵƌƉŽƐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐ
ǁŽƌŬƐŚŽƉŝƐĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚƚŽŝŶĨŽƌŵƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŝŶŐƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕
ĚŝƐĐƵƐƐƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚƚŽƐŽůŝĐŝƚĂŶǇƐƵŐŐĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚͬŽƌĚŝƐĐƵƐƐ
ĂŶǇĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ͘
dŚĞEt^ŝƐďĞŝŶŐƌĞĐŽƌĚĞĚ͘
dŚĞƉƵďůŝĐŚĂƐƐĞǀĞƌĂůŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚŝĞƐƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞŝŶƉƵƚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͗
Et^;ƚŽŶŝŐŚƚ͛ƐŵĞĞƚŝŶŐͿ
WůĂŶŶŝŶŐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶƉƵďůŝĐŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ
ŽĂƌĚƉƵďůŝĐŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ
dŽĚĂƚĞ͕ŶŽƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŚĂƐďĞĞŶĨŝůĞĚ͘dŚĞEt^ŝƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽďĞŚĞůĚƉƌŝŽƌƚŽƚŚĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŽĨ
ĂŶĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞEt^ƐƵŵŵĂƌǇ͕ƌĞĐŽƌĚŽĨƉĂƌƚŝĐŝƉĂŶƚƐ͕ƌĞĐŽƌĚŝŶŐĂŶĚĂŶǇĞǆŚŝďŝƚƐǁŝůůďĞ
ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƉĂĐŬĞƚ͘
dŚĞƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƉĂĐŬĞƚǁŝůůďĞƉŽƐƚĞĚŽŶƚŚĞŽƵŶƚǇ͛ƐǁĞďƐŝƚĞĂƚǁǁǁ͘ƐĐŐŽǀ͘ŶĞƚ͘
zŽƵĐĂŶĂůƐŽĐĂůůƚŚĞĐŽƵŶƚǇ͛ƐƵƐƚŽŵĞƌ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƉŚŽŶĞŶƵŵďĞƌϵϰϭͲϴϲϭͲϱϬϬϬ͕ĂŶĚĂƐŬĨŽƌƚŚĞ
WůĂŶŶĞƌŽĨƚŚĞĂǇ͕ƚŽŐĞƚŵŽƌĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͘

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ProMect Background
ConIerence ID: 7 0
Location and Aerial Maps

±4,117 Acres
Located generally south of University Parkway,
east of Waterside, and north of Fruitville Road

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ProMect Background
ConIerence ID: 7 0
Future Land Use (FLU) & =oning Maps

)L8: R8RAL Zoning: O8R, HPD, O8E-

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ProMect Background
ConIerence ID: 7 0
2050 Resource Management Area (RMA) Map
Sarasota County·s 2050 RMA Map functions as

an overlay to the adopted FLU Map
Goal to enhance the County·s livability
by preserving natural, cultural, and
physical resources
Propert\·s E[isting RMA designation:

I Hamlet: Maximum of 1 du/gross acres
of Developed Area
II Greenwa\: n/a density

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Proposed ReTuest: ComprehensiYe Plan Amendment

ComprehensiYe Plan Lage-Scale Map Amendment ConIerence ID: 7 0
RMA: Village Transition Zone, Greenwa\

RMA: Hamlet, Greenwa\
(Countr\side Line shiIted eastward)

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

ConIerence ID: 7 0
ComprehensiYe Plan Te[t Amendment
RMA: Village RMA: Village Transition RMA: Hamlet

Zone
Minimum Density: 3 Maximum Base Density: Maximum Density: 1
du/gross developable 2 du/gross developable du/gross acres of
acre acre Developed Area
not to exceed 5,000
Maximum Density: 5 dwelling units Minimum Open Space:
du/gross developable 1.5 X developed area
acre Minimum Open Space: acreage
50 of gross acreage
Minimum Open Space:
50 of gross acreage

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022

ConIerence ID: 7 0
ComprehensiYe Plan Te[t Amendment
Text Amendment to Chapter 8 – 2050 Resource Management Area to create a
new 2050 RMA designation – Village Transition =one (VT=)
The VT= seeks to provide a more compatible development form and density
transition from Village to Hamlet
Minimum 0 Open Space
)iscal Neutralit\
IncentiYi]ed Communit\ Housing
No requirement for commercial development
Permit Residential Development consistent with RSF-2/PUD ]oning requirements
of the UDC
Establish a Development Review Process to facilitate predictable outcomes

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Proposed ReTuest: DeYelopment oI Critical Concern

ConIerence ID: 7 0
Application ReTuirements
DOCC Application
Master Development Order

(MDO) and VT= Master Plan
DOCCs provide a
comprehensive process to
analy]e potential impacts and
mitigation procedures regarding
the development of a property

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DeYelopment Concept Plan ² E[isting Road Alignment

ConIerence ID: 7 0

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DeYelopment Concept Plan ² Proposed Road Alignment

ConIerence ID: 7 0

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Ne[t Steps
ConIerence ID: 7 0
Completed In Progress Ne[t Steps
Pre-Application Neighborhood Filing

Meeting Workshop Application of
Comprehensive
Plan
Amendment &
DOCC
Planning
Commission
BOCC (2
Hearings for
Plan
Amendment)

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Short Break to Submit 4uestions

ConIerence ID: 7 0
8RL ATTENDEES:
COMMENT VERBALLY
2 PHONE ATTENDEES:
3 PRESENTATION
TO S8BMIT 48ESTIONS
7 AD-O8RN


April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Respond to 4 A Chat Bo[ 4uestions

ConIerence ID: 7 0
8RL ATTENDEES:
COMMENT VERBALLY
2 PHONE ATTENDEES:
3 PRESENTATION
TO S8BMIT 48ESTIONS
7 AD-O8RN


April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Respond to Call-In 4uestions

ConIerence ID: 7 0
8RL ATTENDEES:
COMMENT VERBALLY
2 PHONE ATTENDEES:
3 PRESENTATION
TO S8BMIT 48ESTIONS
7 AD-O8RN


April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ConIerence ID: 7 0
AdMourn, An\ Additional 4uestions:
Contact InIormation:
Katie LaBarr, AICP
Community Development, Stantec
(941) 907-6900
Katie.LaBarr@stantec.com
County website: www.scgov.net

County’s Customer Service number: 941.861.5000

April 7, 2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
10.5 Attendee Report

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
dŝŵĞŽƌƌĞĐƚĞĚ
WĂƌƚŝĐŝƉĂŶ hdǀĞŶƚ ;ƐƵďƚƌĂĐƚϰ
^ĞƐƐŝŽŶ/Ě ƚ/Ě &ƵůůEĂŵĞ hƐĞƌŐĞŶƚ dŝŵĞƐƚĂŵƉ ĐƚŝŽŶ ZŽůĞ ŚŽƵƌƐͿ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵϬĂϴϴϰϬĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϬϴĐϴͲϰĚĞϯͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϱĂϲͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϲĚϯĨĞĂϲϭϯ ůŚĂǁΛƐĐŐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϱϰĐ Žǀ͘ŶĞƚ >ĂƵƌĂ,Ăǁ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϯͬϮϱͬϮϬϮϮϭϱ͗ϭϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϯͬϮϱͬϮϬϮϮϭϭ͗ϭϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵϬĂϴϴϰϬĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϬϴĐϴͲϰĚĞϯͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϱĂϲͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϲĚϯĨĞĂϲϭϯ ůŚĂǁΛƐĐŐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϱϰĐ Žǀ͘ŶĞƚ >ĂƵƌĂ,Ăǁ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϯͬϮϱͬϮϬϮϮϭϱ͗ϭϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϯͬϮϱͬϮϬϮϮϭϭ͗ϭϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϳϭĨϴϯĚĐďͲ Ϭ
ĐϮĂϭͲϰϯĂďͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ďϮϭϵͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϴϰĞĨĂϱϱϭϬ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϱϬď ǆϲϰ͖ ϯͬϯϭͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϭϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϯͬϯϭͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϭϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϳϭĨϴϯĚĐďͲ Ϭ
ĐϮĂϭͲϰϯĂďͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ďϮϭϵͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϴϰĞĨĂϱϱϭϬ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϱϬď ǆϲϰ͖ ϯͬϯϭͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϭϭ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϯͬϯϭͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϭϭ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϰϮďϱďϳĂͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵĐϳĂͲϰϵϱĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϲϱϵͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĚϳĨĞϳϵϯĨ ůŝŬĞ
ϴĚĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϭ͗ϱϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϯͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϰϮďϱďϳĂͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵĐϳĂͲϰϵϱĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϲϱϵͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĚϳĨĞϳϵϯĨ ůŝŬĞ
ϴĚĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϭ͗ϱϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϯͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϮϯϯϰĞĞϭϵͲ Edϲ͘ϭ͖
ϱĨϮďͲϰĞϯĂͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϯϲϲͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϰϯϰϱϬϮĂϭ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϴĨĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϭϬ͗ϱϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϲ͗ϱϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϮϯϯϰĞĞϭϵͲ Edϲ͘ϭ͖
ϱĨϮďͲϰĞϯĂͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϯϲϲͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϰϯϰϱϬϮĂϭ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϴĨĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϭϬ͗ϱϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϲ͗ϱϮ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϳϯĞďĐϳϮϯͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϯϰĚϭͲϰϰĐĞͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďϳĞϬͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϴϭϲĐϭϯϵĂϰ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
Ăϳϵ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϭϮ͗Ϭϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϴ͗Ϭϵ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϳϯĞďĐϳϮϯͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϯϰĚϭͲϰϰĐĞͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďϳĞϬͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϴϭϲĐϭϯϵĂϰ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
Ăϳϵ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϭϮ͗Ϭϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϴ͗Ϭϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ;yϭϭ͖
ϰďϰϮϱϳĂĞͲ >ŝŶƵǆ
ϮϯϮϴͲϰϲϮϳͲ ǆϴϲͺϲϰͿ
ĂϲĨďͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϵϬϱĞϵϴĚĨ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϰĐϲ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ;yϭϭ͖
ϰďϰϮϱϳĂĞͲ >ŝŶƵǆ
ϮϯϮϴͲϰϲϮϳͲ ǆϴϲͺϲϰͿ
ĂϲĨďͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϵϬϱĞϵϴĚĨ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϰĐϲ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϰͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϲ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϯĚϰďϯϯďϯͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϲĨϰϮͲϰĚϮϯͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ĂϭϭĞͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϬĨϳϴϲĨĨϭĞĐ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϳϬ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϱͬϮϬϮϮϭϮ͗ϰϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϱͬϮϬϮϮϴ͗ϰϰ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϯĚϰďϯϯďϯͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϲĨϰϮͲϰĚϮϯͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ĂϭϭĞͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϬĨϳϴϲĨĨϭĞĐ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϳϬ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϱͬϮϬϮϮϭϮ͗ϰϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϱͬϮϬϮϮϴ͗ϰϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĨĂϴϬďϴĞĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϬϰĐϰͲϰĂĨϵͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĂĐϵϬͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ďĚϰϭϭϵĐĨϳ ƉƉůĞtĞď
Đďϳ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϱ͗ϭϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϭ͗ϭϭ
ϴĚϳϴĞĨϰϯͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϳϰϵϮͲϰϰϱϱͲ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϴϳĨĞͲ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϭϵĚϬďϳďĐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϮϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϮ͗ϮϬ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϴĚϳϴĞĨϰϯͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϳϰϵϮͲϰϰϱϱͲ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϴϳĨĞͲ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϭϵĚϬďϳďĐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϮϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϮ͗ϮϬ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϵĨĨϵĂĨϮďͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ďďϭĚͲϰϯϵĞͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴϮĚĐͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ϲĞϯϰϱĂϯϮ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ĞϵĐϴ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϰϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϮ͗ϰϵ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϵĨĨϵĂĨϮďͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ďďϭĚͲϰϯϵĞͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴϮĚĐͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ϲĞϯϰϱĂϯϮ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ĞϵĐϴ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϰϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϮ͗ϰϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲϲϬϬĐϮϳϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂĨĚĞͲϰϴĨϬͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϴϬϱͲ ĚůŽďĞĐŬΛ ;<,dD>͖
ďĐϲĐĚĂĞϱĨ ůŽďĞĐŬŚĂŶ ůŝŬĞ
Ϭϰϴ ƐŽŶ͘ĐŽŵ ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϱ͗ϯϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲϲϬϬĐϮϳϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂĨĚĞͲϰϴĨϬͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϴϬϱͲ ĚůŽďĞĐŬΛ ;<,dD>͖
ďĐϲĐĚĂĞϱĨ ůŽďĞĐŬŚĂŶ ůŝŬĞ
Ϭϰϴ ƐŽŶ͘ĐŽŵ ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϱ͗ϯϱ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ĂϬϴϬϱĞϴϰͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϴϭĨϲͲϰϴϵĐͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ĂϱĞĐͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ϳĨϰĂďϭϯϭĐ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϮĂϳ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϱϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϱ͗ϱϲ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ĂϬϴϬϱĞϴϰͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϴϭĨϲͲϰϴϵĐͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ĂϱĞĐͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ϳĨϰĂďϭϯϭĐ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϮĂϳ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϱϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϲͬϮϬϮϮϭϱ͗ϱϲ
ϴĚϱϴĞĐϯĚͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϯϳϴϱͲϰϴĞϵͲ ƐƚĞǀĞ͘ƐŝĞď ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϵĂϱĂͲ ĞŶĂůĞƌΛŬƌ ^ŝĞďĞŶĂůĞƌ͕ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ĂϲϭĚďϲϳϲ ŽŐĞƌ͘ĐŽŵ ^ƚĞǀĞ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϬ͗Ϯϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϲ͗Ϯϯ
ϴĚϱϴĞĐϯĚͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϯϳϴϱͲϰϴĞϵͲ ƐƚĞǀĞ͘ƐŝĞď ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϵĂϱĂͲ ĞŶĂůĞƌΛŬƌ ^ŝĞďĞŶĂůĞƌ͕ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ĂϲϭĚďϲϳϲ ŽŐĞƌ͘ĐŽŵ ^ƚĞǀĞ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϬ͗Ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϲ͗Ϯϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĨĂϴϬďϴĞĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϬϰĐϰͲϰĂĨϵͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĂĐϵϬͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ďĚϰϭϭϵĐĨϳ ƉƉůĞtĞď
Đďϳ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϮϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϮ͗ϮϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϴϲĨϱĞĞϭͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĨϴĚϯͲϰϯϰϴͲ ƐƵǌĂŶŶĞ͘Ĩ ;<,dD>͖
ďϬϳďͲ ƵŐĂƚĞΛƐ ůŝŬĞ
ϰϴĨϲϯϮĂϳϵ ŵƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘Đ ^ƵǌĂŶŶĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϱĐϲ Žŵ &ƵŐĂƚĞ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϰ͗ϰϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϴϲĨϱĞĞϭͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĨϴĚϯͲϰϯϰϴͲ ƐƵǌĂŶŶĞ͘Ĩ ;<,dD>͖
ďϬϳďͲ ƵŐĂƚĞΛƐ ůŝŬĞ
ϰϴĨϲϯϮĂϳϵ ŵƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘Đ ^ƵǌĂŶŶĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϱĐϲ Žŵ &ƵŐĂƚĞ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϰ͗ϰϵ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϴϰϵĞϲϰϬĚͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϬϲĞϳͲϰϳďĂͲ DĂĐK^y
ďďϮĐͲ ϭϬͺϭϰͺϲͿ
Ăϳϴϭϱϭϱϵ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱϬĐϵ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϱ͗ϭϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϴϰϵĞϲϰϬĚͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϬϲĞϳͲϰϳďĂͲ DĂĐK^y
ďďϮĐͲ ϭϬͺϭϰͺϲͿ
Ăϳϴϭϱϭϱϵ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱϬĐϵ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϭ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϱ͗ϭϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬĞϴĞϴϭĐĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϱϵϰϱͲϰĞϯϴͲ ƐƵǌĂŶŶĞ͘Ĩ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĂϵĚͲ ƵŐĂƚĞΛƐ ůŝŬĞ
ďϱϲϴϭϲϵϬ ŵƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘Đ ^ƵǌĂŶŶĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϮϴϯĞ Žŵ &ƵŐĂƚĞ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗Ϭϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗Ϭϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϭϱďϱĂĚĐϲͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϴĂϬͲϰĚϵϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϱϵϰͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϲĨϭϴĨϲďϮϴ ůŝŬĞ
ϱϮĚ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗Ϭϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗Ϭϵ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϭϱďϱĂĚĐϲͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϴĂϬͲϰĚϵϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϱϵϰͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϲĨϭϴĨϲďϮϴ ůŝŬĞ
ϱϮĚ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗Ϭϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗Ϭϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬĞϴĞϴϭĐĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϱϵϰϱͲϰĞϯϴͲ ƐƵǌĂŶŶĞ͘Ĩ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĂϵĚͲ ƵŐĂƚĞΛƐ ůŝŬĞ
ďϱϲϴϭϲϵϬ ŵƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘Đ ^ƵǌĂŶŶĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϮϴϯĞ Žŵ &ƵŐĂƚĞ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗Ϭϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗Ϭϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϰϬĐϲĚĨϰͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϲĚĂϵͲϰϰϯĞͲ ƐƵǌĂŶŶĞ͘Ĩ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĂĚďͲ ƵŐĂƚĞΛƐ ůŝŬĞ
ϲϵϴϯĞϱϲĚ ŵƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘Đ ^ƵǌĂŶŶĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϭĚĨĚ Žŵ &ƵŐĂƚĞ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϭϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϭϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϰϬĐϲĚĨϰͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϲĚĂϵͲϰϰϯĞͲ ƐƵǌĂŶŶĞ͘Ĩ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĂĚďͲ ƵŐĂƚĞΛƐ ůŝŬĞ
ϲϵϴϯĞϱϲĚ ŵƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘Đ ^ƵǌĂŶŶĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϭĚĨĚ Žŵ &ƵŐĂƚĞ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϭϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϭϬ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĞϬϭϭďϲϳϳͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϰϱĐϬͲϰϭϱϬͲ DĂĐK^y
ϵϭϯϰͲ ϭϬͺϭϰͺϲͿ
ĚϱĞϯϬϱϱϭ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲďϲĚ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϭϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϭϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĞϬϭϭďϲϳϳͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϰϱĐϬͲϰϭϱϬͲ DĂĐK^y
ϵϭϯϰͲ ϭϬͺϭϰͺϲͿ
ĚϱĞϯϬϱϱϭ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲďϲĚ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϭϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϭϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ĚϭĞϲϭĞĚďͲ Ϭ
ϭϰϬϰͲϰĞϭĐͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϵϴĐϵͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ďϰϵϲϱϲďĞ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϯĂĚϱ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϰϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϰϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϲϭϴĚϮϮϱϳͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϬĞϲϱͲϰϲϳϲͲ DĂĐK^y
ĂďďϬͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ďĨĐďϭϰϭϲϳ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϭϳ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϰϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϰϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϲϭϴĚϮϮϱϳͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϬĞϲϱͲϰϲϳϲͲ DĂĐK^y
ĂďďϬͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ďĨĐďϭϰϭϲϳ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϭϳ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϰϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϰϴ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨϬďϱϲĨďϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďĐϯϬͲϰϵϲϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϵĞĨͲ ĂŵĞƐƐŝŶĂ ;<,dD>͖
ϮϮϵďϯĐĚĂĐ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ŶĂ ůŝŬĞ
ϵĨϮ Ğƚ DĞƐƐŝŶĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϱϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϱϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨϬďϱϲĨďϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďĐϯϬͲϰϵϲϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϵĞĨͲ ĂŵĞƐƐŝŶĂ ;<,dD>͖
ϮϮϵďϯĐĚĂĐ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ŶĂ ůŝŬĞ
ϵĨϮ Ğƚ DĞƐƐŝŶĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϱϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϲ͗ϱϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďďĂϲϴĂĨϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϮϳĂϳͲϰϳϮϴͲ ŵŝŬĞ͘ďůĂĐ ;<,dD>͖
ďĂĞĚͲ ŬƌŝĐŬΛƐŵ ůŝŬĞ
ϴϲϵϵϳϴϭĨϭ ƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽ DŝŬĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĂϳĚ ŵ ůĂĐŬƌŝĐŬ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗Ϯϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗Ϯϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲϲϬϬϵϰĨĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϰĐϭͲϰĚϲϴͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϲϭϭͲ ůĂƵƌĂ͘ĐŽůĞ ;<,dD>͖
ϱĂĐďϯĐĞϯϲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ůŝŬĞ
ϵϴĂ Ś͘ĐŽŵ >ĂƵƌĂŽůĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗Ϯϳ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗Ϯϳ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϭϯϵϰϭϭϬϲͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϭĚďϮͲϰϵĚϲͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϵĚĞϵͲ ŵĂƚƚ͘Đƌŝŵ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ϰďϯϮϯĞĂϭ ΛƐƚĂŶƚĞĐ͘ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϴϰĞĨ ĐŽŵ ƌŝŵ͕DĂƚƚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϵϰĂϳϵϰϴͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĚϰϬϱͲϰĞϳĨͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϴϴϱͲ ĐŬĞŶŶĞĚǇ ůŝŬĞ
ϬϴĨϯϯĚϭϴϯ ΛĂƌĚƵƌƌĂ͘ ŚƌŝƐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϴĐĐ ĐŽŵ <ĞŶŶĞĚǇ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨϰϳϰϯϯϵϭͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϲĨϵͲϰϲĞϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂďϵĞͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϴϵϰϵĚϮϯ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ĂĚĚϵ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨϰϳϰϯϯϵϭͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϲĨϵͲϰϲĞϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂďϵĞͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϴϵϰϵĚϮϯ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ĂĚĚϵ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϳϮĐĞĚϭĚďͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϬĚĚϴͲϰϭϳϯͲ DĂĐK^y
ďĚϯĐͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ĐϳďϯĐĚϴϭϵ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞĐĚ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϰ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϰϭϲĞϰĞĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂĨϲĂͲϰϬĞϴͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϲϳĞͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϱϮϯϬϵϵϯϰ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϬϳϲϬ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϰ
ϴϲĨϬĞϭĚϬͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϵĚϰϬͲϰϮĚĞͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ĂϬĨĚͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϲϳϰĂďĚϴϰ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϯϲϰϰϰϵϲϭͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϯϲϲͲϰϰϭďͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϬϵϴͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ĚϱĐĞďďϱϴĨ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ďϯϳ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϰ
ϴϲĨϬĞϭĚϬͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϵĚϰϬͲϰϮĚĞͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ĂϬĨĚͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϲϳϰĂďĚϴϰ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϯϲϰϰϰϵϲϭͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϯϲϲͲϰϰϭďͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϬϵϴͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ĚϱĐĞďďϱϴĨ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ďϯϳ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϱ
ϮĨϱϴĨϳϵĚͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϰϱϳϰͲϰϱϬĚͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ďϳĐĚͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϴϵϮϵďϭϰϵ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϱ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϮĨϱϴĨϳϵĚͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϰϱϳϰͲϰϱϬĚͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ďϳĐĚͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϴϵϮϵďϭϰϵ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϰϭϲĞϰĞĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂĨϲĂͲϰϬĞϴͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϲϳĞͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϱϮϯϬϵϵϯϰ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϬϳϲϬ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮĨĞĂϵĞϵϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĨϯϬϲͲϰϰĚϲͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϵϯϮͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϴĚϱϱϯĚϭĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĚĐĞĂ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϲ
ϴϮĂĂϱĞϰϭͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ĞϰĞĨͲϰϳĞϲͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϵϲϵϳͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ĞĨϮϲĨϴĞϰĐ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϵĐĨϰĂĨĂͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďϰϭϵͲϰĞĨĐͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĂϯϯϬͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ůŝŬĞ
ĚϳϮϲϴϯĐď ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĂϮďϬ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϲ
ϴϮĂĂϱĞϰϭͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ĞϰĞĨͲϰϳĞϲͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϵϲϵϳͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ĞĨϮϲĨϴĞϰĐ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϲ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϵĐĨϰĂĨĂͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďϰϭϵͲϰĞĨĐͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĂϯϯϬͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ůŝŬĞ
ĚϳϮϲϴϯĐď ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĂϮďϬ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϯĂĚĞϲĨĐϰͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞϳϮĞͲϰϱĞĨͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϵϳϵͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ϭϬϲϯĞϮĚĂ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ĂĨĞϯ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϯĂĚĞϲĨĐϰͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞϳϮĞͲϰϱĞĨͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϵϳϵͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ϭϬϲϯĞϮĚĂ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ĂĨĞϯ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϴ
ĂϵϯϴĚϮϳϴͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϵϵϲĂͲϰĚϱĚͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϵϯϴϯͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϴĞϵĚϴϯďϴ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϵ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϱϵϵĞϮĐĂϴͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵĨĂϮͲϰĨϮϬͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďĞĞĐͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϰĂϴϱĨĂϱĚ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ϳϮϮ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϯϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϯϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϱϵϵĞϮĐĂϴͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵĨĂϮͲϰĨϮϬͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďĞĞĐͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϰĂϴϱĨĂϱĚ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ϳϮϮ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϬ
ĂϵϯϴĚϮϳϴͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϵϵϲĂͲϰĚϱĚͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϵϯϴϯͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϴĞϵĚϴϯďϴ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϯϴϰĚϴďĐĨͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂĨϴĞͲϰďϵϴͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϰϲϵͲ ŵŝůǇ͘,ĞŶ ůŝŬĞ ǀĞŶƚ
ϯϱϳĚϰϰϴϯ ŬĞΛƐƚĂŶƚ ,ĞŶŬĞ͕ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ dĞĂŵ
ϬϴĚď ĞĐ͘ĐŽŵ ŵŝůǇ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ DĞŵďĞƌ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϭ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϵĨĚϳĚĨϴϰͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϳϰϳͲϰϴϬĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďϰϱϯͲ ŬĂƚŝĞ͘ůĂďĂ ;<,dD>͖ ǀĞŶƚ
ϭĂϱϮϴϲϮĞ ƌƌΛƐƚĂŶƚĞ >ĂĂƌƌ͕ ůŝŬĞ dĞĂŵ
ϭĞĂϳ Đ͘ĐŽŵ <ĂƚŝĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ DĞŵďĞƌ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϬϴĐϮĞϰϴϱͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϰϴϯϬͲϰĂďϭͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϳĚϬͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐĐϳĂϬϳĚĐϯ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
Ϯϵϯ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϭ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϭϯϵϰϭϭϬϲͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϭĚďϮͲϰϵĚϲͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϵĚĞϵͲ ŵĂƚƚ͘Đƌŝŵ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ϰďϯϮϯĞĂϭ ΛƐƚĂŶƚĞĐ͘ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϴϰĞĨ ĐŽŵ ƌŝŵ͕DĂƚƚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϭ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϭ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϰĂϰϵϯϲĨϲͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϬϭĚϲͲϰϳĐĞͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďϰϵϴͲ ŵĂƚƚ͘Đƌŝŵ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĨϯďĞϵĨϭĂĂ ΛƐƚĂŶƚĞĐ͘ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϱĨĂ ĐŽŵ ƌŝŵ͕DĂƚƚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϬϴĐϮĞϰϴϱͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϰϴϯϬͲϰĂďϭͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϳĚϬͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐĐϳĂϬϳĚĐϯ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
Ϯϵϯ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϮ
ϳϵϴĞϬϬϱďͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϱϬϭĨͲϰĚďĂͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ĂϵϲϱͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϰĐĐĐĐϳĨϯϯ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϮ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϲĂϴĂϮϱϲĐͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϲϮĨϴͲϰϯĐϲͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϵĞĨĚͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ďϱϳϱĐϴďϲ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ďĨϬϯ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϯϰĐϮϯĂďĐͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϮϳϱϰͲϰϴĚďͲ DĂĐK^y
ϴϮϲϱͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ďϵďĐϮϰϰϱ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϴϲϴ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϳϮĐĞĚϭĚďͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϬĚĚϴͲϰϭϳϯͲ DĂĐK^y
ďĚϯĐͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ĐϳďϯĐĚϴϭϵ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞĐĚ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲϲϬϬϵϰĨĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϰĐϭͲϰĚϲϴͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϲϭϭͲ ůĂƵƌĂ͘ĐŽůĞ ;<,dD>͖
ϱĂĐďϯĐĞϯϲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ůŝŬĞ
ϵϴĂ Ś͘ĐŽŵ >ĂƵƌĂŽůĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϴ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϲĂϴĂϮϱϲĐͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϲϮĨϴͲϰϯĐϲͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϵĞĨĚͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ďϱϳϱĐϴďϲ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ďĨϬϯ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϴ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳϰϮϴϯĞϯϳͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϭϰϳͲϰĐϮϭͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϵϮϳͲ ůĂƵƌĂ͘ĐŽůĞ ;<,dD>͖
ϯďϭĚϯĨϬϮϲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ůŝŬĞ
ĨϬĨ Ś͘ĐŽŵ >ĂƵƌĂŽůĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳϳϲϱϲϰϮĐͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮĨϰϲͲϰĐϴϳͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϮϰĂͲ ƐĐŽƚƚ͘ďƵƚƚ ;<,dD>͖
ϳϯϰϴϰϯϲĐĐ ĂƌŝΛƐƚĂŶƚ ƵƚƚĂƌŝ͕ ůŝŬĞ
Ăϲϯ ĞĐ͘ĐŽŵ ^ĐŽƚƚ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞϵϳϮϯĨϳĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĨϮϱϴͲϰϲĚϭͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϰϮϬͲ ůŝŬĞ
ĨϱϭϭĞϱϵĞĚ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĨĐϰ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϰϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϰϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮĨĞĂϵĞϵϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĨϯϬϲͲϰϰĚϲͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϵϯϮͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϴĚϱϱϯĚϭĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĚĐĞĂ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϬ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ĚϲϬĨϳϯϮϮͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϬϬϬĞͲϰϰϳďͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďϳϯϳͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĚĂϲϵϮϬϴϯ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ĂϮϲĐ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϬ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ĚϲϬĨϳϯϮϮͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϬϬϬĞͲϰϰϳďͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďϳϯϳͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĚĂϲϵϮϬϴϯ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ĂϮϲĐ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϭ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲďĞĚϴϯĨϴͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϱĂďͲϰϵϴďͲ ŵĂŶĚĂ͘ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϰϬϰͲ ƌĂŶĚŽŶΛƐ ;<,dD>͖ ǀĞŶƚ
ϮϰϯϴĞϯĨϰϭ ƚĂŶƚĞĐ͘ĐŽ ƌĂŶĚŽŶ͕ ůŝŬĞ dĞĂŵ
ϳϯϭ ŵ ŵĂŶĚĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ DĞŵďĞƌ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϯϴϰĚϴďĐĨͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂĨϴĞͲϰďϵϴͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϰϲϵͲ ŵŝůǇ͘,ĞŶ ůŝŬĞ ǀĞŶƚ
ϯϱϳĚϰϰϴϯ ŬĞΛƐƚĂŶƚ ,ĞŶŬĞ͕ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ dĞĂŵ
ϬϴĚď ĞĐ͘ĐŽŵ ŵŝůǇ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϭ >ĞĨƚ DĞŵďĞƌ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϯĨϬϲďϰϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĐĚϱĚͲϰĞϲϬͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϵĚϲϵͲ ŵŝůǇ͘,ĞŶ ůŝŬĞ ǀĞŶƚ
ϬϬϳĚϮďϭϴ ŬĞΛƐƚĂŶƚ ,ĞŶŬĞ͕ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ dĞĂŵ
ϮϮϮϱ ĞĐ͘ĐŽŵ ŵŝůǇ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ DĞŵďĞƌ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϮ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϳϰďϬϬϯϯͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϱϮϲϰͲϰĨĐϯͲ ŶŝĐŽůĞ͘ŬŶĂ ;<,dD>͖
ĂϰϱϰͲ ƉƉΛŵǇŵ ůŝŬĞ
ϲϭĨďϵďϮĂϯ ĂŶĂƚĞĞ͘Žƌ EŝĐŽůĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϯϲϱ Ő <ŶĂƉƉ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϮ
ϳϵϴĞϬϬϱďͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϱϬϭĨͲϰĚďĂͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ĂϵϲϱͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϰĐĐĐĐϳĨϯϯ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϰϴĞĚϯϳϭͲ ŬŐƌŝŵĞƐΛ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚĚĐĨͲϰĚϱϲͲ ŐƌŝŵĞƐŐŽĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϭϮďͲ ďĞů͘ŽŶŵŝĐ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĚϴϳϱϲĨϳď ƌŽƐŽĨƚ͘ĐŽ <ǇůĞ ůŝŬĞ
ϵϭϱ ŵ 'ƌŝŵĞƐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϲϬϱďϮϲĐĞͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϳďϬďͲϰĞĂĂͲ DĂĐK^y
ďϭĨϮͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϰϲϴϯϰϳϲϳ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬϮϳϮ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϱϳϭϳϵϯϬϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϬĚϰϯͲϰϯĂĂͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϰϭĚͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴϮϱϬĞϲĐϱĐ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĨĚϴ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϰ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϭĚĚϵϳĚϬĚͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĐϮϵϬͲϰĨϱĨͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ďďϬϬͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭĂϴĨĚϬĞϮĚ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϰϮĞ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϮϴϰĞϭĞϭϬͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϰϯϱĂͲϰϮĚϴͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϵĚϮϵͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĞĞĞϭϲϵϯĞ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϱϮϬ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĂĐĂϳĐϵϵďͲ Edϲ͘ϯ͖
ϳĂϳĚͲϰϬĂďͲ EϯϴϱϯϰϬ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĂϲϰĨͲ ΛƐĂƌĂƐŽƚ W,z ǆϲϰͿ
ĚĐĚĂϭĂĂϮϱ ĂĐŽƵŶƚǇƐĐ >K'E ƉƉůĞtĞď
Ϯϳϲ ŚŽŽůƐ͘ŶĞƚ >>E <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϵďϰĨĚĞĂϳͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĞϲϮϬͲϰďϵĂͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϭϲϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲϴϱϱĚϳϳĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϮĨĚĚ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϳďϭϴϴϳĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϳϯϬϰͲϰϵďϳͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĂĨĞϬͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϮϴĚϵĞϭĐď 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϲϮϵĐ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϱ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĐϬϴϯĐϭϮϯͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐĞϰϵͲϰĚϳĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϮϯϮͲ ďŚĂƌƌŝŶŐ ;<,dD>͖
ϮĚĨϬϲϲĐϯϲ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ƌĞƚƚ ůŝŬĞ
Ăďϲ Ğƚ ,ĂƌƌŝŶŐƚŽŶ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ďĨϭϰďĨϵϮͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ĂϰϮϲͲϰϬϰĂͲ DĂĐK^y
ĂϳϵĂͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϱϳďϱĂϱϯϵ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϵĐϵ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞϵϳϮϯĨϳĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĨϮϱϴͲϰϲĚϭͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϰϮϬͲ ůŝŬĞ
ĨϱϭϭĞϱϵĞĚ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĨĐϰ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ďĨϭϰďĨϵϮͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ĂϰϮϲͲϰϬϰĂͲ DĂĐK^y
ĂϳϵĂͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϱϳďϱĂϱϯϵ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϵĐϵ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϬϴϴϭϯϴϵĂͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϭĂϰϰͲϰĨϲϴͲ DĂĐK^y
ďĨĐϬͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϰϲĨϰϲĞďĂϬ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϮϴ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϲ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲϱϮĨϳϭĚϳͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴĨĐϭͲϰϵϯĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϬϵϱͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĐϲϵϬϱĚϬ ůŝŬĞ
ĚϳϮĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϳ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϳ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϵϰĂϳϵϰϴͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĚϰϬϱͲϰĞϳĨͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϴϴϱͲ ĐŬĞŶŶĞĚǇ ůŝŬĞ
ϬϴĨϯϯĚϭϴϯ ΛĂƌĚƵƌƌĂ͘ ŚƌŝƐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϴĐĐ ĐŽŵ <ĞŶŶĞĚǇ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϳ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϳ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϬϬϬĨĞϰϵϲͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮϮϰĚͲϰĞĞϭͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϬϮďͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĨϯϭĚĐĂĂϲϵ ůŝŬĞ
ϱϵϮ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϳ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϳ
ĂϴϲĚϰϭϯϲͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϬϳĨĞͲϰϳĂĂͲ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ĂϲϭϳͲ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϴϭĚϰϮϱϰϱ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĚϱϮĚϱĐϲĐͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϮϭϱϲͲϰϳďĐͲ DĂĐK^y
ĂϱϱĨͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϭϮϭϯϲϲďϱ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϰĂĚ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϴ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϳĂϮϭĞĂĂϯͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĚĐϰĚͲϰϳĐĞͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϵϰϲϳͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϯĐďϳϳďϲĂ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮĨϮĐ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϰĚϮϳϴϮϰϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴĚĞĚͲϰϱĐϳͲ ƌĂŶĚĂůů͘ƐŽ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϭϳϴͲ ĚĞƌďĞƌŐΛ ;<,dD>͖
ϯϯϴϬĚϵϴĐ ĐĂƉĞůŽŐŝĐ͘ ZĂŶĚĂůů ůŝŬĞ
ϴĨϵĐ ĐŽŵ ^ŽĚĞƌďĞƌŐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϴ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϮĞĂϮϴϱϱϭͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϰĚϰϲͲϰĞϭĚͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϵϯϲĚͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϯϬĨĚϯϲϯϵϵ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ďϰϰ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϴ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϯĂϲϲϴϴϬĞͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ĂϯϰĂͲϰϭϲďͲ ϭ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ϴϮĚϳͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϮĨϬϳĞϵĨϲϮ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ĂϰĚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ĞĨĞϵϭĂϳϵͲ Ϭ
ϴϬĚϬͲϰďϯϳͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϴϳĞĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϳϯϵĞďϮϳĚ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĞϭϵĞ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϴ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ďďĐϱďϵϵϰͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϳďϳͲϰϰĐĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴĨϰĂͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ϱĨϵϭĚĚĂϴĂ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ĐϬϯ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϱĂϭϯϳĞĞĚͲ Edϲ͘ϭ͖
ĨϭϴĂͲϰϭďϳͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĂϲďϱͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϰĂďďϱϴĞĨĚ ƉƉůĞtĞď
Đϳϲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĂϯďĨĨϬϬϳͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϮϴĂϴͲϰϳϭϯͲ DĂĐK^y
ϴĂĞϮͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϴĂϴϵϵĂϭϯ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮϰϬĨ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϱϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϳ͗ϱϵ
ϰϯĂĞϰĐϰϰͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ĚϬϲϯͲϰϲďϯͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ĂĂϲĂͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ĨϱϮϵϴďϱĞϲ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϬϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϬϬ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϵϲĨϯĂϵĞϵͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϬĐϳϱͲϰĞϮϲͲ ϭ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ďϮϵϵͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ĂϭϳĐϮϱϰϱϳ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϵϳϮ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϬϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϬϬ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳϮϴϴĂϬϵϱͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴϱĚϮͲϰĂϰĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϬϳϰͲ ĂŵĞƐƐŝŶĂ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϱϰϲĐϮϮϮ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ŶĂ ůŝŬĞ
ϴďϭĨ Ğƚ DĞƐƐŝŶĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϬϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϬϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨĚϯϵϳĚϰĚͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳďĨĨͲϰϱϵϵͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵĞϴϲͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϱĚϱϱϵϲĂϳ ůŝŬĞ
ĂĚĚϴ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϬϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϬϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ĂϰϬĞďďϮďͲ Ϭ
ĚϲĂϬͲϰϳϯĞͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϴϭϰϲͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĨϭϭϬϰϴϭĂĞ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĨϮϮ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϳϳϳďϵϱĐďͲ Ϭ
ϯϭϮĨͲϰϲϴϵͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĂϳďϴͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĂĂĐϬϴϮϴϴϬ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĂĨĚ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϴĐďĞďĨϱϳͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭĐϮĚͲϰĚϬϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂĞĂĞͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϭĨϲϯϳϱĞϭϯ ůŝŬĞ
ϵϮϲ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϭ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϬϬĚĨϮĚϵϲͲ Ϭ
ϳϳďϳͲϰĚĞĨͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ďĂϭϮͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϳĨϱϬĚϭϲϯϵ tŝŶϲϰ͖
Ĩϰϭ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ;yϭϭ͖
ƌK^
ĐϱϮĚϯϲĞϲͲ ǆϴϲͺϲϰ
ϮϭϰϴͲϰϵϰϴͲ ϭϰϰϲϵ͘ϰϭ͘
ϵĂϴϰͲ ϬͿ
ϲĚĐϮĂϱϱϲĂ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϯĞϴ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϮĚϬϭϲĨĚĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĚĞĚϭͲϰĞĚϴͲ EϯϴϱϯϰϬ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϲϬϱͲ ΛƐĂƌĂƐŽƚ W,z ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϱϰϵĂϮϱϬ ĂĐŽƵŶƚǇƐĐ >K'E ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱďϮĨ ŚŽŽůƐ͘ŶĞƚ >>E <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϬϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϬϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨϯϭϬϱϴĂĂͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϯϭĚͲϰϭϭďͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϱĚϰͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϲϭϵĨĨĐϳϱĂ ůŝŬĞ
ϲĚĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϬϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϬϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϬϬϬĨĞϰϵϲͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮϮϰĚͲϰĞĞϭͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϬϮďͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĨϯϭĚĐĂĂϲϵ ůŝŬĞ
ϱϵϮ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϬϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϬϮ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϰĨĨĂϴϵϬďͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬďϱϳͲϰϯϰϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵĚĞĨͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϱϴϭϰĂϯϳϳĐ ůŝŬĞ
ϭϱϰ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϮϳϵϱϭĐĂϴͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϱϰĐϵͲϰϮĂĚͲ DĂĐK^y
ϴĂϰϭͲ ϭϬͺϭϬͺϱͿ
ϵĂϴĨĨĨĨĞϳĞ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϯϰ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϯ
ϵϬĞďϬϯϵϴͲ dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϳϭĐďͲϰĐϲĚͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ĂĐĂϬͲ Ϭ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ĨϬϭĚĂϱϵĐϳ ŝK^ϭϰ͘ϰ͖
ϱϯϵ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϯ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϬϭϵϰϲϬĞĐͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ĂϵĂďͲϰϴϯďͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴϵϲϲͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ďϰĨĨĨĞϬϭĂϭ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϯϲ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϲĞϭϴϴĐϰͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϲϲϳͲϰĞĚϭͲ ƵƚƚƌĞƐƐ^ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϰϲϰͲ ŚĂƵŶΛ:Ž ;<,dD>͖
ϭĚϯϴďĞϯϵ ŚŶĞĞƌĞ͘Đ ƵƚƚƌĞƐƐ ůŝŬĞ
ϳĂĨϰ Žŵ ^ŚĂƵŶ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϱ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϱϴϮĐďϮϵϲͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĚϮϰϴͲϰĚϲϭͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ďϯĐϲͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϴϮϬϳϵϳϯϬ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐϮϳĨ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϯϯďϱϮϳϲϵͲ Ϭ
ϲϭϳĐͲϰϬϱϯͲ ;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϵϭĚϬͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϲϵϬďϴϭϮϬ DĂĐK^y
Ğϰϱϭ ϭϬ͘ϭϱ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ďĂϵďϴĨĐĞͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ĞϲďϳͲϰĂϲĐͲ DĂĐK^y
ϵϲϳϮͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϱϬϭϮϴϵĚĞ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϰĞϵ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϭϰĨďϮϬĚĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱϱϮϱͲϰϯĚĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵĨϱĂͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĂϱϱĂϲϰϰĞ ůŝŬĞ
ϬĐϯϰ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϰĚϮϳϴϮϰϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴĚĞĚͲϰϱĐϳͲ ƌĂŶĚĂůů͘ƐŽ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϭϳϴͲ ĚĞƌďĞƌŐΛ ;<,dD>͖
ϯϯϴϬĚϵϴĐ ĐĂƉĞůŽŐŝĐ͘ ZĂŶĚĂůů ůŝŬĞ
ϴĨϵĐ ĐŽŵ ^ŽĚĞƌďĞƌŐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϲ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϮĐďϲϮĐϰĨͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϴϱϰϭͲϰϮϬϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ďĞϱϭͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϱϵĚďϬĚϴϵ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞĨϬϭ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĂďϰĞďϳϴϵͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϭϬĨĂͲϰĐĂďͲ ƐƵǌĂŶŶĞ͘Ĩ ǆϲϰͿ
ďϱϬĐͲ ƵŐĂƚĞΛƐ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲĐϬϰϵĐĚĚĐ ŵƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘Đ ^ƵǌĂŶŶĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϯďϯ Žŵ &ƵŐĂƚĞ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳĂϳĂϰϴĚĞͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϭĨϲͲϰϱĐĂͲ ƌĂŶĚĂůů͘ƐŽ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϰϴϬͲ ĚĞƌďĞƌŐΛ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϴĐϯϮĚĨϭϬ ĐĂƉĞůŽŐŝĐ͘ ZĂŶĚĂůů ůŝŬĞ
ϱϳĞ ĐŽŵ ^ŽĚĞƌďĞƌŐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϳ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϳ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϬϴĨϯĞĞϵĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϭϮϬďͲϰĞĚĚͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴĨϵϱͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ďĂĞϲϳĂϴĨϭ ƉƉůĞtĞď
Ăϱď <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϳ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϳ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϯϴĐϵďϳϮϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϮϲϲĐͲϰϰĞϬͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϯϵϱͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϮϮϮϬϴϵϱ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϲĞĂĨ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϳ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϳ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨďĨϮďϱϱĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲĞďϲͲϰĨϬĞͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďĨϴϬͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϭĂϲϯĂĞĚĨĞ ůŝŬĞ
ϭϮĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϳ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϳ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϭϰĨďϮϬĚĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱϱϮϱͲϰϯĚĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵĨϱĂͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĂϱϱĂϲϰϰĞ ůŝŬĞ
ϬĐϯϰ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϳ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϳ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϭĚĚϵϳĚϬĚͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĐϮϵϬͲϰĨϱĨͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ďďϬϬͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭĂϴĨĚϬĞϮĚ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϰϮĞ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϳ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϳ
ϯďĐĞĨϴĞϭͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϴϱϵϳͲϰϱĨĂͲ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϴϰϰďͲ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϵϱĨĐĚĚϱĐĨ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϳ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϳ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϲĨĚϰϭĐϴĐͲ Ϭ
ϮĚĐϱͲϰĐϭĐͲ ;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĂϵϬϯͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ĚĐďĚĨĂϯďĨ DĂĐK^y
ϭĂĚ ϭϬ͘ϭϯ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϴ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĐďĐďĂĚďĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϭϵϯϯͲϰϬĐϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϵďϴϭͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϬϵĚϲϲϰϳϰ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂĚϱĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϴ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϴϭϴϳϱĨϰϰͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘Ϯ͘
ϲĨďϴͲϰĨĞĞͲ ϯ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ĂϬϱĞͲ ŝK^ϭϰ͘ϳ͘ϭ͖
ϴĨďϬϰĨϰďϬ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϲϲϵ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϴ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ĨĂϲϯϰϰϱϭͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϯĞϯĚͲϰϵϲϵͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ĂĂϭϯͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ĨϵĞϵϱϵďĂϴ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϭϲϰ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵĂϬďϲϮϳϵͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĐϰϭĨͲϰϭĚĚͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĨĂϳͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϮϭϱϵĨϯϳϱϴ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĂĨď dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϵ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϰĂϰϵϯϲĨϲͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϬϭĚϲͲϰϳĐĞͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďϰϵϴͲ ŵĂƚƚ͘Đƌŝŵ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĨϯďĞϵĨϭĂĂ ΛƐƚĂŶƚĞĐ͘ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϱĨĂ ĐŽŵ ƌŝŵ͕DĂƚƚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϭϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϭϵ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϳďϭϴϴϳĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϳϯϬϰͲϰϵďϳͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĂĨĞϬͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϮϴĚϵĞϭĐď 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϲϮϵĐ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϬ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϳĞĞϲϳϬϯďͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ĨϯϭϮͲϰϱĞĐͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴĂϳϳͲ ŚƐŽǁŝŶƐŬŝ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϴϵϳĞĨϯϭϵϯ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ,ĂŶŶĂŚ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϲϭϭ Ğƚ ^ŽǁŝŶƐŬŝ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϬ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϭϱďďϮϭϴĐͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϱĚϵďͲϰϵϵĂͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ĂĚďϬͲ ŵĂƚƚ͘Đƌŝŵ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĨϳĐĨϯϯďďϵ ΛƐƚĂŶƚĞĐ͘ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϳďĐ ĐŽŵ ƌŝŵ͕DĂƚƚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
DĂĐK^y
ϭϭͺϲͺϬͿ
ĞϭĨϯϬϭϴĂͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲϲĂϯͲϰϳďϳͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴĨϰĨͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĐĐϵϮĨϲĨϵϰ ůŝŬĞ
ϰĚĨ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĐĨϰĚĨďĂϯͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϰĨϭϰͲϰďĐϱͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϯϬĞͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĨĨϳĚϯϳϴϬĂ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴϱď <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϬ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĞϭϭĨϲϭϲϬͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϴϱĐͲϰϰϭĨͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϲϵϳͲ ĚůŽďĞĐŬΛ ;<,dD>͖
ĞϵϮĞĂϱϱϭĐ ůŽďĞĐŬŚĂŶ ůŝŬĞ
ϴĨϰ ƐŽŶ͘ĐŽŵ ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϱϳϭϳϵϯϬϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϬĚϰϯͲϰϯĂĂͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϰϭĚͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴϮϱϬĞϲĐϱĐ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĨĚϴ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϭ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϭ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ĂϴĨϰϱϰϭϵͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ďϬĚϭͲϰϳϱϳͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴϭϲϮͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĂϴϬĚϳϭϳϰ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϭĞϳϲ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϱϬďϰϯĞĐĨͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϴϭϳϯͲϰϱĚϰͲ Eϰϰϵϲϵϳ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϭĐϰͲ ΛƐĂƌĂƐŽƚ ZZ ǆϲϰͿ
ĨĚďϱĚϯϱĚď ĂĐŽƵŶƚǇƐĐ :z>zEE ƉƉůĞtĞď
Ěϰϱ ŚŽŽůƐ͘ŶĞƚ EE <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĨϵϱĚϰϳϳϰͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ĐďĨϰͲϰϱϮϵͲ DĂĐK^y
ďϰϵϲͲ ůĞǆĂŶĚƌĂ ϭϬͺϭϰͺϲͿ
ĨϬϵϲϮϯϵϮϰ ͘ŽĞΛƐĐŐ ůĞǆĂŶĚƌĂ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϯϱ Đƌď͘ŶĞƚ ŽĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϮ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĐĂϭϴϵϬϰϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĚϭĚϯͲϰϲĞĞͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂĨϵĐͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱϭϬϱϰĐĨϰϴ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵĚϭ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĂϯďĨĨϬϬϳͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϮϴĂϴͲϰϳϭϯͲ DĂĐK^y
ϴĂĞϮͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϴĂϴϵϵĂϭϯ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮϰϬĨ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϰϴĞĚϯϳϭͲ ŬŐƌŝŵĞƐΛ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚĚĐĨͲϰĚϱϲͲ ŐƌŝŵĞƐŐŽĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϭϮďͲ ďĞů͘ŽŶŵŝĐ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĚϴϳϱϲĨϳď ƌŽƐŽĨƚ͘ĐŽ <ǇůĞ ůŝŬĞ
ϵϭϱ ŵ 'ƌŝŵĞƐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĚĨĞϴĂϴďϭͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϯĐϱϵͲϰϯϱϬͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϯϰϳͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϳĂĐďĂϳϲϯ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵĂď <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳĨϮϳϰĚϯĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮϰϲϳͲϰĚϱĞͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďϵĐϮͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĐϳϴϬϰϲĂϴ ůŝŬĞ
ϰϭĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϰ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲϱϮĨϳϭĚϳͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴĨĐϭͲϰϵϯĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϬϵϱͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĐϲϵϬϱĚϬ ůŝŬĞ
ĚϳϮĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱĞϳϰďĨĂϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϯĞĂϮͲϰĨϯϬͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďďϭĨͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϵϱϬĚĂĚďϴĨ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
Ϯϵϲ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
DĂĐK^y
ϭϱĐĞϱϲĂĚͲ ϭϬͺϭϲͺϬͿ
ϵϬĞϬͲϰϲϭϯͲ ŚĞĂƚŚĞƌ͘Śŝ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴďϭĂͲ ĐŬŽŬΛǀĞƌ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϳĚϵϮĐϲϴĚ ƚĞǆͲ ,ĞĂƚŚĞƌ ;<,dD>͖
ϳĞĞĐ ƵƐ͘ĐŽŵ ,ŝĐŬŽŬ ůŝŬĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵĂϬďϲϮϳϵͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĐϰϭĨͲϰϭĚĚͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĨĂϳͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϮϭϱϵĨϯϳϱϴ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĂĨď dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϱ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϯϯďϱϮϳϲϵͲ Ϭ
ϲϭϳĐͲϰϬϱϯͲ ;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϵϭĚϬͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϲϵϬďϴϭϮϬ DĂĐK^y
Ğϰϱϭ ϭϬ͘ϭϱ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϳ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϳ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϮĚϲϱϵĨϮĨͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϬĂďϵͲϰĐϳϲͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϵϮϭϯͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͖
ϱĂĨĚĂϳďϰϳ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϳĂĞ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϳ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϳ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ďϰĐĨϴĨϮϯͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϳϭϯϬͲϰϰϬĐͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴϳĨϵͲ ŚƐŽǁŝŶƐŬŝ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ĐϲϮϴϮĚĐϭϰ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ,ĂŶŶĂŚ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϬϭϮ Ğƚ ^ŽǁŝŶƐŬŝ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϴ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϳĞĞϲϳϬϯďͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ĨϯϭϮͲϰϱĞĐͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴĂϳϳͲ ŚƐŽǁŝŶƐŬŝ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϴϵϳĞĨϯϭϵϯ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ,ĂŶŶĂŚ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϲϭϭ Ğƚ ^ŽǁŝŶƐŬŝ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
DĂĐK^y
ϭϮͺϮͺϭͿ
ϰϭϬϭϴϰϴďͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬĞϳĨͲϰϱĨϵͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴďďĞͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϬĨĞϱďϮĨĞ ůŝŬĞ
ďϬϭ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϵ
ϯďĐĞĨϴĞϭͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϴϱϵϳͲϰϱĨĂͲ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ϴϰϰďͲ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϵϱĨĐĚĚϱĐĨ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ĚϭĞϲϭĞĚďͲ Ϭ
ϭϰϬϰͲϰĞϭĐͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϵϴĐϵͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ďϰϵϲϱϲďĞ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϯĂĚϱ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϮϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϮϬ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϭĨϵϰϳϰĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϮϬϰϬͲϰϴĚϴͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĂϳĐĨͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϲϱϬϴϵĂϰϬ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϮϬĂϭ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱĞϳϰďĨĂϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϯĞĂϮͲϰĨϯϬͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďďϭĨͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϵϱϬĚĂĚďϴĨ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
Ϯϵϲ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϭ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϭ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ďĂϰĞϲϱĨϯͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ďϰĞĨͲϰϭϬϮͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďϭĞďͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϴϭϯϴĚĂĐϯĨ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϵϳĚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϮϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϮϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĐďĐďĂĚďĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϭϵϯϯͲϰϬĐϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϵďϴϭͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϬϵĚϲϲϰϳϰ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂĚϱĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϮϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϮϮ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϰϴďϯĂϱĐϳͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϳϮĞĚͲϰϳĂďͲ Ϭ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ϴϭĨϮͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĞĨϵĚϳďϮĚď ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
Ăϴď Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϰ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬďϬϭϴϲĐϰͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďϰϵϵͲϰϰϰϵͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϱϳϲͲ ůŝŬĞ
ĞĚϬϴĂϬĨĐĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
Ğϯϱ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϬϴϴϭϯϴϵĂͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϭĂϰϰͲϰĨϲϴͲ DĂĐK^y
ďĨĐϬͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϰϲĨϰϲĞďĂϬ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϮϴ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϭĨϵϰϳϰĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϮϬϰϬͲϰϴĚϴͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĂϳĐĨͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϲϱϬϴϵĂϰϬ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϮϬĂϭ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ďϱϲϰϵϮĚϯͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϮϴϰĞͲϰϭϭϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ďϳϳϭͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĐĂϵϴϱĚĚĨϯ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐĚĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϭ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϭ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
DĂĐK^y
ϭϮͺϯͺϬͿ
ϲϬϵĞϴĂϳĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϵϯϳͲϰϱĂĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďĂϯϲͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĚϰϬϲĐϳďĂĂ ůŝŬĞ
ϮϬď 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϯϰĐϮϯĂďĐͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϮϳϱϰͲϰϴĚďͲ DĂĐK^y
ϴϮϲϱͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ďϵďĐϮϰϰϱ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϴϲϴ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳĨϮϵϱĐĐĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϳĨϭĐͲϰϲϴϴͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϴĨϯͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϬϮϴĐϬϱϬϯĐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ďĨĐ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬďϬϭϴϲĐϰͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďϰϵϵͲϰϰϰϵͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϱϳϲͲ ůŝŬĞ
ĞĚϬϴĂϬĨĐĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
Ğϯϱ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϰ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϮĚϮϳϴϰϰϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϴϯϰͲϰĐϲϵͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ďϱϯϯͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞĂϮďϱďďϭ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďĂϵĨ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĐĂϭϴϵϬϰϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĚϭĚϯͲϰϲĞĞͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂĨϵĐͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱϭϬϱϰĐĨϰϴ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵĚϭ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳϰϮϴϯĞϯϳͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϭϰϳͲϰĐϮϭͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϵϮϳͲ ůĂƵƌĂ͘ĐŽůĞ ;<,dD>͖
ϯďϭĚϯĨϬϮϲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ůŝŬĞ
ĨϬĨ Ś͘ĐŽŵ >ĂƵƌĂŽůĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲϱϮϯϬĨϰĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱϭϱϮͲϰĨĐĨͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵďϯϬͲ ůĂƵƌĂ͘ĐŽůĞ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϱĚĂϬďϮĂ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ůŝŬĞ
ϴϱϲϲ Ś͘ĐŽŵ >ĂƵƌĂŽůĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϲ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϲ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϰĨĨĂϴϵϬďͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬďϱϳͲϰϯϰϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵĚĞĨͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϱϴϭϰĂϯϳϳĐ ůŝŬĞ
ϭϱϰ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐϴϵďĨϲďϴͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĞϬĂĚͲϰĂϭĐͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϵϵϰͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϱϯĞϴϮϭďĨĐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĞĚϰ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳĨϮϵϱĐĐĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϳĨϭĐͲϰϲϴϴͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϴĨϯͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϬϮϴĐϬϱϬϯĐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ďĨĐ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĐϳĨϰϳϮϴďͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĚĚďĞͲϰĨϳϵͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϵĂϬďͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϱϬϱϲϬϯϯ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϳĐĨĐ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϯ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϮĚϮϳϴϰϰϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϴϯϰͲϰĐϲϵͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ďϱϯϯͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞĂϮďϱďďϭ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďĂϵĨ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϮϵĐϲĚϲϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϭďϭͲϰĨϰϲͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϮďďͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϱĐϬϭďĞϯϱ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϯϱϳϯ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϰ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϮĚϲϱϵĨϮĨͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϬĂďϵͲϰĐϳϲͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϵϮϭϯͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͖
ϱĂĨĚĂϳďϰϳ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϳĂĞ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐϴϵďĨϲďϴͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĞϬĂĚͲϰĂϭĐͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϵϵϰͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϱϯĞϴϮϭďĨĐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĞĚϰ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϮϳϵϱϭĐĂϴͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϱϰĐϵͲϰϮĂĚͲ DĂĐK^y
ϴĂϰϭͲ ϭϬͺϭϬͺϱͿ
ϵĂϴĨĨĨĨĞϳĞ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϯϰ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϲ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
DĂĐK^y
ϭϱĐĞϱϲĂĚͲ ϭϬͺϭϲͺϬͿ
ϵϬĞϬͲϰϲϭϯͲ ŚĞĂƚŚĞƌ͘Śŝ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴďϭĂͲ ĐŬŽŬΛǀĞƌ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϳĚϵϮĐϲϴĚ ƚĞǆͲ ,ĞĂƚŚĞƌ ;<,dD>͖
ϳĞĞĐ ƵƐ͘ĐŽŵ ,ŝĐŬŽŬ ůŝŬĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϳ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϳ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϲĞϭϴϴĐϰͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϲϲϳͲϰĞĚϭͲ ƵƚƚƌĞƐƐ^ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϰϲϰͲ ŚĂƵŶΛ:Ž ;<,dD>͖
ϭĚϯϴďĞϯϵ ŚŶĞĞƌĞ͘Đ ƵƚƚƌĞƐƐ ůŝŬĞ
ϳĂĨϰ Žŵ ^ŚĂƵŶ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϳ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϳ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ĂϴĨϰϱϰϭϵͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ďϬĚϭͲϰϳϱϳͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴϭϲϮͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĂϴϬĚϳϭϳϰ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϭĞϳϲ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳĂϳĂϰϴĚĞͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϭĨϲͲϰϱĐĂͲ ƌĂŶĚĂůů͘ƐŽ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϰϴϬͲ ĚĞƌďĞƌŐΛ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϴĐϯϮĚĨϭϬ ĐĂƉĞůŽŐŝĐ͘ ZĂŶĚĂůů ůŝŬĞ
ϱϳĞ ĐŽŵ ^ŽĚĞƌďĞƌŐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϬ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϴĚĂϭĂϬϳϮͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲϵϳϭͲϰĞϰϬͲ ƌĂŶĚĂůů͘ƐŽ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϳϬϰͲ ĚĞƌďĞƌŐΛ ;<,dD>͖
ϯϲĐĨĞϰďĐĚ ĐĂƉĞůŽŐŝĐ͘ ZĂŶĚĂůů ůŝŬĞ
ϰϴϮ ĐŽŵ ^ŽĚĞƌďĞƌŐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐϲĨĚϵĚϯϲͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĚĞϭϲͲϰϲϬϰͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϲĨϱͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϮϰĂĨĨϮĞϰĐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϳĐĞ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϮϵĐϲĚϲϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϭďϭͲϰĨϰϲͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϮďďͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϱĐϬϭďĞϯϱ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϯϱϳϯ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ďϱĚϮĐĐďĞͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϬĂĚϭͲϰĚďďͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϴĚϬϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϬϵϮϰϵĚϯ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϲϱĂϮ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϮ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĐϳĨϰϳϮϴďͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĚĚďĞͲϰĨϳϵͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϵĂϬďͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϱϬϱϲϬϯϯ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϳĐĨĐ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĚĂϵϯďϵϲϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϭϯϰĚͲϰϯϮϵͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϴϳĨĂͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞĂĞĂϵĚĚϲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϯĨĂϰ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ďϱĚϮĐĐďĞͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϬĂĚϭͲϰĚďďͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϴĚϬϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϬϵϮϰϵĚϯ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϲϱĂϮ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
DĂĐK^y
ϭϮͺϮͺϭͿ
ϰϭϬϭϴϰϴďͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬĞϳĨͲϰϱĨϵͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴďďĞͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďϬĨĞϱďϮĨĞ ůŝŬĞ
ďϬϭ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϲ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ďϰĐĨϴĨϮϯͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϳϭϯϬͲϰϰϬĐͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴϳĨϵͲ ŚƐŽǁŝŶƐŬŝ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ĐϲϮϴϮĚĐϭϰ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ,ĂŶŶĂŚ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϬϭϮ Ğƚ ^ŽǁŝŶƐŬŝ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϳ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϳ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϵϲϴϯĞϯĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϱϮĞĂͲϰĂϰϮͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďďϮϱͲ ůŝŬĞ
ĨĐďϵϭϱϰϴϵ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϬϱĨ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϴ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ĨĂϲϯϰϰϱϭͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϯĞϯĚͲϰϵϲϵͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ĂĂϭϯͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ĨϵĞϵϱϵďĂϴ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϭϲϰ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĂϳĞϯϰĨĂϰͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϲďϬĐͲϰϯϰĂͲ DĂĐK^y
ϵĐĚϱͲ ϭϬͺϭϰͺϲͿ
ĚϴϴϮϬĐϱĞ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮϬϭϭ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϴ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐϲĨĚϵĚϯϲͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĚĞϭϲͲϰϲϬϰͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴϲĨϱͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϮϰĂĨĨϮĞϰĐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϳĐĞ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϴ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ďďĐϱďϵϵϰͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϳďϳͲϰϰĐĚͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴĨϰĂͲ ƚŽŶǇ͘ĐŚŝŽĨ ;<,dD>͖
ϱĨϵϭĚĚĂϴĂ ĂůŽΛƐŵƌƌ dŽŶǇ ůŝŬĞ
ĐϬϯ ĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽŵ ŚŝŽĨĂůŽ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϭĨϴϵϱďϵϯͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂĐĚϴͲϰϱϳĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂĞĐĨͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϯďϬϭϴϮϲĚ ůŝŬĞ
ĐϯĨϱ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϵ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϵ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ďĂϰĞϲϱĨϯͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ďϰĞĨͲϰϭϬϮͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďϭĞďͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϴϭϯϴĚĂĐϯĨ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϵϳĚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĨϵϱĚϰϳϳϰͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ĐďĨϰͲϰϱϮϵͲ DĂĐK^y
ďϰϵϲͲ ůĞǆĂŶĚƌĂ ϭϬͺϭϰͺϲͿ
ĨϬϵϲϮϯϵϮϰ ͘ŽĞΛƐĐŐ ůĞǆĂŶĚƌĂ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϯϱ Đƌď͘ŶĞƚ ŽĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϭ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ĐĐĐϵĨĐϮϭͲ Ϭ
ϱϰĚĚͲϰϭϲϱͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϴϳϳϭͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϬϮďϱϰĨϱϰď tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϳϴϵ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϯ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϯ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϴϲϵϬϴϳϬĐͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϱϴϭͲϰĚϳϴͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϭĞĂͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϭϬĚϭĨϬĚϱϴ ůŝŬĞ
ϲϯϴ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϳϳϳďϵϱĐďͲ Ϭ
ϯϭϮĨͲϰϲϴϵͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĂϳďϴͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĂĂĐϬϴϮϴϴϬ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĂĨĚ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĨĐďϮϭϭϲϬͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϮϮĚĐͲϰĞϱϯͲ DĂĐK^y
ϵϴϬϰͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϮĞϲĨďϴĂϲĨ ƉƉůĞtĞď
Ăϰϰ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϰ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĂĚĞϬϲϯϳϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϭϬϮϭͲϰĐϳĞͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϵĚďϮͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲďϯϲϮϳĚϬ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϯϰĂĐ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϱ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĚĂϵϯďϵϲϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϭϯϰĚͲϰϯϮϵͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϴϳĨĂͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞĂĞĂϵĚĚϲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϯĨĂϰ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϱ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϲĨĚϰϭĐϴĐͲ Ϭ
ϮĚĐϱͲϰĐϭĐͲ ;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĂϵϬϯͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ĚĐďĚĨĂϯďĨ DĂĐK^y
ϭĂĚ ϭϬ͘ϭϯ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϱ
ĂϴϲĚϰϭϯϲͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ϬϳĨĞͲϰϳĂĂͲ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ĂϲϭϳͲ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ϴϭĚϰϮϱϰϱ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϱϴϮĐďϮϵϲͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĚϮϰϴͲϰĚϲϭͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ďϯĐϲͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϴϮϬϳϵϳϯϬ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐϮϳĨ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϲ
ϰϯĂĞϰĐϰϰͲ ^ŝŐŶĂůZ
ĚϬϲϯͲϰϲďϯͲ ĂŶŶĞ͘ƌŽƐƐ ;ůĂŶŐс:ĂǀĂ
ĂĂϲĂͲ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ͖ŽƐсůŝŶƵǆ͖
ĨϱϮϵϴďϱĞϲ Ś͘ĐŽŵ ŶŶĞZŽƐƐ ǀĞƌƐŝŽŶсϮ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϲ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
DĂĐK^y
ϭϮͺϯͺϬͿ
ϲϬϵĞϴĂϳĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϵϯϳͲϰϱĂĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďĂϯϲͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĚϰϬϲĐϳďĂĂ ůŝŬĞ
ϮϬď 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨďĨϮďϱϱĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲĞďϲͲϰĨϬĞͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďĨϴϬͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϭĂϲϯĂĞĚĨĞ ůŝŬĞ
ϭϮĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϬ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϮĐďϲϮĐϰĨͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϴϱϰϭͲϰϮϬϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ďĞϱϭͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϱϵĚďϬĚϴϵ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĞĨϬϭ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϭ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵϲϴĂϵĚĞϰͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĞĚϴϵͲϰĐĐĚͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϬϮĞͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϴϴĂĞĨĨϳďϴ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
Ϭϱϲ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĨϵϲϴϯĞϯĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϱϮĞĂͲϰĂϰϮͲ ;<,dD>͖
ďďϮϱͲ ůŝŬĞ
ĨĐďϵϭϱϰϴϵ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϬϱĨ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϳϰďϬϬϯϯͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϱϮϲϰͲϰĨĐϯͲ ŶŝĐŽůĞ͘ŬŶĂ ;<,dD>͖
ĂϰϱϰͲ ƉƉΛŵǇŵ ůŝŬĞ
ϲϭĨďϵďϮĂϯ ĂŶĂƚĞĞ͘Žƌ EŝĐŽůĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ϯϲϱ Ő <ŶĂƉƉ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϯ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϴϲϵϬϴϳϬĐͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϱϴϭͲϰĚϳϴͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϭĞĂͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϭϬĚϭĨϬĚϱϴ ůŝŬĞ
ϲϯϴ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ĐĐĐϵĨĐϮϭͲ Ϭ
ϱϰĚĚͲϰϭϲϱͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϴϳϳϭͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϬϮďϱϰĨϱϰď tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϳϴϵ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϴ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϵϲĨϯĂϵĞϵͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϬĐϳϱͲϰĞϮϲͲ ϭ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ďϮϵϵͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ĂϭϳĐϮϱϰϱϳ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϵϳϮ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϵ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϳĨϯϴϬϴϴĞͲ Ϭ
ϭďϴϴͲϰϯϳďͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ďϵϭďͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ďϯĞϴĨĂϭĐϮ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϲϲϵ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϮϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϮϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĚϱϮĚϱĐϲĐͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϮϭϱϲͲϰϳďĐͲ DĂĐK^y
ĂϱϱĨͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϭϮϭϯϲϲďϱ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂϰĂĚ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϮϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϮϬ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϬϭϵϰϲϬĞĐͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ĂϵĂďͲϰϴϯďͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϴϵϲϲͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ďϰĨĨĨĞϬϭĂϭ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϯϲ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϮϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϮϮ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ϲϬϱďϮϲĐĞͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϳďϬďͲϰĞĂĂͲ DĂĐK^y
ďϭĨϮͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϰϲϴϯϰϳϲϳ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϬϮϳϮ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϮϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϮϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϱϬďϰϯĞĐĨͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϴϭϳϯͲϰϱĚϰͲ Eϰϰϵϲϵϳ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϭĐϰͲ ΛƐĂƌĂƐŽƚ ZZ ǆϲϰͿ
ĨĚďϱĚϯϱĚď ĂĐŽƵŶƚǇƐĐ :z>zEE ƉƉůĞtĞď
Ěϰϱ ŚŽŽůƐ͘ŶĞƚ EE <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϬ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϬϲϴĞĂϲϬϴͲ Edϲ͘ϭ͖
ϭϴϯďͲϰϲϭϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ďĂϵĚͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϬĚϱϰϮĚϬϯ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϯϴĂ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϬ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϬ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϮϴϰĞϭĞϭϬͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϰϯϱĂͲϰϮĚϴͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϵĚϮϵͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĞĞĞϭϲϵϯĞ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĚϱϮϬ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϭ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϭ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĨĐďϮϭϭϲϬͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϮϮĚĐͲϰĞϱϯͲ DĂĐK^y
ϵϴϬϰͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϮĞϲĨďϴĂϲĨ ƉƉůĞtĞď
Ăϰϰ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϮ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϮĨĂϭϮϮϵϲͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ĂϰĂϯͲϰϯĂϰͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďďďϯͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ĐϬϵϲĚĂϬď ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϱϭϯϮ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϮ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϭϮϮϬĞĐϬĞͲ Ϭ
ϵĐĨďͲϰϳϬϮͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĂĂĂĨͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĂďĚϰϭϵϱϱ tŝŶϲϰ͖
Ϯϯϱϰ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϮ :ŽŝŶĞĚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϳĨϯϴϬϴϴĞͲ Ϭ
ϭďϴϴͲϰϯϳďͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ďϵϭďͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ďϯĞϴĨĂϭĐϮ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϲϲϵ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨϯϭϬϱϴĂĂͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϯϭĚͲϰϭϭďͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϱĚϰͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϲϭϵĨĨĐϳϱĂ ůŝŬĞ
ϲĚĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϴĐďĞďĨϱϳͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭĐϮĚͲϰĚϬϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂĞĂĞͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϭĨϲϯϳϱĞϭϯ ůŝŬĞ
ϵϮϲ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϮ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϳĂϮϭĞĂĂϯͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĚĐϰĚͲϰϳĐĞͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϵϰϲϳͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϯĐďϳϳďϲĂ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮĨϮĐ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϮ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϮ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϵĨĚϳĚĨϴϰͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϳϰϳͲϰϴϬĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďϰϱϯͲ ŬĂƚŝĞ͘ůĂďĂ ;<,dD>͖ ǀĞŶƚ
ϭĂϱϮϴϲϮĞ ƌƌΛƐƚĂŶƚĞ >ĂĂƌƌ͕ ůŝŬĞ dĞĂŵ
ϭĞĂϳ Đ͘ĐŽŵ <ĂƚŝĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ DĞŵďĞƌ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲďĞĚϴϯĨϴͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳϱĂďͲϰϵϴďͲ ŵĂŶĚĂ͘ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϰϬϰͲ ƌĂŶĚŽŶΛƐ ;<,dD>͖ ǀĞŶƚ
ϮϰϯϴĞϯĨϰϭ ƚĂŶƚĞĐ͘ĐŽ ƌĂŶĚŽŶ͕ ůŝŬĞ dĞĂŵ
ϳϯϭ ŵ ŵĂŶĚĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ DĞŵďĞƌ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϬϴĨϯĞĞϵĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϭϮϬďͲϰĞĚĚͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴĨϵϱͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ďĂĞϲϳĂϴĨϭ ƉƉůĞtĞď
Ăϱď <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϭϮϮϬĞĐϬĞͲ Ϭ
ϵĐĨďͲϰϳϬϮͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĂĂĂĨͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĂďĚϰϭϵϱϱ tŝŶϲϰ͖
Ϯϯϱϰ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϲϱϮϯϬĨϰĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱϭϱϮͲϰĨĐĨͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵďϯϬͲ ůĂƵƌĂ͘ĐŽůĞ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϱĚĂϬďϮĂ ΛƐŵƌƌĂŶĐ ůŝŬĞ
ϴϱϲϲ Ś͘ĐŽŵ >ĂƵƌĂŽůĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ϬϬĚĨϮĚϵϲͲ Ϭ
ϳϳďϳͲϰĚĞĨͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ďĂϭϮͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϳĨϱϬĚϭϲϯϵ tŝŶϲϰ͖
Ĩϰϭ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĨĚϯϵϳĚϰĚͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϳďĨĨͲϰϱϵϵͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵĞϴϲͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϱĚϱϱϵϲĂϳ ůŝŬĞ
ĂĚĚϴ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵϲϴĂϵĚĞϰͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĞĚϴϵͲϰĐĐĚͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϬϮĞͲ ůŝŬĞ
ϴϴĂĞĨĨϳďϴ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
Ϭϱϲ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĐĨϰĚĨďĂϯͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϰĨϭϰͲϰďĐϱͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϯϬĞͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĨĨϳĚϯϳϴϬĂ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴϱď <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳϳϲϱϲϰϮĐͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮĨϰϲͲϰĐϴϳͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϮϰĂͲ ƐĐŽƚƚ͘ďƵƚƚ ;<,dD>͖
ϳϯϰϴϰϯϲĐĐ ĂƌŝΛƐƚĂŶƚ ƵƚƚĂƌŝ͕ ůŝŬĞ
Ăϲϯ ĞĐ͘ĐŽŵ ^ĐŽƚƚ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϱĂϭϯϳĞĞĚͲ Edϲ͘ϭ͖
ĨϭϴĂͲϰϭďϳͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĂϲďϱͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϰĂďďϱϴĞĨĚ ƉƉůĞtĞď
Đϳϲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĂĚĞϬϲϯϳϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϭϬϮϭͲϰĐϳĞͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϵĚďϮͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲďϯϲϮϳĚϬ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϯϰĂĐ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϵďϰĨĚĞĂϳͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĞϲϮϬͲϰďϵĂͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϭϲϵͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲϴϱϱĚϳϳĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϮĨĚĚ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĞϭϭĨϲϭϲϬͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϴϱĐͲϰϰϭĨͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴϲϵϳͲ ĚůŽďĞĐŬΛ ;<,dD>͖
ĞϵϮĞĂϱϱϭĐ ůŽďĞĐŬŚĂŶ ůŝŬĞ
ϴĨϰ ƐŽŶ͘ĐŽŵ ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ĂϰϬĞďďϮďͲ Ϭ
ĚϲĂϬͲϰϳϯĞͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϴϭϰϲͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĨϭϭϬϰϴϭĂĞ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĨϮϮ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
ϵϬĞďϬϯϵϴͲ dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϳϭĐďͲϰĐϲĚͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ĂĐĂϬͲ Ϭ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ĨϬϭĚĂϱϵĐϳ ŝK^ϭϰ͘ϰ͖
ϱϯϵ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ĂϳĞϯϰĨĂϰͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ϲďϬĐͲϰϯϰĂͲ DĂĐK^y
ϵĐĚϱͲ ϭϬͺϭϰͺϲͿ
ĚϴϴϮϬĐϱĞ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮϬϭϭ <ŝƚͬϲϬϱ͘ϭ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳĨϮϳϰĚϯĨͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϮϰϲϳͲϰĚϱĞͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ďϵĐϮͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϴĐϳϴϬϰϲĂϴ ůŝŬĞ
ϰϭĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďďĂϲϴĂĨϮͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϮϳĂϳͲϰϳϮϴͲ ŵŝŬĞ͘ďůĂĐ ;<,dD>͖
ďĂĞĚͲ ŬƌŝĐŬΛƐŵ ůŝŬĞ
ϴϲϵϵϳϴϭĨϭ ƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘ĐŽ DŝŬĞ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ
ĂϳĚ ŵ ůĂĐŬƌŝĐŬ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ďϱϲϰϵϮĚϯͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϮϴϰĞͲϰϭϭϯͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ďϳϳϭͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĐĂϵϴϱĚĚĨϯ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐĚĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϭĨϴϵϱďϵϯͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĂĐĚϴͲϰϱϳĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂĞĐĨͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϯďϬϭϴϮϲĚ ůŝŬĞ
ĐϯĨϱ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
ďĂϵďϴĨĐĞͲ Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
ĞϲďϳͲϰĂϲĐͲ DĂĐK^y
ϵϲϳϮͲ ϭϬͺϭϱͺϳͿ
ϱϬϭϮϴϵĚĞ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϰϰĞϵ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϯ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϴĚĂϭĂϬϳϮͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲϵϳϭͲϰĞϰϬͲ ƌĂŶĚĂůů͘ƐŽ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϳϬϰͲ ĚĞƌďĞƌŐΛ ;<,dD>͖
ϯϲĐĨĞϰďĐĚ ĐĂƉĞůŽŐŝĐ͘ ZĂŶĚĂůů ůŝŬĞ
ϰϴϮ ĐŽŵ ^ŽĚĞƌďĞƌŐ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ĐϬϴϯĐϭϮϯͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ĐĞϰϵͲϰĚϳĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĂϮϯϮͲ ďŚĂƌƌŝŶŐ ;<,dD>͖
ϮĚĨϬϲϲĐϯϲ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ƌĞƚƚ ůŝŬĞ
Ăďϲ Ğƚ ,ĂƌƌŝŶŐƚŽŶ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
ĞĨĞϵϭĂϳϵͲ Ϭ
ϴϬĚϬͲϰďϯϳͲ ;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϴϳĞĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϳϯϵĞďϮϳĚ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĞϭϵĞ ǆϲϰ͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tKtϲϰͿ
ƉƉůĞtĞď
ďϯĨϬϲďϰϱͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ĐĚϱĚͲϰĞϲϬͲ ;<,dD>͖
ϵĚϲϵͲ ŵŝůǇ͘,ĞŶ ůŝŬĞ ǀĞŶƚ
ϬϬϳĚϮďϭϴ ŬĞΛƐƚĂŶƚ ,ĞŶŬĞ͕ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ dĞĂŵ
ϮϮϮϱ ĞĐ͘ĐŽŵ ŵŝůǇ dĞĂŵƐͬϭ͘ϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ DĞŵďĞƌ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĚĨĞϴĂϴďϭͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϯĐϱϵͲϰϯϱϬͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϯϰϳͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϳĂĐďĂϳϲϯ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϵĂď <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϰ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĂďϰĞďϳϴϵͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϭϬĨĂͲϰĐĂďͲ ƐƵǌĂŶŶĞ͘Ĩ ǆϲϰͿ
ďϱϬĐͲ ƵŐĂƚĞΛƐ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲĐϬϰϵĐĚĚĐ ŵƌƌĂŶĐŚ͘Đ ^ƵǌĂŶŶĞ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϯďϯ Žŵ &ƵŐĂƚĞ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
tŝŶϲϰ͖
ǆϲϰͿ
ϳϮϴϴĂϬϵϱͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϴϱĚϮͲϰĂϰĐͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϵϬϳϰͲ ĂŵĞƐƐŝŶĂ ;<,dD>͖
ϵϱϰϲĐϮϮϮ ΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘Ŷ ŶĂ ůŝŬĞ
ϴďϭĨ Ğƚ DĞƐƐŝŶĂ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϰ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϭϱďďϮϭϴĐͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϱĚϵďͲϰϵϵĂͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ĂĚďϬͲ ŵĂƚƚ͘Đƌŝŵ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĨϳĐĨϯϯďďϵ ΛƐƚĂŶƚĞĐ͘ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϳďĐ ĐŽŵ ƌŝŵ͕DĂƚƚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϰ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ;yϭϭ͖
ƌK^
ĐϱϮĚϯϲĞϲͲ ǆϴϲͺϲϰ
ϮϭϰϴͲϰϵϰϴͲ ϭϰϰϲϵ͘ϰϭ͘
ϵĂϴϰͲ ϬͿ
ϲĚĐϮĂϱϱϲĂ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϯĞϴ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϱ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϱ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ϯϴĐϵďϳϮϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϮϲϲĐͲϰϰĞϬͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϯϵϱͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϮϮϮϬϴϵϱ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϲĞĂĨ ;<,dD>͖ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϲ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϮĚϬϭϲĨĚĐͲ EdϭϬ͘Ϭ͖
ĚĞĚϭͲϰĞĚϴͲ EϯϴϱϯϰϬ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ϴϲϬϱͲ ΛƐĂƌĂƐŽƚ W,z ǆϲϰͿ
ĂϱϰϵĂϮϱϬ ĂĐŽƵŶƚǇƐĐ >K'E ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϱďϮĨ ŚŽŽůƐ͘ŶĞƚ >>E <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϳ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϳ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϯĂϲϲϴϴϬĞͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ĂϯϰĂͲϰϭϲďͲ ϭ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ϴϮĚϳͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϮĨϬϳĞϵĨϲϮ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ĂϰĚ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϴ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϴ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ĂĐĂϳĐϵϵďͲ Edϲ͘ϯ͖
ϳĂϳĚͲϰϬĂďͲ EϯϴϱϯϰϬ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ĂϲϰĨͲ ΛƐĂƌĂƐŽƚ W,z ǆϲϰͿ
ĚĐĚĂϭĂĂϮϱ ĂĐŽƵŶƚǇƐĐ >K'E ƉƉůĞtĞď
Ϯϳϲ ŚŽŽůƐ͘ŶĞƚ >>E <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϯϵ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϯϵ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϮĨĂϭϮϮϵϲͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ĂϰĂϯͲϰϯĂϰͲ Ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ďďďϯͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ĐϬϵϲĚĂϬď ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ϱϭϯϮ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϰϰ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϰϰ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϮĞĂϮϴϱϱϭͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϱ͘
ϰĚϰϲͲϰĞϭĚͲ ϭ;ŝWŚŽŶĞ͖
ϵϯϲĚͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϯ͘ϭ͖
ϯϬĨĚϯϲϯϵϵ ^ĐĂůĞͬϯ͘ϬϬ
ďϰϰ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϱϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϱϯ
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;tŝŶĚŽǁƐ
ϬϲϴĞĂϲϬϴͲ Edϲ͘ϭ͖
ϭϴϯďͲϰϲϭϲͲ tŝŶϲϰ͖
ďĂϵĚͲ ǆϲϰͿ
ϬĚϱϰϮĚϬϯ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϭϯϴĂ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϱϯ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϱϯ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DŽǌŝůůĂͬϱ͘
Ϭ
;DĂĐŝŶƚŽƐ
Ś͖/ŶƚĞů
DĂĐK^y
ϭϭͺϲͺϬͿ
ĞϭĨϯϬϭϴĂͲ ƉƉůĞtĞď
ϲϲĂϯͲϰϳďϳͲ <ŝƚͬϱϯϳ͘ϯϲ
ϴĨϰĨͲ ;<,dD>͖
ĐĐϵϮĨϲĨϵϰ ůŝŬĞ
ϰĚĨ 'ĞĐŬŽͿ ϰͬϴͬϮϬϮϮϬ͗Ϭϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗Ϭϲ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϰϴďϯĂϱĐϳͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘ϲ͘
ϳϮĞĚͲϰϳĂďͲ Ϭ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ϴϭĨϮͲ ŝK^ϭϱ͘ϰ͘ϭ͖
ĞĨϵĚϳďϮĚď ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
Ăϴď Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϴͬϮϬϮϮϬ͗ϰϳ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϬ͗ϰϳ
dĞĂŵ^ƉĂĐ
ϴϭϴϳϱĨϰϰͲ ĞƉƉͬϰ͘Ϯ͘
ϲĨďϴͲϰĨĞĞͲ ϯ;ŝWĂĚ͖
ĂϬϱĞͲ ŝK^ϭϰ͘ϳ͘ϭ͖
ϴĨďϬϰĨϰďϬ ^ĐĂůĞͬϮ͘ϬϬ
ϲϲϵ Ϳ͖^ŝŐŶĂůZ͘ ϰͬϴͬϮϬϮϮϭ͗ϭϲ >ĞĨƚ ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϭ͗ϭϲ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
10.6 Summary of Workshop

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
To: Sarasota County Planning and From: Katie LaBarr, AICP

Development Services Stantec
Project/File: Lakewood Ranch Southeast Date: April 11, 2022

Reference: Neighborhood Workshop Synopsis
Stantec Consulting Services Inc. conducted a Neighborhood Workshop on Thursday, April 7, 2022.
The meeting was held virtually, via Microsoft Teams, at 6:00 p.m. Approximately 56 individuals were in
attendance.
Katie LaBarr (Agent) conducted the meeting and began with introductions of the consultant team and staff,
followed by an overview of the Project and details on the proposed requests for the Project:
x Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to create a new Resource Management Area (RMA)
designation, the Village Transition Zone (VTZ)
x Comprehensive Plan Large-Scale Map Amendment to change the RMA designation of the
subject property from Hamlet and Greenway to VTZ and Greenway as well as move the
Countryside Line
x Development of Critical Concern (DOCC) and Master Development Order/VTZ Master Plan to
provide a framework for the proposed large-scale development
The following individuals were also present on behalf of the Applicant:
i. Kyle Grimes, Esq., Attorney – Grimes Hawkins Gladfelter & Galvano, P.L.
ii. Katie LaBarr, AICP, Planner – Stantec
iii. Emily Henke, PLA, Planner – Stantec
iv. Scott Buttari, PLA, LEED AP, Landscape Architect – Stantec
v. Matt Crim, PE, PTOE, Traffic Engineer – Stantec
vi. Rob Engel, PE, Engineer – Stantec
vii. Christopher Kennedy, Environmental Scientist – Ardurra
Following the Agent’s presentation, the meeting was opened to the attendees to make comments and/or
ask the team questions regarding the proposed development. The following is a summarized list of the
questions asked and responses given, sectioned by theme. The Applicant’s representatives’ responses are
shown in bold.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Comments:
1. I oppose the proposed countryside line move and the expansion of Village RMA into the areas
currently designated as Hamlet
2. This is not much of a public workshop if the moderator approves the question. A true public
workshop would post all of the questions publicly so we can all read what is being asked. Instead it
seems to be more of a public sales job.
3. For the record I am OPPOSED to this density increase.
4. I am opposed to any increase in density.
5. This is the only opportunity to engage. The Planning and County Commissioners do not answer
questions during the hearings.
6. What happened to the audio?
7. At least 2600
8. Bern Creek adheres to the 2050 master plan aren't we the friendly transition to hamlet already?
9. Isn't this a scheme to not only get higher densities but also to be relieved from the public interest
requirements of the Sarasota 2050 Plan, just one example being a professional analysis, peer-
reviewed by a County expert, demonstrating that the development will be fiscally neutral?
10. I cannot continue at this time, so I’d just like to say that I oppose this entire proposal. The best use
for this property would be if the Conservation Foundation were able to acquire it and re-wild the
entire parcel.
11. Because you don't live there, you brush this aside as previously done. This is not a question, but a
sad fact.
12. My questions are being marked "Private" and as such do not appear in the "Featured" questions. I
tried to repost it that way but cannot (hence the one repeat question). Does it go public only when
you choose it to answer? Thank you.
13. Such a significant change to the 2050 Plan should have a robust process of public input - not just
comments at public hearings.
14. Here's a concept: dont develop our countryside! The folks out here would likely support 3-5 acre
lots but anything more is a threat to our lifestyle
15. Take a drive out east and look at the sky... No streetlights. Go to LWR and do the same thing. We
moved here for a reason.
16. Lies
17. No you didn't.
18. You didn't identify what the amenities would be. Thank you.
19. I challenge you to challenge your "beliefs." "we believe, we believe." Sure.
20. Y'all sound tired and worn down. We feel the same about your development plans. ::hugs::
21. I have been contacted by several people that were unable to join the online workshop. I had
difficulty and have also been bumped off numerous times. This workshop has not been adequate
in terms of pubic access. If people get rejected in accessing the meeting, get bumped off, or
otherwise cannot easily access this required meeting, I believe it is inadequate.
22. Sorry for the math mistake, in my above question: I meant to write 50% of 3900 is 1,950
developable acres and X 2 equals 3900 units
23. I think it is not realistic to pretend that this "Transition Zone" will not be applied to other properties.
This proposal totally breaks the 2050 Plan.
24. It is a falsehood to assert that affordable housing cannot be required by state statute, as a condition
for the increase in base density. That increase in base density of course will more than enough to
compensate the developer for the affordable housing provided, as required by the law. Please
respond, this time truthfully.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: Thank you for your comments.
Requests:
1. Ron Lambert rlambert@mailmt.com. 941-400-4303. Call any time. I'd love to hear your gobbly-
goop.
2. Please give me notice of all future hearings, meetings, etc. on this matter. Susan Schoettle
spgumm@mailmt.com
3. Please include ManaSota88@comcast.net in any future meeting notifications. We hold a
conservation easement within the Southeast Project site and did not receive notice of this meeting.
4. If someone was not included on the mailing list, please tell them to contact planner@scgov.net to
be added to the mailing list. Thank you
5. My email is: mph_04@verizon.net for a written copy of the questions and answers.
6. Also please distribute all questions and answers that come to you after this meeting to all attendees
of this meeting.
Response: Thank you for your comments.
Compatibility:
1. This proposal does not match the existing home and land use in this area. Please elaborate on how
this proposal supports the existing residents and landowners?
Response: The intent is to commit to 50% open space for the overall project and to include
greenbelts along the edges of the project to ensure compatibility with the adjacent land
uses.
Concept Plan:
1. The Development Concept Plan Legend says purple is ROW are the 9 purple spots shown on the
Development Concept Plan ROW?
2. What are the purple blobs on the map?
Response: The lighter purple color on the concept plan represents potential amenity areas
in the development. The darker purple line represents the proposed right-of-way.
3. The on-screen Development Concept Plan boundaries differ from those shown on the development
concept plan in the workshop notice documents - which boundaries are correct.
Response: The concept plan you currently see on the screen is correct. The proposed
project added land in the Northwest corner of the site to help ensure that there is connection
for the extension of Bourneside Boulevard.
4. You state that this new development will have 50% open space, but your map does not appear to
show 50% open space.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: That is the text of the proposal and will be part of our commitment and the
development review process.
5. You do not show any 500-foot buffer along the eastern boundary of your proposed plan. What will
be done along that eastern boundary?
6. There is buffer space along the border with Bern Creek but no buffer on the other boundaries -
why?
7. The north east corner of your development does not show buffer. Is the green space north of your
development (red line) permanent Green space??
Response: When we have concept plans at such a scale, sometimes it may be difficult to
really understand or see the separation along the different edges, but we will include details
in our application, with our master development plan, that addresses these edge conditions.
We assure you that proper buffering will be completed throughout the site.
8. Are you building a wall around this community?
Response: At this point, we do not know what type of buffers will be included for the
Bern Creek:
1. Why is there a large undeveloped area just north of Bern Creek depicted on the Development
Concept Plan?
2. What do you plan to do on the open space area north of Bern Creek rural homesteads?
3. How is the 570-acre conservation easement north of Bern Creek (from FPL settlement) being
handled?
Response: The area in question, north of Bern Creek, is intended to be a part of the 50%
open space provision.
4. There is a conservation easement south of Bern Creek. Is it going to change? Is there going to be a
water pumping station on this easement?
5. I am looking at the Staff Report Dec. 10, 2014 presented to the BCC. Can you tell me where the
pump station is identified.
Response: Regarding the water pumping station – that is going to be constructed within the
area the question is referencing (i.e. to the eastern end of the area). The area referred to
south of Bern Creek is proposed to be open space.
Environment:
1. Will you be providing a wildlife underpasses on the new road?

2. What about wildlife corridor? It seems to be homes from district lines to line
Response: These are details that would be addressed during the construction plan review,
but it’s important to note that the concept plan does contemplate ribbons of green space
throughout the site, to provide interconnected corridors for wildlife and protected species.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
3. Will all development, including roadways, adhere to dark skies principles with shaded lights and
downward only lighting.
Response: Anything that is required by Sarasota County UDC will be complied with at the
time of development.
4. Have you considered a conservation kind of subdivision, like Babcock Ranch, where all buildings
will be clustered and all green space will be clustered?
Response: What we propose is really in keeping with a lot of the goals and objectives of
developments like Babcock Ranch, and we believe that what will come to bear during this
development will be similar in nature.
Housing:
1. What about affordable housing? How long will it take for the sheriff, EMS and Fire get there and
who will pay for added services
2. Please elaborate on "incentivized community housing" - number of units, requirements for housing,
etc.
3. Will missing middle housing types be provided?
4. Is there any affordable housing in Lakewood ranch now?
Response: Affordable/Community housing will be offered on a voluntary basis with the

incentives that are provided for in the UDC. There is an overall cap of 5,000 dwelling units
on the property, which includes any community housing.
Response times for sheriff, EMS, fire, etc. are evaluated during the review process, and in
even greater detail at time of rezone. The cost of these services will be contemplated in the
fiscal neutrality study that we will prepare and submit for review.
Question regarding missing middle housing – we are proposing a range of housing types
including townhomes, semi-detached, and other single-family products.
Lakepark Estates
1. What is happening to Lakepark Estates that was previously approved and construction started in
January 2022?
2. Will Lakepark Phase 2 and Phase 3 change? The new higher density?
3. Has LWR purchased Lakepark Estates?
Response: Lakewood Ranch has not purchased Lakepark Estates. Lakepark Estates will be
incorporated into the Village Transition Zone; however, it’s not going to cause any changes
to Phase One that has already been approved. We are working with staff on how to facilitate
this through the proper language.
Policy:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
1. Cover letter states your proposed policy changes “will offer a more meaningful transition to the
hamlet development to the east.” Can you elaborate on what you mean by a more meaningful
transition?
2. 2050 Plan policies were that Hamlet transitioned between Village and rural development. How
does an increase in density achieve this policy goal?
Response: The goal of these amendments is to allow for a form of development that is very
similar to what is observed in Lakewood Ranch. We propose to do this by creating the
Village Transition Zone, which will be limited to the subject property and be slightly less
dense than the Village designation and slightly more dense than the Hamlet designation.
This zone will allow for a maximum base density of 2 dwelling units per gross developable
acre, not to exceed a maximum unit count of 5,000 units. The amendments will also include
incentive community housing.
3. You have described various characteristics of this new Future Land Use Map category. Will they all
be mandatory or are you simply expressing the present intent of the Lakewood Ranch developer?
Example: "Housing will be made available at a variety of price points." What policy if any is
proposed. Will anything be required for truly affordable housing, and if so what, or are we talking
about so-called "attainable housing" which is affordable to a family of 120% Area Median Income,
that is earning well over $100,000 a year? Again, please respond to the broader question as to
whether everything you describe will be required in Comp Plan policies, and then as to my specific
question on affordable housing. Thank you.
4. What does your "commitment" mean? Does that mean you will positively commit and put in
writing?
Response: As we indicated in this presentation, part of this Comprehensive Plan

Amendment is to create a Village Transition Zone which will include text on incentives for
affordable housing, following the same basis outlined in the UDC. There will not be a
mandate for affordable housing as that is no longer allowed in Florida Statute. All
application materials are made available to the public and published on the County website,
so you’ll have the opportunity to review our policy language once it is formally submitted for
staff review.
5. Does this comp plan amendment limited to your 3900 acres, or does it change other rural lands.
6. Is this the last proposal of the Lakewood Ranch developer to extend suburban sprawl further to the
east, or is the door open to it pushing further in the years after this is approved? What, if any, is the
limit? Verna Road? DeSoto County?
7. Even though this is the last of lands owned by SMR as you state, aren't you actually creating a
whole new development category in the 2050 plan that will set a precedent for other large area
rural land developers? Also, this is not responsible Urban development as adding density in this
amendment does not provide appropriate transition to the rural lands.
8. Is there a figure you can provide that would express the total number of dwelling units in the entire
Lakewood Ranch project - both in Manatee and in Sarasota counties? I..e. do you have a terminus
ad quem, or do you intend to create more communities on open lands that are not now identified in
known plans?
Response: The Village Transition Zone / Comprehensive Plan Amendment is limited to the
property boundary shown on our concept plan.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Process:
1. What is the process by which the public and its elected officials will discuss, analyze, and approve
or deny this new category added by the developer to the Comp Plan?
Response: We will apply for a Comprehensive Plan Map and Text amendment, which will be
fully vetted by County staff and then heard by the Planning Commission and Board of
County Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC will hear the application twice, one for
transmittal and one for adoption. Public comment is welcome at all public hearings.
2. When do you anticipate submitting applications?
Response: We are currently preparing these applications. We expect to submit in the very
near future, within the next thirty to sixty days.
3. You mentioned commercial development... At what point do you expect to begin asking for
exceptions to plans to allow for commercial development?
Response: We will not be asking for any exceptions for commercial development.
4. If this goes ahead, when will initial land clearing begin
Response: We are at the beginning of the review process, so it is too early to tell when initial
clearing may begin.
Public Participation:
1. What can the local resident do to keep growth to a minimum? Thank you
2. So how can I submit more questions and receive answers?
3. How can we stop your request for zoning changes and keep our open-use-estate classification? No
one wants to see more development out here. Do any of you live in these areas.
Response: There are several opportunities for public engagement and input throughout this
process. The first is through tonight’s workshop where we are looking for feedback from the
community. There will also be opportunities for residents to speak to the Planning
Commission and Board of County Commissioners as these applications move though the
public hearing review process.
4. There is a reason we moved to Bern Creek and not Lakewood Ranch. Have you considered how
your project impacts residents like us?
Response: Yes, the intent would be to provide appropriate buffering adjacent to each of the
particular boundary conditions. We will provide the specific details in our application.
Transportation:
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
1. How will this project improve hurricane evacuation clearance times for existing Sarasota County
residents?
2. Wouldn't an additional road extending east to Verna Road assist in an evacuation event?
Response: This project may improve hurricane evacuation clearance times, by providing a
regional corridor connecting University Parkway to Fruitville Road, via Bourneside
Boulevard. Bourneside Boulevard currently extends all the way to State Road 64, so
providing that north-south corridor for cross county transportation may be beneficial.
3. What are the plans for adding lanes on University? Will there be a light on Bourneside?
4. Please elaborate on any traffic studies that have been done. Fruitville Rd. is extremely congested
as is and cannot accommodate the growth you are proposing
5. What considerations are planned for the widening of Fruitville rd as this project will introduce 2600
new vehicles on that road. Thats providing for 2 cars per household.
6. promised 4 lanes to the end of Fruitville rd by 2010 has not been accomplished. Traffic, etc, are
very concerning for those of us that live out east. Your requirement of traffic studies may fail as
previously. stated. the situation is dangerous and irresponsible. what realistic care and promises
will you do?
7. I'm concerned about traffic. There's so much congestion already. Can our roads handle this?
8. Will this mean that University will get extended East to meet I 70
Response: A traffic study has not been completed at this point but will be conducted at the
appropriate time in the application process. Intersection improvements are yet to be
determined. We will coordinate with Sarasota County to evaluate the best type of
intersection control.
9. Just confirming, the purple road indicated is Bourneside continuation?
Response: That is correct.
10. Will the taxpayers be footing the bill to widen Fruitville Road to handle the traffic from your
development? Or will the developer pay for road improvements to Fruitville Road.
Response: Sarasota County has transportation mobility fees, which will be paid during
development. These fees will be utilized by Sarasota County to pay for any required
roadway improvement.
11. Will all on-site roads and other facilities be funded by a CDD as other Lakewood Ranch areas?
12. Is this area going to be a taxing district like much of LWR?
Response: Roadways throughout the community will be constructed both with the
Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District, as well as private development.
13. What is FDOT's role in approving these plans?
Response: None of these roadways touch state rights-of-way, so they would have no role in
this process.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
14. Why has the East West proposed road to Verna Road been eliminated?
Response: This road has not been eliminated. We believe that the proposed alignment, as
seen on the concept plan, is a more context-sensitive alignment. We will be providing a stub
that will allow for the off-site extension of the East-West road over to Verna.
Water:
1. Will this development affect the wastewater system off Bee Ridge Rd?
2. Will the suggested waste water plant be within the outlined property? if so, where
Response: We are currently going through a utility master planning process with Sarasota
County. It is anticipated that this development will require an additional wastewater line that
will bring the wastewater from this property to the Bee Ridge wastewater plant.
3. Do you plan to augment the water in the lakes shown? Will the lakes be lined to prevent lateral
seepage and damage to surrounding areas?
Response: This question involves details that have not been determined yet, but
augmentation of lakes and/or lining of lakes is not anticipated. These details will come later
in the review process.
4. Please elaborate on the water run off studies that have been done to ensure that new
homesites/development do not have a negative impact on existing home and land owners
5. Bern Creek is very wet area during the rainy season, how do you plan to mitigate your water run
off?
Response: Through the process that we are starting here and then followed by the site and
development plan review process, we will be required to go through an evaluation of the
drainage of both existing and proposed drainage patterns. We will go through a rigorous
review, by both Sarasota County and the South Florida Water Management District 1, and
ultimately receive a permit before we can start construction. There are strict criteria to
ensure that there are no negative impacts off-site.
6. Why not require xeriscaping in your development to save water and reduce fertilizers in the
stormwater runoff which pollutes our bays and gulf?
Response: That’s a great suggestion. Thank you for your comment.
Misc.:
1. Who is the developer of this community? What is the estimated price range of the homes? Will all
the development be single family homes?
Response: The developer is our client, Lakewood Ranch Communities (Master Developer is
Schroeder Manatee Ranch). At this time, given where we are at in the review process,
estimated price range of homes is yet to be determined, but it is our intent to provide a
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
variety of housing types including single-family detached, semi-detached, villas, and

attached townhomes.
2. "VOS Policy 5.2 Protected Roadway Character requires open vistas and protect the integrity of the
rural character of Fruitville Road/SR 780 east of Dog Kennel Road, now called Lorraine Road. How
will you accomplish this? Already, Lake Park Estates has not protected the rural character of
Fruitville Road. Will construction continue at Lake Park Estates and go west or will Lakewood
Ranch build eat or both? What is the build out date? Is Lakewood Ranch currently at build out
density? While the western boundary is urban, the proposed area of change, 3,900 acres, is
surrounded by rural lands that may currently have livestock. How will you mitigate the construction
noises such as continual diesel engines on large equipment and the backup beepers that will most
likely startle the livestock? I believe there is already such a problem around the Polo Club,
frightening the horses. What water source will be used to irrigate the lawns? Fruitville Road is
currently listed as a constrained road. How many more vehicles will be added to Fruitville Road due
to this proposed density increase? Fruitville Road is an evacuation route. What analysis was
conducted to determine what the additional traffic would do to reduce evacuation times? Thank
you,
Becky Ayech
President Miakka Community Club
Did SMR or Lakewood Ranch challenge the 2050 Amendment? Why or why not? What has
changed since the adoption of 2050 that necessitates thing proposed Comprehensive Plan
Amendment? The waterbodies colored blue are called stormwater on the Development Concept
Plan. How many are there? What is the total acreage? What is the average size? Will they dry
down since they are stormwater? Or will they be augmented? If augmented, from where will the
water come? How will you manage the mosquitoes? Will the HOA or another entity prohibit mowing
to the edge of the stormwater ponds/waterbodies? What will lawn fertilizer applications or
restrictions be? Who will enforce? You portray this as a transition. 2050 defines Hamlets as a
transition form of development intended to blend toward the more rural eastern area of the County.
Why do you need a different type of transition form of development? Two units an acre does not
blend with rural. It is urban sprawl. Bill Spaeth, retired Sarasota Planner identified Lake park
Estates as urban sprawl. This is urban sprawl times 2. If adopted, this will become a creeping of
urban density that will use the same reasoning for extending urban development throughout the
Rural area identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Why can’t the 1,000-acre development,
Lake Park Estates remain with a density cap of 400 dwelling units on 1 unit per acre? Why don’t
you build up and not out? What amenities will be provided? Where are they located on the
Development Concept Plan? Lake Park Estates is currently under construction. If the proposed
Amendment is approved, when will the next phase begin? Will the infrastructure be in phases or
done all at once? How many water tanks need to be built so the water pressure is sufficient for fire
suppression? Where will they be located? What will they look like? Will you be able to see them or
will they be screened? Lake Park Estates was required to have one pressure tank that would be
located along Fruitville Road.
3. How exactly is this an example of smart growth? Sincere question.
4. How is this a smart growth effort? Will there be objective environmental impact studies? Who will
pay for infrastructure? Please include accident and incident reports within 5 miles for last 5 years.
Btw this was difficult to get into
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: We’ll try to go through the majority of these questions. To begin, it is proposed
that the irrigation will be handled by Braden River Utilities. We are also working through the
details of getting reclaimed water from the County.
For the questions on construction noise, startling livestock, etc. – we hear these concerns
and they will be addressed at the time of formal development. We are still working through
the details on the buffers and greenbelts.
For the question on 2050 - the 2050 regulations were adopted in 2002, about 20 years ago.
Things change and sometimes adjustments are needed, and we believe these adjustments
that we are proposing are appropriate for long term compatible development.
For the questions on stormwater/water – This concept plan is conceptual in nature, it is not
engineered at this point. We do not have the details on stormwater needs, management, etc.
yet, so we can’t speak to it.
For the questions on street lighting/design – Again, this is a question that comes up later in
the process, but I can assure you, any design elements like this will be in compliance.
For the questions on smart growth, we do believe this is a form of smart growth.
5. Because the comp plans calls for an interconnected trail system in the rural lands, will these trails
be open to the general public and be available to the equestrians.
Response: Final details have not been planned yet, but we expect that there would be a
combination of both public and private trails. Equestrian-capable trails has not yet been
contemplated.
6. How many acres of the 3900 acres are deemed "developable" acres? If 50% is deemed OPEN
SPACE and not developable, does that mean the developable acres are 1850 acres , and total
units 3900? ie 2 X 1850 DEVELOPABLE ACRES
Response: In round numbers, yes this is correct.
7. Will there be competitive bidding for all engineering aspects?
Response: Anything constructed by the Stewardship District will be required to go through

the public bid process, per State Statutes.
8. Why no commercial development?

9. Publix puts in a store for every 3000 houses, Why would you say there will be no commercial
development?
Response: At this time, we are not proposing commercial development because we think it
is vital to support the existing commercial that’s been built on Lorrain Road, University
Parkway, and Waterside.
10. Can you share how many people are on this call?
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Response: Currently, there are 29 URL attendees, this was as high as 59 at one point. There
are 7 call-in attendees.
11. What is the email of the person who invited us to submit further questions through email?
12. Will you provide a written record of the questions and answers - including those not addressed
during the live meeting?
13. Will a recording or transcript of this session be available to the public?
14. Will *all* questions and comments be made available to residents and County Commissioners?
Response: All the questions submitted during this meeting will be recorded and submitted
in our application materials. These materials, as well as the recording and transcript, will be
available to the public. You can contact me, Katie LaBarr, with any questions, comments, or
concerns regarding the project at Katie.Labarr@stantec.com or (941) 907-6900.
Respectfully yours,
Katie LaBarr, AICP

Phone: 941-907-6900
Katie.LaBarr@stantec.com
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
dŝŵĞŽƌƌĞĐƚĞĚ
;ƐƵďƚƌĂĐƚĞĚϰ ŽŶǀĞƌƐĂƚŝŽ
^ŽƵƌĐĞ dǇƉĞ /ĚĞŶƚŝƚǇ ŚŽƵƌƐͿ dŝŵĞƐƚĂŵƉ Ŷ/Ě ŽŶƚĞŶƚ
ϴĐϴϰϳϯĨϱͲ /ƚŚŝŶŬŝƚŝƐŶŽƚƌĞĂůŝƐƚŝĐƚŽ
ϳϮϵϲͲϰĚĐĐͲ ƉƌĞƚĞŶĚƚŚĂƚƚŚŝƐΗdƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶ
^ƵƐĂŶ ϴĐϮϴͲ ŽŶĞΗǁŝůůŶŽƚďĞĂƉƉůŝĞĚƚŽ
^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ϴϵĐϮĨϮϮϴϯϲĚ ŽƚŚĞƌƉƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐ͘dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂů
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϮϮ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϮϮ Ϭ ƚŽƚĂůůǇďƌĞĂŬƐƚŚĞϮϬϱϬWůĂŶ͘
ϮĨϵϰϮĐĂϮͲ
ĞĂϭϴͲϰĨĨĨͲ ůƐŽƉůĞĂƐĞĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚĞĂůů
^ƵƐĂŶ ĂϭĞϲͲ ƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚĂŶƐǁĞƌƐƚŚĂƚ
^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ϵĞϯϲϱďĐĚĚϱ ĐŽŵĞƚŽǇŽƵĂĨƚĞƌƚŚŝƐŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϵ ĂϮ ƚŽĂůůĂƚƚĞŶĚĞĞƐŽĨƚŚŝƐŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͘
ϱϲĨϭϰϴϱϲͲ tŝůůǇŽƵƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂǁƌŝƚƚĞŶ
ϲϴϱϵͲϰϵϭĐͲ ƌĞĐŽƌĚŽĨƚŚĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚ
^ƵƐĂŶ ϵĨϳďͲ ĂŶƐǁĞƌƐͲŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚŚŽƐĞŶŽƚ
^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ďϭϭĨĚϬϴϯϭĚ ĂĚĚƌĞƐƐĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞůŝǀĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϴ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϴ ϳϮ ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͍
ϰϵϯĚĚϴϰϴͲ ^ŽƌƌǇĨŽƌƚŚĞŵĂƚŚŵŝƐƚĂŬĞ͕ŝŶ
ϱϮĞϳͲϰϬĚϯͲ ŵǇĂďŽǀĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ͗/ŵĞĂŶƚƚŽ
ĂĞϭϮͲ ǁƌŝƚĞϱϬйŽĨϯϵϬϬŝƐϭ͕ϵϱϬ
ŶŶŽƵŶĐĞ ͘ĂůĞƐ ϵĐϬϴĐϳϮϳϵĨϱ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂďůĞĂĐƌĞƐĂŶĚyϮĞƋƵĂůƐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ŵĞŶƚ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϳ ϴ ϯϵϬϬƵŶŝƚƐ
ĂďϱϰϬϯĞĚͲ
ĞϯϯϬͲϰϵϳĚͲ
'ůĞŶŶ ĂϭϯϵͲ tŚǇŚĂƐƚŚĞĂƐƚtĞƐƚ
WĞĂĐŚĞǇ ϬϮďϲϮĚϭϱϯϰ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƌŽĂĚƚŽsĞƌŶĂZŽĂĚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϳ ϴϮ ďĞĞŶĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞĚ͍
ϭĐďϯĐϱϳϯͲ
ϰϯϬĨͲϰĐĚϴͲ tŚĂƚĚŽĞƐǇŽƵƌΗĐŽŵŵŝƚŵĞŶƚΗ
ďϯĂďͲ ŵĞĂŶ͍ŽĞƐƚŚĂƚŵĞĂŶǇŽƵǁŝůů
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϲϮϯϵĨϰϬϰϳĂϲ ƉŽƐŝƚŝǀĞůǇĐŽŵŵŝƚĂŶĚƉƵƚŝŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϱ Ă ǁƌŝƚŝŶŐ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϰϱĐϰĐĐĂϵͲ
ďĞϵĐͲϰϱϳϵͲ WƵďůŝǆƉƵƚƐŝŶĂƐƚŽƌĞĨŽƌĞǀĞƌǇ
ϴϮϬϰͲ ϯϬϬϬŚŽƵƐĞƐ͕tŚǇǁŽƵůĚǇŽƵƐĂǇ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϬĞĐϬϰďϰϲϵϬ ƚŚĞƌĞǁŝůůďĞŶŽĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϱ ĚĚ ĚĞǀĚĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͍
ďϴϬϴϰϱϲϴͲ
ϬϵĂĨͲϰϳϰϭͲ
ĂϰϱϯͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϰϴĚϰϬϰϬĨϴϯϯ ŝƐƚŚĞƌĞĂŶǇĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϰ Ğ ŝŶůĂŬĞǁŽŽĚƌĂŶĐŚŶŽǁ͍
/ŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĐŽŶƚĂĐƚĞĚďǇ
ƐĞǀĞƌĂůƉĞŽƉůĞƚŚĂƚǁĞƌĞƵŶĂďůĞ
ƚŽũŽŝŶƚŚĞŽŶůŝŶĞǁŽƌŬƐŚŽƉ͘/
ŚĂĚĚŝĨĨŝĐƵůƚǇĂŶĚŚĂǀĞĂůƐŽďĞĞŶ
ďƵŵƉĞĚŽĨĨŶƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƚŝŵĞƐ͘
dŚŝƐǁŽƌŬƐŚŽƉŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶ
ĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞŝŶƚĞƌŵƐŽĨƉƵďŝĐ
ĂĐĐĞƐƐ͘/ĨƉĞŽƉůĞŐĞƚƌĞũĞĐƚĞĚŝŶ
ϭĞϬĂϮϬĂĂͲ ĂĐĐĞƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͕ŐĞƚ
ĐĞϮϮͲϰďϮϴͲ ďƵŵƉĞĚŽĨĨ͕ŽƌŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞĐĂŶŶŽƚ
^ƵƐĂŶ ϵϮϭϯͲ ĞĂƐŝůǇĂĐĐĞƐƐƚŚŝƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ
^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ϭĨϵϵĚϵĨϮďϰĂ ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͕/ďĞůŝĞǀĞŝƚŝƐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϰ Ϭ ŝŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ͘
ϰϱϬĂϵϴϮϵͲ
ϳĨĞĨͲϰϱĞĨͲ tŝůůΎĂůůΎƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚ
ĂϮϰĚͲ ĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐďĞŵĂĚĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƚŽ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĨďďĨďĚĚĐϯϬϱ ƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐĂŶĚŽƵŶƚǇ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϮ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϮ Ϯ ŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶĞƌƐ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ĂďϳĞϭϱĐϰͲ
ϯĚϭϴͲϰĨĞϳͲ
>ŽƵƌĚĞƐ ĂĚϭϰͲ tŚĂƚĂďŽƵƚǁŝůĚůŝĨĞĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌ͍/ƚ
ZĂŵŝƌĞǌ ĐϮϮϳĞϳϬϭďϯ ƐĞĞŵƐƚŽďĞŚŽŵĞƐĨƌŽŵĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϮ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϮ ϭĞ ůŝŶĞƐƚŽůŝŶĞ
ǀĞŶƚŚŽƵŐŚƚŚŝƐŝƐƚŚĞůĂƐƚŽĨ
ůĂŶĚƐŽǁŶĞĚďǇ^DZĂƐǇŽƵ
ƐƚĂƚĞ͕͕ĂƌĞŶΖƚǇŽƵĂĐƚƵĂůůǇ
ĐƌĞĂƚŝŶŐĂǁŚŽůĞŶĞǁ
ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĐĂƚĞŐŽƌǇŝŶƚŚĞ
ϮϬϱϬƉůĂŶƚŚĂƚǁŝůůƐĞƚĂ
ƉƌĞĐĞĚĞŶƚĨŽƌŽƚŚĞƌůĂƌŐĞĂƌĞĂ
ƌƵƌĂůůĂŶĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐ͍ůƐŽ͕ƚŚŝƐ
ϴϮϴϬĂĨĚϰͲ ŝƐŶŽƚƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞhƌďĂŶ
ĐϭĚďͲϰϰϯϴͲ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂƐĂĚĚŝŶŐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ
ĂϲϴϳͲ ŝŶƚŚŝƐĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚ
͘ĂůĞƐ ĨĐϭϳϮĞϲϵĂďĚ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶƚŽ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϭϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϭϬ Ĩ ƚŚĞƌƵƌĂůůĂŶĚƐ͘
ĂĨĨĂϮĐϬϭͲ
ϰĂĐϮͲϰĚϬďͲ
ϴďϰϲͲ zΖĂůůƐŽƵŶĚƚŝƌĞĚĂŶĚǁŽƌŶ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĂĞĚϱĐϵϱϵϵϭ ĚŽǁŶ͘tĞĨĞĞůƚŚĞƐĂŵĞĂďŽƵƚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϳ ϯϮ ǇŽƵƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉůĂŶƐ͗͗͘ŚƵŐƐ͗͗
ϬϵďĞĨϴĚϰͲ
ĨĚϰďͲϰϬĨϯͲ
ĂϯĐďͲ tŝůůĂƌĞĐŽƌĚŝŶŐŽƌƚƌĂŶƐĐƌŝƉƚŽĨ
ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ ϰĐϵϴϱϯĚϵĂϮĨ ƚŚŝƐƐĞƐƐŝŽŶďĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƚŽƚŚĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϱ Ϭ ƉƵďůŝĐ͍
ϳĐϯϬϴϰϰϰͲ
ϬϭϲďͲϰĨĨϱͲ
ĂϮĂϲͲ /ĐŚĂůůĞŶŐĞǇŽƵƚŽĐŚĂůůĞŶŐĞ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϲϯϬĚĐϬĂĂϱϮ ǇŽƵƌΗďĞůŝĞĨƐ͘ΗΗǁĞďĞůŝĞǀĞ͕ǁĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗Ϭϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗Ϭϰ Ϯϯ ďĞůŝĞǀĞ͘Η^ƵƌĞ͘
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϴĂϯϵϯϵĂĐͲ
ϮĞϭϱͲϰϳϯϴͲ
ϴϯĨϴͲ tŽƵůĚŶΖƚĂŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƌŽĂĚ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϴϴĚϰĂϰϬϯϰĚ ĞǆƚĞŶĚŝŶŐĞĂƐƚƚŽsĞƌŶĂZŽĂĚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϬϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϬϬ ϰϮ ĂƐƐŝƐƚŝŶĂŶĞǀĂĐƵĂƚŝŽŶĞǀĞŶƚ͍
ϮϰϰϵďĚďĚͲ
ϵϭĐϴͲϰďϴϵͲ
ďϬĞϬͲ tŝůůƚŚĞƐƵŐŐĞƐƚĞĚǁĂƐƚĞǁĂƚĞƌ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϳĚϯϰĐϲĂϳϲϬ ƉůĂŶƚďĞǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞŽƵƚůŝŶĞĚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϵ͗ϬϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϯ͗ϬϬ ϴď ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͍ŝĨƐŽ͕ǁŚĞƌĞ͍
ϵϯĐϳϬĞϳϵͲ
ĞϳϬĂͲϰϮϲϰͲ
^ƵƐĂŶ ϴϯĨϵͲ tŝůůĂůůŽŶͲƐŝƚĞƌŽĂĚƐĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌ
^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ĐϰĨĚĂϳĂϮϰϭϰ ĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐďĞĨƵŶĚĞĚďǇĂĂƐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϴ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϴ ϯ ŽƚŚĞƌ>ĂŬĞǁŽŽĚZĂŶĐŚĂƌĞĂƐ͍
ϲϬĂĚĚϳϭĞͲ
ϲĞďϰͲϰϵϬĚͲ
ĂďϯϲͲ ,ŽǁĞǆĂĐƚůǇŝƐƚŚŝƐĂŶĞǆĂŵƉůĞ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϬĂϭϬϭϳϬϳϬϯ ŽĨƐŵĂƌƚŐƌŽǁƚŚ͍^ŝŶĐĞƌĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϴ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϴ ĂĨ ƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ͘
ϱϯϮϭϲϵϯϱͲ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚĐŽƌŶĞƌŽĨǇŽƵƌ
ϭĐϲϯͲϰĨĚϭͲ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚƐŚŽǁ
ďďϱϱͲ ďƵĨĨĞƌ͘/ƐƚŚĞŐƌĞĞŶƐƉĂĐĞŶŽƌƚŚ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĐϵĨďĞďĐϲϵϴď ŽĨǇŽƵƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ;ƌĞĚůŝŶĞͿ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϱ ϰ ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ'ƌĞĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͍͍
ĚϴĞϮĨĂϲĂͲ
ϱĞϵϴͲϰϭĚϲͲ
DŝŬĞ ϵϴϳϲͲ
,:ƵƚĐŚŝŶƐŽŶ ϭϯϵϱϱϰĐϳϴĚ ,ĂƐ>tZƉƵƌĐŚĂƐĞĚ>ĂŬĞƉĂƌŬ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϱ ϴϱ ƐƚĂƚĞƐ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ĐϵϰĂĞϳϲĐͲ zŽƵĚŽŶŽƚƐŚŽǁĂŶǇϱϬϬĨŽŽƚ
ĂϯϴϵͲϰĂϵĞͲ ďƵĨĨĞƌĂůŽŶŐƚŚĞĞĂƐƚĞƌŶ
^ƵƐĂŶ ϴϳϱĨͲ ďŽƵŶĚĂƌǇŽĨǇŽƵƌƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉůĂŶ͘
^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ĚϲϵďϴϮĐϲϱϲ tŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĚŽŶĞĂůŽŶŐƚŚĂƚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϯ ďď ĞĂƐƚĞƌŶďŽƵŶĚĂƌǇ͍
ϴϯĂϱĂϯϭϵͲ
ĐϮϴĂͲϰĐĐϱͲ ƚŚĞƌĞŝƐďƵĨĨĞƌƐƉĂĐĞĂůŽŶŐƚŚĞ
ϵĂϴϵͲ ďŽƌĚĞƌǁŝƚŚĞƌŶƌĞĞŬďƵƚŶŽ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϲϴϲĚϴϲĐϯϲϳ ďƵĨĨĞƌŽŶƚŚĞŽƚŚĞƌďŽƵŶĚĂƌŝĞƐͲ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϮ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϮ ϰĞ ǁŚǇ͍
ĐϭĨϮϮĂĞĨͲ ϮϬϱϬWůĂŶƉŽůŝĐŝĞƐǁĞƌĞƚŚĂƚ
ϵĚďĂͲϰĚϳĞͲ ,ĂŵůĞƚƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶĞĚďĞƚǁĞĞŶ
^ƵƐĂŶ ďϮϳϮͲ sŝůůĂŐĞĂŶĚƌƵƌĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘
ŶŶŽƵŶĐĞ ^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ĨϬϲϲϳϲϱĂϭϬϮ ,ŽǁĚŽĞƐĂŶŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞŝŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ŵĞŶƚ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϮ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϮ Đ ĂĐŚŝĞǀĞƚŚŝƐƉŽůŝĐǇŐŽĂů͍
ϰϬϳďϯϱĨϰͲ
ϱĂĞĨͲϰϰĂĐͲ
dŽŵ ϴϱϲďͲ tŚĂƚŝƐƚŚĞĞŵĂŝůŽĨƚŚĞƉĞƌƐŽŶ
DĂƚƌƵůůŽ ϱϴĐϳϭϰĚϭϬϴ ǁŚŽŝŶǀŝƚĞĚƵƐƚŽƐƵďŵŝƚĨƵƌƚŚĞƌ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϭ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϭ ĐĞ ƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚĞŵĂŝů͍
ϳϳĂĂϰďϵĞͲ
ϱĚϰĨͲϰϭϯϯͲ
ϴĚĨϬͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϳϰϰϰĞĂďĚϱϱ tŝůůŵŝƐƐŝŶŐŵŝĚĚůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϱϭ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϱϭ ĐĨ ƚǇƉĞƐďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ͍
ĐϬĂϯĚĐĞĚͲ ,ĂǀĞǇŽƵĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚĂ
ϯďĐϵͲϰϳϱĚͲ ĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŬŝŶĚŽĨƐƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ͕
ϴϵϵĞͲ ůŝŬĞĂďĐŽĐŬZĂŶĐŚ͕ǁŚĞƌĞĂůů
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϬϰϭϴϯĐϭϱĞĂ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐǁŝůůďĞĐůƵƐƚĞƌĞĚĂŶĚĂůů
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϵ ĂĐ ŐƌĞĞŶƐƉĂĐĞǁŝůůďĞĐůƵƐƚĞƌĞĚ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϵĨϯĐϵϮĨĚͲ
ϯĂĞϲͲϰĨϬϵͲ
ϵĞϬϲͲ
ĞĐŬǇǇĞĐŚ ϮϱϯϬϲϱϴĐϲϰ zŽƵĚŝĚŶΖƚŝĚĞŶƚŝĨǇǁŚĂƚƚŚĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϳ Đϰ ĂŵĞŶŝƚŝĞƐǁŽƵůĚďĞ͘dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ͘
ϭϯϬϱϰϮϭďͲ dŚĞƌĞŝƐĂƌĞĂƐŽŶǁĞŵŽǀĞĚƚŽ
ϯϵĂĂͲϰϰϳϵͲ ĞƌŶƌĞĞŬĂŶĚŶŽƚ>ĂŬĞǁŽŽĚ
ϵĞϴĞͲ ZĂŶĐŚ͘,ĂǀĞǇŽƵĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚŚŽǁ
ŶŶŽƵŶĐĞ <ĞƉůĞƌ ϴϭϬďϰϴĂĞϬϲ ǇŽƵƌƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ŵĞŶƚ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϳ Ϯď ůŝŬĞƵƐ͍
ϰĐĚďĞϵĨϵͲ
ϭϭĚϱͲϰϴϬϲͲ /ĂŵůŽŽŬŝŶŐĂƚƚŚĞ^ƚĂĨĨZĞƉŽƌƚ
DŝŬĞ ďĐϬĨͲ ĞĐ͘ϭϬ͕ϮϬϭϰƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞ
,:ƵƚĐŚŝŶƐŽŶ ϮĂĚĐϱĞϯϭϰϮ ͘ĂŶǇŽƵƚĞůůŵĞǁŚĞƌĞƚŚĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϳ ϱĂ ƉƵŵƉƐƚĂƚŝŽŶŝƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚ͘
ϳϮϴϭϮϮϵĚͲ
ϬĐĚďͲϰďϲĂͲ
ϴϴĚϴͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϯĂĐĚĂĨϬϯϯϱď
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϳ Ğ EŽǇŽƵĚŝĚŶΖƚ͘
/ƚŝƐĂĨĂůƐĞŚŽŽĚƚŽĂƐƐĞƌƚƚŚĂƚ
ĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĐĂŶŶŽƚďĞ
ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďǇƐƚĂƚĞƐƚĂƚƵƚĞ͕ĂƐĂ
ĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĨŽƌƚŚĞŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞŝŶ
ďĂƐĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͘dŚĂƚŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞŝŶ
ďĂƐĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨĐŽƵƌƐĞǁŝůůŵŽƌĞ
ϯĚϯϴĂϯĐϮͲ ƚŚĂŶĞŶŽƵŐŚƚŽĐŽŵƉĞŶƐĂƚĞƚŚĞ
ϬĞϰϴͲϰϲĐϬͲ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞ
ϴϴĂĂͲ ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ͕ĂƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďǇ
ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ ϱϱϴϯĨĂϮϵϭϮĨ ƚŚĞůĂǁ͘WůĞĂƐĞƌĞƐƉŽŶĚ͕ƚŚŝƐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϲ ϲ ƚŝŵĞƚƌƵƚŚĨƵůůǇ͘
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϱĂϴϰĚϯĞϮͲ
ϭϱϰϳͲϰϲϳĨͲ ŵǇĞŵĂŝůŝƐ͗
DŝŬĞ ďϴϭĂͲ ŵƉŚͺϬϰΛǀĞƌŝǌŽŶ͘ŶĞƚĨŽƌĂ
,:ƵƚĐŚŝŶƐŽŶ ϭĚĨďĐϬϰĂϯϮϱ ǁƌŝƚƚĞŶĐŽƉǇŽĨƚŚĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϰϭ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϰϭ ϴ ĂŶĚĂŶƐǁĞƌƐ͘
ϰϱϬĞϰĚϮďͲ
ϭďϴϬͲϰϯϵĨͲ /ΖŵĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĞĚĂďŽƵƚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ͘
ϵĚϱĚͲ dŚĞƌĞΖƐƐŽŵƵĐŚĐŽŶŐĞƐƚŝŽŶ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ďďĂĚϳϲϯϱĐϮ ĂůƌĞĂĚǇ͘ĂŶŽƵƌƌŽĂĚƐŚĂŶĚůĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϵ ϵϰ ƚŚŝƐ͍
ĐϰϲϮϭϲďĚͲ /ĨƐŽŵĞŽŶĞǁĂƐŶŽƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŽŶ
ϵϲĞϴͲϰďĚĨͲ ƚŚĞŵĂŝůŝŶŐůŝƐƚ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞƚĞůůƚŚĞŵ
ďϲϬĨͲ ƚŽĐŽŶƚĂĐƚƉůĂŶŶĞƌΛƐĐŐŽǀ͘ŶĞƚƚŽ
ŽƵŶƚǇ^ƚĂĨĨ ϯďϲďϲϰϰĂϰĚ ďĞĂĚĚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞŵĂŝůŝŶŐůŝƐƚ͘
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϵ ϵď dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ
ĞĐϳϳϭϱĞϴͲ
ϲϲĐĚͲϰϴĞϳͲ
ϴďĨϲͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϭĂϵĐϯϭϰϱĨĞϰ ĂŶǇŽƵƐŚĂƌĞŚŽǁŵĂŶǇƉĞŽƉůĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϵ ϲ ĂƌĞŽŶƚŚŝƐĐĂůů͍
ϯϵϲďĐϳĞĚͲ
ĐϱĞϲͲϰϰϴϬͲ
ďϯĐϴͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϭĨϰĐĐďϬϭϮϱĨ tŚǇŶŽĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϴ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϴ ϰ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͍
ĚϭďϬĂϬďĞͲ
ĐϲďϲͲϰĨĚϰͲ
ϵϰϵĚͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ďϳϳϰϯĨϱϮĚϮϮ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϳ ϯ >ŝĞƐ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϴĐϴϴϲϵϭϭͲ tŚǇŶŽƚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞǆĞƌŽƐĐĂƉŝŶŐŝŶ
ďϬϱĨͲϰϭϰĨͲ ǇŽƵƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚŽƐĂǀĞǁĂƚĞƌ
ďϭϮϱͲ ĂŶĚƌĞĚƵĐĞĨĞƌƚŝůŝǌĞƌƐŝŶƚŚĞ
͘ĂůĞƐ ϯĐĞĚĨĞĞϵϬĨϰ ƐƚŽƌŵǁĂƚĞƌƌƵŶŽĨĨǁŚŝĐŚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϳ ϭ ƉŽůůƵƚĞƐŽƵƌďĂǇƐĂŶĚŐƵůĨ͍
ďĐϴĚĨϬĨϴͲ
ĚϳϴϭͲϰĞϮϰͲ ZŽŶ>ĂŵďĞƌƚ
ĂϴĨϰͲ ƌůĂŵďĞƌƚΛŵĂŝůŵƚ͘ĐŽŵ͘ϵϰϭͲϰϬϬͲ
ƌŽŶůĂŵďĞƌƚ ϳϬϮϱĨĐĂĐĚϴĂ ϰϯϬϯ͘ĂůůĂŶǇƚŝŵĞ͘/ΖĚůŽǀĞƚŽ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϲ ϭ ŚĞĂƌǇŽƵƌŐŽďďůǇͲŐŽŽƉ͘
ĐϬϴϵϭϭĞϵͲ
ϯĚĂϲͲϰĞĞϴͲ dĂŬĞĂĚƌŝǀĞŽƵƚĞĂƐƚĂŶĚůŽŽŬĂƚ
ďϯϳϭͲ ƚŚĞƐŬǇ͘͘͘EŽƐƚƌĞĞƚůŝŐŚƚƐ͘'ŽƚŽ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĞϬďĐϴϳĞϳϬď >tZĂŶĚĚŽƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚŚŝŶŐ͘tĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϲ ϲĂ ŵŽǀĞĚŚĞƌĞĨŽƌĂƌĞĂƐŽŶ͘
ĨϳϯϯĐϱϮĐͲ
ϴϭϱĐͲϰϴϵϰͲ
ĂϲϵϮͲ tŝůůƚŚĞƌĞďĞĐŽŵƉĞƚŝƚŝǀĞ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϭϭĞϳĂϵĨϵĂϯĨ ďŝĚĚŝŶŐĨŽƌĂůůĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϱ ď ĂƐƉĞĐƚƐ͍
ϱĚϳϮĨϲϵϯͲ
ϴϯĐĐͲϰďϴϳͲ
DŝŬĞ ďĂĨĚͲ
,:ƵƚĐŚŝŶƐŽŶ ϰĞĨϳϯĚϬĂĂϱĞ /ƐƚŚŝƐĂƌĞĂŐŽŝŶŐƚŽďĞĂƚĂǆŝŶŐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϱ Ϯ ĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚůŝŬĞŵƵĐŚŽĨ>tZ͍
ĚϭĞϵϳϮϮϭͲ
ϮĞĐĨͲϰϴϴϰͲ tŝůůĂůůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐ
^ƵƐĂŶ ϵϳϬĨͲ ƌŽĂĚǁĂǇƐ͕ĂĚŚĞƌĞƚŽĚĂƌŬƐŬŝĞƐ
^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ϭĚϰϲĐĞϵĐϴĞϯ ƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐǁŝƚŚƐŚĂĚĞĚůŝŐŚƚƐĂŶĚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϱ ϰ ĚŽǁŶǁĂƌĚŽŶůǇůŝŐŚƚŝŶŐ͘
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϱϬϱϳďϴĞϯͲ
ĂϯĨϬͲϰĐϭϬͲ zŽƵƐƚĂƚĞƚŚĂƚƚŚŝƐŶĞǁ
ϴĨϴϯͲ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚǁŝůůŚĂǀĞϱϬйŽƉĞŶ
͘ĂůĞƐ ϴĨĂϴϰϮĞĂĐϮϴ ƐƉĂĐĞ͕ďƵƚǇŽƵƌŵĂƉĚŽĞƐŶŽƚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϰ ϰ ĂƉƉĞĂƌƚŽƐŚŽǁϱϬйŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘
,ŽǁĐĂŶǁĞƐƚŽƉǇŽƵƌƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ
ϴĚϲĂϮϴϲϴͲ ĨŽƌǌŽŶŝŶŐĐŚĂŶŐĞƐĂŶĚŬĞĞƉŽƵƌ
ϯϰďϵͲϰϬĚϯͲ ŽƉĞŶͲƵƐĞͲĞƐƚĂƚĞĐůĂƐƐŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘
ϴϬďϯͲ EŽŽŶĞǁĂŶƚƐƚŽƐĞĞŵŽƌĞ
ƌŽŶůĂŵďĞƌƚ ϴĚĨϲϯϲĚϴϳϳĨ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽƵƚŚĞƌĞ͘ŽĂŶǇŽĨ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϰ ϱ ǇŽƵůŝǀĞŝŶƚŚĞƐĞĂƌĞĂƐ͘
ĐĨĂϴϭϰĞĨͲ ,ĞƌĞΖƐĂĐŽŶĐĞƉƚ͗ĚŽŶƚĚĞǀĞůŽƉ
ĚϲĞϭͲϰϬĐϬͲ ŽƵƌĐŽƵŶƚƌǇƐŝĚĞ͊dŚĞĨŽůŬƐŽƵƚ
ϴĞϵϱͲ ŚĞƌĞǁŽƵůĚůŝŬĞůǇƐƵƉƉŽƌƚϯͲϱ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϰĨϲϴĚϮϬϮĞĐĞ ĂĐƌĞůŽƚƐďƵƚĂŶǇƚŚŝŶŐŵŽƌĞŝƐĂ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϰ ϴ ƚŚƌĞĂƚƚŽŽƵƌůŝĨĞƐƚǇůĞ
ĨϮĐĞϵϯϴϭͲ
ϮĂϰĐͲϰϲϱĨͲ
ϵϱϳĨͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϮϳϵĐϲϭĚĞĐď tŚĂƚŝƐ&KdΖƐƌŽůĞŝŶĂƉƉƌŽǀŝŶŐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϰ ϭĐ ƚŚĞƐĞƉůĂŶƐ͍
ϱϯϵϴϬϬĞϳͲ
ĐϴϵϭͲϰϯďĨͲ ^ƵĐŚĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĐŚĂŶŐĞƚŽƚŚĞ
^ƵƐĂŶ ϵϯϮϱͲ ϮϬϱϬWůĂŶƐŚŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞĂƌŽďƵƐƚ
^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ϳďϴĚϵϬĞϲďĚ ƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŽĨƉƵďůŝĐŝŶƉƵƚͲŶŽƚũƵƐƚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϰ Ăϲ ĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐĂƚƉƵďůŝĐŚĞĂƌŝŶŐƐ͘
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
DǇƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂƌĞďĞŝŶŐŵĂƌŬĞĚ
ΗWƌŝǀĂƚĞΗĂŶĚĂƐƐƵĐŚĚŽŶŽƚ
ĂƉƉĞĂƌŝŶƚŚĞΗ&ĞĂƚƵƌĞĚΗ
ϲϰϴĚĞϴϲĐͲ ƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐ͘/ƚƌŝĞĚƚŽƌĞƉŽƐƚŝƚ
ϮĨϲϰͲϰϭϴϱͲ ƚŚĂƚǁĂǇďƵƚĐĂŶŶŽƚ;ŚĞŶĐĞƚŚĞ
ϵĚϳϰͲ ŽŶĞƌĞƉĞĂƚƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶͿ͘ŽĞƐŝƚŐŽ
ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ ϱϲϵϵďĞϮĞĚϯ ƉƵďůŝĐŽŶůǇǁŚĞŶǇŽƵĐŚŽŽƐĞŝƚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϯ ϮĨ ƚŽĂŶƐǁĞƌ͍dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ͘
ϳϳϳϲϵϮϳϵͲ
ϲĐϯĨͲϰĂϭϱͲ WůĞĂƐĞĞůĂďŽƌĂƚĞŽŶ
ďϭĚďͲ ΗŝŶĐĞŶƚŝǀŝǌĞĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇ
<ĞƉůĞƌ ϲϬĐϱĂϵĞϰϬď ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐΗͲŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨƵŶŝƚƐ͕
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϬ ϭď ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ͕ĞƚĐ͘
ϱĐϱϬĐϮϵĚͲ
ĚϰϮĂͲϰĐϰϲͲ ĞĐĂƵƐĞǇŽƵĚŽŶΖƚůŝǀĞƚŚĞƌĞ͕
ϴϵϯĂͲ ǇŽƵďƌƵƐŚƚŚŝƐĂƐŝĚĞĂƐ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϮϬϭϴϰϬϱĞϬϳ ƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐůǇĚŽŶĞ͘dŚŝƐŝƐŶŽƚĂ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϬ ϳď ƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ͕ďƵƚĂƐĂĚĨĂĐƚ͘
/ĐĂŶŶŽƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞĂƚƚŚŝƐƚŝŵĞ͕
ƐŽ/͛ĚũƵƐƚůŝŬĞƚŽƐĂǇƚŚĂƚ/
ϲďĞϬĚĚĐϭͲ ŽƉƉŽƐĞƚŚŝƐĞŶƚŝƌĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĂů͘dŚĞ
ϮĞϵϰͲϰĐďϲͲ ďĞƐƚƵƐĞĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇǁŽƵůĚ
tŝůůŝĂŵ ϴϮĨϵͲ ďĞŝĨƚŚĞŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ
ŽůůĞƌ ĨϴĂĚĐϱϬϮϰϲϬ &ŽƵŶĚĂƚŝŽŶǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂĐƋƵŝƌĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϬ ϱ ŝƚĂŶĚƌĞͲǁŝůĚƚŚĞĞŶƚŝƌĞƉĂƌĐĞů͘
ĂĨϭĨϯϲϳϲͲ tŚĂƚĂďŽƵƚĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ͍
ĚϬϳϴͲϰϮϰĞͲ ,ŽǁůŽŶŐǁŝůůŝƚƚĂŬĞĨŽƌƚŚĞ
ϵϬĐϭͲ ƐŚĞƌŝĨĨ͕D^ĂŶĚ&ŝƌĞŐĞƚƚŚĞƌĞ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĚĨϯϮϵĐĐϰϯďϮ ĂŶĚǁŚŽǁŝůůƉĂǇĨŽƌĂĚĚĞĚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϬ Ϯ ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ŽƵŚĂǀĞĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚǀĂƌŝŽƵƐ
ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŝƐƚŝĐƐŽĨƚŚŝƐŶĞǁ&ƵƚƵƌĞ
>ĂŶĚhƐĞDĂƉĐĂƚĞŐŽƌǇ͘tŝůů
ƚŚĞǇĂůůďĞŵĂŶĚĂƚŽƌǇŽƌĂƌĞǇŽƵ
ƐŝŵƉůǇĞǆƉƌĞƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚ
ŝŶƚĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞ>ĂŬĞǁŽŽĚZĂŶĐŚ
ĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌ͍ǆĂŵƉůĞ͗Η,ŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ǁŝůůďĞŵĂĚĞĂĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĂƚĂ
ǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŽĨƉƌŝĐĞƉŽŝŶƚƐ͘ΗtŚĂƚ
ƉŽůŝĐǇŝĨĂŶǇŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ͘tŝůů
ĂŶǇƚŚŝŶŐďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĨŽƌƚƌƵůǇ
ĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ͕ĂŶĚŝĨƐŽ
ǁŚĂƚ͕ŽƌĂƌĞǁĞƚĂůŬŝŶŐĂďŽƵƚƐŽͲ
ĐĂůůĞĚΗĂƚƚĂŝŶĂďůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐΗ
ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞƚŽĂĨĂŵŝůǇŽĨ
ϭϮϬйƌĞĂDĞĚŝĂŶ/ŶĐŽŵĞ͕ƚŚĂƚ
ŝƐĞĂƌŶŝŶŐǁĞůůŽǀĞƌΨϭϬϬ͕ϬϬϬĂ
ǇĞĂƌ͍ŐĂŝŶ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞƌĞƐƉŽŶĚƚŽ
ƚŚĞďƌŽĂĚĞƌƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŽ
ϮĂďĂϭĞϴϳͲ ǁŚĞƚŚĞƌĞǀĞƌǇƚŚŝŶŐǇŽƵĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞ
ďϮϲϬͲϰĨďϱͲ ǁŝůůďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚŝŶŽŵƉWůĂŶ
ϴĐĂĂͲ ƉŽůŝĐŝĞƐ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞŶĂƐƚŽŵǇ
ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ ϳϱϲďϱĐĂĨϱϱĞ ƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶŽŶĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϯϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϯϬ Ϭ ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ͘dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ͘
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
/ƐŶΖƚƚŚŝƐĂƐĐŚĞŵĞƚŽŶŽƚŽŶůǇ
ŐĞƚŚŝŐŚĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚŝĞƐďƵƚĂůƐŽƚŽ
ďĞƌĞůŝĞǀĞĚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƉƵďůŝĐ
ŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨƚŚĞ
^ĂƌĂƐŽƚĂϮϬϱϬWůĂŶ͕ũƵƐƚŽŶĞ
ϱϬĐϭĚϭϰĚͲ ĞǆĂŵƉůĞďĞŝŶŐĂƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂů
ϵϴĞĚͲϰϳϱϵͲ ĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐ͕ƉĞĞƌͲƌĞǀŝĞǁĞĚďǇĂ
ϵϱϬϰͲ ŽƵŶƚǇĞǆƉĞƌƚ͕ĚĞŵŽŶƐƚƌĂƚŝŶŐ
ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ ϰϱĐϲϵϭϲĚϯϰ ƚŚĂƚƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚǁŝůůďĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϵ ϱϯ ĨŝƐĐĂůůǇŶĞƵƚƌĂů͍
/ƐƚŚĞƌĞĂĨŝŐƵƌĞǇŽƵĐĂŶƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ
ƚŚĂƚǁŽƵůĚĞǆƉƌĞƐƐƚŚĞƚŽƚĂů
ŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐŝŶƚŚĞ
ĞŶƚŝƌĞ>ĂŬĞǁŽŽĚZĂŶĐŚƉƌŽũĞĐƚͲ
ďŽƚŚŝŶDĂŶĂƚĞĞĂŶĚŝŶ^ĂƌĂƐŽƚĂ
ĐŽƵŶƚŝĞƐ͍/͘͘Ğ͘ĚŽǇŽƵŚĂǀĞĂ
ϮϴϵϰϱϳĞϯͲ ƚĞƌŵŝŶƵƐĂĚƋƵĞŵ͕ŽƌĚŽǇŽƵ
ĂϴĚĚͲϰϴϭĂͲ ŝŶƚĞŶĚƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞŵŽƌĞ
dŽŵ ďϬĚĐͲ ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚŝĞƐŽŶŽƉĞŶůĂŶĚƐƚŚĂƚ
DĂƚƌƵůůŽ ĐĂϯďĞϱĚĂϮϮ ĂƌĞŶŽƚŶŽǁŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚŝŶŬŶŽǁŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϴ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϴ ϱϯ ƉůĂŶƐ͍
ĚĚϱϴϭϱĞϵͲ
ϱϳϱϯͲϰϱϯϲͲ
^ƵƐĂŶ ďĨďĐͲ tŚĂƚĚŽǇŽƵƉůĂŶƚŽĚŽŽŶƚŚĞ
^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ ϬďϵϴϵϵϬϵďϰ ŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞĂƌĞĂŶŽƌƚŚŽĨĞƌŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϴ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϴ Đϱ ƌĞĞŬƌƵƌĂůŚŽŵĞƐƚĞĂĚƐ͍
ďϰϭϬϲϳĐϱͲ
ϴĂĚϰͲϰϮĚĞͲ
ĂϴϯϭͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϲϳĚϱϲĚĐϲϬϳ ƌĞǇŽƵďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĂǁĂůůĂƌŽƵŶĚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϴ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϴ Ϭď ƚŚŝƐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
,ŽǁŵĂŶǇĂĐƌĞƐŽĨƚŚĞϯϵϬϬ
ĂĐƌĞƐĂƌĞĚĞĞŵĞĚΗĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂďůĞΗ
ĂĐƌĞƐ͍/ĨϱϬйŝƐĚĞĞŵĞĚKWE
ϬďϵϰϮĨϲĞͲ ^WĂŶĚŶŽƚĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂďůĞ͕
ĞϮϯϯͲϰĂϰďͲ ĚŽĞƐƚŚĂƚŵĞĂŶƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂďůĞ
ďϮϯϭͲ ĂĐƌĞƐĂƌĞϭϴϱϬĂĐƌĞƐ͕ĂŶĚƚŽƚĂů
͘ĂůĞƐ ϴĂϰϮϱĨϱϳϬϰϮ ƵŶŝƚƐϯϵϬϬ͍ŝĞϮyϭϴϱϬ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϳ ď s>KW>Z^
ƉƌŽŵŝƐĞĚϰůĂŶĞƐƚŽƚŚĞĞŶĚŽĨ
&ƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞƌĚďǇϮϬϭϬŚĂƐŶŽƚ
ďĞĞŶĂĐĐŽŵƉůŝƐŚĞĚ͘dƌĂĨĨŝĐ͕ĞƚĐ͕
ĂƌĞǀĞƌǇĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝŶŐĨŽƌƚŚŽƐĞŽĨ
ƵƐƚŚĂƚůŝǀĞŽƵƚĞĂƐƚ͘zŽƵƌ
ĂϴϲĐϰĂϵϱͲ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚŽĨƚƌĂĨĨŝĐƐƚƵĚŝĞƐ
ϵĂϭĨͲϰĨĞĐͲ ŵĂǇĨĂŝůĂƐƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐůǇ͘ƐƚĂƚĞĚ͘
ĂĚďĚͲ ƚŚĞƐŝƚƵĂƚŝŽŶŝƐĚĂŶŐĞƌŽƵƐĂŶĚ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϯϭϱĚϮĚϲϴϲϵ ŝƌƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞ͘ǁŚĂƚƌĞĂůŝƐƚŝĐĐĂƌĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϳ ĚĞ ĂŶĚƉƌŽŵŝƐĞƐǁŝůůǇŽƵĚŽ͍
ϯϭϵĐϭĞďϱͲ
ďϬϰϵͲϰĞϵĐͲ
ĂϭϰϰͲ tŝůůƚŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞŵĞŶƚĂĨĨĞĐƚ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϲϯĚďϳĂďĞĨϳϯ ƚŚĞǁĂƐƚĞǁĂƚĞƌƐǇƐƚĞŵŽĨĨĞĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϳ Ĩ ZŝĚŐĞZĚ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
,ŽǁŝƐƚŚŝƐĂƐŵĂƌƚŐƌŽǁƚŚ
ĞĨĨŽƌƚ͍tŝůůƚŚĞƌĞďĞŽďũĞĐƚŝǀĞ
ĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚŝĞƐ͍
ĂϳĞϴϴϭĞďͲ tŚŽǁŝůůƉĂǇĨŽƌŝŶĨƌĂƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͍
ϵϳϱϱͲϰϱϱϰͲ WůĞĂƐĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂĐĐŝĚĞŶƚĂŶĚ
ďϮĞϲͲ ŝŶĐŝĚĞŶƚƌĞƉŽƌƚƐǁŝƚŚŝŶϱŵŝůĞƐ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϱϵĐϬĂĞϵϬĚĐϳ ĨŽƌůĂƐƚϱǇĞĂƌƐ͘ƚǁƚŚŝƐǁĂƐ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϳ Ă ĚŝĨĨŝĐƵůƚƚŽŐĞƚŝŶƚŽ
ϱďϱϬϳϵϬĐͲ
ĨϯĂϴͲϰϯĨĚͲ ĞƌŶƌĞĞŬĂĚŚĞƌĞƐƚŽƚŚĞϮϬϱϬ
ĂĚϭĂͲ ŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶĂƌĞŶΖƚǁĞƚŚĞ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĐϴϲϬĨϳďϳĞĂϮ ĨƌŝĞŶĚůǇƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶƚŽŚĂŵůĞƚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϲ ϵ ĂůƌĞĂĚǇ͍
/ƐƚŚŝƐƚŚĞůĂƐƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůŽĨƚŚĞ
>ĂŬĞǁŽŽĚZĂŶĐŚĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƚŽ
ĞǆƚĞŶĚƐƵďƵƌďĂŶƐƉƌĂǁůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌ
ĨďϳϵϲϮϬϱͲ ƚŽƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ŽƌŝƐƚŚĞĚŽŽƌŽƉĞŶ
ĨϯĐϴͲϰĞĨĚͲ ƚŽŝƚƉƵƐŚŝŶŐĨƵƌƚŚĞƌŝŶƚŚĞǇĞĂƌƐ
ϵϴϮĨͲ ĂĨƚĞƌƚŚŝƐŝƐĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚ͍tŚĂƚ͕ŝĨ
ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ ϴďϬϴϯĨďĐϬϯĨ ĂŶǇ͕ŝƐƚŚĞůŝŵŝƚ͍sĞƌŶĂZŽĂĚ͍
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϱ Ğ Ğ^ŽƚŽŽƵŶƚǇ͍
ϲϬϵĨĨĨϳĞͲ
ϭϳĐĞͲϰϰϰĂͲ
DŝŬĞ ĂĞĐϳͲ tŝůů>ĂŬĞƉĂƌŬWŚĂƐĞϮĂŶĚWŚĂƐĞ
,:ƵƚĐŚŝŶƐŽŶ ĚĞďϳϳϲϬĂϭϵ ϯĐŚĂŶŐĞ͍dŚĞŶĞǁŚŝŐŚĞƌ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϰ ϵϮ ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͍
ϯϲϳĂϭĨĨĨͲ
ϬĨĞϰͲϰĞϮϵͲ
ϴĚϭϬͲ
ƌŽŶůĂŵďĞƌƚ ϰϵϬĂϰĚϳϴϮϭ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϰ Đϭ ƚůĞĂƐƚϮϲϬϬ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ĚϳϮĚϬϯϬϱͲ
ĐϳϯĨͲϰϲϮϭͲ ŽĞƐƚŚŝƐĐŽŵƉƉůĂŶ
ďϵĨϵͲ ĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽǇŽƵƌϯϵϬϬ
͘ĂůĞƐ ĂϰĐĨϲĚĂĨϬϬĐ ĂĐƌĞƐ͕ŽƌĚŽĞƐŝƚĐŚĂŶŐĞŽƚŚĞƌ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϯ Ğ ƌƵƌĂůůĂŶĚƐ͘
dŚĞŽŶͲƐĐƌĞĞŶĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ
ĨĂϵϱϴĂĂďͲ ŽŶĐĞƉƚWůĂŶďŽƵŶĚĂƌŝĞƐĚŝĨĨĞƌ
Z͘E͘ŽůůŝŶƐ ϰϴĂĨͲϰϵϰϬͲ ĨƌŽŵƚŚŽƐĞƐŚŽǁŶŽŶƚŚĞ
ĨƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞϮϬϱϬ ďĨďĚͲ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƉůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞ
ΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵ ϭϴĚϯϵϴĞϵϰϬ ǁŽƌŬƐŚŽƉŶŽƚŝĐĞĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐͲ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϯ ϱĚ ǁŚŝĐŚďŽƵŶĚĂƌŝĞƐĂƌĞĐŽƌƌĞĐƚ͘
tŚĂƚĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐĂƌĞ
ϯĚĞĚϲĐĐĐͲ ƉůĂŶŶĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞǁŝĚĞŶŝŶŐŽĨ
ϭĞϵϳͲϰϴϴϮͲ &ƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞƌĚĂƐƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŝůů
ďĚϲϳͲ ŝŶƚƌŽĚƵĐĞϮϲϬϬŶĞǁǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐŽŶ
ƌŽŶůĂŵďĞƌƚ ϰďϴϵϲĐϬϲϬϳ ƚŚĂƚƌŽĂĚ͘dŚĂƚƐƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐĨŽƌϮ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϯ ĐĚ ĐĂƌƐƉĞƌŚŽƵƐĞŚŽůĚ͘
ŽǀĞƌůĞƚƚĞƌƐƚĂƚĞƐǇŽƵƌ
ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉŽůŝĐǇĐŚĂŶŐĞƐ͞ǁŝůů
ĨĚϰϲϲϬϮϲͲ ŽĨĨĞƌĂŵŽƌĞŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵů
Z͘E͘ŽůůŝŶƐ ϱϳϬĂͲϰϴĐϳͲ ƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞŚĂŵůĞƚ
ĨƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞϮϬϱϬ ϴĚϵĞͲ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͘͟ĂŶ
ŶŶŽƵŶĐĞ ΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵ ϱĐϴϳĚĂϬĚϬĂ ǇŽƵĞůĂďŽƌĂƚĞŽŶǁŚĂƚǇŽƵŵĞĂŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ŵĞŶƚ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϮϮ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϮϮ ďĚ ďǇĂŵŽƌĞŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵůƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
tŝůůƚŚĞƚĂǆƉĂǇĞƌƐďĞĨŽŽƚŝŶŐ
ĨϳϴĨĞϱĨϯͲ ƚŚĞďŝůůƚŽǁŝĚĞŶ&ƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞZŽĂĚ
ϱĐϱϮͲϰϰϳĨͲ ƚŽŚĂŶĚůĞƚŚĞƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĨƌŽŵǇŽƵƌ
ϴϰϮϴͲ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͍KƌǁŝůůƚŚĞ
͘ĂůĞƐ ϲĂϵďϬĚϴϲĞϵ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƉĂǇĨŽƌƌŽĂĚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϮϮ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϮϮ Ğϴ ŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐƚŽ&ƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞZŽĂĚ͘
dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŵĂƚĐŚ
ĐϴϬϭϴϳĚϮͲ ƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐŚŽŵĞĂŶĚůĂŶĚƵƐĞ
ϴĚďĨͲϰϳϴϱͲ ŝŶƚŚŝƐĂƌĞĂ͘WůĞĂƐĞĞůĂďŽƌĂƚĞŽŶ
ϴϮĨϱͲ ŚŽǁƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƐƚŚĞ
<ĞƉůĞƌ ĐϬϬĚĨϬĐĂϬϮϬ ĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐĂŶĚůĂŶĚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϭ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϭ Ĩ ŽǁŶĞƌƐ͍
ĂĐϵϬϲĚϮϴͲ
tŚĂƚ ϳďĚϲͲϰϯϵϰͲ
ŚĂƉƉĞŶĞĚƚŽ ĂϭϮϳͲ
ƚŚĞĂƵĚŝŽ͍ ϴĨϴĞϯĐϬϲϱĚϱ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϭ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϭ Ϭ tŚĂƚŚĂƉƉĞŶĞĚƚŽƚĞŚĂƵĚŝŽ͍
ďĂϵϮϮĨϴďͲ
ϯϮĨϭͲϰϳϭϭͲ ,ŽǁǁŝůůƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝŵƉƌŽǀĞ
'ůĞŶŶ ϵϰĚϳͲ ŚƵƌƌŝĐĂŶĞĞǀĂĐƵĂƚŝŽŶĐůĞĂƌĂŶĐĞ
ŽŵƉƚŽŶ ϱϭϱĞϬϬĞĚϮϲ ƚŝŵĞƐĨŽƌĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐ^ĂƌĂƐŽƚĂ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗Ϯϭ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗Ϯϭ Ϯϴ ŽƵŶƚǇƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͍
tŚĂƚŝƐƚŚĞƉƌŽĐĞƐƐďǇǁŚŝĐŚ
ϰĚĚϮϯϬĚĂͲ ƚŚĞƉƵďůŝĐĂŶĚŝƚƐĞůĞĐƚĞĚ
ĨϴϭďͲϰϬϯϯͲ ŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƐǁŝůůĚŝƐĐƵƐƐ͕ĂŶĂůǇǌĞ͕ĂŶĚ
dŽŵ ĂϯĨĐͲ ĂƉƉƌŽǀĞŽƌĚĞŶǇƚŚŝƐŶĞǁ
ŶŶŽƵŶĐĞ DĂƚƌƵůůŽ ϰďϰϬĚϯϴďϱĂ ĐĂƚĞŐŽƌǇĂĚĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ŵĞŶƚ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϮϬ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϮϬ Ěϵ ƚŽƚŚĞŽŵƉWůĂŶ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϳĨϱϬϱϲϬϬͲ
ϴϲĂϱͲϰĐĨϬͲ
ďϴϭϲͲ
ĞĐŬǇǇĞĐŚ ϳϲϱϵϳĞϯϲϬϰ ƐŽŚŽǁĐĂŶ/ƐƵďŵŝƚŵŽƌĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϵ ϰϳ ƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂŶƐǁĞƌƐ͍
ϯϮĚϬĚϲϮϰͲ
ϰϳĨĨͲϰϵĚϬͲ
ďĚĐϱͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϰĐϭĐďϱϮϰĨĞϰ /ĨƚŚŝƐŐŽĞƐĂŚĞĂĚ͕ǁŚĞŶǁŝůů
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϵ ϵ ŝŶŝƚŝĂůůĂŶĚĐůĞĂƌŝŶŐďĞŐŝŶ
ϳĂĨďϲĂĨϲͲ dŚŝƐŝƐƚŚĞŽŶůǇŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚǇƚŽ
ĂϱĞϰͲϰĨďϴͲ ĞŶŐĂŐĞ͘dŚĞWůĂŶŶŝŶŐĂŶĚ
ĂďϱĞͲ ŽƵŶƚǇŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶĞƌƐĚŽŶŽƚ
ĞĐŬǇǇĞĐŚ ϵϴϮϳϮϴϰϬϳϬ ĂŶƐǁĞƌƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϵ ϵĐ ŚĞĂƌŝŶŐƐ͘
ϭĞϬϯϯĐϰďͲ
ĚďϱĚͲϰϴϭϯͲ
ĂĚĂϳͲ
͘ĂůĞƐ ϭϰϳďϭĐϴĐϴĂϱ tŝůůǇŽƵďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐĂǁŝůĚůŝĨĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϵ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϵ ϴ ƵŶĚĞƌƉĂƐƐĞƐŽŶƚŚĞŶĞǁƌŽĂĚ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
zŽƵƉŽƌƚƌĂǇƚŚŝƐĂƐĂƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶ͘
ϮϬϱϬĚĞĨŝŶĞƐ,ĂŵůĞƚƐĂƐĂ
ƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶĨŽƌŵŽĨĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ
ŝŶƚĞŶĚĞĚƚŽďůĞŶĚƚŽǁĂƌĚƚŚĞ
ŵŽƌĞƌƵƌĂůĞĂƐƚĞƌŶĂƌĞĂŽĨƚŚĞ
ŽƵŶƚǇ͘
tŚǇĚŽǇŽƵŶĞĞĚĂĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚ
ƚǇƉĞŽĨƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶĨŽƌŵŽĨ
ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͍dǁŽƵŶŝƚƐĂŶĂĐƌĞ
ĚŽĞƐŶŽƚďůĞŶĚǁŝƚŚƌƵƌĂů͘/ƚŝƐ
ƵƌďĂŶƐƉƌĂǁů͘ŝůů^ƉĂĞƚŚ͕ƌĞƚŝƌĞĚ
^ĂƌĂƐŽƚĂWůĂŶŶĞƌŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚ>ĂŬĞ
ƉĂƌŬƐƚĂƚĞƐĂƐƵƌďĂŶƐƉƌĂǁů͘
dŚŝƐŝƐƵƌďĂŶƐƉƌĂǁůƚŝŵĞƐϮ͘
/ĨĂĚŽƉƚĞĚ͕ƚŚŝƐǁŝůůďĞĐŽŵĞĂ
ĐƌĞĞƉŝŶŐŽĨƵƌďĂŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƚŚĂƚ
ǁŝůůƵƐĞƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƌĞĂƐŽŶŝŶŐĨŽƌ
ĞǆƚĞŶĚŝŶŐƵƌďĂŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ
ƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚƚŚĞZƵƌĂůĂƌĞĂ
ŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚŽŶƚŚĞ&ƵƚƵƌĞ>ĂŶĚ
hƐĞDĂƉ;&>hDͿ͘
tŚǇĐĂŶ͛ƚƚŚĞϭ͕ϬϬϬͲĂĐƌĞ
ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕>ĂŬĞWĂƌŬƐƚĂƚĞƐ
ĚĨϮϮϴϰĚϲͲ ƌĞŵĂŝŶǁŝƚŚĂĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĐĂƉŽĨϰϬϬ
ϲϰϳϱͲϰĚϱϮͲ ĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐŽŶϭƵŶŝƚƉĞƌĂĐƌĞ͍
ϵĚϳĨͲ tŚǇĚŽŶ͛ƚǇŽƵďƵŝůĚƵƉĂŶĚŶŽƚ
ĞĐŬǇǇĞĐŚ ĚϵϰϵĐĞĞĚϳϯ ŽƵƚ͍
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϳ ϵϯ tŚĂƚĂŵĞŶŝƚŝĞƐǁŝůůďĞ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
zŽƵŚĂǀĞĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚǀĂƌŝŽƵƐ
ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŝƐƚŝĐƐŽĨƚŚŝƐŶĞǁ&ƵƚƵƌĞ
>ĂŶĚhƐĞDĂƉĐĂƚĞŐŽƌǇ͘tŝůů
ƚŚĞǇĂůůďĞŵĂŶĚĂƚŽƌǇŽƌĂƌĞǇŽƵ
ƐŝŵƉůǇĞǆƉƌĞƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚ
ŝŶƚĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞ>ĂŬĞǁŽŽĚZĂŶĐŚ
ĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌ͍ǆĂŵƉůĞ͗Η,ŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ǁŝůůďĞŵĂĚĞĂĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĂƚĂ
ǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŽĨƉƌŝĐĞƉŽŝŶƚƐ͘ΗtŚĂƚ
ƉŽůŝĐǇŝĨĂŶǇŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ͘tŝůů
ĂŶǇƚŚŝŶŐďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĨŽƌƚƌƵůǇ
ĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ͕ĂŶĚŝĨƐŽ
ǁŚĂƚ͕ŽƌĂƌĞǁĞƚĂůŬŝŶŐĂďŽƵƚƐŽͲ
ĐĂůůĞĚΗĂƚƚĂŝŶĂďůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐΗ
ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞƚŽĂĨĂŵŝůǇŽĨ
ϭϮϬйƌĞĂDĞĚŝĂŶ/ŶĐŽŵĞ͕ƚŚĂƚ
ŝƐĞĂƌŶŝŶŐǁĞůůŽǀĞƌΨϭϬϬ͕ϬϬϬĂ
ǇĞĂƌ͍ŐĂŝŶ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞƌĞƐƉŽŶĚƚŽ
ƚŚĞďƌŽĂĚĞƌƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŽ
ϰϱϴϰĚĚďϴͲ ǁŚĞƚŚĞƌĞǀĞƌǇƚŚŝŶŐǇŽƵĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞ
ĨĚĨϳͲϰĚϲĐͲ ǁŝůůďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚŝŶŽŵƉWůĂŶ
ϵϭϲĞͲ ƉŽůŝĐŝĞƐ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞŶĂƐƚŽŵǇ
ĂŶ>ŽďĞĐŬ ϯϭĚϬϵϵϯĨϳϮϴ ƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶŽŶĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϳ Đ ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ͘dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ͘
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
WůĞĂƐĞĞůĂďŽƌĂƚĞŽŶƚŚĞǁĂƚĞƌ
ϰďϯϯϯϬĐϲͲ ƌƵŶŽĨĨƐƚƵĚŝĞƐƚŚĂƚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶ
ϵϭĐĚͲϰĞĐϱͲ ĚŽŶĞƚŽĞŶƐƵƌĞƚŚĂƚŶĞǁ
ϵϴĂϰͲ ŚŽŵĞƐŝƚĞƐͬĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĚŽŶŽƚ
ŶŶŽƵŶĐĞ <ĞƉůĞƌ ĨϵϮϱϲďϰϬďϰĨ ŚĂǀĞĂŶĞŐĂƚŝǀĞŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ŵĞŶƚ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϳ Đ ĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐŚŽŵĞĂŶĚůĂŶĚŽǁŶĞƌƐ
WůĞĂƐĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞ
DĂŶĂ^ŽƚĂϴϴΛĐŽŵĐĂƐƚ͘ŶĞƚŝŶ
ϳĚĚĨϵĨϲĨͲ ĂŶǇĨƵƚƵƌĞŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŶŽƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘
ĂĐĚĨͲϰϭϬĞͲ tĞŚŽůĚĂĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ
'ůĞŶŶ ĂĨϴϱͲ ĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞ^ŽƵƚŚĞĂƐƚ
ŽŵƉƚŽŶ ϬĨĞϲĐϰϭϳĞϳĨ WƌŽũĞĐƚƐŝƚĞĂŶĚĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϳ Đ ŶŽƚŝĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͘
ϭϳϵϲĚϳďϰͲ ŽǇŽƵƉůĂŶƚŽĂƵŐŵĞŶƚƚŚĞ
ϯϳĞϰͲϰĨĂĂͲ ǁĂƚĞƌŝŶƚŚĞůĂŬĞƐƐŚŽǁŶ͍tŝůů
ĂϬϮϯͲ ƚŚĞůĂŬĞƐďĞůŝŶĞĚƚŽƉƌĞǀĞŶƚ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĨϯĐĂϮϬĂϰĨϵĐ ůĂƚĞƌĂůƐĞĞƉĂŐĞĂŶĚĚĂŵĂŐĞƚŽ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϳ Ğ ƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĂƌĞĂƐ͍
ĂϵĂϮϯĞϵϵͲ zŽƵŵĞŶƚŝŽŶĞĚĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů
ϭϴϬϳͲϰďϮϮͲ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘͘͘ƚǁŚĂƚƉŽŝŶƚĚŽ
ďϮϯďͲ ǇŽƵĞǆƉĞĐƚƚŽďĞŐŝŶĂƐŬŝŶŐĨŽƌ
<ĞƉůĞƌ ϵĂϱĂϯϳϳϭϲϯ ĞǆĐĞƉƚŝŽŶƐƚŽƉůĂŶƐƚŽĂůůŽǁĨŽƌ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϳ ϲĨ ĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ĞĐĂƵƐĞƚŚĞĐŽŵƉƉůĂŶƐĐĂůůƐĨŽƌ
ĚϵĨϴϵĐĂϴͲ ĂŶŝŶƚĞƌĐŽŶŶĞĐƚĞĚƚƌĂŝůƐǇƐƚĞŵŝŶ
ϬĚĐĚͲϰϴϰϵͲ ƚŚĞƌƵƌĂůůĂŶĚƐ͕ǁŝůůƚŚĞƐĞƚƌĂŝůƐ
ϴďĞϭͲ ďĞŽƉĞŶƚŽƚŚĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉƵďůŝĐ
͘ĂůĞƐ ϱĐϮĨĞϳϴďďϰĨ ĂŶĚďĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƚŽƚŚĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϳ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϳ ϵ ĞƋƵĞƐƚƌŝĂŶƐ͘
ϬĐϯĂĐϴϲĨͲ
ϳĚĚϲͲϰĞϲϵͲ
ĂϲĨĞͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĨϵϭĞϭĚϳϮĞϬϬ tŚĂƚĂƌĞƚŚĞƉƵƌƉůĞďůŽďƐŽŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϲ ď ƚŚĞŵĂƉ͍
ϱϯϭϮϴĐϴĨͲ
ϭϱϳϵͲϰϳϳϱͲ WůĞĂƐĞŐŝǀĞŵĞŶŽƚŝĐĞŽĨĂůů
ďĐϰĞͲ ĨƵƚƵƌĞŚĞĂƌŝŶŐƐ͕ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐƐ͕ĞƚĐ͘
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϱĞϬϬϭϴĂϳϬϮ ŽŶƚŚŝƐŵĂƚƚĞƌ͘^ƵƐĂŶ^ĐŚŽĞƚƚůĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϲ ĚϬ ƐƉŐƵŵŵΛŵĂŝůŵƚ͘ĐŽŵ
ĚĨĚĐϲϳϱĂͲ dŚĞƌĞŝƐĂĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ
ϵĨĐϲͲϰĂĂϱͲ ĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚƐŽƵƚŚŽĨĞƌŶƌĞĞŬ͘/Ɛ
DŝŬĞ ďϬϭĐͲ ŝƚŐŽŝŶŐƚŽĐŚĂŶŐĞ͍/ƐƚŚĞƌĞŐŽŝŶŐ
,:ƵƚĐŚŝŶƐŽŶ ϲϮϴϲϯďϭϯϴϵ ƚŽďĞĂǁĂƚĞƌƉƵŵƉŝŶŐƐƚĂƚŝŽŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϲ ϵĞ ŽŶƚŚŝƐĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ͍
ϭϭĨĂϱϱϲĐͲ
ϭĨϴĂͲϰϭϭϰͲ
ďďĐϯͲ tŚĂƚĂƌĞƚŚĞƉůĂŶƐĨŽƌƐƚƌĞĞƚ
<ĞƉůĞƌ ϴďďϱϬĚďϬĐϳ ůŝŐŚƚƐŝŶƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϲ Ğď ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐ͍
ϳϭϬϮĂϭϲϮͲ
ϵϵϵĐͲϰĨϰϰͲ
ϵĂϴϲͲ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϱďϳĂĞĨĚϱϭďĨ /ĂŵŽƉƉŽƐĞĚƚŽĂŶǇŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞŝŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϲ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϲ Ĩ ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͘
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ĞϮďϴĞϮϰϴͲ
ϲĂďϵͲϰĨĨĞͲ
ĂϳĚϮͲ :ƵƐƚĐŽŶĨŝƌŵŝŶŐ͕ƚŚĞƉƵƌƉůĞƌŽĂĚ
ŶŶŽƵŶĐĞ :ĂŶDĞŝƐƐŶĞƌ ĞĚϴϴϰĐĐĂĨϲϯ ŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞĚŝƐŽƵƌŶƐŝĚĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ŵĞŶƚ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϱ ϵ ĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĂƚŝŽŶ͍
sK^WŽůŝĐǇϱ͘ϮWƌŽƚĞĐƚĞĚ
ZŽĂĚǁĂǇŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐ
ŽƉĞŶǀŝƐƚĂƐĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƚŚĞ
ŝŶƚĞŐƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƌƵƌĂůĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŽĨ
&ƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞZŽĂĚͬ^ZϳϴϬĞĂƐƚŽĨ
ŽŐ<ĞŶŶĞůZŽĂĚ͕ŶŽǁĐĂůůĞĚ
>ŽƌƌĂŝŶĞZŽĂĚ͘,ŽǁǁŝůůǇŽƵ
ĂĐĐŽŵƉůŝƐŚƚŚŝƐ͍ůƌĞĂĚǇ͕>ĂŬĞ
WĂƌŬƐƚĂƚĞƐŚĂƐŶŽƚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĞĚ
ƚŚĞƌƵƌĂůĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŽĨ&ƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞ
ZŽĂĚ͘tŝůůĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞ
Ăƚ>ĂŬĞWĂƌŬƐƚĂƚĞƐĂŶĚŐŽǁĞƐƚ
Žƌǁŝůů>ĂŬĞǁŽŽĚZĂŶĐŚďƵŝůĚĞĂƚ
ŽƌďŽƚŚ͍tŚĂƚŝƐƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŽƵƚ
ĚĂƚĞ͍/Ɛ>ĂŬĞǁŽŽĚZĂŶĐŚ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇĂƚďƵŝůĚŽƵƚĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͍
tŚŝůĞƚŚĞǁĞƐƚĞƌŶďŽƵŶĚĂƌǇŝƐ
ƵƌďĂŶ͕ƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĂƌĞĂŽĨ
ĐŚĂŶŐĞ͕ϯ͕ϵϬϬĂĐƌĞƐ͕ŝƐ
ƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚĞĚďǇƌƵƌĂůůĂŶĚƐƚŚĂƚ
ŵĂǇĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇŚĂǀĞůŝǀĞƐƚŽĐŬ͘
,ŽǁǁŝůůǇŽƵŵŝƚŝŐĂƚĞƚŚĞ
ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŶŽŝƐĞƐƐƵĐŚĂƐ
ĚϰĚϬϴĂϱϬͲ ĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĂůĚŝĞƐĞůĞŶŐŝŶĞƐŽŶůĂƌŐĞ
ϬϱϭϳͲϰϳϮĚͲ ĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƚŚĞďĂĐŬƵƉ
ϵϯϬĐͲ ďĞĞƉĞƌƐƚŚĂƚǁŝůůŵŽƐƚůŝŬĞůǇ
ĞĐŬǇǇĞĐŚ ϵĚϵϯϬϱϯϭϬϯ ƐƚĂƌƚůĞƚŚĞůŝǀĞƐƚŽĐŬ͍/ďĞůŝĞǀĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϱ ĚϬ ƚŚĞƌĞŝƐĂůƌĞĂĚǇƐƵĐŚĂƉƌŽďůĞŵ
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϵĂďĐϰϱϵϱͲ
ϰĚϴĂͲϰϭϰϵͲ ,ŽǁŝƐƚŚĞϱϳϬĂĐƌĞ
DŝŬĞ ĂϳĞĐͲ ĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚŶŽƌƚŚŽĨ
,:ƵƚĐŚŝŶƐŽŶ ĂĚďĂϱĚϲĞϲϮ ĞƌŶƌĞĞŬ;ĨƌŽŵ&W>
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϱ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϱ ϯϯ ƐĞƚƚůĞŵĞŶƚͿďĞŝŶŐŚĂŶĚůĞĚ͍
ϴďĨďϮϯϵďͲ
ϳϮϭďͲϰϳϰĞͲ
ϴĐϴϮͲ
͘ĂůĞƐ ϮĐϯϯϬϵϲϯďϰ &ŽƌƚŚĞƌĞĐŽƌĚ/ĂŵKWWK^ƚŽ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϰ ϵĂ ƚŚŝƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞ͘
WůĞĂƐĞĞůĂďŽƌĂƚĞŽŶĂŶǇƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ
ϲϯďϰĞϳĨϵͲ ƐƚƵĚŝĞƐƚŚĂƚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĚŽŶĞ͘
ϬϰϯϱͲϰϰĚĨͲ &ƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞZĚ͘ŝƐĞǆƚƌĞŵĞůǇ
ϴĚϵĚͲ ĐŽŶŐĞƐƚĞĚĂƐŝƐĂŶĚĐĂŶŶŽƚ
<ĞƉůĞƌ ϬϬĚĐϴϭϴĞϵϮ ĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƚĞƚŚĞŐƌŽǁƚŚǇŽƵ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϰ ďϬ ĂƌĞƉƌŽƉŽƐŝŶŐ͘
ĂĐϰĞϭϴĂĨͲ
Z͘E͘ŽůůŝŶƐ ϭĨϵϭͲϰĂϳϭͲ tŚǇŝƐƚŚĞƌĞĂůĂƌŐĞ
ĨƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞϮϬϱϬ ĂĨĂĂͲ ƵŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚĂƌĞĂũƵƐƚŶŽƌƚŚŽĨ
ŶŶŽƵŶĐĞ ΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵ ϵϳĐďϴϯϯϱϬϰ ĞƌŶƌĞĞŬĚĞƉŝĐƚĞĚŽŶƚŚĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ ŵĞŶƚ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϰ ϳϰ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽŶĐĞƉƚWůĂŶ͍
ϵϯďϵϯϲϴĐͲ
ϱϭϵĨͲϰĐϱϯͲ ĞƌŶƌĞĞŬŝƐǀĞƌǇǁĞƚĂƌĞĂ
ϵĞϬĐͲ ĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƌĂŝŶǇƐĞĂƐŽŶ͕ŚŽǁĚŽ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĚϳĨďϬĚϳĨĨĐϰ ǇŽƵƉůĂŶƚŽŵŝƚŝŐĂƚĞǇŽƵƌǁĂƚĞƌ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϰ ϱ ƌƵŶŽĨĨ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
dŚŝƐŝƐŶŽƚŵƵĐŚŽĨĂƉƵďůŝĐ
ǁŽƌŬƐŚŽƉŝĨƚŚĞŵŽĚĞƌĂƚŽƌ
ĂƉƉƌŽǀĞƐƚŚĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ͘ƚƌƵĞ
ϯĞϲϳϲϬďĐͲ ƉƵďůŝĐǁŽƌŬƐŚŽƉǁŽƵůĚƉŽƐƚĂůů
ĨϮϭϮͲϰϳĨϲͲ ŽĨƚŚĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐƉƵďůŝĐůǇƐŽǁĞ
>ŽƵƌĚĞƐ ϵĨϭĨͲ ĐĂŶĂůůƌĞĂĚǁŚĂƚŝƐďĞŝŶŐĂƐŬĞĚ͘
ZĂŵŝƌĞǌ ϬϵϮϴϴϱĐĨĞϰϱ /ŶƐƚĞĂĚŝƚƐĞĞŵƐƚŽďĞŵŽƌĞŽĨĂ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϰ ϲ ƉƵďůŝĐƐĂůĞƐũŽď͘
ďĂďϳϯĂϭϳͲ ŽŵŵĞŶƚ͗/ŽƉƉŽƐĞƚŚĞ
Z͘E͘ŽůůŝŶƐ ĨĨϳďͲϰϯďĨͲ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĐŽƵŶƚƌǇƐŝĚĞůŝŶĞŵŽǀĞ
ĨƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞϮϬϱϬ ĂĂϲĐͲ ĂŶĚƚŚĞĞǆƉĂŶƐŝŽŶŽĨsŝůůĂŐĞ
ΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵ ĨĂĞĨϮϳϭϴϴĚĐ ZDŝŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƌĞĂƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϰ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϰ Ě ĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐ,ĂŵůĞƚ
ϴϭϰϵϬϴďĞͲ
Z͘E͘ŽůůŝŶƐ ϮϲĞϵͲϰϯϭϳͲ
ĨƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞϮϬϱϬ ϵĨĞϴͲ
ΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵ ďďĨϰϯϵĂďϬϬĐ tŚĞŶĚŽǇŽƵĂŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϯ Ğ ƐƵďŵŝƚƚŝŶŐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͍
ϴďĂĚďϵϵϵͲ tŚĂƚŝƐŚĂƉƉĞŶŝŶŐƚŽƚŽ
ϴĐϳϭͲϰĞĨϭͲ >ĂŬĞƉĂƌŬƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚǁĂƐ
DŝŬĞ ϵϮĞϭͲ ƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐůǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĂŶĚ
,:ƵƚĐŚŝŶƐŽŶ ϭϵϲĐϵϳĐĨϲĨϱ ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐƚĂƌƚĞĚŝŶ:ĂŶƵĂƌǇ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϯ ϱ ϮϬϮϮ͍
ŽǀĞƌůĞƚƚĞƌƐƚĂƚĞƐǇŽƵƌ
ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉŽůŝĐǇĐŚĂŶŐĞƐ͞ǁŝůů
ŽĨĨĞƌĂŵŽƌĞŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵů
Z͘E͘ŽůůŝŶƐ ĨĐϱϭϳĨϳϯͲ ƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞŚĂŵůĞƚ
ĨƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞϮϬϱϬ ϴϰĚϭͲϰϭϳϴͲ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͘͟ĂŶ
ΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵ ϵϳϱďͲ ǇŽƵĞůĂďŽƌĂƚĞŽŶǁŚĂƚǇŽƵŵĞĂŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϯ ϯϮďϲϰϵϲϮĨĐĨĨ ďǇĂŵŽƌĞŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵůƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
ϱϲϬĐϵďϭĞͲ dŚĞĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽŶĐĞƉƚWůĂŶ
Z͘E͘ŽůůŝŶƐ ĐĂĞĨͲϰďϬϵͲ >ĞŐĞŶĚƐĂǇƐƉƵƌƉůĞŝƐZKtĂƌĞ
ĨƌƵŝƚǀŝůůĞϮϬϱϬ ďϱϱϲͲ ƚŚĞϵƉƵƌƉůĞƐƉŽƚƐƐŚŽǁŶŽŶƚŚĞ
ΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵ ĞϵϰϳϳϮϱϭĞϭ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽŶĐĞƉƚWůĂŶ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϯ ϭϵ ZKt͍
tŚĂƚŝƐƚŚĞƉƌŽĐĞƐƐďǇǁŚŝĐŚƚŚĞ
ďĞĨďϵϵϳĚͲ ƉƵďůŝĐĂŶĚŝƚƐĞůĞĐƚĞĚŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƐ
ďĂϰĨͲϰϲϳϱͲ ǁŝůůĚŝƐĐƵƐƐ͕ĂŶĂůǇǌĞ͕ĂŶĚ
dŽŵ ĂϲĂĞͲ ĂƉƉƌŽǀĞŽƌĚĞŶǇƚŚŝƐŶĞǁ
DĂƚƌƵůůŽ ϯϲϬĨϯϲϴϱϬϱϰ ĐĂƚĞŐŽƌǇĂĚĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϯ Ă ƚŽƚŚĞŽŵƉWůĂŶ͍
tŚŽŝƐƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌŽĨƚŚŝƐ
ďĂϬϬĚĚϲϰͲ ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇ͍tŚĂƚŝƐƚŚĞ
ĐďϳĐͲϰϳĨϯͲ ĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚƉƌŝĐĞƌĂŶŐĞŽĨƚŚĞ
ϴϬϱϭͲ ŚŽŵĞƐ͍tŝůůĂůůƚŚĞ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϴĐϯĞĞϯϱĐϱϵϴ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚďĞƐŝŶŐůĞĨĂŵŝůǇ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϯ Ĩ ŚŽŵĞƐ͍
ϮĞϰϵϭϵĨϴͲ
ϲϴĨĐͲϰĞϳϲͲ tŚĂƚĐĂŶƚŚĞůŽĐĂůƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚĚŽ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϵϵϵĂͲ ƚŽŬĞĞƉŐƌŽǁƚŚƚŽĂŵŝŶŝŵƵŵ͍
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϯ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϯ ĞϬĨďĨϰĨĨĂϴϯϵ dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ
ďϲϮϳϰϴĚϬͲ
ϰϴϱϬͲϰϴϱϲͲ
ϴϳďϵͲ tŝůůƚŚŝƐŵĞĂŶƚŚĂƚhŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚǇ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ϲϴďĐϲϳϵϱϭϯ ǁŝůůŐĞƚĞǆƚĞŶĚĞĚĂƐƚƚŽŵĞĞƚ/
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϮ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϮ ϴĞ ϳϬ
ĚϳϲϰϱĐďĨͲ
ϳϬĨĂͲϰĐϭϭͲ
ϵďϮϱͲ tŚĂƚĂƌĞƚŚĞƉůĂŶƐĨŽƌĂĚĚŝŶŐ
ŶŽŶǇŵŽƵƐ ĐϯϴϬĐϲĂĞĂĚϮ ůĂŶĞƐŽŶhŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚǇ͍tŝůůƚŚĞƌĞ
ƚƚĞŶĚĞĞ YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶ ;hŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĞĚͿ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϭϴ͗ϭϮ ϰͬϳͬϮϬϮϮϮϮ͗ϭϮ ϯ ďĞĂůŝŐŚƚŽŶŽƵƌŶĞƐŝĚĞ͍
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 11:
FORMS
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
11.1 Billable Fee Agreement Form

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
11.2 Owner Disclosure and Affidavit Forms

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
SECTION 12:
SKETCH & LEGAL
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
APPENDIX A: PROPOSED
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
A.1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Form

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT

3ODQQLQJDQG'HYHORSPHQW6HUYLFHV'HSDUWPHQW
5LQJOLQJ%OYGVW )ORRU
6DUDVRWD)/
7HOHSKRQH)D[(PDLOSODQQHU#VFJRYQHW
FORMAL REQUEST
,KHUHE\UHTXHVWWKH6DUDVRWD&RXQW\&RPPLVVLRQWRDPHQG7KH6DUDVRWD&RXQW\
&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQE\UHYLVLQJ
7KH)XWXUH/DQG8VH0DSE\FKDQJLQJIURPBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBWRBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Hamlet/Greenway RMA Overlay Village Transition Zone/Greenway RMA Overlay
2WKHU&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ$PHQGPHQW$SSOLFDWLRQ7\SHBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$WWDFK1DUUDWLYH
Text Amendment & amending Countryside Line
)RU)XWXUH/DQG8VH0DSDPHQGPHQWVSOHDVHDWWDFKDOHJLEOHPDSWKDWGHSLFWVDQDUHDWKDW
LQFOXGHVWKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\WKHVXUURXQGLQJDUHDIRUDGLVWDQFHRIQRWOHVVWKDQIHHWIURP
WKHERXQGDULHVRIWKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\DQGRQHRUPRUHPDMRUWKRURXJKIDUHV $OOSDUFHO
ERXQGDULHVVKRXOGEHVKRZQ7KH)XWXUH/DQG8VH0DSGHVLJQDWLRQVVKRXOGEHLQGLFDWHG7KH
SURSHUW\WKDWLVWKHVXEMHFWRIWKHDPHQGPHQWVKRXOGEHRXWOLQHGRQWKHPDSDQGWKHUHTXHVWHG
FKDQJHVKRXOGEHQRWHGLQWKHOHJHQG,IDQHZ&RPPHUFLDO&HQWHURU&RPPHUFLDO+LJKZD\
,QWHUFKDQJHGHVLJQDWLRQLVEHLQJUHTXHVWHGZKRVHERXQGDULHVZLOOKDYHWREHGHILQHGWKURXJK
WKH&ULWLFDO$UHD3ODQQLQJ3URJUDPWKHDSSOLFDQWVKDOOVKRZWKHDSSOLFDEOH)XWXUH/DQG8VH
0DSV\PEROUDWKHUWKDQDVSHFLILFERXQGDU\GHOLQHDWLRQ
BBBBB 6PDOO6FDOH&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ$PHQGPHQWSURSRVLQJD)XWXUH/DQG8VH0DSFKDQJH

RQO\IRUDSDUFHODFUHVRUOHVVLQVL]H
■ /DUJH6FDOH&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ$PHQGPHQW!DFUHVLQVL]H
BBBBB
BBBBB
■ 0DSVLQWKH)XWXUH/DQG8VH6HULHVOLVWHGLQ)XWXUH/DQG8VH3ROLF\
3OHDVHDWWDFKDQDQQRWDWHGFRS\RIWKHPDSVDVDGRSWHG
■ *RDOV2EMHFWLYHV3ROLFLHVDQGRU
BBBBB
BBBBB *XLGLQJ3ULQFLSOHVDQGRU
BBBBB 3URYLVLRQVIRU(YDOXDWLQJ'HYHORSPHQWVLQ1DWLYH+DELWDWV
3OHDVHDWWDFKDSDJHVVKRZLQJWKHSURSRVHGWH[WUHYLVLRQVZLWKDGGLWLRQVXQGHUOLQHGDQG
GHOHWLRQVVKRZQVWUXFNWKURXJK BBBBBBBBBBBB
See Attached
Please be sure to refer to page 7 for County Charter language governing Board approval of
Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
PAYMENT OF FEES
$OOH[SHQVHVRIDGYHUWLVLQJQRWLFHVWDIIUHYLHZDQGSURFHVVLQJVKDOOEHSDLGE\WKH3HWLWLRQHU
XQGHUWKH&RXQW\¶VELOODEOHIHHV\VWHPSXUVXDQWWR5HVROXWLRQ1R7KH%LOODEOH)HH
3D\PHQW$JUHHPHQWLVLQFOXGHGLQWKLVDSSOLFDWLRQIRUPDQGPXVWEHVXEPLWWHGZLWKWKH
DSSOLFDWLRQ

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
FUTURE LAND USE MAP REVISIONS

,ID )XWXUH /DQG8VH0DSUHYLVLRQLVEHLQJUHTXHVWHGSOHDVHDQVZHUWKHTXHVWLRQVLQWKLVVHFWLRQ
,ID&RPPHUFLDO&HQWHURU&RPPHUFLDO+LJKZD\ ,QWHUFKDQJHGHVLJQDWLRQLVEHLQJUHTXHVWHG
ZKRVHERXQGDULHVZLOOKDYHWREHGHILQHGWKURXJKWKH&ULWLFDO$UHD3ODQQLQJ3URJUDPWKH
DSSOLFDQWVKDOOXVHWKHPD[LPXPDUHDSHUPLWWHGE\ WKHGHVLJQDWLRQIRUDOO PDUNHWGHPDQGDQG
LPSDFWFDOFXODWLRQV'RQRWLQFOXGHDFRQFHSWSODQZLWK\RXUDSSOLFDWLRQ
Existing Land Use

4,120 Acres
1. :KDWLVWKHDFUHDJHRIWKHSURSHUW\SURSRVHGIRU UHGHVLJQDWLRQ"BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB1RW
DSSOLFDEOHWRQHZ&RPPHUFLDO&HQWHUDQG&RPPHUFLDO+LJKZD\,QWHUFKDQJHGHVLJQDWLRQ
UHTXHVWV
2. $UHWKHUHDQ\EXLOGLQJVRQWKHSURSHUW\" BBBBB<(6 ■ BBBBB12

a. ,I <(6SOHDVHGHVFULEHEULHIO\
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Agricultural (office, barns, sheds, etc.); Single-family residential
3OHDVHattach a description of the land uses on all surrounding properties $QDHULDO

SKRWRJUDSKVKRXOGEHVXEPLWWHGWRDFFRPSDQ\WKHGHVFULSWLRQ7KHERXQGDULHVRIWKH
DPHQGPHQWDUHDVKRXOGEHLQGLFDWHGRQWKHSKRWRJUDSK ,IWKHRZQHURIWKHVXEMHFWSDUFHOV
DOVRRZQSDUFHOVDGMDFHQWWRWKHVXEMHFWSDUFHOSOHDVHLQGLFDWHWKHORFDWLRQRIWKHVHSDUFHOV
,QWKHFDVHRIDUHTXHVWIRUDSURSRVHGQHZ&RPPHUFLDO&HQWHURU&RPPHUFLDO+LJKZD\
,QWHUFKDQJHGHVLJQDWLRQH[LVWLQJODQGXVHVVKRXOGEHGHVFULEHGIRUDGLVWDQFHRIDWOHDVW
IHHWIURPWKHLQWHUVHFWLRQEXWQRSDUFHOERXQGDULHVVKRXOGEHLQGLFDWHG
See Attached 'Adjacent Uses' Exhibit and Attached Narrative
,IWKHUHDUHQDWLYHKDELWDWVRQWKHSURSHUW\SOHDVHLQGLFDWHWKHQDWLYHKDELWDWDUHDVDV
FDWHJRUL]HGRQWKH/DQG&RYHU0DSLQWKH&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQRQDQDHULDOSKRWRJUDSK ,I
DQHQYLURQPHQWDODVVHVVPHQWKDVEHHQGRQHSOHDVHDWWDFKWKHUHSRUWWRWKLVDSSOLFDWLRQ
See Attached 'FLUCCS' Exhibit
Availability of Public Facilities

■
5. ,VWKHSURSHUW\ORFDWHGZLWKLQWKH8UEDQ6HUYLFH%RXQGDU\" BBBBBBB<(6BBBBBBBB12
a. ,IQRZRXOGWKHSURSRVHGGHVLJQDWLRQUHTXLUH DQH[WHQVLRQRIWKH8UEDQ6HUYLFH
%RXQGDU\"
■
BBBBBBB<(6 BBBBBBBB12
Please be sure to refer to page 7 for County Charter language governing Board approval of
Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
■
6. ,VWKHSURSHUW\ORFDWHGZLWKLQD)XWXUH8UEDQ6HUYLFH%RXQGDU\" BBBBBB<(6BBBBBB12
Wastewater Facilities
7. :KDWLVWKHHVWLPDWHGPD[LPXPZDVWHZDWHUIORZSHUGD\WKDWZRXOGEH JHQHUDWHGLIWKH
SURSHUW\ZHUHGHYHORSHGXQGHUWKHSURSRVHGGHVLJQDWLRQDVFRPSDUHGZLWKWKHSUHVHQW
GHVLJQDWLRQ"3OHDVHDQVZHULQJDOORQVSHUGD\DQGVKRZFDOFXODWLRQV

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Existing Designation (RMA Hamlet Overlay) includes 1644 dwelling units and 50,000 SF commercial
Single Family 1644 units x 200 gpd ADF/units = 328,800 gpd ADF + Commercial 50,000 SF x 120 gpd ADS/1000 SF = 6,000 gpd ADF = 334,800 gpd ADF
Peak Flow w/assumed Peak Factor of 4: ADF x 4 = 334,800 gpd x 4 = 1,339,200 gpd
Proposed Designation (RMA Village Transition Zone Overlay) includes 5,000 dwelling units
Single Family 5000 units x 200 gpd ADF/units = 1,000,000 gpd ADF
Peak Flow w/assumed Peak Factor of 4: ADF x 4 = 1,000,000 gpd x 4 = 4,000,000 gpd
8. ,VWKHSURSHUW\ZLWKLQD ZDVWHZDWHUVHUYLFHDUHD" BBBBBBB<(6BBBBBBBB12 ■

LI \HVSOHDVHDQVZHUWKHIROORZLQJTXHVWLRQV
a. :KLFKZDVWHZDWHUVHUYLFHDUHD"BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Bee Ridge Water Reclamation Facility
b. ,VWKHUHDGHTXDWHFDSDFLW\ DWWKH ZDVWHZDWHUWUHDWPHQWIDFLOLW\WRVHUYHWKHIORZ

FDOFXODWHGIRUWKHSURSRVHGGHVLJQDWLRQ" BBBBBBB<(6BBBBBBBB12 ■
c. :RXOGDOLQHH[WHQVLRQEHQHHGHGWRVHUYHWKHSURSHUW\" BBBBBBB<(6BBBBBBBB12 ■
d. ,I \HVSOHDVHGHVFULEHWKHURXWHRIWKHSURSRVHGOLQHH[WHQVLRQ
A force main from the project to the Bee Ridge Water Reclamation facility is necessary to serve the development.
e. ,VWKHOLQH H[WHQVLRQGHVFULEHGDERYHOLVWHGLQWKH &RXQW\¶VPRVWUHFHQWO\ DGRSWHG

)LYH<HDU6FKHGXOHRI&DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQWV" BBBBBBB<(6 BBBBBBBB12 ■
f. ,IWKHDQVZHUWR8e LV12LVWKHQHHGHGOLQHH[WHQVLRQOLVWHGLQ7DEOH)XWXUH
&DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQWV LQWKH&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ" BBBBB<(6BBBBBB12 ■
Potable Water Facilities

:KDWLVWKHHVWLPDWHGPD[LPXPGHPDQGIRUSRWDEOHZDWHUWKDWZRXOGEHJHQHUDWHGLIWKH
SURSHUW\ZHUHGHYHORSHGXQGHUWKHSURSRVHGGHVLJQDWLRQDVFRPSDUHGZLWKWKHSUHVHQW
GHVLJQDWLRQ"3OHDVHDQVZHULQJDOORQVSHUGD\DQGVKRZFDOFXODWLRQV
Existing Designation (RMA Hamlet Overlay) includes 1644 dwelling units and 50,000 SF commercial
Single Family 1644 units x 250 gpd ADF/units = 411,000 gpd ADF + Commercial 50,000 SF x 150 gpd ADS/1000 SF = 7,500 gpd ADF = 418,500 gpd ADF
Max Daily Flow w/assumed Peak Factor of 2: ADF x 2 = 418,500 gpd x 2 = 837,000 gpd
Proposed Designation (RMA Village Transition Zone Overlay) includes 5,000 dwelling units Single Family 5000 units x 250 gpd ADF/units = 1,250,000 gpd ADF
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB Max Daily Flow w/assumed Peak Factor of 2: ADF x 2 = 1,250,000
gpd x 2 = 2,500,000 gpd
,VWKHSURSHUW\ZLWKLQDSRWDEOHZDWHUVHUYLFHDUHDDVVKRZQRQ0DS3RWDEOH:DWHU
6HUYLFH$UHDVLQWKH&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ BBBBBBB<(6 ■ BBBBBBBB12
LI\HVSOHDVHDQVZHUWKHIROORZLQJTXHVWLRQV
D :RXOGDOLQHH[WHQVLRQEHQHHGHGWRVHUYHWKHSURSHUW\" BBBBBBB<(6 ■ BBBBBBBB12
E ,I\HVSOHDVHGHVFULEHWKHSURSRVHGURXWH
A potable extension and booster pump station is currently being installed near the project. A potable line will be necessary from that booster
pump station to the project. In addition to that line, an additional supply line is anticipated from Lorraine Rd and Fruitville Rd to the booster
pump station/storage tanks. That supply line is to be provided by the Peace River Water Authority. The Applicant is not sure if that extension
is planned with the County or Peace River capital improvements budget. The "yes" box is selected below since it is likely in one or the other.
F ,VWKHOLQHH[WHQVLRQGHVFULEHGDERYHOLVWHGLQWKH&RXQW\¶VPRVWUHFHQWO\DGRSWHG )LYH
<HDU6FKHGXOHRI&DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQWV" BBBBBBB<(6 ■ BBBBBBBB12

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Stormwater
,QZKLFKGUDLQDJHEDVLQLVWKHSURSHUW\ORFDWHG"BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
15- Upper Cow Pen Slough and 21- Upper Myakka River/Howard Creek
■
+DVD%DVLQ0DVWHU3ODQEHHQDSSURYHGE\WKH&RXQW\IRUWKDWEDVLQ" BBBBB<(6 BBBBB12
D ,IYESGRHVWKH%DVLQ0DVWHU3ODQVKRZWKDWWKHGUDLQDJHV\VWHPWKDWZRXOGEH LPSDFWHG
■
PHHWVFXUUHQWPLQLPXPDGRSWHGOHYHORIVHUYLFHFULWHULD"BBBBB<(6BBBBB12
E ,INOSOHDVHGHVFULEHWKHQDWXUHRIWKHGHILFLHQFLHV
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
F ,IWKHUHDUHGHILFLHQFLHVDUHWKHLPSURYHPHQWVQHHGHGWRFRUUHFWWKHSUREOHPOLVWHGLQWKH
&RXQW\¶VPRVWUHFHQWO\DGRSWHG)LYH<HDU6FKHGXOHRI&DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQWV"
BBBBB<(6 BBBBBB12
,VDQ\SRUWLRQRIWKHSURSHUW\ZLWKLQD<HDU)ORRGSODLQDVVKRZQRQWKHDSSOLFDEOH%DVLQ
0DVWHU3ODQ",ID%DVLQ0DVWHU3ODQKDVQRWEHHQDSSURYHGXVHD&RXQW\DSSURYHGVWXG\LI
DSSOLFDEOHRUWKHIORRGPDSVRIWKH)HGHUDO(PHUJHQF\0DQDJHPHQW$JHQF\
Dona Bay and Upper Myakka River Watershed Models
0$36285&( ■
BBBBB<(6 BBBBBB12
D ,I YESSOHDVHLQGLFDWHWKHDSSUR[LPDWHSHUFHQWDJHRIWKHWRWDODUHDWKDWOLHVZLWKLQWKH
<HDU)ORRG3ODLQDVGHSLFWHGRQWKHPDSUHVRXUFHFLWHGDERYHBBBB
17.24%
Dona Bay: 49.81 Ac / 4117.53 Ac x 100 = 1.21%

UMR: 660.23 Ac / 4117.53 Ac x 100 = 16.03 % Total Floodplain Percentage = 1.21% + 16.03% = 17.24%
14. ,VDQ\SRUWLRQRIWKHSURSHUW\ORFDWHGZLWKLQD+XUULFDQH9XOQHUDELOLW\ =RQH"
0$36285&( ■
BBBBB<(6 BBBBBB12
Note: Hurricane Vulnerability Maps may be found at all County public libraries. For more
information, contact Sarasota County Emergency Management Services at 861-5
D ,I YESSOHDVHLQGLFDWHWKHDSSUR[LPDWHSHUFHQWDJHRIWKHSURSHUW\WKDWLVORFDWHGZLWKLQ
WKHKXUULFDQHYXOQHUDELOLW\]RQHRULQWKHFDVHRIPRUHWKDQRQH]RQHWKHSHUFHQWDJHLQ
HDFK]RQH
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Transportation
15. 3OHDVHFDOFXODWHWKHWUDIILFJHQHUDWLRQSRWHQWLDORIWKHPD[LPXPDOORZDEOHLQWHQVLW\GHQVLW\
RIWKHSURSRVHGGHVLJQDWLRQDVFRPSDUHGZLWKWKH SUHVHQWGHVLJQDWLRQ7KH DVVXPSWLRQVXVHG
LQWKLVGHWHUPLQDWLRQVKRXOGEHVKRZQ
Please see Section 5: Transportation of this application package for the Transportation Methodology Statement and Traffic Impact Study.
a. 3OHDVHGHVFULEHWKHWUDIILFLPSDFWDUHD
b. &DQWKHDGGLWLRQDOWUDIILFLPSDFWRIWKHUHTXHVWHGGHVLJQDWLRQFKDQJHEHVXSSRUWHGE\WKH
&RXQW\¶V7KRURXJKIDUH 3ODQ" Please see Section 5: Transportation of this application package for the
Transportation Methodology Statement and Traffic Impact Study.
BBBBB NO LI NOSOHDVHDQVZHU15c BBBBBYES LI YESSOHDVHDQVZHU15d
c. ,I NOLGHQWLI\DQ\DGGLWLRQDOURDGZD\LPSURYHPHQWVWKDWZRXOGEHQHHGHGWKDWDUHQRW
LQFOXGHGLQWKHPRVWUHFHQWO\DGRSWHG)LYH<HDU6FKHGXOHRI&DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQWVRU
7DEOH)DFLOLWLHVZLWK8QIXQGHG &DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQWV RU0DS<HDU
)XWXUH 7KRURXJKIDUH3ODQLQWKH&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ
d. ,I YESLGHQWLI\WKHDGGLWLRQDOURDGZD\LPSURYHPHQWVLIDQ\WKDWDUHLQWKH<HDU
)XWXUH7KRURXJKIDUH3ODQWKDWZRXOGQHHGWREHPDGHWRVXSSRUWWKHSURSRVHG
GHVLJQDWLRQ

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Plans Affecting the Area

16. 3OHDVHFKHFNDQ\RWKHU&RXQW\DSSURYHGSODQVWKDWDIIHFWWKHSURSHUW\
&ULWLFDO$UHD3ODQVSOHDVHFLWHRUGLQDQFHQXPEHUBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

'HYHORSPHQWRI5HJLRQDO,PSDFWSOHDVHQDPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
0\DNND5LYHU3URWHFWLRQ3ODQ &RPPXQLW\ 3ODQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
2WKHUSOHDVHQDPHBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Rezone Petition 14-15 (Lakepark Estates)
17. 3OHDVHLQGLFDWHWKHGDWHDQGORFDWLRQRIWKHZRUNVKRSFRQGXFWHGE\WKH3HWLWLRQHU
'DWHBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
April 7, 2022 /RFDWLRQBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Virtual
Attach a copy of the Neighborhood Workshop newspaper advertisement, summary

minutes of the workshop and attendance sheet.
PLAN COMPATIBILITY
18. 3URYLGHDQDUUDWLYHGHVFULELQJWKHMXVWLILFDWLRQIRUWKLVUHTXHVWXVLQJWKHDSSOLFDEOH
6XSSRUWLYH0DWHULDOLQFOXGLQJKRZWKH*RDOV2EMHFWLYHVDQG3ROLFLHVRIWKH)XWXUH/DQG
8VH&KDSWHUDQGWKRVHRI DQ\RWKHUDIIHFWHGFKDSWHUVDUHPHWRUIXWKHUHG$WWDFKDGGLWLRQDO
SDJHVLIQHHGHG
Please see Section 2: Narrative and Consistency of this application package.

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
COUNTY CHARTER LANGUAGE PERTAINING TO

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
$3URYLGHGKRZHYHUDQ\RUGLQDQFH DPHQGLQJ6DUDVRWD&RXQW\

V&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQZKLFK
LQFUHDVHVDOORZDEOHODQGXVHGHQVLW\RULQWHQVLW\VKDOOUHTXLUH DQDIILUPDWLYHYRWHRIDPDMRULW\SOXV
RQHRIWKHIXOOPHPEHUVKLSRIWKH%RDUGRI&RXQW\ &RPPLVVLRQHUV$GGHG
$3URYLGHGIXUWKHUWKDWIURPDQGDIWHUWKH HIIHFWLYHGDWHRIWKLVVXEVHFWLRQ
$DQ\RUGLQDQFHDPHQGLQJ6DUDVRWD&RXQW\
V&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQZKLFKHLWKHU
DGGVODQGVO\LQJRXWVLGHWKH8UEDQ6HUYLFH $UHD%RXQGDU\WRWKH8UEDQ6HUYLFH$UHD
HVWDEOLVKHVQHZ)XWXUH /DQG8VH 2YHUOD\'LVWULFWVZKLFKLQFUHDVHWKHDOORZDEOHODQGXVHGHQVLW\RU
LQWHQVLW\RQODQGVO\LQJRXWVLGHWKH8UEDQ6HUYLFH $UHD %RXQGDU\RU
DGGVODQGVRXWVLGHWKH8UEDQ6HUYLFH$UHD %RXQGDU\WRHLWKHUWKH6HWWOHPHQW$UHD2YHUOD\RUWKH
$IIRUGDEOH+RXVLQJ2YHUOD\VKDOOEHILVFDOO\QHXWUDODQGVKDOOUHTXLUHWKHXQDQLPRXVDIILUPDWLYHYRWH
RIWKHIXOOPHPEHUVKLSRIWKH%RDUGRI&RXQW\&RPPLVVLRQHUV -XO\(GLWLRQ
8UEDQ6HUYLFH$UHDVKDOOPHDQWKDWDUHDGHOLQHDWHGRQWKDWFHUWDLQPDSWLWOHG)XWXUH /DQG8VH0DS
RI6DUDVRWD&RXQW\RQILOHLQWKHRIILFLDOUHFRUGVRIWKH&OHUNWRWKH%RDUGRI&RXQW\&RPPLVVLRQHUV
7KLVVXEVHFWLRQ$ VKDOOQRWDSSO\WRDPHQGPHQWVWRWKHJRDOVREMHFWLYHVDQGSROLFLHVRIWKH
6DUDVRWD5HVRXUFH 0DQDJHPHQW$UHDVRUWRWKH /DQG8VH0DSVDSSURYHGDVSDUWRI6DUDVRWD

7KLVVXEVHFWLRQ$ VKDOOQRWDSSO\WRFRPSUHKHQVLYHSODQDPHQGPHQWVWKDWZHUH DSSURYHGIRU

WUDQVPLWWDOWRWKH'HSDUWPHQWRI&RPPXQLW\$IIDLUVSULRUWR-DQXDU\
$Q\SURSRVHGRUGLQDQFH DPHQGLQJ6DUDVRWD&RXQW\¶V&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQHOLPLQDWLQJWKH8UEDQ
6HUYLFH$UHD %RXQGDU\IURP6DUDVRWD&RXQW\¶V&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQVKDOO EHVXEMHFWWRYRWHUDSSURYDO
DWDUHIHUHQGXPHOHFWLRQFDOOHGIRUWKDWSXUSRVH3XUVXDQWWR6HFWLRQ)ORULGD6WDWXWHVWKH
UHTXLUHPHQWRI DUHIHUHQGXPIRUD&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ$PHQGPHQWLVSURKLELWHG
1R&KDUWHUDPHQGPHQWDGRSWHGDIWHUWKHHIIHFWLYHGDWHRIWKLVVXEVHFWLRQ$WKDWGHDOVZLWKWKH
H[WHQWRIRUSURFHVVIRUDOWHULQJWKH8UEDQ6HUYLFH$UHDLQ6DUDVRWD&RXQW\¶V&RPSUHKHQVLYH3ODQ
VKDOOEHFRPHHIIHFWLYHXQOHVVWKDWDPHQGPHQWH[SOLFLWO\SURYLGHVIRUWKHUHSHDORIWKLVVXEVHFWLRQ
$$GGHGVXEVHFWLRQ$
/LQNWR&RXQW\&KDUWHU

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
See Attached.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION(S) __________________________________________________________
A LEGIBLE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS REQUIRED. YOUR

PETITION CANNOT BE PROCESSED WITHOUT THIS INFORMATION.
A TEXT VERSION OF THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION CAN BE PROVIDED ON THIS PAGE

(ADDITIONAL PAGES IF NECESSARY).
AN ELECTRONIC VERSION OF THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN MICROSOFT WORD

MUST BE SUBMITTED ON COMPACT DISK (CD).

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Addendum to Formal Application

Production and Posting of Hearing Notification Signs
Sarasota County has updated the public hearing notice signage standards to provide
better visibility to the public and improve access to petition materials. We are no
longer using the yellow 3 feet wide by 2 feet high handwritten/noted signs.
The signs will be required to be professionally produced 3 feet wide by 2 feet high.
Agents are responsible for producing and posting the notification signs for both the
Planning Commission hearing and the Board of County Commissioners hearing.
Planning Services will provide the agent with an electronic file of the sign design, a
listing of design specifications, and the number of signs needed. The agent will
arrange with the sign company of their choosing to produce the sign and arrange
for pick-up and posting on the property.
Projects with multiple petition types (rezone, special exception, comprehensive plan
amendment etc.) with have separate signs for each petition type. The signage will
have visibly clear public hearing lettering in a color pallet created for each petition
type. For example, rezone signs are green, special exceptions are light blue, coastal
setback variance are turquoise, comprehensive plan amendments and
developments of critical concern are dark blue.
The signage also contains a QR code to link to the County's website. This offers
citizens a clearer pathway to easily access information about petitions
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
A.2 Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
purpose and intent of the sarasota 2050 resource management area chapter
Adopted on July 10, 2002, Sarasota 2050 creates a set of policies overlaid on top of the
Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map of Sarasota County. It establishes an optional
policy framework to enhance the livability of the County by preserving its natural, cultural,
physical, and other resources with an incentive-based system for managing growth. This policy
framework is the Resource Management Area (RMA) system that encourages a compact
development form; simultaneously implementing a number of public benefits, allowing for
continued growth and economic development that preserves environmentally sensitive lands
and open space in a fiscally neutral manner for the County.
Sarasota 2050 RMA Policy primarily limits development to 43 forms; a Settlement Area, Village,
Village Transition Zone, or Hamlet. Each form of development is limited to those land areas
designated on the RMA- 1 and RMA-3 maps that are a part of Sarasota County’s Comprehensive
Plan. The Settlement Area and Village urban forms are essentially the same except for their
respective geographical locations. Settlement Areas are limited to those lands between the
existing USB and the Future USB lines on the FLUM. Villages are limited to those lands between
the existing USB and the ‘countryside line’ depicted on RMA-3. Village Transition Zone (“VTZ") is
intended to provide a transition from Village to Hamlet, and is limited to those lands depicted
on Map 8 – 5: RMA – 5: VTZ Land Use Map. Hamlets are a transitional form of development
intended to blend toward the more rural eastern area of the county.
The Sarasota County Resource Management Area (RMA) Goal, Objectives and Policies are
designed as a supplement to the Future Land Use Chapter of The Sarasota County
Comprehensive Plan. The RMAs function as an overlay to the adopted Future Land Use Map
and do not affect any existing rights of property owners to develop their property as permitted
under the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Regulations or the Land Development Regulations of
Sarasota County or previously approved development orders; provided, however, that Policy
TDR2.2 shall apply to land located within the Rural/Heritage Estate, Village/Open Space,
Greenway and Agricultural Reserve RMAs where an increase in residential density is sought.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
rma goal 1 Establish a development policy framework that enhances the

livability of the County and preserves its natural, cultural, physical
and other resources, by creating a Resource Management Area
(RMA) system that
addresses development issues within six seven unique resource
areas:
• Urban/Suburban
• Economic Development
• Rural Heritage/Estate
• Village/Open Space
• Greenway
• Agricultural Reserve
• Village Transition Zone
This framework was created to implement the Organizing Concepts

and Principles of
Directions for the Future, Resolution 2000-230, adopted October 10,
2000.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
VILLAGE TRANSITION ZONE RMA

The Village Transition Zone (“VTZ”) RMA, as depicted in Map 8 – 5: RMA – 5: VTZ Land Use Map,
provides a density transition between Villages and Hamlets as the same are described in the
Village/Open Space RMA. The VTZ is further intended to incorporate the development form
and principles of the existing community of Lakewood Ranch of which the VTZ will form a part.
This VTZ is intended to serve as a stand-alone RMA and not to be governed by the Objectives,
Goals and Policies of the Village/Open Space RMA and the related Village Planned Development
(VPD) standards. Rather, development is to be regulated as per this VTZ RMA, the RSF-2/PUD
standards, and the Unified Development Code (UDC) standards as they are more appropriate
for the suburban development form exemplified by Lakewood Ranch.
The VTZ is a portion of Lakewood Ranch, and not a standalone project. Thus, planning and
permitting within the VTZ must be considered in the context of Lakewood Ranch in its entirety
with respect to such issues as neighborhood design, housing mix, transportation, neighborhood
centers, support uses, lifestyle offerings, recreation, open space and infrastructure ownership
installation and capacity.
Development will require significant initial capital investment. To facilitate master

infrastructure construction up front, rather than through a phased approach, entitlement of the
overall project will enable the Developer to commit to repayment of initial capital investments.
Other sections presented in Chapter 8, shall not be applied to the VTZ unless explicitly
referenced in the following Objectives and policies.
VTZ obj 1 Create a VTZ intended to provide an appropriate development form

and density transition from Village to Hamlet or Rural, for the lands
shown on Map 8-5: RMA – 5: VTZ Land Use Map which form a portion
of the larger Master Planned Community of Lakewood Ranch.
VTZ Policy 1.1 Intent

The VTZ is intended to:
x provide an appropriate development form and density transition from
Village to Hamlet or Rural, for lands generally located north of Fruitville
Road, south of the Manatee/Sarasota County line, and east of Heritage
Ranch Conservation Area. [The eastern boundary of the VTZ shall be
the revised Countryside Line as shown on Map 8-5: RMA – 5: VTZ Land
Use Map];
x incorporate the development form and principles of Lakewood Ranch
of which the VTZ will form a part. The VTZ is a portion of Lakewood
Ranch, and not a standalone project. Thus, planning and permitting
within the VTZ must be considered in the context of Lakewood Ranch
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
in its entirety with respect to such issues as neighborhood design,

housing mix, transportation, neighborhood centers, support uses,
lifestyle offerings, recreation, open space and infrastructure;
x provide an efficient permitting process which gives an orderly
progression from Master Development Order (MDO), to Rezoning, to
Site Development Plan; and
x facilitate the advancement of community infrastructure through
developer investment utilizing mechanisms such as a Stewardship
District or Community Development District.
VTZ obj 2 Implement Smart Growth principles through the continuation of

thoughtful development, maintaining the overall context of existing
Lakewood Ranch, by establishing an alternative to the development
forms of the Village/Open Space RMA, and creating a VTZ that provides a
reduction in density and intensity, from west to east, while encouraging
the continuation of Lakewood Ranch, rather than development of a
standalone project.
VTZ Policy 2.1 Permitted Land Uses

Permitted Land Uses within the VTZ may include:
x residential uses permitted in the RSF-2/PUD Zoning District;
x internal civic as well as other nonresidential uses, as permitted in the
RSF-2/PUD Zoning District;
x public facilities such as schools, public safety facilities, all parks, and
other government buildings;
x telecommunication facilities as provided for in Chapter 118 of the
Sarasota Code of Ordinances;
x non-residential uses are permitted, but not required within the VTZ as
such uses have already been provided in other areas of Lakewood
Ranch; and
x other permitted uses shall include all uses allowed in the RSF-2/PUD
Zoning District together with the UDC zoning standards applicable
thereto.
VTZ Policy 2.2 Base and Maximum Density

Maximum Base Density shall be 1 dwelling unit per gross acre,
including such portion of the Greenway RMA located within the VTZ
RMA (“Base VTZ Density”).
Density may be increased by way of VTZ policies 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 below.
The maximum density in the VTZ, which shall be in the Developed Area,
shall be 5,000 dwelling units. (“Maximum VTZ Density”).
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
VTZ Policy 2.3 Incentivized Community Housing

As an incentive to the development of Community Housing units, for any
Community Housing units provided in the VTZ, additional market rate units
(“VTZ Incentive Units”) shall be permitted per the ratios outlined below
(the Community Housing units and the VTZ Incentive Units shall be in
addition to Base VTZ Density calculation, subject to the Maximum VTZ
Density):
x 2.0 incentive dwelling units for every housing unit provided for a family
at or below the 80 percent Adjusted Median Income (AMI).
x 1.5 incentive dwelling unit for every housing unit provided for a family
at or below the 100 percent AMI.
x 1.0 incentive dwelling unit for every housing unit provided for a family
at or below the 120 percent AMI.
If any or all of the foregoing incentives are proposed to be used in any

development increment within the VTZ, a Community Housing Plan,
consistent with the methodologies and mitigation measures used in the
Agreement for Waterside Affordable Housing Plan, may be approved by
the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) either with the MDO or any
subsequent zoning approvals.
VTZ Policy 2.4 Participation in Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program

Density, in addition to density available by right or by way of incentivized
Community Housing may, at the election of the developer, be obtained
through offsite transfer or purchase of TDR credits, as described in the
policies under TDR obj 1 contained elsewhere in this Chapter 8.
VTZ Policy 2.5 In order to promote Community Housing and integration of a variety of
housing options, upon development, should development incentives (i.e.
Incentivized Community Housing) yield more units than development can
support, any undeveloped units (up to, and in excess of the Maximum VTZ
Density) may be transferred from the VTZ to another project, in
accordance with TDR obj 1.
VTZ obj 3 Open Space

Open Space is recognized as one of the key foundations of Community
development in this VTZ RMA. Open Space outside Developed Areas is
required to support the environmental goals of this VTZ RMA by preserving
environmental features, connections, and functions on site and off site.
Lands designated as Greenway RMA shall be included in the VTZ’s Open
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Space calculation. Internal recreation amenities that contain ecological

benefit (i.e. trails or habitat restoration with educational or interpretive
signage), are minimally improved, and are connected to adjacent
Greenway RMA or Open Space, as approved in the MDO, may be
calculated as Open Space for the overall project. Unlike the Village/Open
Space RMA, uses of Open Space outside the Developed Area are
encouraged to be integrated with public Recreational Uses such as parks
and trails to form a seamless community based recreational system with
connectivity to areas outside the VTZ.
VTZ Policy 3.1 Required Open Space and Uses Allowable within Open Space
A minimum of 50% of the gross acreage within the VTZ is required to be
designated as Open Space unless reduced Greenbelt areas are approved by
BOCC as set forth under Greenbelt Modifications below, in which event
Open Space shall be no less than 43% of Gross Acreage.
Allowable use of Open Space shall include natural habitat, improved

pastures and associated uses, low intensity agriculture, regional or local
stormwater facilities, potable or non-potable water storage facilities and
lakes, public or private park facilities, trails, board walks,
telecommunications towers and facilities (subject to the terms and
requirements of Chapter 118 of the Code of Ordinances), public facilities
such as public safety stations and community centers, and mitigation for
wetlands and wildlife, including but not limited to wetland mitigation
banks and gopher tortoise mitigation areas.
Lands designated as Greenway RMA shall count towards the Open Space
requirement for properties within the VTZ.
VTZ Policy 3.2 Alternate Greenbelt

Greenbelts shown conceptually in the VTZ Master Plan may be modified by
the BOCC under a development plan approved with a MDO as follows.
Such modifications will allow for better maintenance and preservations of
the lands, including but not limited to maintenance and removal of exotic
vegetation and compatibility of maintenance practices with nearby
residential uses.
x The 500-foot Greenbelt along Fruitville Road may be modified to not
less than 50 feet.
x The 500-foot Greenbelt along the eastern boundary of the property
may be modified to not less than 50 feet.
x No Greenbelt is required on the northern boundary of the VTZ or on
the western boundary of the VTZ that is adjacent to the Heritage Ranch
Conservation Area.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
x The 500-foot Greenbelt located adjacent to The Ranches at Bern Creek

shall not be eligible for modification or reduction.
Lakes and stormwater facilities may be included within the Greenbelt as

shown on the VTZ Master Plan; in association with landscape planting and
opacity.
Additionally, any reduced Greenbelt configuration shall:
• protect the Greenway systems, including wildlife corridors; and,

• avoid adverse impacts to adjacent publicly owned environmentally
sensitive lands.
VTZ Policy 3.3 Alternate Greenway Resource Management Area Designation

Lands designated as Greenway RMA that fall within the boundaries
of the VTZ may provide Alternate Greenway buffer configurations,
which include reconfigured buffers and ecologically enhanced
Greenway buffers, consistent with Article 14 Section 124-
271(i)(2)(g) of the UDC as amended. In the event the alternative
Greenway buffer within the VTZ is proposed to be reduced to less
than 300 feet in width, the applicant shall mitigate within the on-
site Greenway or other Open Space for the additional reduction to
provide equivalent or greater net ecological benefit.
VTZ obj 4 Provide a development review process that facilitates the efficient
review and approval of projects within the VTZ.
VTZ Policy 4.1 Applicable Zoning Code, Design Standards & Land Development
Regulations
The authorized development form within the VTZ is the primarily suburban
development form of existing Lakewood Ranch. Thus, the implementing
Zone District shall be RSF-2/PUD (not VPD). Any community or street
network design mandates of the Village/Open Space RMA together with
the complementary VPD standards do not apply in any manner to the VTZ.
Rather, the UDC standards shall apply to all aspects of development within
the VTZ. By way of example only, the following shall be permitted within
the VTZ, private roads, gates, and cul-de-sacs. Implementation of other
development standards, such as Greenbelts and Greenways shall be
consistent with the VTZ standards set forth above.
Ownership of Irrigation Utility: Lakewood Ranch is served by Braden River

Utilities with respect to reclaimed water. Any reclaimed water or irrigation
facilities and associated infrastructure within the VTZ may be owned and
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
operated by Braden River Utilities and/or the Lakewood Ranch

Stewardship District.
VTZ Policy 4.2 Development Review Process

At the option of the Developer, the County may process either one or
multiple rezone application(s) that involves one or multiple owners as one
project. The MDO application and RSF-2/PUD rezoning for one or more
development increments may be processed concurrently.
The overall development within the VTZ shall undergo review as a

Development of Critical Concern (“DOCC”) resulting in an MDO and VTZ
Master Plan. No Neighborhood Plan shall be required with respect to any
development within the VTZ.
The unit threshold for the development may exceed the current unit
threshold for a DOCC set forth in the DOCC implementing ordinance. The
MDO shall specify the information which must be submitted with a
rezoning application which may include all or any portion of development
within the VTZ. In no case shall the VTZ consist of more than 5,000
dwelling units.
Once the MDO is approved, the uses and densities and intensities of use
approved by the MDO are not subject to unit or density reduction,
intensity reduction, or other changes to the land relating to the County
Comprehensive Plan or UDC standards, unless the County can demonstrate
that substantial changes in the conditions underlying the approval of the
MDO have occurred.
Once an MDO is approved, each portion of the development within the

VTZ shall be rezoned pursuant to the terms of the MDO and Article 6 of the
UDC (including all submittal standards), provided such application for
rezone is consistent with the VTZ policies in Chapter 8. Rezoning to RSF-
2/PUD shall be permitted in the VTZ, notwithstanding any provision to the
contrary in the UDC.
Given the requirement of significant initial investment in off-site Sanitary

Sewer, Potable Water, Reclaimed Water, and a 4 Lane Section of
Bourneside Boulevard (North South Road B) to be financed and completed
with the initial Lakewood Ranch Stewardship Bond Issue, and the
concurrent assessment of the subject property to Benefit Special
Assessments, the phasing (by either geography or by dwelling unit count)
of development within the VTZ shall not be required in any respect.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
VTZ Policy 4.3 Submittal Requirements

The VTZ Master Plan approved with the MDO shall include at a minimum
the following information:
x site analysis of natural features consistent with the natural system
classification in The Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan;
x location of Greenway RMA Open Space, and Recreational Space to
be preserved;
x land use mix;
x density and intensity of land uses proposed;
x circulation routes for auto, transit (where applicable),pedestrian
and bicycle modes;
x infrastructure analysis on-site and off-site (e.g., water supply,sewer,
stormwater pre-development conditions and drainage intent,
transportation, and schools); and
x location of proposed Sending and/or Receiving Zones for Density
Incentives Program, if implemented by Developer, to increase
residential density beyond the Base VTZ Density.
VTZ Policy 4.4 Fiscal Neutrality

Development within the VTZ shall provide adequate infrastructure that
meets or exceeds the levels of service standards adopted by the County
and be Fiscally Neutral or fiscally beneficial to Sarasota County
Government, the School Board, and residents outside that development.
The intent of Fiscal Neutrality is that the costs of additional local
government services and infrastructure that are built or provided for the
VTZ shall be funded by properties within the VTZ.
A Fiscal Neutrality Analysis, completed for lands within the VTZ, shall be
demonstrated and deemed complete with the approval of the MDO. The
MDO shall require that Fiscal Neutrality be determined for the entirety of
the VTZ. In addition, the MDO may allow for incentives to provide
affordable housing. For off-site impacts, the MDO will address the costs of
infrastructure needed for the development. This shall include, but not be
limited to, both localized and Countywide impacts on County, City, State,
and Federal transportation facilities (such as roads, intersections,
sidewalks, lighting, medians, etc.). Such transportation related
components shall be analyzed as a separate item from the remaining items
of: public transit, schools, water supply and delivery, sewage transmission
and treatment, solid waste, storm and surface water management, law
enforcement, fire and emergency management, justice, general
government, libraries, parks and recreation, and public hospitals. Fiscal
Neutrality for funds that are not fungible (i.e., generally enterprise funds)
shall be measured separately. Nothing within this Policy is intended to
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
establish a school concurrency system.
The BOCC shall require that these procedures for measuring Fiscal
Neutrality and the Fiscal Neutrality plans be submitted as part of the
application for the MDO and reviewed for compliance by County staff.
Fiscal Neutrality procedures and calculations for school demands shall be
submitted to the School Board for review prior to review by the BOCC. All
calculations of costs shall be based on current cost data.
The Fiscal Neutrality provisions applicable to the VTZ are expressly

determined to be overarching to achieving the public benefits of the
Sarasota 2050 RMA-1 Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
Definitions for VTZ:
Developed Area. For the VTZ RMA, that land area exclusive of Open Space identified and
depicted on a VTZ Master Plan, as approved by the MDO.
Greenbelt: A permanent Buffer surrounding the Developed Area of the Village Transition
Zone.
Open Space (VTZ). For the, VTZ, that land area exclusive of Developed Area identified and
depicted on a VTZ Master Plan, as approved by the MDO. Open Space shall be property under
public or private ownership which is unoccupied or predominately unoccupied by buildings or
other impervious surfaces and which is identified as Greenway, Greenbelt, and other open
space and used for parks, recreation, agriculture, conservation, preservation of native habitat
and other natural resources, surface/irrigation water impoundment, historic, or scenic
purposes.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
A.3 Comprehensive Plan Large-Scale Map Amendment

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Town of City of
Longboat Sarasota
Key
City of
L E G E N D Venice
City of North Port
Urban Service Area Boundary
Resource Management Areas
Future Urban Area
Incorporated Area
Urban/Suburban
Urban/Suburban Settlement Area
Urban/Suburban Settlement Overlay ORD NO No 2003-012
Urban Open Space/Conservation/Preservation
Economic Development
Rural Heritage/Estate
Greenway
Publicly Owned Lands and Lands Protected for Preservation
Agricultural Reserve
Village / Open Space
Hamlet
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\Map8-5_RMA-1_20220427.mxd
Village
Village Transition Zone

full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and Map 8-5: RMA-1 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Feet
¯

Sarasota, FL 34240
(
tel 941.907.6900
Notes:
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Florida West FIPS 0902 Feet April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
L E G E N D
Countryside Line
Rural Heritage/Estate
Greenway
Publicly Owned Lands and Lands Protected for Preservation
Hamlet
Village
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY Village Transition Zone
FRUITVILLE ROAD
U:\215616736\gis\mxd\Map8-5_RMA-5_20220427.mxd

full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and Map 8-5: RMA-5 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Feet
¯
VTZ Land Use Map

Sarasota, FL 34240
(
tel 941.907.6900
Notes:
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Florida West FIPS 0902 Feet April 2022
fax 941.907.6910 $ $
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
APPENDIX B:
ORDINANCE 2014-090
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
FISCAL NEUTRALITY
ANALYSIS
LAKEWOOD RANCH
SOUTHEAST
May 31, 2022
Prepared for
Mr. Anthony Chiofalo, Executive Vice President

Schroeder-Manatee Ranch
14400 Covenant Way
Bradenton, FL 34202
Prepared by
Fishkind Litigation Services, Inc.

3504 Lake Lynda Drive, Suite 107
Orlando, Florida 32817
407-382-3256
WWW.Fishkindls.com
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
______________________________________________________________________
Fiscal Neutrality Analysis

______________________________________________________________________
1.0 Introduction and Summary of Results
1.1 Background
Schroeder-Manatee Ranch (“SMR”) is planning and permitting an expansion of

Lakewood Ranch in Sarasota County, Lakewood Ranch Southeast (“Project”).
Part of the permitting process requires submission of a Fiscal Neutrality Report
pursuant to §11 Sarasota Code (“Report”). The County has adopted very specific
requirements for the Fiscal Neutrality Report specified in a 2015 report by AECOM.
Sarasota County’s planning department informs that the AECOM methodology is
to be used for this analysis.
1.2 Assignment
SMR retained Fishkind Litigation Services, Inc. (“FLS”) to produce the Report
quantifying the fiscal impact of the Project. SMR provided the development
program and expected product pricing for the real estate products planned for the
Project. FLS conducted the analysis consistent with the required fiscal impact
methodology specified in the AECOM report.
1.3 Summary of Results
The Project will have very significant, positive, fiscal impacts on Sarasota County
and for the Sarasota County School District as summarized below. The initial small
negative operating impact in 2025 results from the lag between the time a
residential unit is occupied and the time that its ad valorem value is recognized in
the County’s property tax base. However, the Project’s rapid absorption and
strong pricing produces a cumulative operating surplus of almost $20 million by
2030 growing to over $303 million by 2050. The Project will pay County impact
fees which offset 100% of the County’s cost to provide infrastructure. In addition,
the Project will construct extensive offsite infrastructure in the County valued at
nearly $7 million in 2025 and totaling over $118 million by 2040.
The Project also pays school impact fees and property taxes to support the School
District’s capital costs. The revenues exceed the costs by a substantial margin
beginning in 2025 of over $2.4 million and rising to a cumulative total of over $45.7
million by 2035. School operating revenues are supported by the Project and
controlled by State law assuring a balance between District operating costs and
District operating revenues.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Table 1
Lakewood Ranch
Summary of Fiscal Impacts
Cumulative Net Fiscal Impacts
County School District
Year Operations County Capital Capital
2025 (305,634.07) $6,720,117 $2,435,862
2030 $20,711,706 $16,364,380 $34,396,050
2035 $81,165,960 $66,893,832 $45,748,991
2040 $149,678,878 $91,425,290 $45,748,991
2045 $223,586,902 $91,425,290 $45,748,991
2050 $303,165,236 $91,425,290 $45,748,991
2.0 Methodology
2.1 Overview
Sarasota County requires submission of a Fiscal Neutrality Report pursuant to §11

Sarasota Code in support of permitting for the Project. The County prescribes that
the analysis is conducted according to the 2015 report by AECOM. AECOM
outlines several methodologies to conduct the fiscal impact analysis including the
per capita approach.1 AECOM notes that the per capita methodology the most
used type of analysis. The per capita approach estimates the cost of providing
services on a per unit basis. The unit varies depending upon how the services are
used and can include: per person, per employee, and per visitor. Similarly, most
County revenues are appropriately estimated on a per capita basis again
depending upon the revenues are generated.
FLS uses all these factors depending upon the particular expenditure or revenue
category involved. For example, law enforcement and public safety are provided
to all residents, visitors, and employees. FLS measures residents, visitors, and
employees on a full-time equivalent (“FTE”) basis. However, not all expenditures
or all revenues are generated by residents, visitors, and employees. State revenue
sharing funds are provided through a population-based formula, so for this revenue
item FLS only uses population. FLS’s application of the per capita method for both
revenues and expenditures is consistent with AECOM.
FLS uses all categories of revenue and expenditures included in Sarasota

County’s budget (but not all fund types as discussed above). The FY2021 budget
reported to the State includes 129 revenue line items and 57 expenditure
categories. Not all revenues and expenditures relate to the fund types included in
1 AECOM (2015), page 2.

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
our analysis. As discussed above, except for ad valorem tax revenues, each
category of revenue and expenditure is included and analyzed using the modified
per capita approach. It is impractical to discuss each category. However, FLS has
included our fiscal impact analysis model in excel with this report to provide a full
and detailed submission of our calculations.
Ad valorem revenues are calculated directly based on the development program,

product pricing, and estimates for homestead exemptions and assessment ratios.
All other revenues are estimated via the per capita, unit, approach with the unit
varying as required.
Capital impacts are measured by the formulae for impact fees. Sarasota County
sets its impact fees at 100% of capital costs. Therefore, all capital impacts are
fully offset by the payment of the impact fees.
In the case of the Project, the developer will also pay for a large portion of offsite
roadway costs in addition to paying impact fees. It is expected that some impact
fee credits will be earned by the Project for oversizing of offsite infrastructure, but
in no case would the credits total more than the offsite expenditures.
The fiscal impact analysis for the Sarasota County School District focuses on
capital impacts, because the operating revenues are almost completely controlled
by State Law. District operating revenues depend in large part on the Florida
Education Funding Program (“FEFP”) which provides State funding to the districts
on a weighted, per student, basis. Districts can provide only small additional
supplements. Capital costs depend upon the number and type of students
generated by the Project, the cost per student station, transportation costs, and
land costs. Revenues are generated by school impact fees, State funds (PECO),
and the District’s 1.5 mill capital levy.
2.2 Operating Revenues
Except for ad valorem revenues, which are discussed in more detail below,
operating revenues were calculated using the modified per capita method based
on the County’s adopted budget for FY2021 as reported to the State of Florida,
Division of Banking. Consistent with the AECOM parameters, FLS included the
following fund types: (a) general fund; (b) special revenue fund; (c) debt service
fund; (d) permanent fund; (e) internal service; (f) pension; and (g) component. FLS
excluded the following fund types: (a) debt service; (b) capital projects; and (c)
enterprise.
The debt service fund relates to prior commitments and is not directly impacted by
future growth or the Project. While the Project will contribute to this fund, the
impact is relatively small. The impact of the Project on capital funds is calculated
separately, so this fund is excluded to avoid double counting. The enterprise fund
is also excluded, because enterprise funds are designed to be self-funding.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Ad valorem taxes generated by the Project are a function of: (a) the development
program for the Project; (b) its projected pricing and absorption; (c) the County’s
adopted millage rates for general revenue and mosquito control totaling 3.2742
mills; (d) an 85% assessment ratio; (e) 90% homestead assumption for single-
family homes; and (f) 60% homestead assumption for multifamily units (rental and
ownership). These assumptions are more conservative than the AECOM
estimates. Concerning timing, FLS takes a stricter and more conservative
approach then AECOM. FLS recognizes that there is a 1-year lag between the
time a residential unit is occupied and consuming services and the time that
property is included in the tax roll and paying ad valorem taxes.
2.3 Operating Expenses
Operating expenses are correctly calculated by fund type using the modified per
capita approach. As noted above, the per capita units are carefully tailored to the
type of expenditure. We have included impacts from residents and employees
measured on an FTE basis and included FTE visitors who also consume these
services.
2.4 Capital Revenues
The categories of capital revenues/expenses that are evaluated in a fiscal

neutrality report include: roads, parks, library, EMS, fire, general government,
justice, and law enforcement. These are all calculated based on the County’s
impact fee schedule. Impact fees are set at 100% of costs, so the payment of
impact fees offsets 100% of the impacts of the Project on the County’s capital
facilities. In addition, the Project generates capital revenues from the 5-cent local
option gas tax, and intergovernmental capital revenue, all calculated using a
residential and employment per capita method.
2.4 Capital Expenses
As noted previously, the County sets its impact fees at 100% of the cost to provide
these facilities to new developments, like the Project. Therefore, no separate
analysis of the impact of the Project on the County’s capital expenses is necessary.
2.5 Fiscal Impact Analysis for the Sarasota County School District
Fiscal impact analysis includes both operating and capital budgets. In Florida
school district funding is tightly controlled by the State as summarized below based
on information from Florida’s Department of Education.2 Essentially, the State
controls the amount of spending per student based on the Florida Education
Finance Program (“FEFP”).
2 Florida Department of Education (FY2021-22), “Funding for Florida School Districts”.

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Article IX, section 1 of the Florida Constitution commits Florida to provide to fund
kindergarten through grade 12 education, as follows: "The education of children is
a fundamental value of the people of the State of Florida. It is, therefore, a
paramount duty of the state to make adequate provision for the education of all
children residing within its borders. Adequate provision shall be made by law for a
uniform, efficient, safe, secure and high-quality system of free public schools that
allows students to obtain a high-quality education ... "
In 1973, the Florida Legislature enacted FEFP making State policy to equalize
funding to guarantee to each student in the Florida public education system the
availability of programs and services appropriate to his or her educational needs
that are substantially equal to those available to any similar student
notwithstanding geographic differences and varying local economic factors. To
equalize educational opportunities, the FEFP formula recognizes: (1) varying local
property tax bases; (2) varying education program costs; (3) varying costs of living;
and (4) varying costs for equivalent educational programs due to sparsity and
dispersion of the student population. As a result, there is little that a District or a
Developer can do to augment or to detract from the operational funding for a school
district.
The FEFP is the primary mechanism for funding the operating costs of Florida
school districts. A key feature of the FEFP is that it bases financial support for
education upon the individual student participating in a particular educational
program rather than upon locally generated revenues; the number of teachers; or
classrooms. FEFP funds are primarily generated by multiplying the number of full-
time equivalent (FTE) students in each of the funded education programs by cost
factors to obtain weighted FTE students. Weighted FTE students are then
multiplied by a base student allocation (“BSA”) and by a district cost differential
(DCD) to determine the base funding from state and local FEFP funds. Program
cost factors are determined by the Florida Legislature and represent relative cost
differences among the FEFP programs.
In FY 2019-2020 school districts received 39% their financial support from State
sources (primarily through FEFP), 50% from local sources coming from the
Required Local Effort (“RLE”) portion of the FEFP and 11% from federal sources.
RLE is the State-prescribed amount of ad valorem taxes levied to fund the majority
of FEFP funds. Each district's share of the state total required local effort is
determined by a statutory procedure. Counties with large tax bases, like Sarasota,
are net doners to FEFP, because they pay more in then is received back.
School district may set discretionary tax levies limited to the following types:
(1) Current operation - The Florida Legislature set the maximum discretionary
current operating millage for the 2021-22 fiscal year at 0.748 mills.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
(2) Capital outlay and maintenance - School boards may levy up to 1.5 mills
as prescribed in s. 1011.71(2), F.S.
However, any violation of these expenditure provisions results in an equal

dollar reduction of FEFP funds in the year following an audit citation.
Given these facts, FLS focused the fiscal impact assessment for the district on the
capital budget. Operating revenues are strictly controlled, and districts manage
their operating expenditures based on their budgets.
The school district reports that the State exerts substantial control over the district’s
capital improvement program by statute and rule. Facility requirements are
specified in Chapter 1013, Florida Statutes and Section 1013.35 sets forth the
state-mandated Plan must provide a "financially feasible district facilities work
program" for the next five-year period. The District's current Educational Plant
Survey was approved by FDOE in June, 2021 and verifies which of the District's
intended capital projects are "survey approved" and therefore eligible to be funded
by state revenues.3
Since 1997, the state of Florida has used the cost per student station unit of
analysis to quantify construction costs related to traditional kindergarten through
grade 12 school facilities. Maximum cost thresholds have been established to
ensure equivalency of costs and standards related to construction for Florida’s
school population. District’s must adhere to these limits to qualify for State
construction funding.
Florida’s Department of Education estimates the costs per student station. Their
2020 report (the latest available) has the following estimates.4
FLS used the DOE RSMeans Average Modeled Cost Per Student Station as our
base. Since these data were estimated as of 2019, FLS escalated them at 3% per
year. As of 2023, FLS projects the following student station costs:
Elementary $26,420
Middle $28,487
High $35,417
3Sarasota County School District (2021), “2021-22 Five-year Capital Improvement Plan”
4Florida Department of Education (January 1, 2020), “Review and Adjustment for Florida’s Cost per
Student Station”
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
The State’s cost estimates include: (a) the student station, (b) furniture and
equipment, and (c) architectural and engineering fees. However, they exclude
land costs. FLS estimates land costs at 20% of the student station cost.
FLS projected the students by grade level based on the school district’s FY 2022
budget and the number of households in the County. School capital costs are the
product of student generation from the Project and the cost per student station
adjusted for land.
Capital revenues generated by the Project flow from three main sources: (a) school
impact fees, (b) State funds under PECO; and (c) the District’s 1.5 mill capital levy.
Impact fees are one-time levies applied to each unit in the Project. PECO funds
are estimated based on the projected number of students from the Project. The
1.5 mill capital levy is imposed each year. FLS capitalized the incremental capital
revenue generated by each year of Project development over a 30-year period at
5%.
2.6 Sensitivity Analysis
Results are so overwhelmingly positive that they remain positive under any set of
reasonable assumption. This is the result of the pricing and absorption projected
for the Project. These characteristics are discussed below in the market study
section.
Nevertheless, FLS conducted sensitivity analysis by reducing the absorption

pace by 25% and the pricing by 10%.
2.7 Affordable Housing
Sarasota County Zoning Regulations Article 11.2.14. b.3.states that, "Fiscal

Neutrality analyses may include incentives to provide affordable housing." SMR
is not requesting any incentives for affordable housing. However, the Project plan
provides for 10% of its dwelling units to meet the County’s affordability criteria.
The affordable housing component of the product mix is 500 units or 10% of the
total residential housing and consists of the following:
Units Percentage
Multi Family Condos 200 40%
Single Family Townhomes (20') 200 40%
Single Family Bungalows (36') 100 20%
Total 500 100%
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
2.8 Market Study
Lakewood Ranch is a master-planned community located in Manatee and Sarasota

Counties, with four eastbound exits off Interstate 75: University Parkway, State Road 70,
State Road 64, and Fruitville Road. The 33,000+-acre/50 square mile community is part
of Schroeder-Manatee Ranch (SMR), a working ranch since the early 1900s. SMR
transitioned into community development in February of 1994 and, today, Lakewood
Ranch is the bestselling master-planned community for all ages in the United States (per
MPC rankings by RCLCO and John Burns) for the fourth year in a row.
Lakewood Ranch’s location, strong sense of community, scenic features and amenities,
and schools and services have formed the basis of its success. As of April 2022, 39,300
for-sale and multifamily units—the entirety of Lakewood Ranch’s existing residential
entitlements--have been sold to builders. More than 23,500 households call Lakewood
Ranch home, and this results in a current population of approximately 57,300 based upon
various Census reports. In 2021 Lakewood Ranch sold a record 2,582 new homes and,
according to Zonda (formerly Metrostudy), Lakewood Ranch led the North Port-Sarasota-
Manatee region with 2,638 annual housing starts, a quarter of all housing starts in the
region, and more than three times the runner-up community.
Lakewood Ranch is the region’s economic development hub with approximately 5.6
million square feet of non-residential mixed-use space constructed since 1997. This non-
residential space includes two major office parks, Lakewood Ranch Hospital, three hotels,
six grocery store anchored shopping centers, Main Street, The Greens, and the newly
opened-Waterside Place Town Center. Over 1,600 large and small businesses call
Lakewood Ranch home and over 16,000 people are employed on-site.
Recreational opportunities within Lakewood Ranch are anchored by 150 miles of trails, 6
community parks, and the Lakewood Ranch Golf & Country Club (consisting of 54 holes
of golf, two clubhouses, tennis center, fitness center and related amenities). In addition,
there are 18-hole golf courses at both the Ritz Carlton Golf Club and the Legacy Golf
Club. Lakewood Ranch is also home to the 180-acre Sarasota Polo Club and the Premier
Sports Campus (Home of the Nike International Friendlies) where 22 sports fields support
a variety of field related events drawing up to 200,000 visitors each year.
Lakewood Ranch is the area’s only true “lifestyle community”. This lifestyle is supported
by a strong social fabric, with over 85 resident operated clubs, the area’s newest and best
schools (from pre-K to medical, dental and pharmacy schools) and a wide variety of
places to worship.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Source: LWR Communities, LLC
Lakewood Ranch is consistently one of the best-selling, master planned, communities in

the country. Last year Lakewood Ranch sold 2,574 units second only to The Villages
according to the authoritative survey by RCLCO.5 Lakewood Ranch has a strong
following among national and regional homebuilders. These homebuilders have
contracted to purchase all of the proposed real estate products planned for the Project.
Therefore, the pricing and absorption for the real estate products in the Project as
demonstrated in the Subdivision Rankings (Source: Zonda/Metrostudy, Q1 2022) is
achievable.
5 RCLCO (Year-end 2021), “The 50 Top Selling Master-Planned Communities”.

Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
3.0 Development Program
The development program, absorption, and pricing are provided in detail in Tables
2 and 3, and in Appendix Tables 1 and 2. The program consists of 200 multifamily
units and 4,800 single family units. The absorption of the residential units and their
average sales prices are consistent with the historical data for Lakewood Ranch.
Finally, as noted above, all of the proposed real estate products are sold to national
and regional homebuilders.
The composition for the residential product design for the target audience consists
of following.
Residential
Product Design Units Percentage
Luxury 940 19%
Family/Empty Nester/Retiree 2,244 45%
Age Restricted 316 6%
Affordable/Community 500 10%
Active Adult 1,000 20%
Total 5,000 100%
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
The composition for the residential housing types for the target audience consists
of following.
Residential
Product Type Units Percentage
Multi Family 200 4%
SF Attached 966 19%
SF 40 ft wide lot 1,118 22%
SF 50 ft wide lot 1,170 23%
SF 60 ft wide lot 396 8%
SF greater than 60 ft wide lot 1,150 23%
Total 5,000 100%
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Table 2
Lakewood Ranch
Development Program
Category Product Units Target Audience
Multi Family Condos 200 Affordable/Community
Single Family SFD (44') 300 Active Adult

1,000 Subtotal
Single Family Townhomes (24') 100 Family/Empty Nester/Retiree
Single Family SFD (40') 250 Family/Empty Nester/Retiree

1,080 Subtotal
Single Family Townhomes (20') 200 Affordable/Community

Single Family Bungalows (36') 100 Affordable/Community
Single Family Paired Villas (36') 164 Family/Empty Nester/Retiree
464 Subtotal
Single Family SFD (50') 140 Age Restricted

Single Family SFD (60') 176 Age Restricted
316 Subtotal
SFD (62') 168 Luxury

Single Family SFD (76') 219 Luxury
585 Subtotal
Single Family 65 Luxury
Single Family Townhome 204 Family/Empty Nester/Retiree

Single Family Paired Villa 198 Family/Empty Nester/Retiree
402 Subtotal

498 Subtotal

290 Subtotal
5,000 Total
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Table 3
Lakewood Ranch
Property Valuation
Average Property Average Property

Category Units Square Feet Value Per Unit Value Per Category
Multi Family 200 1,250 + $ 400,000 $ 80,000,000
Single Family 1,000 3,000-3,500 $ 757,500 757,500,000
Single Family 100 2,500-2,999 $ 400,000 40,000,000
Single Family 1,080 3,000-3,500 $ 669,241 722,780,000
Single Family 464 2,500-2,999 $ 404,819 187,836,000
Single Family 316 3,000-3,500 $ 684,582 216,328,000
Single Family 585 3,501 + $ 953,744 557,940,000
Single Family 65 3,501 + $ 2,000,000 130,000,000
Single Family 402 2,500-2,999 $ 359,701 144,600,000
Single Family 498 3,000-3,500 $ 530,763 264,320,000
Single Family 290 3,501 + $ 989,655 287,000,000
Total 5,000 $ 3,388,304,000
4.0 Fiscal Impact – Operating Revenues and Expenses – Table 4, Appendix

Tables A, B, and C.
Using the methodology described in Section 2, the fiscal impacts of the Project on
the County’s operating budget are summarized below in Table 3. The Project
produces a small fiscal deficit in its first year, 2025, because of the lag between
the time a residential unit is occupied and when its value is included in the County’s
taxable value base determine by the property appraiser. The lag is approximately
1 year. However, this initial deficit is quickly reversed as additional development
occurs. By 2030 the net fiscal impact is almost $8 million with a cumulative total
of nearly $20 million. Fiscal surpluses mount quickly as the development
progresses.
Table 4
Lakewood Ranch
Fiscal Impact - Operating Revenue and Expenditures
Cumulative
Total Operating Total Operating Net Fiscal Net Fiscal
Year Total Taxable Value Ad Valorem Revenue Expenditure Impact Impact
2025 141,235,953 462,435 2,781,104 3,086,739 (305,634) (305,634)
2030 2,239,483,172 7,332,516 24,514,583 16,378,848 8,135,735 20,711,706
2035 3,134,959,183 10,264,483 31,768,208 18,689,766 13,078,441 81,165,960
2040 3,294,873,608 10,788,075 32,815,391 18,689,766 14,125,625 149,678,878
2045 3,462,945,275 11,338,375 33,915,992 18,689,766 15,226,225 223,586,902
2050 3,639,590,287 11,916,747 35,072,734 18,689,766 16,382,967 303,165,236
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
The strong growth in net fiscal surpluses is driven by the gains in total taxable
values as development momentum builds. Appendix Table A displays the growth
in taxable value generated by the Project. Taxable value rises from almost $141
million in 2026 to more than $2.9 billion by 2033 when the Project is fully developed
and sold.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table A
Lakewood Ranch
Taxable Property Values
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Residential Development
Multi Family-200 Unit - 21,020,201 42,460,806 64,328,121 86,628,536 87,494,822 88,369,770 89,253,468
Single Family-1000 Units 37,391,504 112,037,409 203,429,722 312,048,479 422,819,268 568,523,306 661,530,575 668,145,881
Single Family-100 Units - 6,200,959 18,788,907 31,627,993 31,944,273 32,263,716 32,586,353 32,912,216
Total Taxable Value 141,235,953 475,428,068 870,981,437 1,310,733,052 1,772,027,554 2,239,483,172 2,644,230,974 2,915,018,267
Appendix Table B
Lakewood Ranch
Development Impact Summary
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033
Residential Units - - - 241 828 1,531 2,283 3,035 3,758 4,385 4,784 5,000
Resident Households - - - 210 720 1,331 1,985 2,638 3,267 3,812 4,159 4,347
Peak Population - - - 241 828 1,531 2,283 3,035 3,758 4,385 4,784 5,000
Resident Population - - - 537 1,832 3,385 5,047 6,710 8,322 9,720 10,610 11,092
Seasonal Population - - - 10 34 64 95 126 156 182 199 208
Total Operating Revenues Generated - - - 544,577 2,781,104 6,543,306 10,818,049 15,382,219 20,036,692 24,514,583 28,066,637 30,327,946
Total Operating Expenditures Generated - - - 905,579 3,086,739 5,703,778 8,504,940 11,306,102 14,022,839 16,378,848 17,878,127 18,689,766
Net Fiscal Impact of Operations - - - (361,002) (305,634) 839,528 2,313,109 4,076,117 6,013,853 8,135,735 10,188,510 11,638,180
5 Years 10 Years 20 Years 30 Years

Net Present Value of Operating Impact (436,344) 8,813,216 13,622,649 19,471,936
Operating Impact at 5% Interest 30 Years
Total Impact Fee Capital Revenue - 14,645,099 14,645,099 21,025,296 24,320,360 25,493,317 26,016,633 22,046,074 7,272,609 6,342,599 4,108,305 2,251,695
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table C shown below, presents the key assumptions employed in

calculating the taxable values shown previously. Our assumptions related to the
assessment ratio and percentage of homes expected to take advantage of the
homestead exemption are more conservative than those of AECOM making our
analysis more conservative than if we had adopted the AECOM assumptions for
these parameters.
Using data from Census On-the-Map we determined that there were 86,210
County residents who also work in the County. Since we also included all
employees, FLS weighted resident-employees by 0.7619 to avoid double counting.
Non-working residents are weighted at 1.0 FTE. Seasonal residents are at 0.34
reflecting seasonal demands on County services.
Persons per household and total households are from Florida Population Studies.
Appendix Table C
Lakewood Ranch
Fiscal Impact Assumptions
Taxable Assessment Ratio 85%
Homestead Exemption $50,000

% Single-Family with Homestead 90%
% Multifamily with Homestead 60%
Occupancy Rate 89%
Permanent Resident Percent 98%
Note Homestead Guide is 71% vs more conversative 90%
Millage
GENERAL REVENUE 3.2232 Mills
MOSQUITO CONTROL 0.0510 Mills
Total 3.2742 Mills
Equivalent Full-Time
Factor Equivalent
Population-Working Residents 86,210 76.71% 66,134
Population-Non-Working Residents 259,298 100.00% 259,298
Population- Seasonal 96,000 34.62% 33,231
Total Population (peak season) 441,508 358,662
Employment (total) 174,193
Persons per Household - Single Family * 2.23

Persons per Household - Multifamily 2.23
Total Households 189,228 * (Fl Population Studies, 2020)
Annual growth rate of Residential Property Value 1.0%

Annual growth rate of Non-Residential Property Value 1.5%
Table 4 summarizes the results of the fiscal analysis for the County’s operating
budget. The detailed analysis (Appendix Table D) is presented through 2033
which is projected buildout.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table D
Lakewood Ranch
Fiscal Impact Detail Operating Revenue and Expenses
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Revenues
Ad Valorem Taxes - 462,435 1,556,647 2,851,767 4,291,602 5,801,973 7,332,516 8,657,741 9,544,353
Tourist Development Taxes 30,640 104,438 192,983 287,758 382,534 474,453 554,166 604,893 632,355
County Ninth-Cent Voted Fuel Tax 1,862 6,348 11,730 17,491 23,252 28,839 33,684 36,767 38,436
First Local Option Fuel Tax (1 to 6 Cents Local Option Fuel Tax) 6,535 22,276 41,161 61,376 81,591 101,196 118,198 129,018 134,875
Second Local Option Fuel Tax (1 to 5 Cents Local Option Fuel Tax) - County Proceeds 4,767 16,250 30,028 44,774 59,521 73,823 86,227 94,120 98,393
Local Government Infrastructure Surtax 47,428 161,663 298,726 445,432 592,138 734,423 857,815 936,337 978,845
Local Communications Services Taxes 8,162 27,821 51,408 76,655 101,902 126,388 147,623 161,136 168,451
Local Business Tax (Chapter 205, F.S.) 648 2,209 4,082 6,086 8,091 10,035 11,721 12,794 13,375
Building Permits (Buildling Permit Fees) 14,297 48,731 90,047 134,270 178,492 221,382 258,577 282,247 295,060
Permits - Other 1,033 3,521 6,505 9,700 12,895 15,993 18,680 20,390 21,316
Franchise Fee - Electricity 18,082 61,633 113,887 169,817 225,748 279,993 327,035 356,971 373,177
Impact Fees - Residential - Public Safety 6,603 22,508 41,590 62,015 82,441 102,250 119,429 130,362 136,280
Impact Fees - Commercial - Public Safety 1,895 6,458 11,933 17,793 23,653 29,336 34,265 37,402 39,100
Impact Fees - Residential - Transportation 12,766 43,515 80,408 119,896 159,385 197,684 230,897 252,033 263,475
Impact Fees - Commercial - Transportation 2,308 7,868 14,539 21,680 28,820 35,745 41,751 45,572 47,641
Impact Fees - Residential - Culture / Recreation 14,005 47,737 88,210 131,530 174,851 216,866 253,302 276,488 289,040
Impact Fees - Residential - Other 2,117 7,215 13,332 19,880 26,428 32,778 38,285 41,790 43,687
Impact Fees - Commercial - Other 539 1,837 3,394 5,060 6,727 8,343 9,745 10,637 11,120
Special Assessments - Charges for Public Services 46,313 157,861 291,701 434,956 578,212 717,151 837,641 914,317 955,825
Inspection Fee 1 4 7 11 14 17 20 22 23
Vessel Registration Fee 242 823 1,521 2,268 3,015 3,740 4,368 4,768 4,984
Other Fees and Special Assessments 108 368 680 1,014 1,349 1,673 1,954 2,133 2,229
Federal Grant - Public Safety 36,096 123,034 227,347 338,999 450,651 558,937 652,845 712,605 744,956
Federal Grant - Transportation - Mass Transit 2,063 7,033 12,997 19,379 25,762 31,952 37,321 40,737 42,586
Federal Grant - Economic Environment (291) (992) (1,833) (2,733) (3,633) (4,506) (5,263) (5,745) (6,006)
Federal Grant - Human Services - Other Human Services 367 1,251 2,312 3,448 4,583 5,685 6,640 7,248 7,577
Federal Grant - Other Federal Grants 402 1,369 2,529 3,772 5,014 6,219 7,263 7,928 8,288
State Grant - Public Safety 161 548 1,013 1,511 2,008 2,491 2,909 3,176 3,320
State Grant - Physical Environment - Other Physical Environment 882 3,006 5,554 8,282 11,010 13,655 15,949 17,409 18,200
State Grant - Economic Environment 179 609 1,125 1,677 2,229 2,765 3,230 3,525 3,685
State Grant - Culture / Recreation 236 806 1,489 2,221 2,952 3,662 4,277 4,669 4,880
State Grant - Court-Related Grants - County Article V Trust Fund 1,728 5,892 10,887 16,233 21,580 26,765 31,262 34,124 35,673
State Shared Revenues - General Government - Insurance License Tax 136 464 857 1,278 1,699 2,107 2,461 2,686 2,808
State Shared Revenues - General Government - Mobile Home License Tax 203 692 1,279 1,907 2,535 3,144 3,672 4,009 4,191
State Shared Revenues - General Government - Alcoholic Beverage License Tax 276 941 1,739 2,594 3,448 4,277 4,995 5,452 5,700
State Shared Revenues - General Government - Cardroom Tax 70 237 439 654 869 1,078 1,259 1,375 1,437
State Shared Revenues - General Government - Local Government Half-Cent Sales Tax Program 43,840 149,431 276,124 411,730 547,336 678,856 792,912 865,493 904,785
State Shared Revenues - General Government - Other General Government 14,002 47,727 88,191 131,502 174,813 216,818 253,246 276,428 288,977
State Shared Revenues - Public Safety - Enhanced 911 Fee 2,541 8,662 16,006 23,867 31,728 39,352 45,963 50,171 52,448
State Shared Revenues - Transportation - Other Transportation 6,140 20,928 38,672 57,664 76,655 95,075 111,049 121,214 126,717
State Shared Revenues - Culture / Recreation 159 542 1,002 1,495 1,987 2,464 2,878 3,142 3,284
Grants from Other Local Units - Public Safety 1,912 6,518 12,044 17,958 23,873 29,609 34,584 37,750 39,463
Grants from Other Local Units - Physical Environment 9 29 54 80 107 132 155 169 176
Grants from Other Local Units - Culture / Recreation 1,237 4,216 7,790 11,616 15,441 19,152 22,369 24,417 25,525
General Government - Recording Fees 4,637 15,806 29,207 43,551 57,894 71,806 83,870 91,547 95,703
General Government - Public Records Modernization Trust Fund 1,986 6,770 12,510 18,654 24,798 30,756 35,924 39,212 40,992
General Government - County Portion ($2) of $4 Additional Service Charge 1,559 5,315 9,822 14,645 19,469 24,147 28,204 30,786 32,183
General Government - Internal Service Fund Fees and Charges 130,424 444,559 821,471 1,224,901 1,628,331 2,019,601 2,358,919 2,574,849 2,691,743
General Government - Administrative Service Fees 29 99 183 273 362 450 525 573 599
General Government - Fees Remitted to County from Tax Collector 8,638 29,444 54,408 81,127 107,847 133,762 156,235 170,537 178,279
General Government - Fees Remitted to County from Sheriff 4,274 14,567 26,918 40,138 53,358 66,179 77,298 84,373 88,204
General Government - Fees Remitted to County from Property Appraiser 1,062 3,619 6,687 9,970 13,254 16,439 19,201 20,959 21,910
General Government - Other General Government Charges and Fees 23,108 78,767 145,548 217,028 288,507 357,833 417,953 456,211 476,922
Public Safety - Law Enforcement Services 608 2,071 3,826 5,706 7,585 9,407 10,988 11,994 12,538
Public Safety - Fire Protection 230 782 1,446 2,156 2,866 3,555 4,152 4,532 4,738
Public Safety - Emergency Management Service Fees / Charges 57 195 360 537 714 885 1,034 1,129 1,180
Public Safety - Protective Inspection Fees 4,786 16,314 30,146 44,952 59,757 74,116 86,568 94,492 98,782
Public Safety - Ambulance Fees 13,749 46,865 86,598 129,128 171,657 212,904 248,674 271,437 283,760
Public Safety - Other Public Safety Charges and Fees 73 248 459 684 909 1,128 1,317 1,438 1,503
Physical Environment - Water / Sewer Combination Utility 28 97 179 267 355 441 515 562 587
Physical Environment - Conservation and Resource Management 610 2,078 3,840 5,725 7,611 9,440 11,026 12,035 12,581
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table D
Lakewood Ranch
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Physical Environment - Other Physical Environment Charges 22 76 141 210 279 346 404 441 462
Transportation - Other Transportation Charges 1,206 4,111 7,596 11,326 15,056 18,674 21,811 23,808 24,889
Economic Environment - Housing 34 116 214 319 424 526 615 671 701
Economic Environment - Other Economic Environment Charges 4 13 24 36 48 60 70 76 80
Human Services - Animal Control and Shelter Fees 919 3,133 5,789 8,632 11,475 14,233 16,624 18,145 18,969
Human Services - Other Human Services Charges 1,126 3,837 7,089 10,571 14,052 17,429 20,357 22,221 23,230
Culture / Recreation - Libraries 55 186 344 513 682 846 988 1,078 1,127
Culture / Recreation - Parks and Recreation 971 3,310 6,117 9,120 12,124 15,038 17,564 19,172 20,042
Culture / Recreation - Special Events 222 756 1,397 2,084 2,770 3,435 4,012 4,380 4,579
Culture / Recreation - Special Recreation Facilities 765 2,608 4,820 7,187 9,554 11,850 13,841 15,108 15,793
Court-Related Revenues - County Court Criminal - Filing Fees 0 1 3 4 5 6 8 8 9
Court-Related Revenues - County Court Criminal - Service Charges 23 77 143 213 283 351 410 447 467
Court-Related Revenues - County Court Criminal - Court Costs 29 99 182 272 361 448 523 571 597
Court-Related Revenues - County Court Criminal - Non-Local Fines and Forfeitures 47 159 294 438 583 722 844 921 963
Court-Related Revenues - Circuit Court Criminal - Filing Fees 0 1 1 2 3 3 4 4 5
Court-Related Revenues - Circuit Court Criminal - Service Charges 21 72 133 198 264 327 382 417 436
Court-Related Revenues - Circuit Court Criminal - Non-Local Fines and Forfeitures 339 1,156 2,136 3,185 4,234 5,251 6,134 6,695 6,999
Court-Related Revenues - County Court Civil - Filing Fees 1,613 5,498 10,160 15,150 20,140 24,979 29,176 31,847 33,292
Court-Related Revenues - County Court Civil - Service Charges 1 3 6 8 11 14 16 18 18
Court-Related Revenues - Circuit Court Civil - Filing Fees 971 3,310 6,116 9,119 12,122 15,035 17,561 19,169 20,039
Court-Related Revenues - Circuit Court Civil - Service Charges 599 2,040 3,770 5,621 7,473 9,268 10,826 11,817 12,353
Court-Related Revenues - Circuit Court Civil - Fees and Service Charges - 462,435 1,556,647 2,851,767 4,291,602 5,801,973 7,332,516 8,657,741 9,544,353
Court-Related Revenues - Traffic Court - Filing Fees 1 3 6 9 12 15 17 19 20
Court-Related Revenues - Traffic Court - Service Charges 304 1,037 1,916 2,857 3,798 4,711 5,503 6,006 6,279
Court-Related Revenues - Traffic Court - Court Costs 82 280 518 773 1,027 1,274 1,488 1,624 1,698
Court-Related Revenues - Traffic Court - Non-Local Fines and Forfeitures 938 3,196 5,905 8,805 11,705 14,518 16,957 18,509 19,349
Court-Related Revenues - Juvenile Court - Service Charges 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
Court-Related Revenues - Probate Court - Filing Fees 601 2,050 3,787 5,647 7,507 9,311 10,875 11,871 12,409
Court-Related Revenues - Probate Court - Service Charges 31 106 196 292 388 481 562 613 641
Court-Related Revenues - Restricted Board Revenue - Court Innovations / Local Requirements 66 226 418 624 829 1,028 1,201 1,311 1,371
Court-Related Revenues - Restricted Board Revenue - Legal Aid 66 226 418 624 829 1,028 1,201 1,311 1,371
Court-Related Revenues - Restricted Board Revenue - Law Library 66 226 418 624 829 1,028 1,201 1,311 1,371
Court-Related Revenues - Restricted Board Revenue - Juvenile Alternative Programs 66 226 418 624 829 1,028 1,201 1,311 1,371
Court-Related Revenues - Restricted Board Revenue - State Court Facility Surcharge ($30) 1,012 3,451 6,377 9,509 12,641 15,678 18,313 19,989 20,896
Court-Related Revenues - Restricted Board Revenue - Traffic Surcharge 165 561 1,037 1,546 2,055 2,549 2,977 3,250 3,397
Court-Related Revenues - Restricted Board Revenue - Domestic Violence Surcharge 26 90 166 248 330 409 478 521 545
Other Charges for Services (Not Court-Related) 1,648 5,617 10,380 15,477 20,574 25,518 29,806 32,534 34,011
Court-Ordered Judgments and Fines - As Decided by County Court Criminal 657 2,239 4,137 6,169 8,201 10,171 11,880 12,967 13,556
Court-Ordered Judgments and Fines - As Decided by Circuit Court Criminal 137 467 863 1,286 1,710 2,121 2,477 2,704 2,826
Court-Ordered Judgments and Fines - As Decided by Traffic Court 1,188 4,048 7,480 11,154 14,828 18,391 21,480 23,447 24,511
Total Revenues 544,577 2,781,104 6,543,306 10,818,049 15,382,219 20,036,692 24,514,583 28,066,637 30,327,946
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table D
Lakewood Ranch
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Expenditures
Legislative 851 2,901 5,361 7,993 10,626 13,180 15,394 16,803 17,566
Executive 9,597 32,711 60,444 90,128 119,813 148,602 173,570 189,458 198,059
Financial and Administrative 45,766 155,998 288,259 429,824 571,390 708,689 827,758 903,528 944,547
Legal Counsel 3,371 11,489 21,231 31,657 42,084 52,196 60,965 66,546 69,567
Comprehensive Planning 2,569 8,757 16,181 24,128 32,075 39,782 46,466 50,719 53,022
Debt Service Payments 93 316 584 871 1,158 1,437 1,678 1,832 1,915
Other General Government Services 14,828 50,543 93,395 139,262 185,129 229,614 268,192 292,741 306,031
Law Enforcement 109,273 372,464 688,252 1,026,257 1,364,262 1,692,080 1,976,370 2,157,282 2,255,219
EMS 42,206 143,862 265,834 396,386 526,939 653,557 763,363 833,239 871,067
0 35,294 120,303 222,300 331,473 440,646 546,528 638,352 696,785 728,418
Protective Inspections 15,220 51,878 95,862 142,940 190,019 235,678 275,275 300,473 314,114
Emergency and Disaster Relief Services 84,545 288,179 532,506 794,024 1,055,541 1,309,177 1,529,134 1,669,107 1,744,882
Ambulance and Rescue Services 49,924 170,171 314,448 468,875 623,303 773,076 902,962 985,617 1,030,362
Medical Examiners 3,570 12,167 22,483 33,525 44,567 55,276 64,563 70,473 73,672
Other Public Safety 2,872 9,789 18,089 26,973 35,856 44,472 51,944 56,699 59,273
Water-Sewer Combination Services 67 228 421 628 834 1,035 1,209 1,319 1,379
Conservation and Resource Management 7,877 26,849 49,612 73,976 98,341 121,971 142,464 155,505 162,564
Other Physical Environment 0 0 1 1 2 2 2 2 2
Road and Street Facilities 25,485 86,869 160,520 239,352 318,185 394,641 460,946 503,140 525,981
Other Transportation Systems / Services 13 44 82 123 163 202 236 258 269
Industry Development 5,305 18,081 33,410 49,819 66,227 82,140 95,941 104,723 109,477
Veteran's Services 721 2,457 4,540 6,769 8,998 11,161 13,036 14,229 14,875
Housing and Urban Development 1,381 4,708 8,700 12,972 17,245 21,389 24,982 27,269 28,507
Other Economic Environment 597 2,033 3,757 5,603 7,448 9,238 10,790 11,777 12,312
Health Services 5,301 18,068 33,386 49,782 66,178 82,080 95,870 104,646 109,397
Mental Health Services 665 2,265 4,186 6,242 8,297 10,291 12,020 13,120 13,716
Public Assistance Services 329 1,122 2,073 3,090 4,108 5,096 5,952 6,496 6,791
Developmental Disabilities Services 89 302 558 833 1,107 1,373 1,603 1,750 1,830
Other Human Services 15,790 53,822 99,453 148,295 197,138 244,508 285,588 311,730 325,882
Libraries 13,023 44,389 82,024 122,306 162,588 201,657 235,537 257,098 268,770
Parks and Recreation 26,859 91,552 169,174 252,256 335,338 415,916 485,795 530,264 554,337
Cultural Services 1,871 6,379 11,788 17,576 23,365 28,980 33,849 36,947 38,625
Other Culture / Recreation 518 1,765 3,262 4,864 6,465 8,019 9,366 10,224 10,688
Inter-fund Group Transfers Out 264,707 902,276 1,667,256 2,486,056 3,304,856 4,098,979 4,787,657 5,225,907 5,463,156
Proprietary - Other Non-Operating Disbursements 97,600 332,679 614,735 916,636 1,218,536 1,511,338 1,765,261 1,926,849 2,014,325
General Administration - Court Administration 1,181 4,025 7,437 11,089 14,742 18,284 21,356 23,311 24,369
General Administration - State Attorney Administration 1,170 3,987 7,368 10,987 14,605 18,114 21,158 23,095 24,143
General Administration - Public Defender Administration 1,288 4,390 8,112 12,096 16,080 19,944 23,294 25,427 26,581
General Administration - Clerk of Court Administration 8,089 27,572 50,949 75,970 100,992 125,259 146,304 159,696 166,946
Circuit Court - Criminal - Drug Court 1,246 4,248 7,849 11,703 15,558 19,296 22,539 24,602 25,719
Circuit Court - Criminal - Pre-Trial Release 1,462 4,982 9,206 13,727 18,249 22,634 26,436 28,856 30,166
Circuit Court - Civil - Clerk of Court Administration 0 1 2 4 5 6 7 7 8
Circuit Court - Family - Clerk of Court Administration 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
Circuit Court - Juvenile - Guardian Ad Litem 256 874 1,615 2,409 3,202 3,971 4,639 5,063 5,293
Circuit Court - Probate - Clerk of Court Administration 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
General Court-Related Operations - Courthouse Facilities 1,574 5,365 9,913 14,782 19,650 24,372 28,467 31,073 32,483
General Court-Related Operations - Information Systems 856 2,919 5,395 8,044 10,693 13,263 15,491 16,909 17,677
General Court-Related Operations - Public Law Library 66 226 418 624 829 1,028 1,201 1,311 1,371
General Court-Related Operations - Legal Aid 135 460 850 1,268 1,685 2,090 2,441 2,665 2,786
County Court - Criminal - Clerk of Court Administration 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
County Court - Civil - Clerk of Court Administration 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
County Court - Civil - Alternative Dispute Resolution 75 256 472 704 936 1,161 1,356 1,480 1,547
County Court - Traffic - Clerk of Court Administration 4 12 23 34 45 56 66 72 75
Total Expenditures 905,579 3,086,739 5,703,778 8,504,940 11,306,102 14,022,839 16,378,848 17,878,127 18,689,766
Net Fiscal Impact (361,002) (305,634) 839,528 2,313,109 4,076,117 6,013,853 8,135,735 10,188,510 11,638,180
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
5.0 Fiscal Impact Capital Revenues and Capital Expenses – Table 5, Appendix Table E.
The categories of capital revenues/expenses that are evaluated include roads, parks, library, fire, EMS, general
government justices and law enforcement. The capital revenue sources are impact fee and developer’s contributions
The impact fee rates are applied 100% to each unit permitted with the rate charged determined by the unit square
footage. Lakewood Ranch is contributing more than $118 million for the construction of roads, infrastructure, and
parks of which $35 million benefit offsite roads. The impact fees for the Project (Appendix Table 5) are calculated
using the Impact and Mobility fee rates effective for permits applied after April 2017. All rates are applied 100% for
determining impact fees. For this Project the required capital improvements are funded 100% by the developer’s
contributions and impact fees. Therefore, Sarasota County will not incur any capital expenses for this Project.
Table 5
Lakewood Ranch
Fiscal Impact - Capital Revenue and Expenditures
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Total
Capital Revenues
Mobility - 14,645,099 14,645,099 15,846,490 17,475,425 18,036,925 18,290,854 18,297,551 3,591,449 3,108,676 1,986,955 1,092,433 127,016,957
Law Enforcement - - - 77,527 184,040 220,842 236,825 237,765 233,241 201,998 128,617 68,714 1,589,570
Fire - - - 68,165 164,677 200,669 216,300 217,220 212,795 189,258 125,786 67,202 1,462,072
EMS - - - 46,156 109,594 131,526 141,032 141,552 138,832 120,247 76,561 40,942 946,442
Parks - - - 4,665,281 5,618,127 5,973,552 6,127,717 2,143,868 2,099,861 1,867,690 1,241,256 663,545 30,400,896
Library - - - 150,006 360,886 440,657 479,386 481,595 480,017 407,467 264,354 166,639 3,231,006
General Government - - - 171,670 407,611 489,146 524,518 526,523 516,414 447,263 284,777 152,220 3,520,144
Justice - - - 277,700 659,343 791,242 848,460 851,691 835,361 723,504 460,662 246,245 5,694,209
Total Capital Revenue - 14,645,099 14,645,099 21,025,296 24,320,360 25,493,317 26,016,633 22,046,074 7,272,609 6,342,599 4,108,305 2,251,695 173,861,295
Impact fees 2,665,376 6,342,085 7,646,940 8,227,473 8,252,666 8,107,970 7,066,104 4,568,967 2,497,941 55,375,521
Developer Contribution - 14,645,099 14,645,099 18,637,619 18,637,619 18,637,619 18,637,619 14,645,099 - - - - 118,485,774
Total Capital Revenue - 14,645,099 14,645,099 21,302,995 24,979,704 26,284,560 26,865,092 22,897,765 8,107,970 7,066,104 4,568,967 2,497,941 173,861,295
DEVELOPER'S CONTRIBUTION TO CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
ROAD EXPENDITURES UTILITIES EXPENDITURES

BOURNESIDE BLVD UNIVERSITY TO FRUIVILLE ASSOCIATED WITH BOURNESIDE BLVD
25,172 LF $50,529,452 16,929,484
OFFSITE FRUITVILLE RD BOURNESIDE EXTENSION TO LORRAINE RD ASSOCIATED WITH FRUITVILLE RD
$4,483,009 10,131,000
OFFSITE UNIVERSITY PKWY LORRAINE TO BOURNESIDE PARKS EXPENDITURES
$6,720,117 PARKS & TRAILS 2,679,105
OFFSITE BOURNESIDE BLVD UNIVERSITY TO MASTERS AVE
$2,778,324 INFRASTRUCTURE
OFFSITE BOURNESIDE BLVD MASTERS AVE TO SR 70 LAKE PARK ESTATES 13,290,976
$2,382,930
OFFSITE LORRAINE RD FRUITVILLE RD TO BEE RIDGE EXT PLANT TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 118,485,774
$8,561,377
SUBTOTAL $75,455,209
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table E
Lakewood Ranch
Impact Fees
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Total
Mobility Impact Fee Revenue
Multi Family-200 Unit - 159,306 159,306 159,306 159,306 - - - - 637,222
Single Family-1000 Units 290,431 571,181 687,354 803,526 803,526 1,045,552 638,949 - - 4,840,520
Single Family-100 Units - 96,810 193,621 193,621 - - - - - 484,052
Single Family-900 Units 232,345 484,052 629,268 629,268 726,078 726,078 726,078 726,078 348,517 5,227,762
Single Family-238 Units 53,246 164,578 193,621 193,621 242,026 242,026 242,026 198,461 - 1,529,604
Single Family-65 Units 16,531 49,592 49,592 49,592 49,592 49,592 49,592 44,082 - 358,166
Single Family-402 Units 116,172 290,431 348,517 348,517 348,517 290,431 203,302 - - 1,945,889
Total Mobility Impact Fee Revenue 1,201,391 2,830,326 3,391,826 3,645,755 3,652,452 3,591,449 3,108,676 1,986,955 1,092,433 24,501,264
Law Enforcement Impact Fee Revenue

Single Family-1000 Units 19,571 38,489 46,318 54,146 54,146 70,455 43,056 - - 326,180
Single Family-900 Units 15,657 32,618 42,403 42,403 48,927 48,927 48,927 48,927 23,485 352,274
Single Family-65 Units 979 2,936 2,936 2,936 2,936 2,936 2,936 2,609 - 21,202
Total Law Enforcement Impact Fees 77,527 184,040 220,842 236,825 237,765 233,241 201,998 128,617 68,714 1,589,570
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table E
Lakewood Ranch
Impact Fees
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Total
Fire Impact Fee Revenue
Total Fire Impact Fees 68,165 164,677 200,669 216,300 217,220 212,795 189,258 125,786 67,202 1,462,072
EMS Impact Fee Revenue

Total EMS Impact Fees 46,156 109,594 131,526 141,032 141,552 138,832 120,247 76,561 40,942 946,442
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table E
Lakewood Ranch
Impact Fees
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Total
Parks Impact Fee Revenue
Total Parks Impact Fees 672,760 1,625,607 1,981,032 2,135,197 2,143,868 2,099,861 1,867,690 1,241,256 663,545 14,430,815
Library Impact Fee Revenue

Total Library Impact Fees 150,006 360,886 440,657 479,386 481,595 480,017 407,467 264,354 166,639 3,231,006
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table E
Lakewood Ranch
Impact Fees
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Total
General Government Impact Fee Revenue
Total Buildings Impact Fees 171,670 407,611 489,146 524,518 526,523 516,414 447,263 284,777 152,220 3,520,144
Justice Impact Fee Revenue

Total Buildings Impact Fees 277,700 659,343 791,242 848,460 851,691 835,361 723,504 460,662 246,245 5,694,209
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table E
Lakewood Ranch
Impact Fees
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Total
Education Impact Fee Revenue
Total Buildings Impact Fees 494,609 1,130,426 1,368,495 1,469,059 1,469,059 1,483,827 1,286,805 818,876 443,301 9,964,458
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
6.0 Fiscal Impact School District – Table 6, Appendix Table F

Table 5 presents the fiscal impact on the Sarasota district for elementary, middle, and high schools. This Project
satisfies the fiscal impact neutrality standard. Revenues generated by the Project exceed the costs needed to provide
the student stations required by the Project’s school enrollment.
Table 6
Lakewood Ranch
Fiscal Impact - School District
Capital Revenues 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Total
Residential Development Property Value

Multi Family-200 Unit - 20,812,080 21,020,201 21,230,403 21,442,707 - - - - 84,505,391
Single Family-1000 Units 46,827,180 93,014,389 113,051,896 133,480,851 134,815,660 177,177,014 109,357,590 - - 807,724,582
Single Family-100 Units - 8,324,832 16,816,161 16,984,322 - - - - - 42,125,315
Single Family-1080 Units 33,096,931 69,641,460 91,439,237 92,353,629 107,627,499 108,703,774 109,790,811 110,888,719 53,758,851 777,300,911
Single Family-316 Units 7,758,584 24,220,888 28,780,114 29,067,915 36,698,243 37,065,226 37,435,878 31,004,394 - 232,031,242
Total 174,096,596 405,405,267 478,729,414 528,125,595 548,168,089 556,271,050 473,223,665 302,825,273 161,664,793 3,628,509,741
Residential Units 241 587 703 752 752 723 627 399 216
Elementary School Students 26 64 77 82 82 79 69 44 24
Middle School Students 11 26 31 33 33 32 28 18 10
High School Students 20 48 58 62 62 59 52 33 18
Total Students (FTE) 57 138 166 177 177 170 148 94 51
Ad Valorem -Education Capital Improvement 261,145 608,108 718,094 792,188 822,252 834,407 709,835 454,238 242,497
State Sources - Capital Projects 6,103 14,865 17,803 19,043 19,043 18,309 15,878 10,104 5,470
Total Ad Valorem - Capital Improvement & State Source 267,248 622,973 735,897 811,232 841,296 852,716 725,713 464,342 247,967
Prevent Value at 5% for 30 Years 4,108,255 9,576,620 11,312,535 12,470,620 12,932,774 13,108,328 11,155,994 7,138,075 3,811,862
Education Impact Fees 494,609 1,130,426 1,368,495 1,469,059 1,469,059 1,483,827 1,286,805 818,876 443,301
Total Capital Revenues 4,602,864 10,707,046 12,681,030 13,939,680 14,401,833 14,592,155 12,442,798 7,956,951 4,255,163
Capital Expenditures
Land Cost Per Student

Elementary School Students 147,709 369,485 454,891 499,736 512,729 505,773 450,020 293,822 163,197
Middle School Students 64,006 160,107 197,115 216,547 222,177 219,163 195,004 127,320 70,717
High School Students 148,604 371,725 457,648 502,765 515,837 508,838 452,748 295,603 164,186
Total Students (FTE) 360,318 901,317 1,109,654 1,219,047 1,250,743 1,233,775 1,097,773 716,746 398,101
Capital Cost Per Student Station *

Elementary School Students 738,543 1,847,427 2,274,456 2,498,679 2,563,645 2,528,865 2,250,102 1,469,112 815,987
Middle School Students 320,028 800,533 985,574 1,082,735 1,110,886 1,095,816 975,021 636,600 353,586
High School Students 743,019 1,858,624 2,288,241 2,513,823 2,579,183 2,544,192 2,263,740 1,478,016 820,932
Total 1,801,589 4,506,583 5,548,271 6,095,237 6,253,714 6,168,873 5,488,863 3,583,729 1,990,505
Capital Transportation Per Student

Vehicle & School Bus 5,094 12,408 14,860 15,896 15,896 15,283 13,254 8,434 4,566
Total Capital Expenditures 2,167,002 5,420,307 6,672,786 7,330,181 7,520,353 7,417,930 6,599,890 4,308,909 2,393,172
Table 6 summarizes the key assumptions used to calculate the impacts of the Project on the District’s capital
budget.
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
Appendix Table F
Lakewood Ranch
Fiscal Impact Assumptions School District
Millage Rates
School Board Operating 5.2090 Mills
School Board Capital 1.5000 Mills
Total 6.7090 Mills
Students
Total Students 44,617 Source 2
Elementary School 46.46% Source 2
Middle School 18.67% Source 2
High School 34.87% Source 2
-
Students per Household - Single Family 0.2358 Source 2
Students per Household - Multifamily 0.2358 Source 2
State Source of Funds $ 4,791,939 Source 2

Per Student $ 107 Source 2
(Capital Project Fund Five -Year Fiscal Forecast)
Capital Cost Per Student Station *

Adjusted 3% annually 2022
Elementary $ 25,601 Source 1

Middle $ 27,604 Source 1
High $ 34,318 Source 1
Land Costs % of Student Station 20%

Capital
Vehicle & School Bus Replacement 4,000,000 Source 2

Per Student $ 90
(Capital Project Fund Five -Year Fiscal Forecast)
Source
1) Florida Department of Education : Review &
Adjustments for Florida Cost Per Student Station
2) Sarasota County Scholls :2021-2022 Adopted
Annual Budget
Rcv'd 5/31/2022
7.0 Sensitivity Analysis
A sensitivity analysis is required as part of the fiscal impact assessment. As noted above, this requirement is not
particularly appropriate for this analysis. Unlike most real estate developments, all of the real estate products planned
for the Project have been sold to national and regional homebuilders. Therefore, the usual uncertainties that impact
projections for absorption and product pricing do not apply in this particular situation.
Nevertheless, FLS conducted a sensitivity analysis by reducing product pricing by 10% and slowing the absorption
by 25%. The results are summarized below. The Project maintains its performance generating very substantial
fiscal surpluses after its initial launch in 2025. The results are marginally weaker than the base case. This is because
product pricing remains high enough to generate substantial growth in the tax base. Slower sales absorption reduces
the timing for revenue receipts, but it also lowers costs. This sensitivity analysis is consistent with the traffic study
submitted by SMR for the development.
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
ORDINANCE No. 2022-00_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF SARASOTA,

FLORIDA, ISSUING THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT ORDER
FOR LAKEWOOD RANCH SOUTHEAST; PROVIDING FOR
FINDINGS OF FACT; PROVIDING FOR CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW; PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT; PROVIDING FOR
DEVELOPMENT ORDERS FOR PURPOSES SET FORTH IN
THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR CHALLENGES AND
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR RELATIONSHIP TO
OTHER REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR SERVICE,
RECORDING AND CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. Findings of Fact. T

1.1 On October __, 2022, the Board approved Ordinance No. 2022-__ and Ordinance No. 2022-
___ for the property described therein as the Village Transition Zone (“VTZ”) to adopt an alternative,
AF
two-step approval process for development under Chapter 8 Sarasota County 2050 Resource
Management Area of the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan (the “2050 Plan”).
1.2 On ______ __, 2022, LWR Communities LLC., was authorized by the landowners of the
property described herein (the “Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property”) to submit to Sarasota County an
Application for a VTZ Master Plan for the Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property (the “VTZMP
Application”) in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 2022-____ and Ordinance No.
2022____, and the requirements contained in the Standardized Questionnaire for Developments of
Critical Concern (DOCC) within Unincorporated Sarasota County.
R
1.3 The Application for the Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property is for a parcel of approximately
4,120 acres, located north of Fruitville Road and south of the Manatee/Sarasota County line, more
particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference.
D
1.4 The VTZMP Application has been reviewed and processed in compliance with the provisions
of Sarasota County Ordinance No. 89-77, as amended, and the provisions of Sarasota County Ordinance
No. 2022____ and Ordinance No. 2022-___.
1.5 The Sarasota County Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the VTZMP
Application on July 21, 2022, received all pertinent evidence and testimony, and recommended approval
of this Lakewood Ranch Southeast Master Development Order (the “MDO”) subject to certain
conditions as contained in the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota
County, Florida.
1.6 The Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota County, Florida, held a duly noticed public
hearing on said VTZMP Application October 25, 2022, and considered all matters relevant to the
proposed Lakewood Ranch Southeast VTZMP, including the Sarasota County Planning Commission
recommendations and the testimony of the general public.
1
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
1.7 The proposed development, subject to the conditions imposed herein, is consistent with the
Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan and does not appear to conflict with other local land development
regulations.
1.8 The following information, commitments, and impact mitigating provisions submitted by the
Applicant are hereby incorporated in this MDO by reference:
a) Lakewood Ranch Southeast VTZMP Application, dated June 2, 2022;
b) Lakewood Ranch Southeast, 1st Sufficiency Comments, dated _______ __, 2022;
c) Lakewood Ranch Southeast, 1st Sufficiency Response, dated ________ __, 2022;
d) Lakewood Ranch Southeast, 2nd Sufficiency Comments, dated _______ __, 2022;
e) Lakewood Ranch Southeast, 2nd Sufficiency Response, dated _________ __, 2022; and
T
f) Lakewood Ranch Southeast, all maps, studies, and documents submitted after the 2nd
Sufficiency Response, dated _______ __, 2022, until and including the public hearing of the
Board of County Commissioners on ________ __, 2022.
1.9 In construing and enforcing the provisions of the documents incorporated in this MDO by
AF
sub-section 1.7 above, the following shall apply:
a) The most recent response of the Applicant in the above referenced documents shall control
over any previous response, wherever there is a conflict, otherwise the responses shall be
considered cumulative.
b) Any information, commitments or impact mitigating provisions in the above referenced

documents which are inconsistent with the specific conditions set forth in this Ordinance and
the exhibits hereto, shall be deemed superseded and inapplicable.
R
1.10 The Board further finds:
a) The proposed development will not have an unfavorable impact on the environment and
natural resources of Sarasota County and any other affected jurisdictions;
D
b) The proposed development will have a favorable impact on the economy of Sarasota County
and any other affected jurisdictions;
c) The proposed development will efficiently use water, sewer, solid waste disposal, and other
necessary public facilities; and
d) The proposed development will efficiently use public transportation facilities.
SECTION 2. Conclusions of Law.
2.1 Approval of Lakewood Ranch Southeast Master Development Order with Conditions. The
Application for Lakewood Ranch Southeast VTZMP is hereby approved, subject to the conditions
contained in Exhibits B, C, D, E, F, G, and H which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference, subject to the other provisions of this MDO. The definitions found in the Developments of
Critical Concern Ordinance shall apply to this MDO.
2
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
2.2 Approved Units. The Maximum number of residential dwelling units shall not exceed 5,000
dwelling units.
2.3 Project Areas. Lakewood Ranch Southeast is divided into seven (7) Project Areas, each with
its own allocated density as set forth in Exhibit C Map C-4 and Table C-4. Authorization to pursue
development in each of these Project Areas must be obtained, pursuant to applications for rezoning of
each Project Area to RSF-2/PUD zone district. As determined by the Master Developer and the
individual Applicants, Project Areas may be developed sequentially or simultaneously and may or may
not be subject to phasing within a given Project Area at the election of the Applicant. Notwithstanding
any conditions to the contrary in this MDO, the first 113 dwelling units, known as Phase I of Lakepark
Estates may proceed under its current approvals and shall not be subject to further review or rezoning.
2.4 Fiscal Neutrality. Development that takes place in substantial accordance with the proposed
development program or Alternative Development Scenarios (Deviations 1, 2, 3, and 4) identified in the
Fiscal Neutrality Plan dated June 2, 2022, and incorporated herein by reference shall be deemed fiscally
T
neutral under the 2050 Plan. Any development less than that referenced in the Fiscal Neutrality Study
shall not require submittal or approval of a new or revised Fiscal Neutrality Plan.
2.5 Buildout and Termination. Unless this MDO is extended by the Board of County
AF
Commissioners, the buildout date shall be December 31, 2057 and no final development plans, plats,
site and development plans shall be approved or issued after this date except for re-plats or revisions to
existing plats or plans that do not increase intensity or density, building permits, reconstruction, or
renovation. An extension of the buildout date of seven years or less shall be subject to further review of
traffic related issues. An extension of the buildout date of more than seven years shall be subject to
further review of all issues set forth in the Application and Standardized Questionnaire for DOCCs. Any
extension must be presented to the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing, noticed and
processed in accordance with the procedures for amending a Master Development Order contained
within Ordinance No. 89-77, as amended.
R
2.6 Biennial Monitoring Requirements. The Master Developer shall submit a biennial report on
the second anniversary of the effective date of the MDO and shall continue biennial reporting until
ninety percent (90%) of the dwelling units approved pursuant to this MDO have received certificates of
occupancy. The report shall contain:
D
a) Summary comparison of development activity proposed and actually constructed for the
reporting year including number of dwelling units, site improvements and lots sold:
b) List of all preliminary plans approved with the total number of dwelling units, construction
plans approved, final plats, building permits, and the total number of certificates of occupancy
issued;
c) List of all local, state, and federal permits which have been obtained, applied for, or denied
during the reporting period;
d) List of all MDO Conditions and a statement of how and when each condition has been met or
how and when it will be met;
3
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
e) Names and addresses of all persons to whom undeveloped tracts of land in the Lakewood
Ranch Southeast Property (other than individual single-family lots) have been sold and maps
showing the area involved; and
f) Water Quality Monitoring Report referenced in Water Quality Conditions in Exhibit “B” and
contained in Exhibit “E”.
2.7 Application for Master Development Order Approval. The Application for VTZMP Approval
and related documents referenced in Section 1.8 and 1.9 are incorporated herein by reference and
relied upon by the County in discharging its statutory duties under law. Compliance with the
representations contained therein is a condition for approval unless waived or modified by amendment
to this MDO.
2.8 Duty to Comply with Local and State Permitting Requirements. The approval granted by this
MDO is conditional. Such approval shall not be construed to obviate the duty of the Applicant to comply
with all other applicable local or state permitting requirements and procedures.
T
2.9 Downzoning and Reductions. Subject to the Conditions contained in this MDO, the approved
units, uses, densities and intensities approved by this MDO for the subject property shall not be subject
to down-zoning, or to changes to the 2050 Plan or the regulations pertaining thereto that have a similar
AF
effect to a down zoning, unit density reduction, or intensity reduction from the effective date of this
ordinance, provided that the Applicant is timely meeting the conditions and requirements of this MDO
unless
a) The information provided by the Applicant on which the MDO was based is found to be
substantially inaccurate after public hearing on the matter; or
b) The County can clearly establish that a change is essential to the public health, safety or
welfare.
R
If the subject property is subject to, downzoning, unit reduction, or intensity reduction, in accordance
with the terms of this Section, such shall be to that most appropriate for the property and consistent
with the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan. The Applicant agrees that the terms of this MDO express
the Applicant’s reasonable expectations with regard to the property and the possibility that the property
D
may be, downzoned, or reduced as to units or intensity as provided above.
2.10 Designation for Receiving Reports. The Sarasota County Planning and Zoning Department
shall be the designated recipient for all reports required by this MDO. All reports shall be addressed to
the attention of the Director of Planning and Development Services Department.
SECTION 3. Enforcement.
3.1 All conditions, restrictions, requirements, commitments and impact mitigating provisions
contained or incorporated by reference in this MDO may be enforced by Sarasota County by action at
law or equity, and, in the event Sarasota County prevails in such action at law or equity, it shall be
awarded all its reasonable costs of investigation and enforcement, including County staff time and
reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by or on behalf of Sarasota County.
4
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
3.2 In the event it is determined by the Board of County Commissioners, after notice to the
Applicant and a full hearing, that the Applicant has failed to comply with any conditions, restrictions,
requirements or impact mitigating provisions contained or incorporated by reference in this MDO, the
Board of County Commissioners may suspend this MDO during which no development permit
applications shall be granted within the development until compliance is achieved. Where such a failure
has been finally determined, the Applicant shall be liable for all costs of investigating and enforcement,
including County staff time and reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by or on behalf of Sarasota County.
3.3 The rights and obligations of this MDO shall run with the land. The Master Developer is
bound by the terms of this MDO so long as it owns such property. This MDO shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the Master Developer and its assignees or successors in interest and Sarasota
County and its successors. It is understood that any reference herein to any governmental agency shall
be construed to mean any future instrumentality which may be created and designated as successor in
interest thereto, or which otherwise possess any of the powers and duties of any referenced
governmental agency in existence on the effective date of this MDO.
T
SECTION 4. Development Orders for Purposes Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be deemed the Master
Development Order for Lakewood Ranch Southeast as required by Sarasota County Ordinance No. 89-
77, as amended, and pursuant to Ordinance No. 2022-___ and Ordinance No. 2022-___.
AF
SECTION 5. Challenges and Severability. If any section, clause, phrase or word of this MDO is for any
reason held or declared to be invalid, inoperative, or void, such holding of invalidity shall not affect the
remaining portions of this MDO, provided such provision does not affect the essential terms of this
MDO. The development must be evaluated to see if it results in a substantial deviation. It shall be
construed to have been the intent to pass this MDO, without such invalid or inoperative part herein, and
the remainder, exclusive of such part of parts, shall be deemed and held to be valid as if such parts had
not been included herein, unless to do so would frustrate the intent of this MDO.
R
SECTION 6. Relationships to Other Regulations. This MDO shall not be construed as an agreement on the
part of Sarasota County to exempt the Applicant, its successors and assigns, from the operation of any
Ordinance or other government regulation now in effect or hereafter adopted by Sarasota County, and
which said Ordinance or regulation shall be generally and equally applicable throughout Sarasota
County, and which said Ordinance or regulation does not impair or otherwise frustrate the Development
D
herein approved.
SECTION 7. Service and Recording. The County is hereby directed to record this Ordinance in the Official
Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. All costs associated with the recording of this Ordinance shall
be borne by the Master Developer. This Ordinance shall be binding upon the Master Developer, its
successors and assigns and upon Sarasota County.
SECTION 8. Effective Date. This MDO shall take effect upon execution by Applicant agreeing to the terms
hereof, upon receipt of official acknowledgment from the Office of the Secretary of State of Florida that
this Ordinance has been filed with said office, or the effective date of Ordinance No. _______-____,
including final resolution of any appeals, whichever is later.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota County,
Florida, this __________ day of ____________________________, 2022.
5
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA
By______________________________________
Chairman
ATTEST:
KAREN E. RUSHING, Clerk of Circuit Court
and ex-officio Clerk of Board of County Commissioners of
Sarasota County, Florida
By:_____________________________________
Deputy Clerk
Applicant’s Agreement and Consent to Terms

T
The Applicants, by signing this document in the space hereinafter provided, signifies its approval of, and
AF
assent to, the provisions of this Development Order. __________________________________, hereby
warrants that they are the Owners in fee simple of all the real property described in Exhibit A, attached
hereto. They have reviewed with qualified legal counsel, approves and assents to all the terms,
conditions and provisions of the foregoing Development Order, including all attachments thereto, which
Development Order is also described in Ordinance No. ____________-_____, and it acknowledges that
the same are binding upon the Applicants, their successors, and assigns and shall constitute covenants
running with the property described in Exhibit “A.”
By:__________________________________
R
_________________________________
(Signature Witness Name)
____________________________________
D
(Print Witness Name)
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF SARASOTA
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by means of physical presence or online
notarization this _____ day of ________________, 2022, by
_____________________________________________, on behalf of said entity. He is (personally known
to be) or (has produced a driver’s license as identification) and (did/did not) take an oath.
(NOTARY SEAL) ___________________________________
Signature of Notary Public, State of Florida
6
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
___________________________________
(Print, Type, or Stamp Name of Notary Public
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF SARASOTA
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by means of physical presence or online
notarization this _____ day of ________________, 2022, by on behalf of said entity. He is (personally
known to be) or (has produced a driver’s license as identification) and (did/did not) take an oath.
(NOTARY SEAL) ___________________________________
Signature of Notary Public, State of Florida
___________________________________
(Print, Type, or Stamp Name of Notary Public
____________________________
(Signature Witness Name)

T
AF
____________________________
(Print Witness Name)
By:__________________________________
R
D
7
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit A – Legal Description
Exhibit B – Conditions for Development Approval
Exhibit C – VTZ Master Plan
Exhibit D – Fiscal Neutrality Analysis
Exhibit E – Water Quality Monitoring Plan
Exhibit F – Environmental Systems
Exhibit G – Drainage
Exhibit H – Transportation
T
AF
R
D
8
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
EXHIBIT A: LEGAL DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION (as prepared by the certifying Surveyor and Mapper):
A tract of land lying in Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 19, 20 & 21, Township 36 South, Range 20 East
and in Sections 1 & 24, Township 36 South, Range 19 East, Sarasota County, Florida, being more
particularly described as follows:
BEGIN at the northwest corner of Section 6; thence N.89°58'02"E., a distance of 5,314.13 feet; thence
S.01°32'06"E., a distance of 2,828.89 feet; thence N.89°46'32"E., a distance of 5,412.05 feet; thence
S.89°48'15"E. along the north line of the South 1/2 of Section 4, a distance of 2,764.45 feet to the
northeast corner of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 4; thence S.00°16'33"W. along the east line of the
T
Southwest 1/4 of Section 4 and along the east line of the West 1/2 of Section 9, also being the west line
of lands described in Official Records Instrument Number 2020070786 of the Public Records of Sarasota
County, Florida, a distance of 7,944.33 feet; thence N.90°00'00"W. along the south line of Section 9 and
along the north line of Section 16, a distance of 2,089.79 feet to the point of curvature of a non-tangent
AF
curve to the right, having a radius of 1,015.00 feet and a central angle of 48°30'42"; thence Southerly
along the arc of said curve, a distance of 859.39 feet, said curve having a chord bearing and distance of
S.10°32'31"W., 833.95 feet, to the point of tangency of said curve; thence S.34°47'52"W., a distance of
468.83 feet to a point of curvature of a curve to the left having a radius of 1,740.00 feet and a central
angle of 21°02'28"; thence Southwesterly along the arc of said curve, a distance of 638.99 feet, to the
point of tangency of said curve to a point of curvature of a compound curve to the left having a radius of
551.00 feet and a central angle of 16°21'12"; thence Southerly along the arc of said curve, a distance of
157.27 feet, to the point of tangency of said curve; thence S.02°35'48"E., a distance of 77.29 feet to a
R
point of curvature of a curve to the right having a radius of 1,004.00 feet and a central angle of
12°22'19"; thence Southerly along the arc of said curve, a distance of 216.79 feet, to the point of
tangency of said curve; thence S.09°46'31"W., a distance of 50.21 feet to a point of curvature of a curve
to the left having a radius of 1,151.00 feet and a central angle of 09°39'05"; thence Southerly along the
arc of said curve, a distance of 193.88 feet, to the point of tangency of said curve; thence S.00°07'26"W.,
D
a distance of 107.17 feet; thence S.89°52'33"E., a distance of 2,809.46 feet; thence S.00°16'33"W., a
distance of 3,352.52 feet; thence N.89°42'42"W., a distance of 726.86 feet; thence N.00°20'12"E., a
distance of 266.12 feet; thence N.89°39'48"W., a distance of 420.00 feet; thence S.00°20'12"W., a
distance of 520.00 feet; thence S.89°39'48"E., a distance of 420.00 feet; thence S.00°20'12"W., a
distance of 430.00 feet; thence S.31°24'22"W., a distance of 449.38 feet; thence S.00°20'14"W., a
distance of 246.00 feet; thence S.60°37'30"E., a distance of 355.00 feet; thence S.39°36'43"E., a distance
of 263.73 feet; thence S.89°08'23"E., a distance of 0.38 feet; thence S.42°52'27"E., a distance of 93.26
feet; thence S.30°02'51"W., a distance of 81.13 feet; thence S.84°18'43"W., a distance of 124.92 feet;
thence S.39°04'38"W., a distance of 273.97 feet to the northerly maintained right-of-way line of
Fruitville Road (variable width public right-of-way) recorded in Road Plat Book 2, Page 7 of the Public
Records of Sarasota County, Florida; the following eight (8) calls are along said northerly maintained
right-of-way line: (1) thence S.89°41'26"W., a distance of 393.64 feet; (2) thence N.89°09'49"W., a
distance of 422.33 feet; (3) thence N.87°42'17"W., a distance of 274.31 feet; (4) thence N.75°30'40"W.,
9
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
a distance of 197.87 feet; (5) thence N.68°54'54"W., a distance of 197.02 feet; (6) thence
N.63°51'03"W., a distance of 173.82 feet; (7) thence N.63°29'40"W., a distance of 222.68 feet; (8)
thence N.64°31'33"W., a distance of 232.63 feet; thence N.00°52'40"W., a distance of 2,100.78 feet;
thence S.89°14'40"W., a distance of 1,334.00 feet; thence S.00°53'28"E., a distance of 1,399.08 feet to
said northerly maintained right-of-way line of Fruitville Road; the following twenty-five (25) calls are
along said northerly maintained right-of-way line: (1) thence N.63°29'40"W., a distance of 456.79 feet to
the point of curvature of a non-tangent curve to the left, having a radius of 1,958.46 feet and a central
angle of 26°14'15"; (2) thence Westerly along the arc of said curve, a distance of 896.84 feet, said curve
having a chord bearing and distance of N.76°36'47"W., 889.02 feet, to the point of tangency of said
curve; (3) thence N.89°43'54"W., a distance of 2,707.45 feet; (4) thence S.00°24'06"W., a distance of
16.00 feet; (5) thence N.89°43'54"W., a distance of 220.91 feet; (6) thence N.89°57'39"W., a distance of
500.00 feet; (7) thence S.89°47'18"W., a distance of 119.36 feet; (8) thence N.89°52'05"W., a distance of
180.52 feet; (9) thence S.88°15'06"W., a distance of 276.02 feet; (10) thence S.87°58'05"W., a distance
of 424.38 feet; (11) thence S.88°18'42"W., a distance of 500.02 feet; (12) thence S.87°23'40"W., a
T
distance of 199.73 feet; (13) thence S.87°58'05"W., a distance of 51.20 feet; (14) thence S.88°05'41"W.,
a distance of 348.76 feet; (15) thence S.89°10'09"W., a distance of 350.62 feet; (16) thence
N.89°45'51"W., a distance of 548.94 feet; (17) thence S.88°37'45"W., a distance of 500.02 feet; (18)
thence S.88°30'52"W., a distance of 500.02 feet; (19) thence S.88°43'27"W., a distance of 315.37 feet;
AF
(20) thence S.89°34'40"W., a distance of 766.79 feet; (21) thence N.89°38'00"W., a distance of 417.14
feet; (22) thence continue N.89°38'00"W. along said line, a distance of 500.00 feet; (23) thence
S.89°33'52"W., a distance of 500.05 feet; (24) thence N.89°51'45"W., a distance of 500.00 feet; (25)
thence N.89°38'02"W., a distance of 323.93 feet; thence N.00°29'50"W., a distance of 1,278.42 feet;
thence S.89°37'57"E., a distance of 2,646.47 feet; thence N.89°08'13"E., a distance of 2,708.36 feet;
thence N.89°08'38"E., a distance of 2,707.93 feet; thence N.00°19'12"E., a distance of 5,423.31 feet;
thence S.88°29'35"W., a distance of 5,421.56 feet; thence N.00°00'02"E., a distance of 5,697.41 feet;
thence N.88°41'30"E., a distance of 166.74 feet; thence S.74°44'41"E., a distance of 84.66 feet; thence
R
S.62°36'08"E., a distance of 181.95 feet; thence S.89°59'59"E., a distance of 169.10 feet; thence
N.48°45'11"E., a distance of 104.55 feet; thence N.23°36'35"E., a distance of 455.33 feet; thence
N.01°26'56"W., a distance of 261.50 feet; thence N.42°37'03"W., a distance of 506.60 feet; thence
N.89°42'21"W., a distance of 204.51 feet; thence S.57°54'05"W., a distance of 239.38 feet; thence
D
S.86°12'26"W., a distance of 254.93 feet; thence N.76°12'01"W., a distance of 81.02 feet; thence
N.00°30'41"W., a distance of 150.06 feet; thence N.53°18'38"E., a distance of 291.62 feet; thence
N.24°06'19"W., a distance of 123.42 feet; thence S.85°09'11"W., a distance of 44.04 feet; thence
N.00°00'09"E., a distance of 289.51 feet; thence N.00°00'04"W., a distance of 829.34 feet; thence
S.76°41'15"W., a distance of 147.00 feet; thence N.64°21'03"W., a distance of 359.24 feet; thence
N.18°33'15"W., a distance of 298.59 feet; thence S.89°58'05"E., a distance of 1,301.66 feet to the POINT
OF BEGINNING.
10
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Containing 179,407,339 square feet or 4,118.6258 acres, more or less.
T
AF
R
D
11
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
EXHIBIT B: CONDITIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
The “Conditions for Development Approval” set forth below have been, or will be, met by the Master
Developer or the Applicant. For development pursuant to an RSF-2/PUD rezone application pursuant to
this MDO, the Master Developer or Applicant shall be required to address the Conditions identified
below and as required in Article 6 Section 124-76, Article 7 124-101, and Article 5 Section 124-39 of the
UDC. Failure to meet any applicable Condition in this MDO, failure to meet any Condition information
requirement, failure to make satisfactory provision for any issue raised by the information requirements
related to the Conditions, or failure to meet the requirements of the UDC constitute issues that can
result in denial of an RSF-2/PUD rezone application for a Project Area.
Section 1 Definitions
1. The term “Master Developer” shall mean the party or parties responsible to ensure that the
obligations and the duties of the Master Developer set forth in the MDO are met. However, the
Master Developer named below is not required to be the party actually constructing the on-site
T
and/or off-site infrastructure or otherwise developing Lakewood Ranch Southeast. The “Master
Developer” shall be Lakewood Ranch Communities LLC. All references made in the following
Conditions for Development Approval pertaining to Master Developer shall also include any
AF
successors or assigns to any of the legally described area found within this MDO to whom the
responsibilities as Master Developer for that entity have been assigned. The Master Developer
may from time to time assign its responsibility for particular obligations under this MDO to the
Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District (defined in Section 1.5 below).
2. The term “Project Area” shall mean any of the parcels in Lakewood Ranch Southeast designated
on Exhibit C Map C-4 as a Project Area. Any such Project Area may be the subject of an
individual rezoning and shall have an allocated base density of dwelling units as set forth in
Table C-4 of Exhibit C. Unit allocation within and among Project Areas may be adjusted as long
as the total unit count does not exceed the maximum 5,000 unit threshold. The specific unit
R
allocation will be refined at each RSF-2/PUD submittal.

3. The term "Applicant" shall mean the developer(s) of an individual Project Area. All references
made in the following Conditions pertaining to the Applicant shall also include any successors in
interest of the Project Area.
D
4. The term "Lakewood Ranch Southeast" shall mean the property described in Exhibit A, and the
land uses, phasing, and improvements described in the MDO or as amended by subsequent
Applications to Amend the MDO, which are attributable to the development on that property
described in Exhibit A. All references made herein pertaining to “Lakewood Ranch Southeast”
shall also include any successors or assigns in interests of any of the area covered under the
“Lakewood Ranch Southeast” MDO.
5. The term “Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District” or “LWRSD” shall mean that certain limited
purpose local government created pursuant to Fl. Statutes _______, as amended. The LWRSD
will, among other things, construct Bourneside Blvd, off-site and on-site utilities, portions of the
stormwater system and other items of infrastructure described in this MDO. The LWRSD will
also maintain certain items of infrastructure which has: 1) not been dedicated to the County or a
Homeowners’ Association; or 2) been dedicated to the County but is the subject of a written
maintenance agreement authorized by the County.
12
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
6. The term “Final Development Order” shall mean a Final Development Order as defined in
Sarasota County’s Concurrency Management Regulations (Sarasota County Code of Ordinances,
Chapter 94, Article VII) and shall include, without limitation, the approval of a construction plan
for development requiring subdivision plans or site and development plan approval, or building
permits for development not requiring such construction plan approval.
7. The terms “Preservation and/or Conservation” of native habitats which is used herein are
defined as follows:
a. Preservation – The perpetual maintenance of habitats in their existing (or restored)
native condition. No activities including, but not limited to, filling, excavating, alteration
of vegetation, or storing materials, shall be allowed unless authorized by a resource
management plan administratively approved by the County.
b. Conservation – The wise use of native habitats other than those required to be
preserved. No activities including, but not limited to, filling, excavating, alteration of
vegetation, or storing materials shall be allowed unless authorized by a resource
8.
T
management plan approved by the County’s Resource Protection office. Limited clearing
may be allowed to accommodate nature trails, picnic areas, and other passive
recreational facilities if prior administrative approval is obtained from the County.
The term “Developed Area” for the VTZ RMA shall mean that land area exclusive of Open Space
AF
identified and depicted on a VTZ Master Plan, as approved by the MDO.
9. The term “Greenbelt” shall mean a permanent Buffer surrounding the Developed Area of the
Village Transition Zone.
10. The term “Open Space” for the VTZ RMA shall mean that land area exclusive of Developed Area
identified and depicted on a VTZ Master Plan, as approved by the MDO. Open Space shall be
property under public or private ownership which is unoccupied or predominately unoccupied
by buildings or other impervious surfaces and which is identified as Greenway, Greenbelt, and
other open space and used for parks, recreation, agriculture, conservation, preservation of
R
native habitat and other natural resources, surface/irrigation water impoundment, historic, or
scenic purposes.
Section 2 General

D
1. All future development approvals pursuant to this MDO (i.e., Rezone Petitions, Special
Exceptions, Site and Development, Construction Plans, Preliminary Subdivision Plans, and Final
Plats) shall be in substantial accordance with the Lakewood Ranch Southeast VTZ Master Plan
shown on Map C-3 and the Conditions for Development Approval as set forth herein unless
superseded by further studies, regulations or other analysis as approved by the appropriate
Sarasota County departments and/or other regulatory agencies. As to variable criteria
referenced in this MDO, a future development approval shall be in substantial accordance with
that element of this MDO if it falls within the range of variability contemplated by this MDO.
2. No development permit shall be granted for construction within a Project Area subject to the
MDO until an application for RSF-2/PUD zone district has also been approved encompassing the
area for construction. Exemptions are for: 1) those Civic uses identified in the MDO such as
parks, trails, fire stations, utilities, and schools; 2) off-site utilities pursuant to plans approved by
13
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
the County and 3) for Bourneside Boulevard, together with intersection improvements and
associated utilities pursuant to plans approved by the County.
3. Throughout the Lakewood Ranch Southeast development, the Master Developer shall comply
with the requirements listed in the document entitled, “Administrative Guidelines for
Monitoring Developments of Critical Concern in Unincorporated Sarasota County,” Ordinance
No. 89-77 as amended.
4. All proposed deed restrictions that relate to MDO Conditions shall be submitted by the
Applicant for approval by the County, and provide for enforcement of those conditions and the
award of reasonable attorneys' fees to the County, in addition to enforcement by the not-for-
profit Florida corporation established by Applicant and known herein as the "Master
Association," and/or such additional delegees and such other persons as may be appropriate,
including but not limited to the Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District.
5. “Common Areas” including, but not limited to, common recreation areas, open and landscaped
T
areas, drainage areas, wetlands and lakes, roadways, sanctuaries, and entranceways shall be
maintained by a Master Association (or duly delegated sub association), an individual
Homeowners Association, or the Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District as designated in the
AF
applicable rezone, construction permits, or final plat.
6. If Conditions contained in this MDO require the Master Developer or Applicant to submit certain
information with preliminary plan/site development plan and construction plans, it shall be
understood that such information shall be reviewed and approved by appropriate Sarasota
County Development Review Committee Members.
7. Where approval by a Sarasota County department is required herein, the Master Developer or
Applicant requesting approval shall be entitled to review of the department decision by the
Board of County Commissioners. Where existing County, State and Federal regulations do not
R
apply, department decisions shall be based upon the highest standards of accepted professional
practice in the particular field applicable to the requirements of the conditions set forth herein.
8. The Master Developer and individual Applicants shall ensure the reasonable access to the
Lakewood Ranch Southeast project site by Sarasota County government agents and employees
D
shall be granted for the purpose of monitoring and implementation of the MDO.
9. Temporary uses shall be processed as required by County Ordinances then in full force and
effect.
10. The issuance of MDOs, including Final Development Orders for Lakewood Ranch Southeast, shall
be subject to the requirements of the Sarasota County Concurrency Management Regulations
(Sarasota County Code of Ordinance, Chapter 94, Article VII) with respect to public facilities and
levels of service for such facilities.
11. Notwithstanding any term or the MDO to the contrary, Sarasota County shall have no obligation
to construct or improve any facility or capital improvement necessary or desirable to
accommodate development of the Project, unless Sarasota County and the Master Developer
have entered into a written agreement whereby Sarasota County specifically agrees to construct
14
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
or improve a designated facility for the benefit of the Project. The inclusion of any facility or
improvement in the County's Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan or capital budget shall not
constitute a guarantee to the Master Developer that such facilities or improvement will be
constructed.
12. With the approval of each RSF-2/PUD rezone application, the following Master Plans shall be
administratively updated as needed:
a. Water Quality Monitoring Plan
b. Conceptual Transportation and Access Management Plan
c. Conceptual Master Development Plan Utility Master Plan
d. Assessment of Pre-Development Conditions (Pre-Development Drainage Map)
1. None.
Section 3 Land Use

T
AF
1. Lakewood Ranch Southeast shall be developed in substantial accordance with the VTZ Master
Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and made a part hereof. The VTZ Master Plan may be
administratively revised concurrently with each subsequent approval of a RSF-2/PUD zone
district.
2. Lakewood Ranch Southeast shall be developed in Project Areas as generally shown in Map C-4
and Table C-4 by way of one or more RSF-2/PUD rezone applications.
R
3. The base density for Lakewood Ranch Southeast shall be 1 dwelling unit/gross acre, including
such portions of the Greenway RMA located within the VTZ RMA. This base density may be
increased by way of density bonuses for Incentivized Community Housing or other TDR’s,
however, the total number of residential dwelling units shall not exceed 5,000 units within the
D
boundaries of Lakewood Ranch Southeast for any reason. If Incentivized Community Housing
Bonuses allow market rate units in excess of the 5,000 dwelling unit maximum, said excess units
may be sold or otherwise transferred by the Master Developer pursuant to Sarasota County’s
TDR Program and VTZ Policy 2.5. individual Project Areas may have densities greater than that
permitted in RSF-2/PUD provided that the aggregate density of all land within the Lakewood
Ranch Southeast VTZMP does not exceed 5,000 dwelling units.
4. Non-residential (i.e., retail/commercial and office) land use shall not be required within
Lakewood Ranch Southeast.
1. The rezoning of any of the Lakewood Ranch Southeast Project Areas to RSF-2/PUD shall be in
accordance with Article 5, Sections 124-39 and 124-40 of the UDC. This includes the component
parts of the review procedure as follows:
15
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
a) Preapplication Conference. Prior to initiating an application for a Rezoning/Planned

Development, a Preapplication Conference with the Development Review Coordination
staff pursuant to Section 124-37 of the UDC is required.
b) Application Submittal. All applications for a Rezoning/Planned Development shall be

submitted in writing to the County, accompanied by all pertinent information required
by the UDC. The applicant must hold an advertised neighborhood workshop prior to the
submission of the Rezoning/Planned Development application in accordance with the
procedures established for that purpose by Resolution of the Board.
c) Application Sufficiency. Applications for a Rezoning/Planned Development shall be

accompanied by a clear statement and accounting that presents the applicant's purpose
for the requested Rezoning/Planned Development. The statement shall include those
facts required and outlined in the UDC.
d) T
Application Review. The report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to
the Board regarding a specific application shall show that the Planning Commission has
studied and considered the application in relation to the findings within the UDC.
AF
e) Public Hearing Notification Requirements. Notice shall be provided as set forth within
Section 124-36(c)(5) of the UDC for both the Planning Commission and the Board public
hearings.
f) Public Hearings. Rezoning/Planned Development applications shall be considered by the

Planning Commission and the Board at public hearings. The Planning Commission may
recommend that an application be approved subject to stipulations. The report and
recommendations of the Planning Commission shall be advisory only and shall not be
R
binding upon the Board.
g) Action. Final action on all Rezoning/Planned Development applications shall be taken by

the Board. The Board, after receiving the recommendation from the Planning
D
Commission on the application, may grant or deny the application or modify the
application to a zoning district consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. In addition, each RSF-2/PUD rezone application submittal and follow-up submittals (Subdivision
Plans, Preliminary Plats) shall include Development Tracking Tables to assist in monitoring unit
counts, open space, parks and housing.
3. The location and boundaries of each Project Area shall be finally established at the time of the
RSF-2/PUD rezone application for that Project Area. The Development Tracking Tables together
with the Project Area Map will be administratively updated with each RSF-2/PUD rezone
application submittal.
16
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
4. If additional density is obtained through offsite transfer or purchase of Transfer of Development

credits then a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Plan pursuant to TDR Objective 1, Chapter 8
of Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan shall be created and administratively updated with each
RSF-2/PUD rezone application submittal and follow-up submittals (Subdivision Plans, Preliminary
Plats).
5. The location and sequence of the Restrictive Covenants recorded by the Applicant over the
Greenway RMA and Open Space will be as depicted in a Conceptual Restrictive Covenant
Phasing Plan submitted in support of each RSF-2/PUD rezone, and these stipulations.
a. Restrictive Covenant areas may be divided by Initial Restrictive Covenants and

Supplemental Restrictive Covenants by Project Area.
b. The Restrictive Covenant for each of the Initial Restrictive Covenant areas within each
Project Area shall be recorded concurrent with the first plat approval which includes any
of the land within that phase in that Project Area.
c. T
The Restrictive Covenant for each Supplemental Restrictive Covenant area shall be
recorded with the individual plats for each such area.
AF
d. Open Space will be counted cumulatively throughout the Project Area with the
recording of the respective Restrictive Covenants.
e. Each Restrictive Covenant shall be in a form approved by the County Attorney in

consultation with the Environment Protection Division of the County.
f. Conceptual Restrictive Covenant boundaries will be updated via the RSF-2/PUD rezone
process and amended on a per Project Area basis as successive Project Areas are
rezoned.
R
Section 4 Land and Soil
A. Conditions for Development Approval
1. With regard to the exemptions for agricultural activities that are found within Chapter 54,
D
Article XII (Earthmoving Code) and Article XVIII (Trees Code) the submittal of the application for
the MDO, and the adoption hereof, shall not constitute evidence that the activity was in
preparation for, or in anticipation of, nonagricultural development.
B. Issues Subject to Further Review in RSF-2/PUD Rezone Applications
1. None.
Section 5 Housing
1. VTZ Policy 2.3 provides incentives for affordable housing. Additional units may be added beyond
the base density of 1 dwelling unit per gross acre approved at the time of rezoning of a Project
Area.
17
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
2. To achieve the maximum 5,000 dwelling units, it is anticipated that approximately 440
incentivized community housing units will need to be provided.
1. If affordable housing is proposed, the amount of affordable housing for that Project Area shall
be established at the time of the RSF-2/PUD rezone application submittal and shall be updated
with follow-up submittals (Subdivision Plans, Preliminary Plats). The Affordable Housing
Development Tracking Tables will be updated with each submittal.
2. The total number of residential dwelling units shall not exceed 5,000 units within the boundaries
of Lakewood Ranch Southeast for any reason, including but not limited to housing bonuses for
Incentivized Community Housing or other TDR’s. If Incentivized Community Housing Bonuses
allow market rate units in excess of the 5,000 dwelling unit maximum, said excess units may be
sold or otherwise transferred by the Master Developer pursuant to Sarasota County’s TDR
Program and VTZ Policy 2.5.
Section 6 Fiscal Neutrality

T
AF
1. Development shall take place in substantial accordance with the proposed development
program identified in the Fiscal Neutrality Plan dated June 2, 2022 incorporated herein by
reference. Any development in excess of these totals will require approval of a new or revised
Fiscal Neutrality Plan.
1. Any development in excess of the total dwelling units identified on the Fiscal Neutrality Plan will
require approval of a new or revised Fiscal Neutrality Plan.
R
2. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall provide the number of dwelling units to be developed
within that Project Area and the cumulative number within previously approved Project Areas
within the Lakewood Ranch Southeast property.
D
3. The development deviation scenarios for Lakewood Ranch Southeast, as described in the Fiscal
Neutrality Plan shall be allowed to be further modified by the Applicant by exchanging units of
housing types with lower market value for units of housing types with higher market value, and
still maintain fiscal neutrality, without requiring revision or update of the Fiscal Neutrality
Analysis or Plan.
Section 7 Environmental Systems
1. The approved location and acreages of the Open Space and Greenways for Lakewood Ranch
Southeast are shown in Exhibit C, VTZ Master Plan. This is a conceptual visualization of the
Open Space which can be adjusted and refined at each rezone as long as there is at least 43%
Open Space for the entire Lakewood Ranch Southeast development.
18
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
1. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall contain the following plans, which shall be consistent
with the VTZ Master Plan. Additionally, each subsequent RSF-2/PUD rezone shall include
cumulative accounting of acreages and associated data:
a. Existing Native Habitat Map (Map F-1) for that Project Area
b. Native Habitat Preservation and Alteration Map (Map F-2) for that Project Area
c. Listed Species Survey (Map F-3) for that Project Area
d. Preliminary Grand Tree Survey for that Project Area.
e. Wildlife Corridor Map (Map F-4) for that Project Area
f. Resource Management Plan for that Project Area.
2. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall provide design details (e.g., cross sections, types of
T
structures, signage, etc.) for measures to allow wildlife passage across road rights-of way that
cross the Wildlife Corridor as depicted on Wildlife Corridor Plan Map (Map F-4) for review by the
County. The Applicant shall maintain all areas of the wildlife corridor in a condition that allows
wildlife movement within and across the project.
AF
3. The Applicant shall maintain the wetlands, mesic hammocks, pine flatwoods, and other native
uplands as shown on the approved Native Habitat/Preservation Plan (Map F-2) for each Project
Area in accordance with the Resource Management Plan submitted and approved for each
Project Area.
4. Recreational activities within the Greenway RMA shall be passive or natural resource based.
5. The Applicant shall provide details of proposed recreational activities within the Greenway RMA
and Open Space with the RSF-2/PUD rezone to demonstrate that the proposed recreational
R
activities do not conflict with the resource management goals of those lands.
Section 8 Drainage/Stormwater

D
1. The stormwater management system shall be designed to maintain wetland hydroperiods and
drainage flow patterns as permittable by the Southwest Florida Water Management District and
Sarasota County.
2. The Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District shall establish an Annual Stormwater Facilities
Monitoring Program which shall include, without limitation:
a. For the Annual Monitoring Reporting Period, a list with all substantial local, state and
federal permits which have been obtained, applied for, or denied during this reporting
period and past reporting periods for stormwater management, flood protection or
drainage shall be provided. The agency, permit number, type of permit, duty for each,
the date obtained and the date to expire shall be specified.
19
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
b. Documentation for any outstanding “Requests For Additional Information (RAI)” for
stormwater management, flood protection or drainage for all substantial local, state
and federal permits which have been obtained to show that they are in compliance and
approved.
c. Information to substantiate that the stormwater management facilities have been

certified and accepted by the applicable local, state and federal permitting agencies
during each reporting period. If the stormwater management facilities have not been
accepted by the applicable permitting agencies, information related to the inspection
dates, with identified deficiencies, required maintenance, the schedule of the required
maintenance or repair, and final acceptance letter must be provided to Sarasota County.
If the Stormwater management facilities have not been recertified and accepted by the
applicable permitting agencies, and in lieu of the requirement set forth in the
immediately preceding sentence, Master Developer may perform an independent
review and certification of the said Stormwater Management Facilities to Sarasota
T
County by a registered professional engineer verifying the following components of the
Stormwater Management System are functioning properly and consistent with the
permitted system:
AF
1) Include a specific reporting section for “Stormwater Facility Monitoring and
Maintenance” that includes documentation of the stormwater facility
inspections and include determination of the following:
2) Document the presence of any obstruction or impediments to flow contained in

or around control structures. This could include sediment deposited within or
surrounding the structure, unauthorized alterations to the structure, or
vegetation, debris, trash, or litter impeding flow into or out of the structure.
R
3) Document the condition and presence of baffles and / or skimmers on

structures for wet ponds to ensure proper function and presence where
originally installed. For dry ponds or swales, check the clearance under the
skimmer (between skimmer and bottom of dry pond or swale).
D
4) Document the condition of lake and drainageway banks including appropriate

slope and erosional problems, including the condition of the vegetation/sod.
5) Document the condition of lakes and littoral shelves to ensure the presence
and health of the specified quantity of littoral vegetation as well as observation
of any sedimentation which has occurred within the lakes.
6) Document the condition of pipes and structures including corrosion, cracking,

and/or crushing (No TV inspection of pipes is required).
7) Document the presence of sediment, vegetative, and / or debris obstructions

within pipes and drainageways, and checking for settling / sinking above and /
or next to the pipe (indicative of a leaking joint).
20
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
8) Provide a description of specific actions to be taken by the applicant to address

deficiencies identified during the reporting period inspections and the specific
timeframes to complete necessary actions for the reporting period.
3. An overall Assessment of Pre-Development Conditions (Map G-1) has been submitted and is
hereby approved. This Assessment of Pre-Development Conditions includes the following and
will be the baseline information to be used to develop Stormwater Management Plans with
respect to subsequent rezones:
a. existing surveyed wetlands;
b. Lidar contour lines;
c. 100-year floodplain areas (if any);
d. major basin/catchment delineations;
e.
T
watershed boundaries showing historic flow patterns to be maintained on a Post
Development and consistency with county watershed management plans (show flow
arrow indicators);
AF
f stormwater modeling of the 100yr storm event;
g. determination of the peak discharge rates at the project boundary study points;
h. determination of the peak stage elevations at the project boundaries;
i. determination of existing runoff curve number and times of concentration; and
j a full existing conditions report to be utilized for all rezone submittals.

R
1. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall, if necessary, contain the Assessment of Pre-
Development Conditions (Map G-1), to be administratively approved, which reflects the pre-
development drainage conditions in the Project Area to be rezoned.
D
2. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall contain a Post-Development Drainage Plan Map (Map
G-2), to be administratively approved, for the Project Area to be rezoned that must be
consistent with conditions identified in the Assessment of Pre-Development Conditions together
with the following for the area being rezoned:
a. the total impervious area allowed in each basin/catchment area;
b. conceptual pond sizes and conceptual pond locations;
c. incorporates the attenuation and treatment facilities planned for the property being
rezoned to fully accommodate and benefit all lots, parcels or tracts within the property.
This Plan shall be consistent with, to the extent applicable, the Cow Pen Slough Basin
Master Plan (Donna Bay Water Shed) and the Howard Creek/Myakka River Basin Master
Plan, or other applicable watershed management plans; and
21
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
d. required conveyance of appropriate rights to the Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District

to carry out the Annual Monitoring functions listed in Section 8. A. 2 above.
3. Prior to submittal of the first Site Development Plan for an approved rezone, a Detailed
Stormwater Management Plan shall be submitted and administratively approved for the area of
the rezoned Project Area within which the Site Development Plan is located. In addition to items
required by the UDC, the detailed Stormwater Management Plan shall include the following:
a. a project boundary that includes the facilities within the Detailed Stormwater
Management Plan and specific delineation and labeling of all the contributing areas (i.e.,
basins) draining to and being managed by the facilities;
b. illustration of the components of the Detailed Stormwater Management Plan (existing

and proposed) – including the lakes, ponds, wetland areas that are part of the
stormwater management facilities, floodplain compensation areas and their respective
stormwater controls and/or interconnecting conveyance systems. A detailed Node-
T
Basin-Reach graphical exhibit (both hardcopy and digital format, such as ArcGIS or
CADD) should also be included that is consistent with the corresponding Hydrodynamic
modeling, stormwater calculations, stormwater report, Master Stormwater
AF
Management Plan, and other supportive documentation;
c. details for the control structures, weirs, and or conveyance system must also be
included;
d. all lakes, ponds, and floodplain compensation areas should have the typical stormwater
data called out (SHWL, CWL, design high water level, TOB elevation, TOS elevation, etc.);
e. pre- and post-hydrographs to confirm that natural hydroperiods will be sustained after
development within the area to be rezoned; and
R
f. spreadsheet or tabulation within a plan sheet that defines what is the allowable
impervious area for specific areas called out on the Detailed Stormwater Management
Plan (i.e. square feet per lot, per phase, or per modeled catchment/basin);
D
g. Whenever a Detailed Stormwater Management Plan is being revised or updated,

additional information should be added to the allowable impervious area callout that
identifies how much of the impervious area has been permitted, how much has been
built, and how much allowable impervious remains. This should be in the form of a
tracking log or instrument for use during the life of the Detailed Stormwater
Management Plan and project. The tracking log shall be consistent with the tabulation in
part e above; and
h. Should the Detailed Stormwater Management Plan for an individual Site Development
Plan application identify any downstream or offsite Stormwater infrastructure (outside
of the Site Development Plan area) required to ensure the proper functionality of the
Detailed Stormwater Management system for that Project Area, these downstream or
offsite facilities shall be included as part of the initial phase of the Site and Development
22
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Application and shall be constructed as part of the first phase horizontal construction
for the area being rezoned.
Section 9 Water Quality
1. The Master Developer has established and has begun to implement, and the County has
approved the Baseline Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program in accordance with Exhibit “E”
of this MDO (the “Baseline Monitoring Program”). Prior to approval of any RSF-2/PUD rezoning
for a Project Area, the Baseline Monitoring Program needs to be performed by obtaining at least
10 independent samples, with at least one sample from three of the four calendar seasons, from
each WBID lying wholly or partially within the Lakewood Ranch Southeast property.
2. The Master Developer shall be responsible for implementing the Ongoing Surface Water Quality
Monitoring Program in accordance with Exhibit “E” of this MDO (the “Ongoing Surface Water
3.
T
Quality Monitoring Program”). The Water Quality Monitoring Plan shall consist of the Baseline
Monitoring Program and the Ongoing Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program.
Any proposed changes in the Monitoring Program related to water quality location, parameters,
AF
frequency, or reporting to reflect unforeseen changes to on-site or off-site conditions or
otherwise and proposed by the Master Developer shall be made in writing and shall be subject
to administrative approval of Sarasota County Water Resources (or its successor).
4. Surface water quality shall be maintained by the Master Developer through the development
and implementation of a stormwater management system.
1. Until the Baseline Monitoring Program has been completed, each RSF-2/PUD rezone application
R
shall contain a report on compliance with the Baseline Monitoring Program to that date and, if
not previously commenced, a condition for said timely commencement.
2. The Ongoing Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program by the Master Developer will
commence at the startup of construction within the first phase of the first Project Area and will
D
be progressively implemented as additional Project Areas begin to be constructed. Once the

construction begins in each Project Area, sampling will begin at the station(s) within that
construction phase to monitor surface water conditions that would potentially be impacted by
the development. Monitoring locations will be established as approved by Sarasota County in
connection with each Project Area rezoning and the monitoring location map in Exhibit E will be
administratively amended accordingly. On-going monitoring within Project Areas will continue
on this progressive schedule until one year has elapsed following the completion of construction
of eighty percent of the habitable structures within each phase of that Project Area.
Section 10 Historical and Archeological
1. None.
23
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
1. None.
Section 11 Transportation Commented [RJ1]: NOTE: Traffic review not

completed…so this section drafted based upon unreviewed
A. Conditions for Approval. results of traffic study.
1. The Master Developer has submitted a Traffic Study entitled Lakewood Ranch Southeast VTZ
Master Plan Transportation Analysis dated June 2, 2022, (the “Traffic Study”). This Traffic Study
is the analysis of the buildout of Lakewood Ranch Southeast pursuant to this MDO and the
traffic conditions at buildout. It is a guide to the roadway network and improvements
anticipated to be needed to support the Lakewood Ranch Southeast development program
authorized by this MDO together with anticipated growth in background traffic and it is
intended for use only with this Lakewood Ranch Southeast development program. The Traffic
Study is hereby approved, and among other items, contains the following:
a.
b.
a Traffic Analysis of Project Impacts;
a Conceptual Transportation Plan; and

T
AF
c. a Conceptual Access Management Plan.
Each of the foregoing items shall be refined and administratively updated with the submission
and approval of subsequent rezonings of Project Areas.
2. While the development will not be responsible for improvements needed to correct deficiencies
caused by existing traffic or traffic not attributable to the Lakewood Ranch Southeast
development, the following improvements have been identified as the sole responsibility of the
development:
R
a. Within six (6) months of the approval of the construction plans, the construction of
Bourneside Boulevard shall be commenced and diligently pursued by the Lakewood
Ranch Stewardship District until completion as a four (4) lane divided roadway from
University Parkway to Fruitville Road. Such construction plans will be submitted to
D
Sarasota County within six (6) months from the date of approval of this MDO.
b. University Parkway from Lorraine Road to Bourneside Boulevard shall be widened from
two (2) to four (4) lanes. Within six (6) months of the approval of construction plans,
construction will be commenced and diligently pursued by the Lakewood Ranch
Stewardship District until completion. Such construction plans will be submitted to
Manatee and Sarasota Counties as applicable within eighteen (18) months of the date of
approval of this MDO.
c. The Master Developer shall be fully responsible for all costs associated with site-related
road and intersection improvements solely attributable to the Lakewood Ranch
Southeast development. All roads shall be constructed to Sarasota County or FDOT
standards, as applicable.
24
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
d. The Master Developer and/or the Applicant(s) shall pay to Sarasota County mobility fees
as set forth in Ordinance No. ________ as from time to time amended.
3. Roundabouts may be utilized if an intersection control evaluation (ICE) determines a

roundabout is the most effective option. Roundabouts are proposed on Bourneside Blvd at both
University Parkway and Fruitville Roads. To avoid repeated construction projects or
reconfigured intersections along Bourneside Boulevard, roundabouts will be proposed at certain
locations which provide access to certain Project Areas. The suitability of these roundabouts
will be evaluated during the review of the Bourneside Blvd. construction plans.
4. The collector and arterial road network for Lakewood Ranch Southeast (as shown on Map C-3
VTZ Master Plan) shall be constructed to design standards consistent with Sarasota County
standards, FDOT Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction, and
Maintenance (“Florida Greenbook”) standards, and FDOT Design Manual standards as
applicable.
5. T
While not identified in the Traffic Study as improvements which are the responsibility of the
development, the Master Developer, the Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District, and the
Applicant(s) shall cooperate with Sarasota County to establish and convey to Sarasota County in
AF
accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and ordinances, the following rights of way should
Sarasota County determine in its sole discretion that the acquisition of said rights of way are in
the public interest:
a. a 120 foot right of way from Bourneside Blvd to the eastern boundary of Lakewood
Ranch Southeast, depicted as East-West Roadway “B” on Map 10-8 of the Sarasota
County Comprehensive Plan; and
b. sufficient right of way on the north side of Fruitville Road within the development to
facilitate any future widening of Fruitville Road to four (4) lanes if determined by
R
Sarasota County to be necessary or desirable.
Said rights of way shall be treated as Open Space for purposes of this MDO and subsequent
rezonings whether or not subsequently acquired by Sarasota County.
D
6. The right of way of Bourneside Boulevard and the completed road improvements therein shall
be dedicated to Sarasota County. Nonetheless, as part of said dedication, the Lakewood Ranch
Stewardship District shall execute a Right of Way and Landscaping Maintenance Agreement
which relieves Sarasota County of the expense of maintaining the landscaping within said right
of way. The right of way for East-West Roadway “B” on Map 10-8 of the Sarasota County
Comprehensive Plan shall be acquired by Sarasota County within five (5) years from the date of
final adoption of this MDO. The Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District shall have responsibility
for the maintenance of the right of way and landscaping therein within its boundaries. Outside
these boundaries, the Sarasota County shall have the responsibility therefor. Sarasota County
shall have responsibility for the maintenance of the pavement on the foregoing roadways.
7. Maps H-1 and H-2 represent conceptual depictions of trails to serve the Lakewood Ranch
Southeast development and the surrounding area.
25
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
a. Map H-1 depicts potential additions to the regional trail network that relate to
Lakewood Ranch in general, and which are to one degree or another being considered
by the Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Trust for Public Land as part of a
multi-stakeholder cooperative effort.
b. Map H-2 depicts a conceptual trails map for Lakewood Ranch Southeast which is
supportive of the larger effort shown in Map H-1. The Lakewood Ranch Stewardship
District is building the portion of the trails shown on Map H-2 represented by a solid
line. This represents the spine of a multi-modal bicycle/pedestrian network that will be
linked to Project Areas at the time such Project Areas are rezoned. The trails depicted
by a dashed line represent corridors that may be used to link this trail system to other
areas in the greater community and are not being proposed to be built solely by the
Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District.
1.
reviews) a:
a. Project Area Transportation Plan;

T
With each RSF-2/PUD rezone, the Applicant shall provide (provided the Master Developer
AF
b. Project Area Access Management Plan; and
c. Project Area Bicycle and Pedestrian Network Plan.
Such items shall be reviewed and approved by the Master Developer prior to submission to
Sarasota County and must either be consistent with the Conceptual items listed in Section
11.A.1 or said Conceptual items or the Project Area Plans shall be administratively revised as
necessary to reconcile that inconsistency.
R
2. The required mobility interconnections and the details of the Project Area transportation system
within each such Project Area shall be identified at the time of each RSF-2/PUD rezoning on the
Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property.
3. The rezone application for each Project Area shall identify those areas where the multi-use trail
D
system will provide for pedestrian access.
4. Each Project Area development within the Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property, as identified in
the Application for VTZ Master Plan Approval, will undergo a traffic review limited to
operational, safety, and site access issues through traffic studies prepared for each RSF-2/PUD
rezone application. A transportation methodology shall be submitted to Public Works
Transportation for review and approval prior to initiating the study. This will allow the study to
address any specific operational, safety, and site access issues that may be related to any
particular RSF-2/PUD rezone, consistent with Sarasota County Resolution No. 2019-106.
5. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall include a Transportation Plan in graphic (map) form.
On said map, the location and size of all areas and features may be approximate, the location
and configuration of access points, internal streets, blocks, trails, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and
tracts shall be conceptual only and will be determined by the Applicant at the Site Development
26
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Plan stage, and internal Project Area roadway crossings across Open Space corridors will be
determined at the Site Development Plan stage.
6. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall provide a second fully functional access (ingress and
egress access) for each subphase, unit, or pod with 100 dwelling units or more. Each RSF-2/PUD
rezone shall also comply with any applicable requirements of the UDC, as it may be amended
from time to time, regarding any requirements for a third fully functional access. The
requirements of this Section 11.B.6 shall be subject to such modifications as may be approved
by the Board of County Commissioners.
7. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone shall contain provisions which assign financial responsibility for the
maintenance of roads, rights of way, and landscaping to an appropriate permanent entity such
as the Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District or a Homeowners Association.
Section 12 Public Utilities
1.
T
A. Conditions for Development Approval - Water and Wastewater.
Monitoring Reports - The Applicant shall include the following information in the Biennial
Monitoring Reports that are submitted to the Sarasota County Planning Department, unless a
AF
different submission timeline is authorized by the Planning Department in writing. Failure to
submit the report after 30 days may result in Sarasota County temporarily suspending this MDO,
or could lead to a suspension of issuing permits until the requirements of this section are met:
a. The Development Tracking Chart that is submitted with each Biennial Monitoring
Report, shall include tabulations prepared by a Florida professional engineer detailing
housing units by type and mix, non-residential development (i.e., civic) land uses, along
with an accounting of the Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU’s) associated with all
development permits within Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property. The EDU calculations
R
provided shall use a methodology that is consistent with the adopted Water and
Wastewater Equivalent Dwelling Units Table, (Resolution No. 2018-163 as amended)
with breakdowns and tabulations listing development types within each Project Area
and calculations for the corresponding potable water and wastewater flow generation.
D
b. The Biennial Monitoring Report shall include an irrigation summary prepared by a

Florida professional engineer or geologist estimating the amount of irrigated acreage,
identifying irrigation sources and demands, with tabulations by development within
each Project Area within the Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property. The irrigation
summary shall include a summary of the recorded monthly quantities of water used for
irrigation, by type, (e.g. reclaimed water, stormwater, ground water, potable water,
etc.) for the reporting period.
The Florida professional engineer or geologist shall provide an analysis of the historical
monthly and annual average values compared against the reporting period values, a
comparison of wastewater flows vs. reclaimed water used, and provide any
recommendations, strategies, or corrective actions, explaining the programs in place to
reach the objective hierarchy for irrigation supply (e.g. (1) demand management
strategies, (2) reclaimed water, (3) rain water or stormwater, (4) groundwater), and
27
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
identify the appropriate action(s) to beneficially use an amount of reclaimed water at

least equal to the proposed wastewater flow generated by development within the
Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property.
2. Development within the Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property is required to connect to Sarasota
County Public Utilities potable water and wastewater. Non-potable and reclaimed water
systems shall be provided by Braden River Utilities, subject to the terms of an agreement for
reclaimed water supply with Sarasota County Utilities (the “Reclaimed Water Supply
Agreement”).
3. Development within the Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property shall be subject to all rates, fees,
and charges for water and wastewater, as approved or amended by the Board of County
Commissioners, including but not limited to capacity fees, permitting fees, security deposits,
installation fees, availability charges, and guaranteed revenues. Reclaimed water rates shall be
governed by the Reclaimed Water Supply Agreement. Utility service will be subject to
4.
approved or amended. T
compliance with the Sarasota County Public Utilities Departments Rules and Regulations as
Upon completion of construction, portions of the potable water and wastewater collection
AF
facilities shall be deeded to Sarasota County as public utilities at no cost to the County for
ongoing operation and maintenance. All potable water and wastewater customers connected to
Sarasota County's system shall be responsible for the monthly charges in accordance with the
most recently adopted Utility Rate Resolution.
5. Sarasota County shall have access to all potable water and wastewater collection systems within
the development at all times. Public utility shall be provided in accordance with all applicable
County regulations. Easements in excess of 20 feet may be required for larger sized pipelines
and those in close proximity to proposed structures. For facilities that are conveyed to the
R
County for ongoing operation and maintenance, and where the facilities must be installed
beneath pavement, any easement must carry the stipulation that should a line break occur, the
County will be responsible for the replacement of sod only. All other restoration costs will be the
responsibility of the property owner/developer.
D
6. This project is within the Southern Water Use Caution Area (SWUCA). Through its master
covenants or deed restrictions each development shall enforce provisions to preclude the
installation and use of individual irrigation wells. Development within the Lakewood Ranch
Southeast Property shall prioritize meeting irrigation needs through a hierarchy of (1) demand
management strategies, (2) reclaimed water. (3) rainwater or stormwater. Only after a
development demonstrates to Sarasota County that these measures are insufficient can
community ground water wells be considered as a supplement to these other strategies.
7. Prior to the first RSF-2/PUD rezone application for a Project Area being deemed sufficient, the
Applicant shall submit an overall conceptual Master Development Plan Utility Master Plan
(“MDP Utility Master Plan”) signed and sealed by a Florida registered professional engineer
identifying the planned infrastructure, sizes, and conceptual layout of the transmission mains
that will be used to serve the entire Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property. The MDP Utility
28
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Master Plan will indicate the offsite connection points and line sizing for transmission and major
distribution lines to the Master Development area for potable water and wastewater collection.
B.1. Water Supply: Issues Subject to Further Review in RSF-2/PUD Rezone Applications.
1. In the event that a Project Area Master Plan shall be inconsistent with the conceptual MDP
Utility Master Plan, the MDP Utility Master Plan or the Project Area Master Plan shall be revised
as necessary to reconcile that inconsistency. The Project Area Master Plan will include a Water
Quality Plan that demonstrates how the potable water system expansion will maintain
compliance with applicable drinking water quality standards; an evaluation of the system
impacts for the entire Project Area increment; and identification of any off-site improvements
required.
2. Prior to receiving Subdivision Plan or Site Development Plan approval for the first phase of
development within a Project Area an applicant must receive approval for a Project Area Utility
Master Plan and hydraulic models for the entire Project Area signed and sealed by a Florida
T
registered professional engineer identifying the infrastructure required to connect the Project
Area development increment to Sarasota County Public Utilities water, and reclaimed water
systems.
AF
3. The Project Area water distribution system shall be extended in a manner that minimizes dead
ends by providing a looped system to minimize the need for the flushing of water lines. Each
development phase will need to accommodate service to adjoining areas so that water mains
can be looped or interconnected to form a water supply network.
4. Potable water sources shall not be utilized for non-potable water uses such as cooling water,
decorative fountains, or lake augmentation.
5. The application for the Project Area rezoning shall designate the party or parties responsible for
R
providing the on-site and off-site infrastructure required to serve the Project Area development
inclusive of the on-site infrastructure required under the MDP Utility Master Plan, and shall
contribute toward the provision of required off-site infrastructure in compliance with Sarasota
County Utility Department Rules and Regulations as contemplated by the Fiscal Neutrality Plan.
D
6. Each Project Area rezone application shall include tabulations prepared by a Florida registered
professional engineer detailing housing units by type and mix, non-residential (i.e., civil) land
uses, along with an accounting of the Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU’s) associated with all
development within the proposed Project Area. The EDU calculations provided shall use a
methodology that is consistent with the adopted Water and Wastewater Equivalent Dwelling
Units Table, (Resolution No. 2018-163 as amended) with tabulations listing development types
within each Project Area, and calculations for the corresponding potable water and wastewater
flow generation.
7. Project Area rezone applicants may need to amend the approved MDP Utility Master Plan or
provide additional details regarding utility improvement phasing prior to being deemed
sufficient during the rezone process.
29
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
8. During rezonings, applicants will be encouraged to identify potential areas for these
improvements and to consult with Sarasota County and/or the Regional Water Supply Authority
and/or FPL relative to the terms and conditions pursuant to which any such necessary
easements or property for these future improvements might be acquired.
Subsequent development approvals shall not be required to dedicate these areas unless the
parties mutually agree.
B.2. Wastewater Management: Issues Subject to Further Review in RSF-2/PUD Rezone Applications.
1. Prior to receiving Subdivision Plan or Site Development Plan approval for the first phase of
development within a Project Area, an applicant must receive approval for a Project Area Utility
Master Plan and hydraulic models for the entire Project Area development signed and sealed by
a Florida registered professional engineer identifying the infrastructure required to connect the
Lakewood Ranch Southeast development to Sarasota County Public Utilities wastewater
systems. The Project Area Utility Master Plan will include a Lift Station Optimization Plan
2.
off-site improvements required.
T
evaluating system impacts for the entire Lakewood Ranch Southeast increment along with any
In the event that a Project Area development plan is inconsistent with the approved or amended
AF
MDP Utility Master Plan, the MDP Utility Master Plan or the Project Area Master Plan shall be
administratively revised as necessary to reconcile that inconsistency.
3. The application for the Project Area rezoning shall designate the party or parties responsible for
providing the on-site and off-site infrastructure required to serve the Lakewood Ranch
Southeast development, including the on-site infrastructure required under the MDP Utility
Master Plan in order for the development to be deemed Fiscally Neutral, and shall contribute
toward the provision of off-site infrastructure as required by the Sarasota County Utilities
Department Rules and Regulations as contemplated by Fiscal Neutrality Plan.
R
4. No Permanent On-Site Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems (OSTDS) or holding tanks will be
allowed within the development. Any existing OSTDS in place at the time of rezoning may
remain in use, subject to Sarasota County Health Department approval, or until such time as
central wastewater collection service is available to the property.
D
Sarasota County’s Public Utility Director is authorized to make final determinations regarding
the continued use of existing OSTDS or the use of temporary holding tank(s) where phasing or
timing of development warrants their utilization.
5. Each Project Area rezone application shall include tabulations prepared by a Florida registered
professional engineer detailing housing units by type and mix, non-residential (i.e., civil) land
uses, along with an accounting of the Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU’s) associated with all
development within the proposed Lakewood Ranch Southeast Property. The EDU calculations
provided shall use a methodology that is consistent with the adopted Water and Wastewater
Equivalent Dwelling Units Table, (Resolution No. 2018-163 as amended) with tabulations listing
development types within each Project Area, and calculations for the corresponding wastewater
flow generation.
30
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
6. Project Area rezone applicants may need to amend the approved MDP Utility Master Plan or
provide additional details regarding utility improvement phasing prior to being deemed
sufficient during the rezone process.
B.3. Reclaimed Water: Issues Subject to Further Review in RSF-2/PUD Rezone Applications.
1. Reclaimed water service to Lakewood Ranch Southeast shall be provided by Braden River
Utilities pursuant to a bulk supply agreement with Sarasota County.
2. The reclaimed water supply system shall be extended in a manner that is consistent with the
MDP Utility Master Plan; or if inconsistent, the MDP Utility Master Plan shall be revised as
necessary to reconcile that inconsistency. Each development phase shall accommodate the
extension of the reclaimed water supply system to adjoining areas so that reclaimed service can
be provided in a systematic fashion throughout the entire development, to all its development
phases. If Sarasota County’s Public Utility Director determines that the phasing or timing of
development makes the connection to or utilization of reclaimed water impractical before
T
issuing Subdivision or Site Development Plan approval for a phase, then development is
required to construct systems in a manner deemed to be reclaimed ready. Reclaimed ready
developments must provide sufficient infrastructure to minimize disruptions to existing and
AF
planned infrastructure and make provisions to connect to the County’s reclaimed system within
365 days of notification by the County. Irrigation systems will use best management practices to
minimize overspray onto impervious area and avoid unauthorized discharges.
3 The Project Area Utility Master Plan shall identify the volume of land application, location and
placement of proposed reclaim facilities (including ponds, pumps and pipe routes), water
balance calculations encompassing precipitation on an annual duration (AGMOD), demonstrate
how the system will be operated in accordance with state rule, and reclaimed water & sewer
effluent balance calculations for the project demonstrating how each phase of development will
R
manage the volume of reclaimed water allocated.
4. Each Project Area rezone application shall include an irrigation summary prepared by a Florida
registered professional engineer or geologist estimating the amount of irrigated acreage,
identifying irrigation sources and demands, with tabulations by development within each
D
Project Area. The irrigation summary shall estimate the quantities of water that are planned to
be made available for irrigation, by type, (e.g. reclaimed water, stormwater, ground water,
potable water, etc.) and a map identifying any proposed community wells, or storage ponds,
along with identifying the infrastructure required to supply the Lakewood Ranch Southeast
Property with reclaimed water, along with any offsite improvements required.
5. Developers shall provide reclaimed system storage or equivalent means in accordance with
Sarasota County guidelines and a central irrigation system for the development to enable the
use of reclaimed water for irrigation through the irrigation supply hierarchy.
At the Subdivision Plan or Site Development Plan approval stage developers shall designate a
single entity responsible for reclaimed water within a development and make provisions to
accommodate reclaimed water supply to adjoining areas with Lakewood Ranch Southeast.
Systems shall be designed to accept, at a minimum, an amount of reclaimed water at least equal
31
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
to the proposed wastewater flow generated from the development in accordance with Sarasota
County guidelines.
Section 13 Solid Waste
1. None.
1. Each RSF-2/PUD rezone application will include a letter from the Sarasota County Director of
Solid Waste indicating whether there is adequate landfill disposal capacity available for the
Project Area or the projected date when disposal capacity will be available for the Project Area,
or the amount of current excess capacity to accommodate the additional refuse.
Section 14 Education
A.
1.
Conditions for Development Approval. T
The School District of Sarasota County has previously secured a ~20-acre site for a future
elementary school within the Waterside DRI and ~61-acre site for a future school within the
AF
Lakewood Ranch Corporate Park together with High School and Middle School sites within Hi-
Hat Ranch Master Plan. School Board staff analysis indicates that these school sites satisfy the
school capacity needs generated by the Lakewood Ranch Southeast DOCC & VTZ Master Plan..
1. The RSF-2/PUD rezone application shall provide the status and capability of existing schools or
planned facilities to accommodate anticipated students.
R
2. The Applicant shall provide updated anticipated student generation numbers as part of the RSF-
2/PUD rezone application using student generation rates adopted at the time of the Application
by School Board.
Section 15 Recreation
D
1. The Master Developer shall provide +/- 106 acres of park land (the “Required Park Site”) of
which a minimum of 40 acres (the “Required Park Site”), shall be made available for a future
regional park, as indicated on the VTZ Master Plan.
The following shall also count toward park land acreage:
a. Pocket parks and other active or passive recreation facilities constructed by the Master
Developer within Open Space areas throughout Lakewood Ranch Southeast
b. Internal trails and regional trail connections that are set aside and/or constructed with
Project Area development
32
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
c. Eligible Private Amenities and recreational facilities within Project Areas (determined as
part of an RSF-2/PUD rezoning of a Project Area).
All of the items noted above, which shall also be counted as a portion of the Open Space
calculation for Lakewood Ranch Southeast.
2. The Master Developer shall provide trails that link to the park land, sidewalks, and a multi-
modal mobility network within each Project Area, with interconnectivity between Project Areas
and future connection points to the remaining developed area within Lakewood Ranch
Southeast, including the provision of appropriate transition and connections to adjacent
external multi-use path systems and the proposed or existing off-site trails adjacent to the
project site, as generally identified in the Sarasota County Trails Master Plan.
3. Providing access to the park and trails for persons with disabilities, per the Americans With
Disabilities Act (ADA), shall be a primary consideration in all park and trail development.
4.
5.
T
The park land shall be accessible via a roadway, perimeter sidewalk or a trail, and mobility
within the park shall be provided via sidewalks or improved trail.
Subsequent to approval of this MDO, the Master Developer shall cooperate with Sarasota
AF
County for a period of five (5) years from the date of adoption of this MDO to expand the
Required Park Site within areas otherwise set aside as Open Space to accommodate a regional
park provided that:
a. Programming of park facilities and activities shall be within the sole discretion and the
sole responsibility of Sarasota County;
b. Development of the park by Sarasota County shall not alter the Open Space calculations
R
for Lakewood Ranch Southeast;
c. The park site requested by Sarasota County shall not contain lands owned by Heritage
Ranch, LLC.;
D
d. Sarasota County agrees to allow linkages to and through the park site to the trails
network depicted in Map H-1 and H-2; and
e. The Master Developer and Sarasota County agree upon the form and amount of the
consideration for the acquisition of the land and the time table for improvement of the
park facilities.
1. Those items enumerated in Section 15.A.1.c. above shall be reviewed for acceptability to be
considered Recreational Uses and/or Open Space.
33
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
2. A Tracking Chart shall be prepared by the Master Developer and included by each applicant with
each Rezone Application for Project Areas, updated with Subdivision Plan submittals, to show
the incremental fulfillment, and ultimate compliance with Condition 15.A.1, above, at time of
Buildout.
Section 16 Fire Protection and other Emergency Services.
1. The Master Developer shall identify one fire station site, no less than 2 acres of developable
land and accessible to a planned public roadway.
1. The first RSF-2/PUD rezone application for the Project Area will address the terms and
conditions pursuant to which the fire station site referenced in Section 16.A.1. above will be
T
made available to the County. The station site shall be no less than two (2) buildable acres
directly accessible to a planned public road and planned public utilities to serve the site, and
shall not be located within the 100-year floodplain or within 600 feet of any FPL transmission
right of way. The Master Developer shall have all required infrastructure to serve the fire station
AF
site in place prior to issuance of the fire station Certificate of Occupancy.
Section 17 Sheriff Protection
1. The Master Developer shall consult with the Sheriff’s Office to ensure that security features are
incorporated within the project design, including but not limited to: a) appropriate access for
law enforcement and other emergency vehicles; b) reasonable levels of lighting for public areas;
and c) appropriate signage to enhance public safety.
R
1. None.
Section 18 Hurricane Evacuation.

D
1. None.
1. None.
34
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
EXHIBIT C: VTZ MASTER PLAN
Map C-3: VTZ Master Plan
T
AF
R
D
35
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Table C-3: Development Base Information
Development Base Information

Lakewood Ranch Southeast Area Composition
Land Use Area (AC) % of Total Acreage
Developed Area 2,348± 57%
Open Space 1,772± 43%
Sub-Total 4,120± 100%
Total Residential Units (Maximum) 5,000
T
AF
R
D
36
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Map C-4: VTZ Master Plan with Project Areas
T
AF
R
D
37
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Lakewood Ranch Southeast is divided into Project Areas, as shown on Map C-4, that are intended to
correspond to future rezonings pursuant to this MDO. These Project Areas may be rezoned collectively
or individually. Table C-4 shows the base densities of each Project Area and provides an example of how
densities may be allocated and the use of Incentivized Community Housing to achieve the maximum
permitted density of 5,000 dwelling units in Lakewood Ranch Southeast. Density may be transferred by
the Master Developer between Project Areas provided that the maximum density of 5,000 dwelling
units is not exceeded cumulatively within the Project Areas. This Table C-4 and Map C-4 will be
administratively updated with the approval of each Project Area Rezoning.
Table C-4: Project Area Densities
Total Units to be
Allocated Incentivized Additional Transferred Total Internally Excess Units
Total Built
Base Dwelling Community Market Rate From Other Allocated Transferred For Sale Per
Project Area 1
Units Housing Units
340
1
-
Units Preject Areas
- -
T Units
65
To Other
Project Areas
Units
(275) TBD
TDR Policies
AF
Project Area 2 570 94 94 275 1,033 TBD TBD
Project Area 3 495 46 46 449 1,036 TBD TBD
Project Area 4 149 300 300 - 300 (449) TBD
Project Area 5 1188 - 1,188 TBD TBD
Project Area 6 872 - - 872 TBD TBD
Project Area 7 506 - - - 506 TBD TBD

Total Dwelling
4,120 440 440 - 5,000 - TBD
Units
R
1
AMI Level with Mortgage = 120% (Incentive Market Rate Units Æ 1.0)
Note: The specific unit allocation may be adjusted and refined at each RSF-2/PUD submittal.
Note: The "Excess Units" are intended to be internally exchanged up to the 5,000 unit maximum. Should development incentives yield more units than are built, any undeveloped units (up to, and
in excess of the Maximum 5,000 units) may be sold or otherwise transferred by the Master Developer.
Dwelling Units in excess of the Base Dwelling Units listed above for any Project Area are conditioned
D
upon the provision of Incentivized Community Housing Units or other approved TDR’s in accordance
with goals, objectives, and policies contained within Chapter 8 , Objective 1 of the Sarasota County
Comprehensive Plan. To achieve the maximum density of 5,000 dwelling units, it is anticipated that
approximately 440 incentivized community housing units will need to be provided. The total number of
units in each Project Area (Allocated Base Dwelling Units + Incentivized Community Housing + Additional
Market Units + Other TDR’s) shall be determined at the time of rezoning for each Project Area.
Individual Project Areas may have densities greater than that permitted in RSF-2/PUD provided that the
aggregate density of all land within the Lakewood Ranch Southeast VTZMP does not exceed 5,000
dwelling units.
The total number of residential dwelling units shall not exceed 5,000 units within the boundaries of
Lakewood Ranch Southeast for any reason, including but not limited to housing bonuses for Incentivized
Community Housing or other TDR’s. If Incentivized Community Housing Bonuses allow market rate units
38
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
in excess of the 5,000 dwelling unit maximum, said excess units may be sold or otherwise transferred by
the Master Developer pursuant to Sarasota County’s TDR Program and VTZ Policy 2.5.
EXHIBIT D: FISCAL NEUTRALITY ANALYSIS
Can we avoid including the whole thing??? Commented [BA2]: Katie asking Elma
T
AF
R
D
39
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
EXHIBIT E: WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN
BASELINE AND ONGOING

SURFACE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM
LAKEWOOD RANCH SOUTHEAST MASTER DEVELOPMENT ORDER
1.0 OVERVIEW
The Baseline Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program for the Lakewood Ranch Southeast
Development will commence one year in advance of anticipated initiation of site development activities.
Project Area.
2.0 MONITORING STATIONS/LOCATIONS

T
Ongoing Surface Water Monitoring Program will commence upon beginning of construction within each
AF
The project occupies approximately 4,120 acres and includes three water bodies within two drainage
basins. Cow Pen Slough, Howard Creek, and Indian Creek within the Sarasota Bay and Upper Myakka
River drainage basins.
The specific locations for the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring stations are identified on the attached
Monitoring Station Location Exhibit for the monitoring program is anticipated to commence. For the
Ongoing Surface Water Quality Monitoring stations, it is anticipated that the foregoing Baseline Water
Quality Monitoring Stations will be used in conjunction with any necessary additional stations specific to
R
one or more Project Areas. Such additional stations, if any, shall be designated with the rezoning of
each Project Area and shall be administratively added to the Monitoring Station Location Exhibit.
3.0 MONITORING COMMENCEMENT and FREQUENCY
Baseline Surface water sampling will commence one year in advance of anticipated initiation of site
D
development activities. The surface water sampling as outlined in the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring
Program will cease once construction begins and the Ongoing Surface Water Quality Monitoring
Program commences.
Baseline Samples shall be collected monthly and Ongoing Samples shall be collected quarterly at the
designated monitoring locations, as described under Section 2.0 above. The Baseline Monitoring
Program will be considered complete and sufficiently satisfied under FDEP’s data sufficiency provision,
referenced in Chapter 62-303.320(4) Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The provision indicates that at
least 10 independent samples be collected with at least one sample from three of the four calendar
seasons from each WBID lying wholly or partially within the project. The Ongoing Surface Water Quality
Monitoring Program will be deemed complete for a Project Area at the expiration of one year after such
time as 80% of the dwelling units within such Project Area have been constructed and issued certificates
of occupancy.
40
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
4.0 SAMPLE COLLECTION METHODS, ANALYSIS and QUALITY ASSURANCE
Sample collection methods shall be consistent with Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Standard Operating Procedures for Field Activities, DEP-SOP-001/01. Per the SOP, grab samples will be
collected within the top 12 inches of the water column, however, skimming the surface will be avoided
in order to minimize collection of surface scum or other unrepresentative contaminants.
Analytical Parameters:
1. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/l) MDL = 0.1

2. Total Ammonia (mg/l) MDL = 0.02
3. Total Nitrate + Nitrite (mg/l) MDL = 0.025
4. Total Phosphorus (mg/l) MDL = 0.1
5. Specific Conductance (umhos/cm) MDL = 100
6. Fecal Coliform Bacteria (cfu/100ml) MDL = 100
7.
8.
9.
10.
Escherichia Coli Bacteria (cfu/100ml)
Dissolved Oxygen Saturation (%)
Turbidity (NTU)
Water Temperature (F)
T
MDL = 10
MDL = 2.0
MDL = 2.0
MDL = 2.0
AF
11. BOD5 (mg/l) MDL = 2.0
12. Chlorophyll A – Corr. for Pheo (mg/m3) MDL = 0.5
13. Water Velocity (ft/sec)
14. Water Depth (ft)
15. Sample Depth (inches below surface)
Laboratory analysis of samples will be performed by NELAP certified laboratories. Data shall not have
qualifiers that prohibit the use of the data for evaluation of water quality conditions or regulatory
R
compliance.
5.0 REPORTING
Reporting of the monitoring results will be required as follows:

D
1. The monitoring data from the previous year shall be reported to Sarasota County annually in
April of each year in a single excel spreadsheet.
2. Sarasota County will post the reported information on the Sarasota Water Atlas website
3. A full set of water quality data for the previous year shall be uploaded to Florida’s Watershed
Information Network (WIN) data system annually in April of each year
4. Total Nitrogen shall be reported as the sum of TKN and Total Nitrate + Nitrite
6.0 MODIFICATION OF THE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM
The Baseline Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program may be revised upon request of the Sarasota
County Stormwater Environmental Utility (or its successor) to reflect unforeseen changes to on-site and
off-site conditions. The Master Developer shall continue sampling until a formal request has been
41
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
submitted to the County and subsequently approved or until the criteria in Section 3.0 above have been
met.
7.0 INCORPORATION INTO MASTER DEVELOPMENT ORDER
The terms of this monitoring program will be incorporated into any Master Development Order
approved by Sarasota County for the project as the monitoring program may be modified by Sarasota
County and the developer at the time of adoption of the Master Development Order.
T
AF
R
D
42
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Exhibit E, Monitoring Station Location Exhibit.
T
AF
R
D
43
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
EXHIBIT F: Environmental Systems
Map F-1 Existing Native Habitat Map
T
AF
R
D
44
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Map F-2, Native Habitat Preservation and Alteration Map
T
AF
R
D
45
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
EXHIBIT G:
Map G-1 Predevelopment Drainage Conditions Map
T
AF
R
D
46
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Exhibit H: TRANSPORTATION
Map H-1, Conceptual Regional Trails Map, Potential Corridors
T
AF
R
D
47
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
Map H-2 Lakewood Ranch Southeast Conceptual Trails Map
EXHIBIT G: NATIVE HABITAT PRESERVATION, ALTERATION, AND MITIGATION PLAN
T
AF
R
D
48
Rcv'd 6/14/2022
T
AF
R
D
49

DOCC Lakewood Ranch Southe

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DOCC Lakewood Ranch Southe

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DOCC Lakewood Ranch Southeast 22-134868 GR

Lakewood Ranch Southeast

May 27, 2022

The existing conditions of the subject property include the following:

x Acreage: 4,120± Acres

The Applicant is requesting the following:

1.2 Adjacent Land Uses

North: Water and Sewer Utility; Residential; Agriculture

West: Agriculture; Residential

South: Agriculture; Residential; Manufacturing or Scientific

East: Agriculture; Vacant; Residential

1.3 Comprehensive Plan Consistency Analysis

Chapter 2 – Parks, Preserves, and Recreation

Chapter 7 – Future Land Use

Chapter 11 – Economic Development

Chapter 12 – Watershed Management

See Section 11 of this application package for Owner

d. Attach the names, addresses, and phone numbers of any

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Scott Buttari, PLA, LEED AP, Landscape Architect

Grimes Hawkins Gladfelter & Galvano, P.L.

Caleb J. Grimes, Esq., Attorney

a. Attach a legal description of the development site which

Response: See Section 12 of this application package for

b. Type and size of the Development of Critical Concern

Response: The Lakewood Ranch Southeast property is

maximum base density will be 1 du/gross acre,

The intent of development is to be a continuation of the

Ancillary support uses such as places of worship, public

In order to support the development of Lakewood

c. Have you requested a DRI binding letter of interpretation

Response: Not Applicable.

d. List all local jurisdictions (i.e., other counties and

i. Manatee County, Florida

a. List all local governments with jurisdiction over the

b. List all agencies (local, state and federal) from which

The Development of Critical Concern (DOCC) Application is

a. The development will have a favorable or

Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will have a

implementation of 43% to 50% open space as well as

b. The development will have a favorable or

Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will have a

c. The development will efficiently use or unduly

Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will efficiently

d. The development will efficiently use or unduly

Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will efficiently

e. The development will favorably or adversely affect

Response: Lakewood Ranch Southeast will favorably

f. The development complies or does not comply with

Response: See Section 1 of this application package for

The completion of this application is the initial step in the

Response: The Applicant held a Pre-Application meeting on

a. The pre-application meeting provides an opportunity for

b. Applicants proposing a Development of Critical Concern

c. The required maps are indicated in Section A of Part II of

d. Methodology meeting(s) on issues such as drainage and

Sarasota County Planning Department from the appropriate

e. A Development of Critical Concern includes all other

f. All information supplied shall be accurate, up-to-date, and

g. Applicants should be prepared to supply, upon request,

h. Any information pertinent to the development which has

i. Where a format and units of measurement for information

j. All narrative responses and associated maps should be in an