CCPC Agenda 10/17/2013 R CCPC
MEETING
AGENDA
OCTOBER 17, 2013
AGENDA
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, OCTOBER 17,
2013, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM,ADMINISTRATION BUILDING,
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER,THIRD FLOOR,3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST,NAPLES,FLORIDA:
NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY
ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION
OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK
ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO
HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA
PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO
THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS
INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE
APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE
PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE
CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE
AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
IF APPLICABLE.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED
A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE
MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS
MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON
WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY
3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA
4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES— September 19,2013
6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS
7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
A. PUDZ-A-PL20120001593: Bay House Campus CPUD, an Ordinance of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier
County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps for
a project previously known as the Cocohatchee River Trust Planned Unit Development (PUD) which is
henceforth to be known as the Bay House Campus CPUD, to remove the Special Treatment Overlay and
to allow 400 seats of restaurant/cocktail lounge, a 50 room hotel or motel, and 4,500 square feet of gross
floor area of accessory retail uses including a culinary school, specialty retail and restaurant/brew house on
property located in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
8.67 +/- acres; providing for the repeal of Ordinance Number 88-30, the Cocohatchee River Trust PUD;
and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Kay Deselem,AICP,Principal Planner]
Page 1 of 2
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. RZ-PL20120002095, The Landings at Bear's Paw: An Ordinance of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the
Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by
changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from an Agricultural (A) zoning
district within Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay zones W-3 and W-4 (ST/W-3 and
ST/W-4) to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district within Wellfield Risk
Management Special Treatment Overlay zones W-3 and W-4 (ST/W-3 and ST/W-4) for a project to be
known as the Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD to allow construction of a maximum of 25 residential
dwelling units and up to 38 boat slips on property located on the Golden Gate canal south of Bear's
Paw in Section 35, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 10.75±
Acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator:Nancy Gundlach,AICP,RLA,Principal Planner]
10. OLD BUSINESS
11. NEW BUSINESS
A. IT introduction to electronic format for consideration by the CCPC [Coordinator: Information Technology]
12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM
13. ADJOURN
**NOTE: There will be a brief 15-minute workshop for the new CCPC members regarding the
Sunshine Law immediately following this hearing
CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows/jmp
Page 2 of 2
AGENDA ITEM 9-A
Co er County
STAFF REPORT
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING &ZONING DEPARTMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION, PLANNING AND REGULATION
HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 17, 2013
SUBJECT: PETITION RZ-PL20120002095, THE LANDINGS AT BEAR'S PAW
RPUD (RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT)
APPLICANT/AGENT:
Headwaters Development Limited John M. Passidomo and William J. Dempsey
Liability Limited Partnership, LLLP Cheffy Passidomo, P.A.
9130 Galleria Court, Suite 312 821 5th Avenue South
Naples, Florida 34109 Naples, Florida 34102
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezone
from an Agricultural (A) zoning district within Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment
Overlay zones W-3 and W-4 (ST/W-3 and ST/W-4) to a Residential Planned Unit Development
(RPUD) zoning district within Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay zones W-3
and W-4 (ST/W-3 and ST/W-4) for a project to be known as the Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD to
allow construction of a maximum of 25 residential dwelling units and up to 38 boat slips on the
subject property.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The 10.75± acre subject property is located on the Golden Gate canal south of Bear's Paw and south
of Golden Gate Parkway (C.R. 886), approximately 1/2 mile east of Goodlette-Frank Road (C.R.
851), in Section 35, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida (See Location Map
on following page.)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
This petition seeks to rezone 10.75± acres of vacant, undeveloped land zoned Rural Agricultural (A)
to Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD). A portion of the site includes submerged
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD,RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 1 of 21
in= ° � }ri _ mill pl
wol p�ipj
�. • CC£ p
•
i m Os
O R Ed ea
iii Ii U p
O ! .
1\ . 1:11 i
\".:::': _mall* i Si 6
v
p a 'GY
.. tit
F N
I g
I $1 4 all I
l ' I 0
i 1 gg N
6 Q i
N
CV
. ate'
J
a
31'IJ5 of Loa N
Ct „....\
4t
Z
se-31V18M31N f� 010331011.11111 �� 9� 3 8 O
R
^=11i eE� Q h 1 g 121 li
a.
:� — i s 1,
,miles n� ■ � NM -"!I
L
g ill i p
w O g > _
� iAi4I/m� rnrnnL o ry IL' •4Lai—
cil /,,,, Ill . 7 orlead i
L___,,'" I/ tii
Fillilli iliMil
� � L�V, aav
t..sea'o) P__I
IL
e�� g� ,
6ssN - wawa
J
L.
�F GULF OF MEXICO
r.
CXHIDI I }l, r (1 OF 3)
3li g gI 'I3
err h5
Ii e
W —s 2= �p I
..JIi w ce z WWII
'IJ a�3�V � K
LJ
1,414J i.�jw w O
< li `tie a aQ4�Q a F- w
¢oa V
4 W
it N d ON-!0 MO O N WU iCgf
1 \ .-:NOON NVl ID N
0
It°� il ' \ ® is
Q9�� IL 8 .-. z
1 p � II * \ \ Z0 0 0
i N i` \ \ Fa on cir J H\\ o° .a. m z ID \ 3J 1 C Q
dT I \\ \ o 2 Oa V zcwa oo a Z °� Hg
I \\ Z ce z(7 a Jd' Ir ce w W tj� W G
\ a Z } Q W a s re z 1-
z O_ No 3�wam ww w w ao 3sxZ
w ? a°'� l6¢w� UU U ar F i
1
I
\ \ &m O QU� OWE<J NN loll j OK CQ� aM La D
W H
172
I = W?H =N W a 65 W X w O d W O
Q 0; UWm 0 as a a WQ l"'Fy°j U
Wtf ' t VI CcraoF 00 0 W11 < I_ Z*-
<g
I \ I zo= aW
' \ 55� a'=
g \ g=am ��
� I \e WQ
1-O90
2<\Flo \ w-
a�
\ o
. N \ 4 \
D
,20- \
Non a d
zN- 2
N V
' U w a' 1 , %:,t'), \' 31. j1
Qa° I -1 �j $i \ ii,2 N w"iii :
z v azp N \ v °.�� o� ci z3S
<O.....NN o spa EC" PI. �� `5$,`,� \ zzmv
/� }ZU R WI}-J U d nei \ �J ..6t UZ
ao�1Oa/ w Li FZI!) a x3 r1�1 3 aVCam 5130-1
WN O ZNr, IY \ -±-� P .',4:6_ \ r 10 wti
�a0 a. Ua0 cE C4 \ \ t = O \ ; w0•M
a U
w Z V
at a � w '\ � a� \ (ii
i CEOei O 1 6 W J v I 3 ` < �o \ o i
o mU2 z \ c-R 33, \%
\
;o
a
W ■ Y6 ,,6G \ FZ
H
N
V 'm / \ \ Z� Z Z
< � ., r• 4 \d o_,Od Ckt■ wl-wo\// \ I\
o
Lil 11 O-
�' �� 1 1
l;`l l \ \ egW6
�� �\ a \ \ €
l
l�l c i \ ti \ \ eE� 3E..•
o 3 <\ , � _ _
w .
m LL w ,..,
p yp w
N
-_ --Ill", � 3o T.I
1 rear — — — — - — it o
,'-0311'd 03SOJ0NJ JO li1Vd ION).0pOa SS300V 03SOd011d
\ _
a
' I ik w'S J oa a3wzoo
o�¢xo
.rcoa o'i�� a °mo <-'68 =n; am zI
MATCH LINE o J
III o....r.o,rtva N 01Cwo007-1010..200wN II.=1.34CNNYLOWS\v..IG.m,.mwuw 3.01211.mw KOKm z-...1N..,.wI* .n.
EXHIBIT "C" (2 OF 3) .
i7 WN 40 C "'
.Logg II IS
I z : u d
- 1 N , z w �o
U 3 ° wa O
W m F z
cA °
} ;m, U ill
LA
1D§ CD
W °° O C LL Z mi> W m tL
2a
�g -tr, co <0 W 5
m K W ° W .5z a^-
d •,:c.-,< H
.cd 00
K (• _,• I - - W < mN f
Q w
U
° N
'n W° Z LL ZOM
U x
= N
h N (A-
...<6 a F -
x 171-
V w "O1 } m W"D
g$ Z o2
.._ o
a -° , 0 - 3� (n
M.
•
V
>U c
n v 0:N dR o o a
W;� 3
J 0 m K W
a Fw- U} W W W O m W
z
(lili
z- x;03 ¢z zNW view x o ox} o I--
H F- N ,J 30 oaYO I-Z¢J U F. Np HF-, ZWUW ¢
w<z O �QO zWZZ xwm0 �7NO 0 ¢000 apWp3 ¢
wa�z� �W= ow=��c~i �?O� o= zzaw,i.i N<mawa
50"-1=6 0 W 3-'W E,31 VI Q U U z a W x LAW
00 C 00E -ono . QwC ow I-oj wC�F 1~/1¢O,,,n ZNaWOH<
O ,wO w- 00E0, WOr w aW ¢OO F 0 ¢x O
w2'cZ_7 aFw-Ix-Q aa o o- wY ilia aooWp 3G.O ZWWa'Z 5wIU/1~ Z
w z a H Z O Q< U H W_.<m 0)-Q<--1 O~a W <E Z o W W o
¢ W ,Cr-
I- 0 0 U¢ Z w f A N i FG a J
>W QQON } Z JOZIx- <aOZ0 NWNpO NUn-1aW OJmm,m 41' ,1--;,-10 QO
Ny--3 a U N = °Oo UO0< W-0 ZZ< W1,OW CC. F0al'F
KW rim- w¢F, Wp NWm OF aWW< WI¢N� F01-x J,¢awz
VdFw-U WN xx Nx j Wti �wFx-N 1,-cc 3WW~ Qlice,=O 0
=1Xoom OW `n m :mom WOV _O WO mI3ti mz�m0 .:m.tx-Z3oJ
•--.wF- >> Q <z-C W-<O 0_O CJw3W mcD Uteri U41<a'F'Oa
W m_1 zF-W ¢ Z O N
p W x NU N O¢f- 00 N W Z NxJO N J I- N dnOZWF' g
pWIWf JJ aWZ 0 3 OO~W OKwW OI-J 00
ma O¢WW JOU 83
,ENOU6'0 tOyn,m KYW~ �ZK, Mz<p •cO�a.Qw ep Y/1WK>O
Z Q
400''' co x8 c03<w NmtiQ6 �pa'o Nw�¢ 0Oa Q.N^., a?s0.'Q $AYE$p�
Z..W F.O W Z Q Z > Z W O W z N _ Z W Q W O K W m W O J Q U w m Z `II
O IOow O-_ O-W ONu_Y¢ OOrz 0,00
�apN xl-c' X3 zx Jp
HwaaO.Um uz- rNOW F. WV F W H F '"
wQWa z� wz-U WN ,- Ww o- WMNZ w I,C 0�' 41--00'-',71 3@i
Ne^0} Q NO�m Nd'Oo NCR_ > NO JWa N00< 0-,To N?� 0 N I -i .-�.
UH QQJ: x 00T- U j Z U¢¢F-n U V, V O W<
O W Q r N O N�W �Q Q p p 3 Z w _-¢° 9 U Z S 9'-v,_Va O O O o -z o>
g Ww=Z °_ O GwJJ 0 QQ K M,WF- ,W Z M ULWW A Z OM, -,1-U Qz
001—Zi< OwyW or zm Ox w OI--,>>QNQ O= OE ww W
wz-O W, ,,FO u_Vw_< ILi Ls - wOWJ lai 4'Z 4V10a I.~ZOQNo
Z h O oO O O
W w M N 0> W N Op W='S N Q'- W H 4}Z W O D r > o W D ¢ W<U W H y0j
U 416000. W a 0 O 41,,-; W Z W w O Q 11400<3 W-0, W<H<a W J W-041-110
O
• 17,0 z� U I W - < I -<- W a 0 W 0 J W W a x U U W-Z a O W U
ap bO Z< �_YNa N uO O O NU¢W 3 �S VIOw N<Z3 N QW=m N Q�j<Um�
J =< W Z .- -r W W<x Y W F J Z W C-7<< w~w I W N N N N W>W z W W W
O N~O�pa V0Im OJZ N?>�O uWjUNNUQQ N�t,�N (w/IN�Z NKOW Wm oz ,...--L,_H-1x-L nl
L� QNa aW WOO ate 1 0 aGp x¢(.7 OWO0p ''301 ''Izero Z3«Omd wl
(!) Ul) I z� �a-N Zv2 W zCF_> z�Va z V9,- Z } z. 1254- J
Z o wp�Ooo Oa p<Wom 0w3¢Z o UN, otizz pl°,lalw7 OK, W>U
O ¢U IU¢W ¢¢>0a0 doo ¢IwwU <n,a> >>UDWQ ¢>Mg, >Z(a)QZ ¢¢>,ww.cOZ
I- = x U> W W¢N 0 w w>0,41-, w X z Mo W W w w W U p 0 O w p O a p W
Q 0>0>Ow
> p3O>JO na�c± pawinp paJHV n3¢ow pane pNJaN nms,QzS
Q < Q ® ® < Q ,..0-..,n 4
1
M.m<« _.mencru l-. a .Ams\=as.:wweacr•.o 33.171 Id.a 0.z..l0Mw.'..01004]LIWL1Y
EXHIBIT 1tC" (3 OF 3)
�N
0.F.zia
m
oik¢ \3
.
I hilillh,
I I S318NA -
I x
A tly
m 1
od
w o
n N 1 _ zi�waa N
cn
i,a .< 0, i ^°man a
z z g g O W
n--,o °o -`7)c ( L--_ J N N J O
r
W° > d,° % I , v 0o Z 12=1
4 zN 1 ■
R z w J J z c.° Eo I \ a JO �o� a=
E O w 1 °a Q2 W�� z
s4 s 1 aN WaW NW a^
L y oZW cc La. M
N N `n 2 1- wSr ��a wo
I z m►S-� �wW
I y a z i OS a¢- zn
I ' . 5 I-W W `i72 OU
o zo. w
N ° WCJDY Zsr wz
I L_—_ J 2 owl-Q wWQ Nv
Lu
Z Q„ >
° r o WOp o2
ozm Zoo z
Z
I—O czisca� ❑
_oao „0_ 5Z Q rt
m W w;no¢ N p 2 re
ZIL co zin,g <OZ
°°mz¢ ., y J
Z
o:aN
Jo _wo --
r W OI-OV W gill•
r— zi3Sll
mQ 1 ° °° I W O O\rt
W o9-,f:_
N N N 1 z g= J Z w o cos-
�� w �r� Cia I d ocrz .1:,-. E°i
? a� w �n ot+ Naw f - I p F- Q w�
� g aq ° 1 > 0 s 'z-' u 7__ U W Z
a°G . 1 oao 0 O>O mr
o oa OJ < N N }U Jre 0
T-
o rN I < & gQ N �ZT-
o o,. a I Z �¢ ” am
(114.1'
aO ai ow a a ° J f7
1 saiavn - ° ` Q r F-c�
g I N >` aQ pLu=
LL J J
1 z s Z O W LL
•
L
J w�
N O Q o 0
J IL
/ F.-I--I_
o �C pi
ce
'- N J V L i
rA z3w<� 6 ZZ� 9
�oma woo h
N N
=_Uw � O $$�y�y
Y g�wV~ °y Z ii
N N In oN 3gi
JNJ N O
�6Q �U O J n IT cc o a0 o I r_ r ' F-S
Kq L I Mc.)
Y Z Q 6 y }O I-
o� &6o i so
o LL t
z z 1 > N ~Q>-. z
5 . I a J
11'._ z w Q Q
N 9 - 1 s312VA o U w z z
1 1 a a W
J� J N
L_ J r > Z ? \z
r 9 � m
¢U J K ' I I
N
pC1 eilgl Q iv 1
L N �� �� o I
z" 1
� 1
w OP"130i/ti/a'Jn1MY-03D]-xLS.w 000le 110.0 0sw\data q laOaouyp yysy spy pypa iK.»\*uM w ■=0 aavoadVa
lands located in the Golden Gate Canal. The land area above the mean high water line (MHWL) of
the canal is 8.71± acres. The PUD proposes the development of no more than 25 single-family
residential units with a density of 2.9 dwelling units per acre. (The Growth Management Plan allows
up to 3 units per acre on the subject site.) The buildings are a maximum of two stories and will have
a zoned height of 30 feet and an actual height of 35 feet. Ingress/egress will be from Golden Gate
Parkway via an access road easement that will also serve the Gordon River Greenway Park.
The site is also located in a Special Treatment Overlay for well fields (ST/W-3 and ST/W-4), which
requires land uses such as residential development that reduce the potential for groundwater
contamination.
The Master Plan provided on the previous pages of this Staff Report depicts the areas of residential
and amenity area development, water management, and traffic/pedestrian circulation. The Master
Plan also shows that 5.27 acres will be residential area, 0.19 acres will be an amenity area, 2.05 acres
are tidally submerged lands, 1.83 acres will be right-of-way and 1.41 acres are "other area" landward
of the MHWL (mean high water line).
Notes on the Master Plan state that there are a maximum number of 25 residential units. The notes
also indicate the petitioner's intention to meet the required preservation area off-site. In addition,the
open space requirement of 60 percent will not be met and the proposed alternative is to provide 50
percent open space. (For more information, please refer to the Deviations section of this Staff
Report.)
Landscape buffering requirements are met by a 10-foot wide Type D right-of-way Landscape Buffer
adjacent to the access road easement. In addition, where the private road serving the proposed
development abuts the existing golf course, a 10-foot wide Type D right-of-way Landscape Buffer
has been provided. No landscape buffer is required between the golf course and the proposed
residences, as the golf course is considered to act as a buffer. Along the canal a deviation is
requested from the landscape buffer that mitigates the impact of the proposed residences from the
existing residences across the canal. The requirement is for a 10-foot wide Type A Landscape
Buffer with trees 30 feet on center;the deviation request is to allow for trees spaced an average of 45
feet on center. (For more information, please refer to the Deviations section of this Staff Report.)
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North: Golf course and then residential dwellings, with a City of Naples zoning designation of
Bear's Paw Country Club PD (Planned Development), at 6 dwelling units per acre
South and East: Golden Gate Canal, a 160-foot wide drainage easement containing an
approximately 120-foot wide canal, and then Manatee Point Condo single family residences with a
zoning designation of RSF-4 (Residential Single-family), at 4 dwelling units per acre
West: a 60-foot wide access easement and then a preserve area within the Gordon River Greenway
Park,with a zoning designation of P (Public Use)
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 6 of 21
1
arr
.ter 1 F i-
t
Sq _
R.oYGaf41T q'
.r:
Subject Site ' -�-
Itt1W
f y -+ _g1 T--- --'_
F T Q, j�
o8iarouaty Proa+a7Y!�okrwer,Naples.F • f 4°
AERIAL PHOTO
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN(GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is located within the Urban designated
area (Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict). This designation is intended to
accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential uses, including parks, recreational
facilities, and essential services as defined in the Land Development Code (LDC). The subject
property is further within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) Overlay, as identified on the
Countywide Future Land Use Map.
Review of the Density Rating System yields the site eligible for 3 dwelling units per acre (DU/A), as
shown below:
Base Density 4 DU/acre
Coastal High Hazard Area -1 DU/acre
Total Eligible Density 3 DU/acre (x 8.713 acres =26.14 DU's total)
The applicant seeks to develop 2.9 single family dwelling units per acre, or a total of 25 dwelling
units per the application re-submittal request.
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 7 of 21
FLUE Policy 5.4 requires that new developments be compatible with the surrounding land uses per
the Land Development Code (LDC). Please see Rezone and PUD findings contained in this Staff
Report.
Policy 7.1
The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting
collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating
intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [There are no collector or
arterial roads fronting the site. However, the Master Concept Plan does show an access
connection to the west of the project within the proposed Gordon River Greenway Park (not a part
of this proposed P U.D.) which leads to Golden Gate Parkway, an arterial road to the north of the
project.]
Policy 7.2
The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle
congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals.
[The proposed Master Concept Plan depicts an internal roadway located between two (2)
residential tracts that loops around a proposed water management area on the west side of the
project, and connects to the proposed access road located within the proposed Gordon River
Greenway Park.]
Policy 7.3
All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their
interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use
type. [The proposed project contains one internal roadway, which provides for only one access
point west of and into the project from the proposed Gordon River Greenway Park access road.
There are no other local streets or interconnection points to connect to. Connection to adjoining
Bear's Paw to the north of the project is not feasible due to the fully developed golf course. The
Golden Gate Canal separates the project from the residential Manatee Point Condos to the east
and south of the project, therefore connection is not feasible.]
Policy 7.4
The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of
densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [Twenty —
five (25) single family dwelling units are being proposed within the project. According to a
conversation between staff, the agent and the Bears Paw HOA president, there will be pedestrian
interconnection to the adjacent Bear's Paw community. With the requested deviation, a sidewalk
will be provided on one side of the internal street. Preserve areas and open space must be provided
per the LDC subject to the deviations described herein. The size and shape of the site limits the
ability to provide Civic facilities.]
Transportation Element:
Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement(TIS) and has
determined that this project can be found consistent with policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of
the Growth Management Plan. The project impacts can be accommodated on the adjacent roadway
network without need for any additional mitigation.
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 8 of 21
Conservation and Coastal Management Element:
Environmental review staff found this project to be consistent with the Conservation and Coastal
Management Element(CCME).
Based on the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed rezone consistent
with the Future Land Use Element(FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan(GMP).
ANALYSIS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon
which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Subsection 10.02.13 B.5.,
Planning Commission Hearing and Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD
Findings"), and Subsection 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report
(referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal bases to support the CCPC's
recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the
BCC, who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation
relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning and Land Development
Review Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analyses:
Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff reviewed this petition. The petitioner has
requested the option to relocate the required onsite preserve offsite in accordance with LDC section
3.05.07.H.1.f.; staff has found this property meets the criteria for off-site vegetation retention. The
off-site vegetation retention shall be based on the preserve requirement, which is 25 percent (or 0.74
acres) of the existing 2.97 acres of on-site native vegetation.
There are gopher tortoises present on the subject site that mostly inhabit the spoil berm area. The
owner will be obtaining permits from Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission to
relocate the tortoises to an approved off-site gopher tortoise relocation bank.
Transportation Review: Transportation Department staff has reviewed this petition and has found
that there is less than a 1 percent impact on the roadway network. Golden Gate Parkway is within an
acceptable LOS (Level of Service) along the first link and there are no impacts beyond the first link.
Utility Review: The City of Naples Utilities Department staff has reviewed the petition and has
stated that this project is located within the City of Naples potable water and waste water service
areas. In addition, staff has reviewed the petition and has confirmed that the existence of potable
water, reclaimed water and waste water mains within the public right-of-way or utility easement are
available for new connections to the property. Allocation of additional utility capacity at the city water
and sewer plants will be assured as the site development plans and permit applications have been
submitted,reviewed and approved by the City of Naples Utilities Department.
Historic Preservation Review: The Historic Archeological Preservation Board recommended
approval of the Historical Survey waiver request with the condition that a certified archaeologist will
be onsite during all excavations to monitor for the presence of historical and/or archaeological
artifacts or resources. The petitioner has agreed and this commitment is included in PUD Exhibit
"F" "Developer Commitments."
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 9 of 21
Emergency Management Review: The Emergency Management staff has reviewed the petition and
has no comments.
Collier County Public Schools (CCPS) District Review: CCPS staff has reviewed the petition and
has stated that there is sufficient capacity within the School CSA (Concurrency Service Areas). At
the time of site plan or plat, the development will be reviewed for concurrency to ensure there is
capacity and that the levels of service standards are not exceeded. At that time, the most current
student enrollment will be used and the capacity within adjacent CSA's will be evaluated if
necessary. This analysis should not be considered a reservation of capacity or a determination of
concurrency.
Zoning and Land Development Review: As depicted on the PUD Master Plan, aerial photograph,
and the surrounding zoning discussion, the subject site will be separated from the existing single
family residences to the southeast by an approximately 120-foot wide canal. To the north, the
subject site is separated from the single-family portion of the residential development at Bear's Paw
by an approximately 300-foot wide golf course area. To the west of the subject site is an access
easement and then a preserve area within the Gordon River Greenway Park.
According to conversations with the agent, approximately 14-16 residential dwellings may be
constructed along the waterfront property. The PUD indicates that up to 28 boat slips are proposed
along the Residential Tract waterfront area. A maximum of 10 boat slips for the non-waterfront lots
are proposed for the multi-slip docking facility located in the Amenity Area. There will be a total of
up to 38 boat dock slips, and they will be for the exclusive use of the Landings at Bear's Paw
residents.
The proposed homes are a maximum of 2-stories and have a side yard setback of 5 feet and a
minimum separation of 10 feet between structures and front and rear setbacks of 20 feet.
Analysis of the surrounding neighborhood reveals that the proposed development setbacks are less
than that of the surrounding neighborhood. In addition, the development intensity of the subject
property is greater than that of the surrounding neighborhood. Bear's Paw has front, side and rear
yard setbacks of 35 feet, 15 feet and 30 feet. The single-family neighborhood across the canal has
front, side and rear yard setbacks of 25 feet, 10 feet, and 25 feet. The subject property has front, side
and rear yard setbacks of 20 feet, 5 feet, and 20 feet, which are less than the neighboring properties.
Approximately 14 to 16 waterfront homes at 10 feet apart are proposed along approximately 1,000
lineal feet of waterfront, directly across from 9 existing homes on the canal. The proposed
maximum of 38 boat slips contrasts with 5 existing docks located across the canal. The minimum
required Type A landscape buffer will mitigate for the waterfront development by providing some
softening of the buildings. A landscape buffer deviation is proposed to allow for waterfront views
from the proposed residences. (Deviation # 8 seeks to reduce the tree plantings from 30 feet on
center to an average of 45 feet on center.) Due to the compact nature of the development, there is
also a proposed reduction in open space. (Deviation # 5 seeks a reduction in open space from the
required 60 percent to 50 percent.)
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD,RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 10 of 21
For further discussion of the Deviations, see the Deviation section of the Staff Report.
REZONE FINDINGS:
LDC Subsection 10.02.08 F. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and
recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show
that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the
following when applicable." (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in non-bold font):
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and
future land use map and the elements of the GMP.
The Comprehensive Planning Department has indicated that the proposed PUD amendment is
consistent with all applicable elements of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth
Management Plan(GMP).
2. The existing land use pattern.
As described in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report and discussed in the
zoning review analysis, the neighborhood's existing land use pattern can be characterized as
residential and park lands. There is residential zoning to the north, south and east. To the west is a
passive park. The land uses proposed in this PUD petition should not create incompatibility issues.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
The subject parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to
adjacent and nearby districts. It is also comparable with expected land uses by virtue of its
consistency with the FLUE of the GMP.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the
property proposed for change.
The district boundaries are logically drawn as discussed in Items 2 and 3 above.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
necessary.
The growth and development trends, changing market conditions, specifically the development of
the site with residences, and the development of the surrounding area, support the proposed PUD.
This site is located within an area of development with a mixture of residential and park uses. The
proposed PUD rezoning is appropriate, as limited in the PUD document and the PUD Master Plan
based on its compatibility with adjacent land uses.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 11 of 21
The Manatee Point waterfront neighborhood located across the canal will be most impacted by the
proposed development. As previously stated, approximately 14 to 16 homes may be constructed
along the waterfront property along with up to 28 boat slips. In addition, up to 10 boat slips are
proposed for the multi-slip docking facility, for a total of up to 38 boat dock slips.
However, the proposed change should not adversely influence living conditions at Bear's Paw
because the existing Bear's Paw residences are buffered by the golf course and mature landscaping
located within the Bear's Paw community.
7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create
types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or
projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the
development, or otherwise affect public safety.
Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for consistency with the applicable
policies of the Traffic Element of the GMP and the project was found consistent with those policies.
Additionally,the transportation commitments are contained in Exhibit"F" of the PUD document.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed development will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore,the project is subject to
the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
The proposed change will not seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area.
Staff is of the opinion this PUD amendment will not adversely impact property values. However,
zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by law is driven by market
value.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
Property to the south and east and north of the subject site are already developed. The basic premise
underlying all of the development standards in the Land Development Code is that their sound
application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision
process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to
improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed zoning change should
not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 12 of 21
The proposed change will not constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as
.-. contrasted with the public welfare.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning.
The subject property can be developed within existing zoning.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county.
The change suggested is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is
not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition
was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; and staff does not review
other sites in conjunction with a specific petition.
16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would
be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the
proposed zoning classification.
Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require site alteration and these
residential sites will undergo evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development
regulations during the building permit process.
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services
consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and
implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance.
The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate
Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the
GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is
responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and that staff has
concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted.
18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall
deem important in the protection of the public health, safety and welfare.
To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing.
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 13 of 21
PUD FINDINGS: �.
LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the Planning
Commission shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following
criteria." (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in non-bold font):
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
water, and other utilities.
The nearby area is developed or is approved for development of a similar nature. The petitioner will
be required to comply with all county regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water and other
utilities. In addition, the commitments included in the PUD exhibit adequately address the impacts
from the proposed development.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may
relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance
of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office,
demonstrate unified control of the property. Additionally, the development will be required to gain
platting and/or site development plan approval. Both processes will ensure that appropriate
stipulations for the provision of, continuing operation of, and maintenance of infrastructure will be
provided by the developer.
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and
policies of the GMP.
County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives
and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on that analysis, staff
is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP.
4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
While the proposed waterfront development is more intense than the neighborhood across the canal,
the proposed landscaping should aid in making the development compatible. In addition, the
proposed residential development is compatible with the surrounding golf course and Gordon River
Greenway Park.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
While the open space set aside for this project is less than the minimum requirement of the LDC, the
subject development, as previously stated, is surrounded by open space: a golf course, a passive
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 14 of 21
greenway park and a canal. Every residence in subject community will have a view of either the
waterfront or of the golf course, increasing the sense of open space. Furthermore, according to
conversations with the agent and with the Bear's Paw Home Owner's president, the subject
development will have access to the neighboring Bear's Paw golf course and amenities. Staff is of
the opinion that the open space provided is adequate.
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Currently, the roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this
time, i.e., GMP consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation
Element consistency review. In addition, the project's development must comply with all other
applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
If "ability" implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water
supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, then the subject
property has the ability to support expansion based upon the commitments made by the petitioner
and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will be addressed when development
approvals are sought.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in
the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting
public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.
The petitioner is seeking 8 deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the purpose and
intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06 A). This criterion requires
an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD
depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning
district. Staff believes that the 8 deviations proposed can be supported, finding that, in compliance
with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has demonstrated that "the elements may be waived
and will not have a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC
Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviations are "justified as meeting
public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations."
Please refer to the Deviation Discussion portion of the staff report below for a more extensive
examination of the deviations.
Deviation Discussion: The petitioner is seeking 8 deviations from general LDC requirements and
has provided justification in support of the deviations. Staff has analyzed the deviation requests and
provides the analysis and recommendations below:
Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J, "Street System Requirements," which states
that dead-end streets are prohibited except when designed as a cul-de-sac, to allow the internal dead-
end street to terminate in a "T" junction vehicular turnaround, as generally depicted on the
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 15 of 21
Conceptual Master Plan. Final location and dimensions of the "T"junction shall be determined at
the time of site development plan approval, and shall meet local fire district standards.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that the unique
triangular shape of the project site makes accommodation of a cul-de-sac at the narrow corner of the
project site unfeasible. The proposed T-junction provides full vehicular turnaround, does not pose a
risk to public health, safety, and welfare, and has been approved by County staff for use by
emergency vehicles.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends
approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and
welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that
the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations."
Deviation # 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.O6.O1.N, Street System Requirements, and Appendix
B, Typical Street Sections and Right of Way Design Standards, which requires a 60-foot wide local
road, to allow a 50-foot wide local road in accordance with the internal right-of-way cross section
attached under Exhibit"C."
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that the project
size, low density, and relatively small number of residential dwelling units renders the full 60-feet of
roadway width unnecessary, and the lack of public through-traffic on the dead-end private roadway
(and the absence of any other identifiable risk to public health, safety, and welfare) supports the
modest reduction in the proposed street width.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends
approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and
welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that
the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations."
Deviation # 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.O2A.2., Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway
Requirements, which requires sidewalks on both sides of a right-of-way terminating in a cul-de-sac
where there are more than 15 units fronting on said right-of-way,to allow for a sidewalk along one
side of the right-of-way, including the western terminus of the "T"junction described in Deviation
# 1, above.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that the
project size and relatively low number of residential units renders the LDC requirement for
sidewalks on both sides of the internal roadway unnecessary, and one sidewalk is sufficient when
considering that the internal roadway:
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD,RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 16 of 21
1. Dead-ends within the project and does not connect as a through-street to adjacent lands.
2. Does not permit public pedestrian access.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends
approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and
welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that
the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations."
Deviation # 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.06.E.5., "Dock Facilities," which requires dock
facilities to have a side setback of 15 feet for dock facilities on lots with greater than 60 feet of water
frontage, to allow a 0-foot side setbacks for the private single-family community dock facilities
located along that section of Golden Gate Canal within the Residential Tract.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that the
location of the project adjacent to the dead-end Golden Gate Canal and North of the fixed bridges at
the intersection of the Gordon River and US-41 serves to limit the size of boats that will use the
single-family residential docking facilities. In addition, there are relatively few docking facilities
lying between the project boundary and the Golden Gate Canal weir near Airport Road, which
results in a low volume of boat traffic passing by the project and the docks. The subject docks have
been conceptually designed to provide for mooring of boats horizontally with the shoreline, thereby
reducing the projection of docks and boats into the Golden Gate Canal, and boat sizes will be limited
by virtue of the community covenants, conditions, and restrictions. The approximately 120 foot
width of the Golden Gate Canal will readily accommodate the proposed dock facilities and preserve
navigability. The LDC setback requirements for the subject docks are accordingly not necessary and
fulfill no public purpose.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends
approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and
welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that
the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations."
Deviation # 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.07.02.G.1., "Open Space Requirements," which
requires that PUD districts composed entirely of residential dwelling units and accessory uses to
devote at least 60 percent of the gross area to usable open space, to allow at least 50 percent of the
gross Project area to be devoted to usable open space.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that the unique
triangular shape of the parcel limits the available onsite open space to 50%, even though the 2.9 unit
per acre density is well below the maximum permitted density. The site, however, has significant
usable open space available for the use of residents in the form of the immediately adjacent Gordon
River Greenway park, and the Bear's Paw golf course and club facilities immediately to the North.
The project will include a direct connection to the Bear's Paw golf course for pedestrian and golf
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 17 of 21
cart use, and residents of the project will be required to acquire memberships to the Bear's Paw
Country Club. As a practical matter, the project residents will accordingly have direct use and
enjoyment of the vast open space areas within the Bear's Paw community. Additionally, the modest
10% reduction in open space will be mitigated visually by the Alternative Type A Buffer described
in Deviation# 8, below, and by an enhanced internal landscape plan.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends
approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and
welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that
the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations."
Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.b., "Fences and Walls," which permits walls
at a maximum height of 6 feet in the rear and side yards of designated residential components of
PUDs, to allow walls at a maximum height of 8 feet in the non-waterfront rear and side yards of the
residential lots.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that the
increased wall heights are desired to provide additional privacy for residents given the project
location immediately adjacent to the Gordon River Greenway Park and the anticipated public
pedestrian traffic associate with the park. The walls will not have an adverse visual impact on
adjacent residential and/or commercial uses as they will be located at the project entry (which faces
only the park).
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends
approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and
welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that
the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations."
Deviation # 7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02 B.l.b., "Development Standards for Signs
within Residential Districts," which requires signs within residential PUDs to be located no closer
than 10 feet from the property line or from the edge of the roadway, paved surface, or back of
curb, as applicable, to allow Project entry signage to be set back a minimum of five (5) feet from
the property line.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that the project
entry signage will be mounted on the wall facing the Gordon River Greenway Park, which wall will
be located approximately 5 feet from the project boundary and the 60-foot wide Access Easement.
The wall and signage will effectively meet the LDC setback from the paved surface within the
Access Easement because the roadway paved surface will be approximately 10 feet narrower than
the Access Easement's 60-foot width.
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 18 of 21
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends
approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and
welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that
the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations."
Deviation # 8 seeks relief from LDC Section LDC Section 4.06.02 C.1., "Alternate A: Landscape
Buffer," which requires a ten-foot-wide landscape buffer with trees spaced no more than 30 feet on
center, to allow a modified Alternate A Landscape Buffer with trees spaced an average of 45 feet on
center for that portion of the Project adjacent to the Golden Gate Canal. The equivalent number of
trees otherwise required by the 30-foot spacing shall be provided within the Alternative A Landscape
Buffer located on the Residential Tract along the Golden Gate Canal.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that the Type
A Buffer along the waterway will block scenic views of the Golden Gate Canal from the project
residences, and Developer's proposed Modified Type A Buffer will preserve view corridors while
serving as the functional equivalent of the Type A Buffer(and while providing the same number of
trees as otherwise required by the Type A Buffer). The proposed alternative landscape buffer will
provide buffering to the Manatee Point residences, which are located across the Golden Gate
Canal.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends
approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and
welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that
the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations."
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The agent/applicant duly noticed and held the required NIM on July 23, 2013. For further
information, please see Attachment B: "Neighborhood Information Meeting Notes."
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for Petition RZ-PL20120002095, revised
on October 1, 2013.
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission
forward Petition RZ-PL20120002095 to the Board of County Commissioners with a
recommendation of approval.
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD, RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 19 of 21
Attachments:
Attachment A: Proposed PUD Ordinance
Attachment B: Neighborhood Information Notes
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD,RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 20 of 21
PREPARED BY:
1.41.1►. Al Ali AL.A ic6V 20 20(5
NANCY e� D• CH, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER x DATE
GROWT ,i► • • GEMENT DIVISION
REVIEWED BY:
4 d / 7- Z5 - 13
RAYMSi D V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE
GROWT MANAGEMENT DIVISION
__— / 4'- 2 s-a 0 k)
MICHAEL BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
APPROVED BY:
0 i
. Af .1.!:Alli )0-)v13
I CK rASALANG D: , • DM STRATOR DATE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
The Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD,RZ-PL20120002095
October 2,2013
Page 21 of 21
�-. ORDINANCE NO. 13-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE
NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY
AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY
CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN
DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM AN AGRICULTURAL (A)
ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN WELLFIELD RISK MANAGEMENT
SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY ZONES W-3 AND W-4 (ST/W-3
AND ST/W-4) TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN WELLFIELD RISK
MANAGEMENT SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY ZONES W-3 AND
W-4 (ST/W-3 AND ST/W-4) FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE
LANDINGS AT BEAR'S PAW RPUD TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF
A MAXIMUM OF 25 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AND UP TO
38 BOAT SLIPS ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE GOLDEN GATE
CANAL SOUTH OF BEAR'S PAW IN SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 49
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
CONSISTING OF 10.75 ± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. (PETITION RZ-PL20120002095)
WHEREAS, John Passidomo, Esquire and William. Dempsey, Esquire of Cheffy
Passidomo, P.A., representing Headwaters Development Limited Liability Limited Partnership
LLLP, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the
herein described property; and
WHEREAS, the Special Treatment zones ST/W-3 and ST/W-4 are not changed by this
rezone.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA that:
SECTION ONE:
The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 35,
Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida is changed from an Agricultural (A)
zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for a project
to be known as the Landings at Bear's Paw RPUD to allow construction of a maximum of 25
residential dwelling units and up to 38 boat slips in accordance with Exhibits "A"through "G",
Landings at Bear's Paw`,RZ-PL20120002095 1 of 2
Rev. 10/07/13
Attachment A
attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate atlas map or maps as
described in Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code,
is/are hereby amended accordingly.
SECTION TWO:
•
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. •
•
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida,this day of ,2013.
ATTEST BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS •
DWIGHT E. BROCK,CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: By:
Deputy Clerk GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQUIRE
•
Chairwoman •
Approved as to form and legality:
Heidi Ashton-Cicko 0\
Managing Assistant County attorney
•
•
Attachments: Exhibit A— Permitted Uses
Exhibit B— Development Standards
Exhibit C— Master Plan(3 pages)
Exhibit D— Legal Description
Exhibit E— Requested Deviations from LDC
Exhibit F— Developer Commitments
Exhibit G— Sidewalk Exhibit
CP\12-CPS-01199\82
Landings at Bear's Paw\RZ-PL20120002095 2 of 2
Rev. 10/07/13
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
DOCUMENT
FOR
THE LANDINGS AT BEARS PAW
Date of Submittal: September 25, 2013
Prepared by: Cheffy Passidomo,P.A.
EXHIBIT A
PERMITTED USES
No building, structure, or part thereof shall be erected or used within the RPUD, nor shall
any portion of the land within the RPUD be used, other than for the following permitted uses
and a maximum of 25 residential dwelling units:
a. Residential Tract:
i. Permitted Principal Uses:
1. Single family detached dwelling units;
2. Single family attached duplex dwelling units;
3. Single family zero lot line dwelling units;
4. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
list of principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning
Appeals or Hearing Examiner by the process set forth in the
Collier County Land Development Code("LDC").
ii. Permitted Accessory Uses:
1. Accessory uses customarily associated with residential uses,
including but not limited to private recreational single-family boat
docks, mooring pilings, boat lifts/davits, swimming pools, spas,
and screen enclosures to serve residents and their guests;
2. Recreational facilities such as clubhouses, observation decks,
parks, playgrounds, pedestrian walkways, and bicycle paths to
serve residents and their guests;
3. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
list of permitted accessory uses, as determined by the Zoning
Appeals or Hearing Examiner by the process set forth in the
Collier County Land Development Code("LDC").
b. Amenity Area:
i. Permitted Uses:
1. A golf cart path, and uses and structures customarily associated
with waterfront residential amenity areas, including but not limited
to swimming pools, spas, parking, private recreational single
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 1 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
family boat docks, mooring pilings, boat lifts/davits, picnic areas,
and kayak launches to serve residents and their guests; and
2. Any other use or structure which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing list of uses and structures, as determined by the Zoning
Appeals or Hearing Examiner by the process set forth in the
Collier County Land Development Code.
c. Golden Gate Canal (as to the Northern '/2 of the Golden Gate Canal abutting
the project):
i. Permitted Uses: private recreational single-family boat docks, mooring
pilings, boat lifts/davits, and kayak launches to serve residents and their
guests. All docks are reserved for the exclusive use of the owners of
dwelling units within the RPUD property. No more than ten (10) boat
slips may be constructed adjacent to the Amenity Area, no more than two
(2) boat slips may be constructed adjacent to each platted single-family
water-front lot, and no more than thirty-eight (38) slips may be
constructed within the project. Except for any deviations listed in this
RPUD Document, all docks and boat slips shall be subject to the
requirements of LDC Section 5.03.06 and, to the extent applicable, the
Manatee Protection Plan.
d. General: The following structures and uses shall be considered general permitted
uses throughout the RPUD:
i. Essential Services facilities designed and operated to provide water,
sewer, gas, telephone, electricity, cable television or communications to
the general public, as described in LDC Section 2.01.03;
ii. Water management facilities and related structures; and
iii. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures.
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 2 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
EXHIBIT B
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The following Development Standards shall apply to all development within the RPUD:
I. Residential: The table below sets forth the development standards for residential
principal and accessory structures within the RPUD. Standards not specifically set forth
herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of
approval of the SDP or subdivision plat:
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
SINGLE-FAMILY
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED/
DETACHED DUPLEX AND
ZERO-LOT-LINE
PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES
MINIMUM LOT AREA 5,600 S.F. 2,800 5.F_
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 40' 20'
MINIMUM FLOOR AREA 1,200 S.F. 1,200 S.F.
MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK° 20' 20'
MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK 5' 0' OR 5'
MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK 20' 20'
MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN 10, 0' OR 10'
STRUCTURES
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT NOT 1-2 STORIES, 1-2 STORIES,
TO EXCEED (ACTUAL/ZONED) 35'/33' 35'/30'
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK 10' 10'
MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK(2) 5' 5'
MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK 10' 10'
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT NOT 1-2 STORIES, 1-2 STORIES, •
TO EXCEED (ACTUAL/ZONED) 35730' 35'/30'
NOTES:
1. FOR FRONT ENTRY GARAGES, A MINIMUM OF 23' FROM EDGE OF SIDEWALK TO
THE GARAGE MUST BE PROVI=DED. FOR SIDE ENTRY GARAGES, THE MINIMUM
FRONT YARD SETBACK MAY BE REDUCED TO 12'.
2. PATIOS, POOLS, SCREEN ENCLOSURES AND SIMILAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
MAY ENCROACH INTO THE MINIMUM YARDS AND MAY ATTACH TO THE
AD,.CIhING DWELLING UNIT,
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 3 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
EXHIBIT C
CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 4 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
EXHIBIT "C" (1 OF 3)
=s
- 1- —
i1 tEi
ri-, ES It C w cnNNvon N z IV-
121i a N ��
4: W W W W W Lk/
O
"z3 I ¢ UUUUU U Q
w y�a < w
y \ n 0Nrn7 NO ,)0 IR W qi.'
j�U \ .\ ��O�IV Ill II� t00 N >� 3
� ;\ ® s.I.
:.i!1 I S Li
cc
1„sift I N r- \\ \ Z oo v;� > Zz...3 I F K 3"'! W W W J ULr
-∎ j \\ •'\ o I O� U Qc9 00 d z OW Z�
Q' K < JK d'K w w pc i
Z o
H Z N,° 3j- 0u U ry H<m0 l� N ¢¢ <p ��� oz�Qr taiivai vai j z�i+� an
b . t M W?1x- XNW W< W W W X mz° W O
via 1 1 d Nv KK<oP 00 O m rea i—...0 0
do
I \ Q6•\e \l`<< 4.4- `l` ca LI• \�a yd :\ '�pD '
•
f °tea �� � V \
�zon i i,� 1. \ q
OvK / 11 0 � c7� o
a azo I //�/1 / \ d2.J 5� Zs<o$ a
S1� war or-Or �%/ /;. ` YZ �'So. O Nd 3°9gI ga
d N a}o J S)O. ff W / ,:V..• .J� �O> •% ZZONp< EoLLnio —'
YZC'1 6 wFd UC9 C'i H 7' y<.-. / ♦`iii �O\l (OjZ �ci:W�
aZa co Y?a a ' O3�/ ���., > v.t. oc� dt";,.•ZOO aki O ZN / RS3 �1�` Lj ,\ ¢Nd GS...°�
}NN m On _c3i//�f1 t ��Nd •\ Ymm W�
(w�j l-� O ON'• I \\ // z `� >6•�3 ,•'•\ 0ze3, Kry 3
�O�o a Sao \ `” *§=/en' ,�,/\ / 3 t� Wo •
hi ¢Z U I \ o3Y is/$0 p6 se,-s- •\ Wm p
�. a O \n .Oyr / ym yam°+ 20 U •
(IIIII
mo
•
< / T� .3 1�.p,m r `I %.% ,, $ 6 o
m
rt \� �z�o
o /% `4 l ZOZN
0\‘'` /% I. a a
i/ • _ Z S sib++ ! z
" orc /a j V �,j t "Na Z., ...-0_
x oYE
j Q •s• / /%,0 St—‘,„♦ 4 b 14'1'O\ 8 K 5 1
i
^\\\ �/
�+ \ / qF rrr
3
•
: 3 E 8 ' .):// i , . ,000* !kg N g
!� o
•
Z SCI ��'/--/ // 3
_ (a-nd 03SOdONd:JO i8Vd ION) • ON SS333v/03SOdOad I 77•
f I
__/ — I Y �a a EC•
(( m
• _J O 03 ;N �<2 N
1d1.11i1 tom-< O \a d'a0a W0
NWO� U�wW�wd�' KO z<U2<a 8 <
x u lifg4IJD oaoa OZw�am o HV KWJNZ� KO, KOd n, 0KO O am O
MATCH LINE o UU c 2
O W —
IN no,oiovwo aurwu-1n.0-11v..nmwww,1,03 1015+1.*w.r.u,..O toV,&mma m.wu O.Mom z-fl \.w2 M...wa 54.011AA
EXHIBIT "C" (2 OF 3)
. :R o x
P.
ITS
a r
h rn G3ui! 7
,—. Y,Z
i2 o ip H
a °
,,, PO g
w P..,,§ 1 1 °a NE K rl vN Om Wo
.
Z F ° _
- , O z 3 w Qo
z 2 vi
U l 3 6o O
W °m wa z
a � ::: U•
W z
w °� fn Nz u, °o W ° W Q-S-
Hoe O LL z-,
do, IL O N Y N CO d g
�� < W °W-L' w ...� Iw W sw� dM
rc� _1'
d W°d '-n"
Q sm W2 a
¢ c, Z mar
o �, �a QF-W V oN
O at z
Z °� i td CI 032 0 W
U 61,,- m x
iS L -1 z 2_ H.Ni
5 �a o U z�� 2 gwc
J =_ham a ` o m 1-oJ
w
> N xm
1
�ti em Q s f-
^� O z U
i� W
1 F 1 a> CO
w o 14 nw
r•J� rw
> m w .
w a N v :2 a
> U
R
o
st13^_
Z s_
/"*"..., __-- w> dW'<gg
mLIE LL
z� 3
•
J 0 Np m K W 1- (lili
a� �Q rZ �z w °mw r
N OZN N�i Qp ZQO r-W 2 O NO2)- OmU J
I+- 1- 3 Om- F-J U zW W W Q ZmO
waz o Apo zwzz =LI wo<I ¢oow, aotw"03
N O Z W W W F-
°o° O F N w O J 0 w W op Q w o a 1'<U
- IL l- � � w1l aU 3JOa 57.00 vi°m as 0Qw• Naww=wL
O�Y N 000_
z=UOj . QNix- ow --I NQ°W,J ZNaFOF-"tQ7
O m W 0 W m-w w W Q Q O O F O}} not)Q Q
K U Q H H Q 3 a O m U" W Y O U K p W° 3 a OJ Z w S d F- w N Z Z
WO?f QQ Wpm' Qw r JOO OJ UaQm ZW a N~ -pw" Q1-ZZd'wJ
N Z F J o N Y I Z Y°Z= Q O°Q a Z N, <0�Q Z OJ K°o K Q=g O w Q U
NwZOZF NO_ JWOV- woQO Nw� W 1-o w wQd Z�-<W0W La
3 mamK ,L . w° 0 ,....3a wino ZzQW �2KOw w��ad'~F
b
WFW0WQ W ~ O mN 0W_0 OILWQ WQ Na. _ �p�1- JWZI-mZ
N K x J J = mQ 7. Q w Q O §1
WW oo°p° NJF= NOOF? -wQ WH0 -M x mLZJ� OWFOF'p Wag
Wr1-° La Q3 'M mYK �j1nOW .- 000 mm I- �zJ}Q� -mQ�Z3Q 6•
- W x m W z N U Q Z Q H W` J O W~0 O woo m N F J w1- N W 0 O Z W F-
°Wf-J WZ N° mW WU Na,Zw NxJ a- O Q W woU
°1-m JQ 0 Q ONWZ QOQQ OF-U= 01--I ONWaL �J Q i•
mp m N O 2 U0 00e, O J N W O U Z w F- O w W~ 0-0M O_0 Q w O N°, H EE
ID 00pNJ 102 )03aN NmKUQ a°ao N,Tj~Y °OO.Q� aZ�wOaa BE
ZawIOt z 0 z0 zlw0� zuwi0'' Z�ow ZLwmw z j'wmZ
FwoQau o NZ OInOW ONW J 0 w Om0N-n F2H > PO 02 w ..�
0<wo ZJ WZ_U WNw I- wcQ2F W�N� w d W-m W 0{{--~QN iRC
N O 7< N__O1- NW>i 0-- ,Z NODW N00Z NSOww 01-at xW �.
N J J < U(5'45 U M00 U N w 0 la 0 U J a 0 F
00Z QQ 0 w°p U O Q U.<
N K
Jm ZKro ONww O OQOw °wOUw 001-0 UQN °=zW 0-,U0 WOo<UZF=-
ON ZwI-Q pw3W 0.OZm °=I.w"JU 0-0‹ ° O� °mwmZ o�wwww Qaz
MELar
�O-UwJ -�Z �UW-Q 1i�-0 �F- wO�J wmaz w,,,0 W~ZOQN°
W , 1---00 O J Q 0-
° W Q 3 a J Lam 1 W Z W= J O O Q .73_..U a, 7J7,-,<0, J W z Q W O Q
• ILw00ZOa IL-fix ILFN--04"00 IF- (J]>i M,,0 I a mI-wm m,www I O
N°J Q Z Q N--Q Q N w J O Q N U -J N 2 N 0 W N Q z 3 N O W° N O Q U O m
J W Q Q m_Z W Q W W Q S W l.Q"QW W Z W~=Q a W a O Z w N N N N W m Z W W w
Q N~ °w N m Z N W ° N U Q Q U N K O N N J LU Z N I O>m N U°°°~~D O
lei aQN�¢w a?p� a0?wo a°_°'� 'to000. ''3w2 aZ-0„,_,F_ 3z< °a w
W Z Igza ZdHN Z}Zwm 0W1-w o,,oao Z ~Z Z- < Z xNw U J Om�\ Z p °0°1=°J
_ 0 aQo if°y a ,o ax< m ¢ � ^QQ Pw,m0-
o
Q 1 U O ¢ U �N U Z az Oz m
0> ° > ° p w MW<o Z Q io zoO . < -0 ¢°°° 3< od0l 711l I
030>J0 0 QOO 0 a I.1 0 " 00 w 01flIILv1 0 <
o a ® 4 4 4
1
1.pal clwai.p.o,.,r mmve..nm<.nwl.,mm musnev+,wc\oa o evml!o v+fl low seam:-u..\,uan as»vim craw..
EXHIBIT "C" (3 OF 3) .
:: ;/„ , .
/§§)§ ! `
))/i\\6,
| , y ,
!
t mm - /
` | $ \)
(
L d - -1:
--I —I
j ! •-e0co./ §
g§
\ E_ ) ( /g
b /o , / \12 ( M § a%
( |
• \ - �/ z ƒaw §2
#� �sZ &! z
\ \ r �� §�§ `� )cr
~ M f.'.1 } \ \ 0\ <\/ (\
| ° O \ \§} )%! SL
ƒkY `-§ m¥
, u g\\ !ff %a
rAl u=F • !
_ 0\0 ��\
� �,& 0 )@§
j\\k/� s(0
La 0
In°a
z§ƒLa
\\ �/ - \)§
caz -
§a§ !�;
I F q / ocI./\)(
x 3 u g • .• -;;5
d
L L 03� I } ®b a (/t«|�
k in\� ��m I AG {\\ �` §
2 2 ® ' — . v RK 0 50
\} \Im {§§ \ ( \/ ///
&
(11 illi
= {
2 §[ § {)�
- § nm \j U)
I— - -
. k \ zI \§E
~ e | (
} 2 �w 5§
. ! _ � / )2§
` p 2 �W
g \ --0
CO 200
Zi ci
a.Er)Z i|
�w!@a
f ce (2\ |
§
_ ` b� Kf j 1.1
�B ® e •
}kkk§ _•R. k |i
(� § ( -°`�j /\§ / al:
_.0..., . ...
0
/) /} \ r- l - k\
qG ,JJ I o<
k \| I-
0 ( §e E Q r»
@ k • - f guz
_,; L. ` /~ / §\
"
10 em -
§ - 1 zw. g
f / ) _ _� L_ u k \ q a�(
ci
/\ | I k \/ \§0j \\ i{ | 1®
n.xi.c./a/s awsvu-Jarrceracusokawforne Isom Men.wiresse.....o sAucanuuct=mom MAW I.1110 2-241*\loon au 7.1.11E S1230.4\4
EXHIBIT D
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
"""-■
IN NORTH Y2 OF NORTH Y2 OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25
E4ST, BEGIN AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SECTION AND RUN EAST
1,398.25 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 64 WEST 1555.05 FEET; THENCE NORTH 564.01
FEET TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING, COLLIER COUNT); FLORIDA.
•
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 5 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
f'*—\
EXHIBIT E
LIST OF LDC DEVIATIONS
NOTE: Nothing in this PUD Document shall approve a deviation to the LDC unless it is listed
in this Exhibit E.
1. Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J, "Street System Requirements,"
which states that dead-end streets are prohibited except when designed as a cul-de-sac, to
allow the internal dead-end street to terminate in a"T"junction vehicular turnaround, as
generally depicted on the Conceptual Master Plan. Final location and dimensions of the
"T"junction shall be determined at the time of site development plan approval, and shall
meet local fire district standards.
2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N, "Street System Requirements,"
and Appendix B, "Typical Street Sections," which establish a 60-foot width for local
roads, to allow a 50-foot wide road in accordance with the internal right of way cross
section attached under Exhibit C.
3. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02A.2., "Sidewalks and Bike Lane
Pathway Requirements," which requires sidewalks on both sides of a right-of-way or
easement internal to a site, to allow for a sidewalk to be constructed along one side of the
right-of-way, including the western terminus of the "T"junction described in Deviation#
1, above.
4. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.06.E.5., "Dock Facilities," which
requires dock facilities to have a side setback of 15 feet for dock facilities on lots with
greater than 60 feet of water frontage, to allow a 0-foot side setbacks for the private
single-family community dock facilities located along that section of Golden Gate Canal
within the Residential Tract.
5. Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.07.02.G.1., "Open Space Requirements,"
which requires that PUD districts composed entirely of residential dwelling units and
accessory uses to devote at least 60 percent of the gross area to usable open space, to
allow at least 50 percent of the gross area to be devoted to usable open space.
6. Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.b., "Fences and Walls," which
permits walls at a maximum height of 6 feet in the rear and side yards of designated
residential components of PUDs,to allow walls at a maximum height of 8 feet in the non-
waterfront rear and side yards of the residential lots.
7. Deviation#7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.b., "Development Standards for
Signs within Residential Districts," which requires signs within residential PUDs to be
located no closer than 10 feet from the property line or from the edge of the roadway,
paved surface, or back of curb, as applicable,to allow project entry signage to be set back
a minimum of five (5)feet from the property line.
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 6 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
8. Deviation #8 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C.1. "Alternate A: Landscape
Buffer," which requires a ten-foot-wide landscape buffer with trees spaced no more than
30 feet on center,to allow a modified Alternate A Landscape Buffer with trees spaced an
average of 45 feet on center for that portion of the project adjacent to the Golden Gate
Canal. The equivalent number of trees otherwise required by the 30-foot spacing shall be
provided within the Alternative A. Landscape Buffer located on the Residential Tract
along the Golden Gate Canal.
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 7 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
EXHIBIT F
LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
I. PUD Monitoring:
One entity (hereinafter the "Managing Entity") shall be responsible for PUD
monitoring until close-out of the RPUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for
satisfying all RPUD commitments until close-out of the PUD. At the time of this
RPUD approval, the Managing Entity shall be Headwaters Development Limited
Liability Limited Partnership, LLLP, a Florida limited liability limited partnership
(the"Developer"). Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and
related commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally
binding document to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney.
After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon
written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall
become the Managing Entity. As Developer sells off tracts, the Managing Entity
shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of the
commitments required by the RPUD by the new owner and the new owner's
agreement to comply with the commitments through the Managing Entity, but the
Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When
the RPUD is closed-out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the
monitoring and fulfillment of RPUD commitments.
II. Utilities:
Potable water distribution and sewage collection and transmission systems shall be
constructed throughout the RPUD by the Developer. Potable water and sanitary sewer
facilities constructed within platted rights of way or within City of Naples utility
easements shall be conveyed to City of Naples pursuant to the LDC.
III. Transportation:
a. Access to and from the RPUD and the Golden Gate Parkway right of way is
provided by the Right of Way Easement Agreement recorded in Official Records
Book 4097, Page 661, as amended in Official Records Book 4535, Page 2342,
both of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida (the "Access Easement"),
and Developer shall be responsible for fulfilling its obligations under the Access
Easement. No later than sixty (60) days after approval of this RPUD, an
amendment to the Access Easement between Developer and the County shall
completed, signed, and recorded to provide terms for maintenance of the
improvements within the Access Easement, and construction of Developer's
connection between the RPUD and Golden Gate Parkway. Infrastructure internal
to the RPUD (not including roads) may be public, private, or a combination of
public and private. Roads internal to the RPUD shall be private.
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 8 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
b. Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for any dwelling unit,
Developer shall construct a single sidewalk connection between the RPUD and
Golden Gate Parkway. Two alternative scenarios may be proposed for the
sidewalk connection:
i. Default Option: Developer shall construct a sidewalk within the Access
Easement from the RPUD entrance to the shared project entrance with the
Gordon River Greenway Park; or
ii. Alternative Option: At the discretion of the County Parks and Recreation
Department and in lieu of the Default Option, the Developer may elect to
connect to the Gordon River Greenway Park asphalt sidewalk that runs
north south parallel and adjacent to the Access Easement ("County's
sidewalk segment"), provided that the necessary access rights are
conveyed to Developer, and — to the extent required by law — the entire
sidewalk segment from the RPUD to the Golden Gate Parkway right of
way is made to be ADA compliant at Developer's cost. The proposed
connection is at or near the southern end of the County's sidewalk
segment, as shown on the attached Sidewalk Exhibit, with all design,
construction and permitting costs to be paid by Developer. If this option is
exercised: 1. Final approval of the sidewalk interconnect plans shall be
subject to review and approval by County Parks and Recreation staff, in
addition to the appropriate Collier County Growth Management Division
staff; and 2. The Developer, its successors and/or assigns (which may
include the homeowner's association described in Section V, below), shall
bear a proportionate fair share responsibility for maintenance of the
County's sidewalk segment in perpetuity.
c. Developer and its successor(s) and/or assign(s) (which may include the
homeowner's association described in Section V, below) shall be responsible for
all operation and maintenance of the internal RPUD roadways, sidewalks or their
appurtenances, and Collier County shall have no responsibility for maintenance of
any such roadways. The foregoing operation and maintenance obligations include
the Access Easement, except that portion of the Access Easement that provides
shared access to the Gordon River Greenway Park.
d. Developer shall not deprive the County Parks and Recreation Department of use
of the Access Easement for purposes of maintaining the Gordon River Greenway
Park or any of its related features or appurtenances.
e. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for any structure in the project,
Developer shall pay the County (Parks and Recreation Department) one-half of
the total sum of$140,365.20 as reimbursement for %2 of its fair share of the funds
expended by Collier County for construction of roadway improvements within the
Access Easement. The remaining V2 balance (or $70,182.60) shall be due and
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 9 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
payable to the County (Parks and Recreation Department)prior to issuance of the
first certificate of occupancy for a dwelling unit.
IV. Environmental:
Pursuant to LDC Section 3.05.07H.l.f.i. and iii., Developer shall satisfy all of its on-site
native vegetation preserve requirement by either making a monetary payment to Collier
County pursuant to LDC Section 3.05.07H.1.f.iii.a), or by donating land for conservation
purposes to Collier County pursuant to LDC Section 3.05.07H.l.f.iii.b). The off-site
alternatives to the on-site native preserve requirements shall be based on preservation of
25% (or .74 acres) of the existing 2.97 acres of onsite native vegetation, and shall be in
place prior to final site plan and/or plat approval, whichever is earlier.
Developer, its successors and/or assigns (which may include the homeowner's
association described in Section V, below), shall be responsible for maintenance of the
Golden Gate Canal within the project boundary, as depicted on Exhibit C.
V. Planning and Common Area Maintenance:
Prior to issuance of the first residential certificate of occupancy,Developer shall establish
a homeowner's association, which shall be responsible for maintenance of the RPUD
common areas, water management areas, community infrastructure, and internal
roadway.
VI. Miscellaneous: A certified archaeologist will be onsite during all excavations to monitor
for the presence of historical and/or archaeological artifacts or resources.
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 10 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
SIDEWALK EXHIBIT
10916-0001#298
The Landings at Bear's Paw Page 11 of 11
PUDZ-PL20120002095
September 25,2013
C3
—....,1 �Q-7 _� may- - �'
-,::::<-4-,, 0" , -->v!..:----„, s .4•42-4.7.ta,4=:-.1,7,i-izt:,:gt-,*4-7,- -,.. . - -. 0 ,,,,,_ >-
)1 i 1 .*..01471-";;;t7"--24-."42",:- ..i-;- -"\ i ),_,' a_ c,
f'� =-��y'�i• ./.7•f i• Tina. i s ii+ii s i li l�l s • �`�� ` ,,. �'/ tr r
-- ,
—— :II ek av�-Fao +m- s „ .w %i,1 9f I,• S•• Q
' _ ' _ - '.-_.,--4__ Z
�. `• .T .. , -I Z z
J —' 1- ,�,.- `m z 5
a.
S -�ax}sa taa� J T j '"--tit^jw�7.-._e w
.fati,.. ..�. /:4 m • \ •-,/� ~
/I o rx
•
__/I— //� * a�-'�\ ', '
• QZ — � - / r r. ,, - o ff"'—{ 11f _
z 8^� � ��— W j * *;"--c 2 ��% I CO J
LL
6LL
in
wW tf ;1* � o O E} ` a z Z z
' (El
,� \� / r_/ ,Z H Z ' 1 a ' 0.311.;_' ,- . m< 0. 4 _Q
------‹ „7.........e"'' ii-j. .fili +Li s'„/—.. -Ali .-4. .
Ill ill
� r
_
-
/Q x e t , { � t Q .. .� L i'off ao , m o / /, FQr ' it a.v p t.-Q
ta
vii „ \ !
Qom o !'� •"\ T :4 ./.•/_.d / , t i _
0
'X 6 Q6 5° a iii' " .h°-1 �. ii3 `I I
Il -tit • \ , `�•�
LI
■ CI QV,
ti! .. I ii
• ! . --
_ .__ _________t.,.1...,__:_,_.1 .._____,,...,.___ ,......_ _-_:' ' a
cc
cc
tallai
glt
1 0 L.
brEl
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING NOTES
PETITION NO. RZ-PL20120002095; Headwaters Development Limited Liability Limited Partnership,
LLLP—Rezone Application for The Landings at Bear's Paw.
A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Tuesday, July 23, 2013, at 5:30 at the Freedom Park
Education Facility located at 1515 Golden Gate Parkway. This is the nearest meeting facility from the
project property(approximately 2,500 linear feet from the project boundary). The meeting was properly
noticed by advertisement in the Naples Daily News (see attached proof of publication) and by posting
directional signage along the Golden Gate Parkway right-of-way near the facility.
ATTENDEES:
Developer Representatives:
Will Dempsey(Legal Counsel—Cheffy Passidomo)
Dan Hartley(Engineering and Site Planning Consultant—JR Evans Engineering)
Tim Hall(Environmental Consultant and Biologist—Turrell Hall&Associates)
Greg Wardeberg(Developer Representative and Construction Consultant)
Ray Couret(Sales Representative—Premier Sotheby's International Realty)
County Representative:
Nancy Gundlach,AICP—Principal Planner
Members of the Public:
See attached sign-in sheet
The meeting convened at 5:30. Will Dempsey introduced the developer representatives and Mrs.
Gundlach and gave a brief overview of the project. The overview explained the existing zoning
(agricultural), proposed zoning (residential PUD), maximum number of residential units (25), and
included 24 x 36 graphics depicting the PUD Master Concept Plan, conceptual elevations of the
residential dwelling units, and a conceptual perspective aerial of the developed project. Mr. Dempsey
also explained that access to the site would be from Golden Gate Parkway via a shared roadway serving
both the project and the County Greenway Park.
After the introductory overview,Mr.Dempsey fielded questions from the attendees. A summary of those
questions and the responses follows:
• Will there be a separate construction entrance for the project? Mr. Dempsey explained that all
traffic — construction, resident, public services, and otherwise — will use the project/Greenway
common access road.
• Will there be a red-light at the intersection of the access road and Golden Gate Parkway? Mr.
Dempsey explained that there are no immediate plans for a red-light, and that a red-light would
have to be warranted based on traffic counts before being installed
• What will the typical rear yards look like from the Bear's Paw Golf Course, and where will
driveways for individual homes be located? Mr. Dempsey explained that the rear yards will be
typical, with swimming pools,patios, and landscaping, and that the view of rear yards within the
project will be visually blocked from the golf course by the existing strip of landscaping along the
Attachment B
North side of the property boundary. Mr. Dempsey went on to explain that the internal project
driveway (and individual residential driveways)will not be visible from the Golf Course.
• What is the anticipated timeframe for commencing construction? Mr. Dempsey and Dan Hartley
explained that the developer would seek approval to commence clearing the site and to start work
on the access road this calendar year, and that work on the project site should begin in earnest
after approvals are secured (early 2014). Dan Hartley explained that residences would be
constructed based on market demand
• Have you sold any units yet? Mr. Dempsey explained that the project has not yet gone to market,
and that the developer needs to secure entitlements before marketing units for sale.
• What is the anticipated timeframe for getting the approvals and beginning marketing efforts? Mr.
Dempsey estimated that approvals should be in hand by the end of the calendar year, and that
marketing efforts would begin in early 2014.
• What is proposed for the "Amenity Area" and adjacent docks, will the boat docks be used
commercially, and are there any plans for boat lifts or a marina at the site? Mr. Dempsey
explained that all docks will be reserved for the exclusive use of community residents, that
commercial activities associated with the docks would be prohibited, and that there will be no
marina. He also explained that initial plans included a boat ramp, but that those plans were
quickly abandoned, and that there might be boat lifts based on market demand Mr. Dempsey
went on to explain that he does not expect the project to include covered boat houses because
same would block the scenic view of the canal and are difficult to permit. Mr. Dempsey
explained that the amenity area is reserved for the exclusive use of community residents and that
no parking or vertical improvements are planned for the amenity area other than picnic tables,
fillet stations, grills, and similar amenities.
• What is the expected volume of boat traffic? Mr. Dempsey explained that this is an open
question & will be driven by the number of boat slips desired by community residents. He went
on to explain that there will be 10 slips made available to the 10 planned interior lots, and that
each water-front lot owner will have the option (but not the obligation) of constructing a dock to
serve its lot.
• How will traffic to the project be routed through Bear's Paw? Mr. Dempsey explained that there
will be no connection for vehicular traffic through Bear's Paw, and that the only connection
through the Bear's Paw community is a golf cart path at the far Eastern end of the project.
• Mr. Frank Rapley, member of the Bear's Paw Country Club, Inc., Board of Directors, on behalf
of the Club, endorsed the project and offered the Club's support.
• What type of security is proposed for the project, and will there be public access to the
community/waterfront? Mr. Dempsey explained that the objective is to have a security gate
blocking public traffic from traveling South of the Greenway Park parking lot, and a separate
security gate at the entrance to the community, and that there would be no public access to the
community or waterfront.
The meeting adjourned at 6:05.
10916-0001#274 ��