Loading...
CCPC Agenda 01/02/2014 R COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONMEETING AGENDA JANUARY 2, 2014 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 2014, 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 —December 5, 2013 6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Note: This items has been continued from the December 5, 2013 CCPC meeting: PUDA- PL20130000052: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 92 -7, the R. Roberts Estate PUD, and amending Ordinance Number 2004 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code which includes 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 designation of 3.2 acres of land from Residential Single Family -3 (RSF -3) to R. Roberts Estate Mixed Use Planned Unit Development; by increasing the size of Tract A of the PUD by 3 acres, from 5.9 t acres to 8.9 t acres; by changing the permitted uses on Tract A from single family residential to up to 50,000 square feet of gross floor area of institutional and professional office uses; by revising Section I, Property Description; by revising Development Standards and Developer Commitments for the PUD located on the south side of Roberts Avenue and north and east of SR -29 in Section 4, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County Florida consisting of 42 t acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, RLA, Principal Planner] Page 1 of 2 B. PUDZ- PL20130001352: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2004 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Residential Multi- Family -12 District (RMF -12) within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District to allow up to 10,000 square feet of commercial uses for a project to be known as 7- Foodmart CPUD on property located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard, north of Golden Gate Parkway in Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, RLA, Principal Planner] 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS A. Consider to amend the consent portion of the CCPC agenda items, to only require items to be on consent if requested by a vote of the majority of the Commissioners present at the meeting. 12. ADJOURN CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows /jmp Page 2 of 2 AGENDA ITEM 9 -13 � r County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FRONI: PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION, PLANNING AND REGULATION HEARING DATE: JANUARY 2, 2014 SUBJECT: PETITION PUDZ,- PL20130001352, 7- FOODMART CPUD (COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) APPLICANT /OWNER: Kevin and Anand Deonarine Deonarine Enterprise, Inc. 1600 401h Terrace SW Naples, Florida 34116 AGENT: Mr. Tim Hancock, AICP Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezone from a Residential Multi - Family -12 District (RMF -12) within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay (SBCO) District to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District to allow up to 10,000 square feet of commercial uses for a project to be known as 7- Foodmart CPUD. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The 1.03± acre subject property is located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard, approximately 1 mile north of Golden Gate Parkway, with a physical street address of 2300, 2316 and 2332 Santa Barbara Boulevard, located in Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See Location Map on following page.) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The SBCO encourages commercial development such as the proposed 7- Foodmart along the Santa Barbara Boulevard roadway corridor. The subject 1.03± acre site is currently undeveloped. The 7- Foodmart CPUD Ordinance proposes up to 10,000 square feet of commercial land uses as permitted by the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay (SBCO) District. These land uses include C -1 (Professional and General Office), C -2 (Convenience Commercial), C -3 (Intermediate Commercial) and C -4 (General Commercial) commercial development. 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 1 of 18 "=oil” r ee / 7 ZVIa a$ OaY.1TnOB�a31Tp� ray ���$ r � S � A 5 � � �� H�� •wu un ���' � p C3 O'W+ Q 3 w kre � 31 rauviuro � cavl3noe rvv�o,. vna�noe rar�•�i}nc oavn�nos raysave v:.ws gg v¢p¢� -� stsavisaazw - L � H �NOlOwiersl � aron w on;nn ILI L-lia 4 p1>y 7 pS8 • n I Qg :i Z N 1..1. cQ G O M N J a v o. ©sasses ® ®eeedeee � f/j n x y 4i = Vf h A V1 Vt eeeeeeeeeeeee © Zu. ea 1 Vl _ LL pig i a N _R N ©s g - 19 �tl31 �1{LYs 'M'S 30VMM31 N115 WS 30vaN31 HL1+ 'M's r 3 R 8j IVNVO OOVNOMOJ log, wommmmum ppp0. 'M'S 133a5 NLSS x WS 1338LS HISS A A.$—.L.15. R R � YS _ _ � •M'S 3OVMN31 NIS6 _ -_ 'nA Fi�R °?�g . ^� =' aq;.o w,. r, „_ a 4 :•:: e .. r _ o o - e. e 13 d`iry N_..— O MVA31noe VMVONVB V1NVS- - -_ _.. __ - - -- I I I O Go g a � i I I I I I "=oil” r ee / 7 ZVIa a$ OaY.1TnOB�a31Tp� ray ���$ r � S � A 5 � � �� H�� •wu un ���' � p C3 O'W+ Q 3 w kre � 31 rauviuro � cavl3noe rvv�o,. vna�noe rar�•�i}nc oavn�nos raysave v:.ws gg v¢p¢� -� stsavisaazw - L � H �NOlOwiersl � aron w on;nn ILI L-lia 4 p1>y 7 pS8 • n I Qg :i Z N 1..1. cQ G O M N J a v o. ©sasses ® ®eeedeee � � e eeeeeeeeeeeee © ©s r ee / 7 ZVIa a$ OaY.1TnOB�a31Tp� ray ���$ r � S � A 5 � � �� H�� •wu un ���' � p C3 O'W+ Q 3 w kre � 31 rauviuro � cavl3noe rvv�o,. vna�noe rar�•�i}nc oavn�nos raysave v:.ws gg v¢p¢� -� stsavisaazw - L � H �NOlOwiersl � aron w on;nn ILI L-lia 4 p1>y 7 pS8 • n I Qg :i Z N 1..1. cQ G O M N J a v o. Z N 1..1. cQ G O M N J a v o. I _ J H j.. RL S is i N n I D Z D I w I' D O (_ r D I, v / I I D� O� C° 5* N i m I♦ Imo' d Z _ N� O M c A 17' (O� D m v m, I$$$ m ° C O �1 C� Z 2_ Z 2 z C m C A Qro A �If z °m (7Dn1 X333 r mz N m Z <mfip r OOrT-O m 0 1 N N Z �0N Z N i M °c0 z g z 0 0 m m yc g O '� 1 mm m O ^� p C � m A 00s ; Z <05 F ° N <O N 00 is ° �z '0m $c 0 20 $ "v ° >ZA >$ ;g ®15.0' TYPE "8" r m m _ fA Z S o z -LANDSCAPE BUFFER m° S g .S°C+ r? o; °o v r- �'�_�---^'I voz mSg §cz�rtlr cv0$ CC N v �CAn c P. m O g A t D m N° g m O i m b ,ri I - -_ I z° Z D O tu m m y p I ;° m° I WATER I I '' -� 5 r A T„ s P': A 3 A? I MANAGEMENT m y i -+ ps -� ti A N,o 50; O N 2 s �r mmi� v 0o> I I I I msm I q I I c v m o c m v U 0 N n A o m 'I mo nrT"y= 2Z z z� oca D T� GI Iz czi o�^8 1 3R1 A m.•p.•p m gb zoo Dp O t� I zvr z� oA Ar °oxln m-=iim opgAx bAli^ �vm °m o I I !zm��cA >a °� N�g� °�� N I 61 I Sm� ccyf ymTm°mPy�vm Os o D m C RAIm A �A > D A �g� �0 I I II eon °m� omrtrl�i dog m m5mo �m0 O N D i gy m° 2m - mmm >z > g� Z 0 booms dosZy °o Z l55r>Z 0 ,0 nip mZn0 D T y T O m�m O D -gZgi N A C� 9�G .0y Z io Zl I I v l{�p�j`f� OAnl 8€ sob F Omp= jp0m I I F i s m A m R m T. N o ° A 0 7 >mA zmNmmp T6m cz czi P'm° >z oCA> I I F I I < 1 Zmm Al 00D z c y Z 0 0 A y m D C p i Ap Z A S N y� pO > N O 3Z m =fnm <m C WATER II 'm o o-iN�j m��j zm2�p 5 MANAGEMENT D ie z > m a D m 1mm m < >F�" m p Q y I' A v on m m > Z s N 1 o$ W o -------------- r A Z C 5.0'TYPE M m y LANDSCAPE BUFFER SETBACK n1 m o fn n> C A c AZ z > <� I I m o m o o n a 1" m a A T- FOODMART CWD EXHIBIT C: MASTER CONCEPT PLAN 1- n. OEONMdNE omwwn iNTaeiws,lne. I ..eK unami[wn�aw �� _ (X W P r^ `> 'a m 0 0 O p The Master Concept Plan depicts the general location of the building area, parking area, water management areas, dumpster area, landscape buffer areas and a sidewalk along Santa Barbara Boulevard. The Master Concept Plan also shows a 10,000 square -foot building area and 0.31± acres of open space. The site depicts two ingress /egress points, one on Santa Barbara Boulevard and one on Tropical Way, an alley. The buildings will be a maximum of two stories and will have a zoned height of 35 feet and an actual height of 42 feet. A 15 -foot wide Type B landscape buffer will be provided along the north, east and south property lines (trees 25 feet on center and a 6 -foot hedge). A 10 -foot wide Type D landscape buffer (trees 30 feet on center and where the parking lot abuts the street, a 3 -foot height hedge) is proposed along the Santa Barbara Boulevard right -of -way. There are a total of five deviations related to architectural fagade treatments and landscape buffering being sought as part of this CPUD rezoning petition. (For more information, please refer to the Deviations section of this Staff Report.) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North and South: vacant lot(s) and then residential dwellings, with a zoning designation of Residential Multi - Family -12 District (RMF -12) at 12 dwelling units per acre within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District. East: Tropical Way, (an alley) and then multi - family dwellings and a single - family dwelling with a zoning designation of Residential Multi- Family -12 District (RMF -12) at 12 dwelling units per acre within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District. West: Santa Barbara Boulevard, a 4 -lane divided right -of -way and then single - family dwellings with a zoning designation of Estates (E). 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 4 of 18 AERIAL PHOTO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Urban (Commercial District, Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element. This Subdistrict is intended to accommodate low intensity retail, offices, personal services and institutional uses, such as churches and day care facilities. Development within the Subdistrict is intended to serve the needs of residents within surrounding neighborhoods and passerby traffic. Factors to consider during review of the rezone petition are identified in italics, with [bracketed staff analysis] following each provision. Similar criteria exist in the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District of the Land Development Code. 1. Landscaping and buffering requirements. [The project is subject to the Land Development Code regulations for landscaping and buffering requirements.] 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17. 2013 Page 5 of 18 2. Water Management Provisions. [The project is subject to the Land Development Code (LDC) regulations for water management provisions.] 3. Architectural Design Standards. [The project is subject to the Land Development Code, specifically Section 5.05.08, except where provisions conflict with the goal of designing the commercial building(s) to have a residential appearance.] 4. Prohibition of automobile service stations and similar repair facilities. [The CPUD list of permitted uses does not include automobile services stations and similar repair facilities.] S. Encouragement of shared parking and access with adjacent projects, wherever possible. [Shared access and shared parking with adjacent properties is not proposed by this project due to limited site acreage and developable building area. However, the project will reduce the number of access points onto Santa Barbara Boulevard from the presently allowed 3 access points to 1 access point onto Santa Barbara Blvd.] 6 Provisions for local street vacation or relocation, if alternate access is provided. [There is no proposed street vacation or relocation within this CPUD, as no alternate access is provided.] 7. Minimum project size of one acre. [The subject project acreage is 1.03+ acres.] 8. Encouragement of submittal of proposed development in the form of a PUD zoning district. [The proposed project was submitted as a CPUD.] 9. Provision for sidewalks and coordination of sidewalk location between adjacent properties. [The PUD Master Concept Plan depicts a sidewalk along the frontage of the property, adjacent to Santa Barbara Boulevard.] 10. Signage restrictions. [The project is subject to the Land Development Code regulations for signage.] 11. Building height limitation of two stories, not to exceed a maximum building height of 35 feet. [The proposed zoned height is 35 feet and the proposed actual height is 47 feet. (The zoned building height is the vertical distance measured from the first finished floor to the highest point of the roof surface of a flat or Bermuda roof, to the deck line of a mansard roof and to the mean height level between eaves and ridge of gable, hip and gambrel roofs. The actual building height is the vertical distance from the average centerline elevation of the adjacent roadways to the highest structure or appurtenances.) ] 12. Variance provisions are not applicable to items 4, 6, 9, and 11 above. [The applicant has not requested variances from the referenced provisions.] 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 6 of 18 FLUE Policy 5.4: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses. (Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to Zoning staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety. However, staff would note that in reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses on the subject site, the compatibility analysis might include a review of both the subject proposal and surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities, development standards (building setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location, traffic generation /attraction, etc.). Further, the intent of the Subdistrict is to allow low intensity commercial development that is compatible with adjacent residential development. The requested deviations lessen the potential to achieve that compatibility. FLUE Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. (The conceptual CPUD Master Plan indicates that a single access connection to Santa Barbara Boulevard, a minor arterial roadway, is proposed.) FLUE 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 CPUD conceptual master plan identifies that the project will have an internal driveway that will permit vehicles to move through the site, with ingress and egress points on Santa Barbara Boulevard and Tropical Way (an alley). Due to the limited site acreage no loop road is proposed.) FLUE Policy 73: 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 conceptual CPUD Master Plan does not include future interconnections to adjacent sites. The site layout is designed such that interconnections are precluded.) FLUE 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. (This Policy is not applicable to the proposed commercial project.) Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5 year planning period. Therefore, Staff recommends that the subject application be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The project generates a maximum potential trip generation totaling 262 new, p.m. peak hour, two -way trips. 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 7 of 18 Santa Barbara Boulevard Impacts: Link 76.0, Santa Barbara Boulevard, from Golden Gate Boulevard to Green Boulevard, is the first concurrency link impacted by this rezoning petition. When directionally distributed, there are project trips in the peak direction of Santa Barbara Boulevard totaling 67 peak directional trips. This represents a significant (but not adverse) impact of 3.19 %. Santa Barbara Boulevard currently has a remaining capacity of 867 trips, and is at LOS "C" (Level of Service "C ") according to the 2013 AUIR (Annual Update and Inventory Report). Logan Boulevard Impacts: Link 49.0, Logan Boulevard, from Pine Ridge Road to Green Boulevard, is a second concurrency link impacted by this rezoning petition. When directionally distributed, there are project trips in the peak direction of Logan Boulevard totaling 45 peak directional trips. This represents a significant (but not adverse) impact of 2.47 %. Santa Barbara Boulevard currently has a remaining capacity of 462 trips, and is at LOS "D" (Level of Service "D ") according to the 2013 AUIR. Green Boulevard Impacts: Link 27.0, Green Boulevard, from Santa Barbara Boulevard to Collier Boulevard, is a second concurrency link impacted by this rezoning petition. When directionally distributed, there are project trips in the peak direction of Green Boulevard totaling 19 peak directional trips, which represent a significant (but not adverse) impact of 2.23 %. Santa Barbara Boulevard currently has a remaining capacity of 273 trips, and is at LOS "C" according to the 2013 AUIR. 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) and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan 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 has reviewed the petition and the PUD document to address environmental concerns. This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2 -1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. A tree count and tree retention or replanting is required in accordance with LDC Section 3.05.07. A. 2. Native Trees; the PUD document includes language in Exhibit F: Development Commitments. 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 8 of 18 Transportation Review: Transportation Department staff has reviewed the petition and is recommending approval subject to the Transportation Commitments provided in Exhibit F of the attached PUD Ordinance. One of the Transportation Commitments is for a trip generation cap of 262 p.m. peak hour, two -way (unadjusted) trips. Another commitment is to coordinate the project with future Santa Barbara Boulevard improvements. Special restrictions may apply to the median opening at the driveway to this site, or the project may require a Southbound left turn lane; this will be addressed at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP) submittal. Utility Review: The Utilities Department staff has reviewed and approved the petition. Water and sewer service will be provided by the Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA). Zoning and Land Development Review: As previously noted, the subject site is located in the on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard approximately 1 mile north of Golden Gate Parkway in the RMF -12 zoning designation within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay (SBCO) District. It is surrounded by residential development, the development to the north and south is vacant lots and residential development located in the RMF -12 zoning designation within Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay (SBCO) District. The development to the east is single - family and multi- family development located in the RMF -12 zoning designation within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay (SBCO) District. The development to the west and across Santa Barbara Boulevard is single- family residences in the Estates (E) zoning district. The 7- Foodmart CPUD is buffered from the residential development by a 15 -foot wide landscape buffer along the north, east and south property lines. A 6 -foot high wall is required between the commercial development where it abuts existing residential development across the alley and to the east. The petitioner is seeking a deviation from this requirement. Please refer to the Deviation section of this Staff Report for additional information. A 15 -foot wide landscape buffer is required along Santa Barbara Boulevard. The petitioner is requesting a deviation from this requirement to provide a 10 -foot wide buffer. For further discussion of the Deviation, see the Deviation section of the Staff Report. This rezone petition requests a total of 10,000 square feet of commercial land uses in the C -1 through C -4 zoning districts and as provided for in the SBCO Zoning Overlay. The maximum zoned height proposed for this CPUD is 35 feet or 42 feet actual height and a maximum of two stories. The site depicts two ingress /egress points, one on Santa Barbara Boulevard and one on Tropical Way, an alley. There are three other deviations related to architectural fagade treatments being sought as part of this CPUD rezoning petition. For more information, please refer to the Deviations section of this 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): 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 9 of 18 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) and Golden Gate Area Master Plan 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 with some vacant lots. There is residential zoning within a Commercial overlay to the north, south and east. To the west is a single - family in the Estates zoning designation. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The proposed 7- Foodmart CPUD is located within the "Urban (Commercial District, Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element. In addition, the PUD includes standards for buffering and building height, setback, and architectural design that have been provided to ensure the project is compatible with the adjoining land uses. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed CPUD will not result in an isolated district unrelated to nearby districts along the Santa Barbara corridor. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The proposed PUD district boundaries are logically drawn and conform to the "Urban (Commercial District, Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The growth and development trends, changing market conditions, and the development of the surrounding area, support the proposed PUD. This site is designated for a mix of commercial uses that are specified within the parameters of the LDC's "Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District" and the applicant intends to develop the property within the parameters of the "Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District." 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. While the proposed commercial development is different from the surrounding residential development, the landscape buffering and architectural standards will help blend the proposed commercial development into the neighborhood. Furthermore, Santa Barbara Boulevard is a 4 -lane arterial road and the proposed commercial development is more appropriate along an arterial roadway than residential development. In addition, there are many neighboring Golden Gate City 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 10 of 18 residents without automobiles who walk and benefit from commercial development such as this that is located nearby. 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 east and west of the subject site are already developed. The property (lots) to the north and south of the subject site are partially 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 proposed rezone to CPUD is in compliance with the GMP. The GMP is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said plan. In light of this fact, the proposed CPUD does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the GMP is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 11 of 18 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 site development plan 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. PUD FINDINGS: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.13.5 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): 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 12 of 18 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. As previously stated, the property is designated for commercial uses as identified by the Urban (Commercial District, Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element. The petitioner will be required to comply with all county regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water and other utilities. In addition, the commitments included in PUD Exhibit F 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 site development plan approval. These 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. The development standards, landscaping and buffering requirements contained in the PUD document are designed to make the proposed uses compatible with the adjacent uses. Staff believes that this petition is compatible, with the existing land uses and with the existing undeveloped land. Additionally, the Development Commitments contained in the PUD document provide additional requirements the developer will have to fulfill. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 13 of 18 The timing or sequence of development in light of concurrency requirements does not appear to be a significant problem for this project based upon the transportation commitments contained in the PUD document. In addition, the project's development must be in compliance 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 5 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 5 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 5 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 5.05.08 C.9.b., "Freestanding Building within a PUD," which requires all facades for freestanding structures within a PUD to be treated as a primary facade, except for secondary facades, to require only the fayade facing Santa Barbara Boulevard to be treated as a primary fagade. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that the project will be visible from Santa Barbara Boulevard but not from any other exterior roadways. The required Type "B" buffers on the north and south and the Type `B" to the east along the alley, will visually screen the site at eye level within one year of development. Therefore, requiring all four side of the building to meet primary fagade standards would result in significant additional expenditures for the property owner and no measurable benefit to the community. 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 14 of 18 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 5.03.02 11., "Wall Requirement between Residential and Non - residential Development," which requires a masonry wall, concrete or pre - fabricated concrete wall and/or fence to be constructed on a non - residential property when it lies contiguous to or opposite a residentially zoned district, to instead allow a Type "B" buffer inclusive of a 6 -foot high hedge consistent with LDC section 4.06.02 C.2. where residential zoning occurs on the perimeter of the subject property. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that due to the small scale nature of the project and the Type "B" buffer requirements on three sides of the property, the provision of a masonry wall may be excessive in this case. Furthermore, the presence of the Tropical Way alley on the Eastern boundary of the proposed development serves as additional buffering by increasing the distance from the project to the nearest residential structure. The required Type "B" buffers on the north, south and the east along the alley, will visually screen the site at eye level within one year of development. Requiring a masonry wall would result in significant additional expenditures for the property owner and no measurable benefit to the community. 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 4.06.02 CA., "Alternative D Landscape Buffer," which requires a 15 -foot wide Type "D" landscape buffer when the ultimate right -of -way is 100 or more feet, to instead provide a 10 -foot wide Type "D" buffer along Santa Barbara Boulevard. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that due to the shallow depth and nature of the project, the provision of a 15 -foot wide Type "D" landscape buffer would further diminish the developable area and circulation of the proposed development. The adjacent right -of -way width is 150 feet. Requiring a 15 -foot width would result in significant loss of developable area and therefore income producing square footage for the property owner while offering no additional and measurable benefit to the community. The alternative proposed buffer width will consist of the same plant material and spacing requirements per the LDC. 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 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 15 of 18 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 4.06.02 C.2., "Alternative B Landscape Buffer," which requires a 15 -foot wide Type "B" landscape buffer, to instead provide a 5 -foot wide buffer with the same planting materials on the west side of the dumpster enclosure, as shown on the Master Plan. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that due to the shallow depth and nature of the project, in order for trash pick -up to occur along Tropical Way, which is typical in this area, requires that this deviation be approved. 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 5.03.04.A.2., "Dumpsters and their enclosures may be located within a required yard provided that they do not encroach into a required landscape area," to instead provide that the dumpster enclosure be allowed to minimally encroach into the landscape buffer along Tropical Way (alley) as shown on the Master Plan. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states that the justification for this deviation is that due to the shallow depth and nature of the project, in order for trash pick -up to occur along Tropical Way, which is typical in this area, requires that this deviation be approved. 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 October 10, 2013. For further information, please see Attachment B: "Neighborhood Information Meeting Summary Notes." COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for Petition PUDZ- PL20130001352 revised on December 13, 2013. 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17. 2013 Page 16 of 18 RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends forward Petition PUDZ- PL20130001352 to th e recommendation of approval. Attachments: Attachment A: Proposed PUD Ordinance Attachment B: Neighborhood Information Notes 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 that the Collier County Planning Commission Board of County Commissioners with a Page 17 of 18 1 1 �VWbJX aA4AAl NANCY G DIA H, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER GROWTH N ' EMENT DIVISION RAYMOND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION MICHAEL BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION APPROVED BY: NICK CA- SALANGUIDA, ADMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION 7- Foodmart CPUD, PUDZ- PL20130001352 December 17, 2013 Page 18 of 18 p,10 , IlIx DATE DATE DATE DATE 2 W T, r.h i ! MEMORANDUM TO: Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner FROM: Tim Hancock, AICP October 10, 2013 RE: 7- Foodmart PUDZ- PL20130001352 Neighborhood Information Meeting Summary Notes A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Monday, October 7`h, 2013 at the Golden Gate Community Center. The meeting was properly advertised in the Naples Daily News and started at 5:30 pm. A total of 9 interested parties attended, please see the attached sign in sheet. In addition., the following individuals associated with the review and presentation of the project were present: • Nancy Gundlach, Collier County • Tim Hancock, Davidson Engineering, Inc. • Frederick Hood, Davidson Engineering, Inc. • Anand Deonarine, Deonarine Enterprise, Inc. 'him Hancock introduced himself, Fred Hood and Anand Deonarine. Tim opened the meeting, discussing the requirement of the neighborhood information meeting and explained why property owners were notified. He indicated the purpose of the meeting, which was to explain the project to neighbors and to obtain input from interested parties and answer any questions they may have. Tim used an Aerial Exhibit to show the project's location and size. He discussed the property's future land use designation and zoning that the subject property is in. Tim informed attendee's that the property is governed by the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) where it has the future land use designation of Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict. He then gave details and history on the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict. Tim also explained the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code. A list of permitted uses, proposed within the 7- Foodmart PUD, was then handed out. 4365 Radio Road, Suite #201 , Naples, Florida 34104 - Phone: 239.434.6060 • Fax: 239.434.6084 w w._davidsonn,a nee___ng.ccrn Davidson Engineering, Inc. A tachment B Using a Site Plan Exhibit, Tim went over the proposed building layout and size. He discussed the proposed dumpster location and explained that the alley in the rear of the site would be used for all dumpster pick -up and service trucks. Tim pointed out the location of the on -site stormwater management areas using the Site Plan Exhibit. Tim then discussed land uses and indicated that a food store and butcher shop are being proposed. He.also let attendee's know that a gas station was not an permitted use. Tim explained why a Planned Unit Development (PUD) was needed for the property. Tim went over the four (4) deviations being requesting within the PUD. 1. Asking that only the fagade facing Santa Barbara Blvd be treated as a primary fagade, meaning it has to have all the windows and entry statements that are required, but the sides of the building do not. 2. Deviation #2 would allow for a 6 -foot hedge along the rear alleyway instead of going through the expense of a wall which would be redundant located right behind the building. 3. Deviation #3 asks to reduce the width of the buffer along Santa Barbara from 15 feet to 10 feet due to the shallow nature of these lots. The plantings will remain the same, but the width will be a little less. 4. Deviation 4 would allow for a 5' planted buffer around the west side of the dumpster enclosure since it fronts on the alley where the rear 15' buffer normally would be. Tim then discussed site lighting being more restrictive in the PUD, a 2 -story (35') maximum building height, and a somewhat residential appearance from Santa Barbara Blvd. He then closed the meeting and asked for any additional questions. Question # 1: What is the logic on the deviation of the appearance of the building? Why can't they comply with all of the regular rules? Response: There are sides of the building that don't face the roadway. The side that facer the roadway will have a primary faVade. The other sides will have what's called a secondary fagade, which still have architectural elements just not as many as what will be on the primary fagade. We can look into see if we are missing anything and take care of it if we do. Question #2: Will you be putting in a turn lane northbound on Santa Barbara? Response: The County has requirements and the size and use determine that. A 10,000 sq ft food store probably won't trigger the need for one. As properties develop on these small lots in the area, there will be a problem. A typical turn lane is 185' and there is no ability to do that. This is one of the reasons we are taking truck traffic in the rear. Question #3: Can customers access store from the rear? Response: Yes and customers will also be walking to the store on foot. Question #4: I understand the road will be six -lanes in the future. Did you take this into consideration? Response: Yes, but there is no time table on that happening even within the next five years. The plans have been put on the shelf and there is no funding. The site will also construct a sidewalk and then will be able to connect to adjacent sites in the future (uses exhibit to show sidewalk location). Question 45: A typical 7 -11 type of store is only 5 -7,000 sq ft. Is anything else proposed? Will levels 1 and 2 of the 2 -store building both be 10,000 sq ft? Response: This will be a neighborhood food store with a proposed deli and butcher shop. There may be an office. A list of permitted uses are within the PUD. The building is limited to 10,000 sq ft gross floor area. Question #6: Will it affect property taxes? Response: It should not have any effect on property taxes. This site has been designated for commercial uses since 1999. A market study was done on a 17 acre commercial site and there were no significant impacts on taxes. Please contact the Property Appraisers website to get more information because this is just an opinion. Question #7: Will gas be involved. Response: No. Gas .stations are a prohibited use. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:00 pm. End of memo. ORDINANCE NO. 14- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 200441, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RESIDENTIAL MULTI - FAMILY-12 DISTRICT (RMF -12) WITHIN THE SANTA BARBARA COMMERCIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT TO A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE SANTA BARBARA COMMERCIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS 7- FOODMART CPUD ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD, NORTH OF GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PUDZ- PL20130001352) WHEREAS, Tim Hancock of Davidson Engineering, Inc. representing the petitioner, Deonarine Enterprise "Inc. ", petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described property. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: Zoning Classification. The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida is changed from a Residential Multi - Family-12 District (RMF -12) within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) within the Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District for a project to be known as 7- Foodmart CPUD in accordance with Exhibits A through F attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning 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: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. 7- FOODMART - PUDZ- PL20130001352 Page 1 of 2 11/06/13 Attachment A PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super - majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of , 2014. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 0 GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ. Chairwoman N�n3 Heidi Ashton -Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A — Permitted Uses Exhibit B — Development Standards Exhibit C — Master Plan Exhibit D — Legal Description Exhibit E — Deviations Exhibit F — Development Commitments CP\ 13- CPS - 0125\2 7- FOODMART - PUDZ- PL20130001352 Page 2 of 2 11/06/13 EXHIBIT A PERMITTED USES: The 7- Foodmart Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) is allowed a maximum of 10,000 square feet of gross floor area of limited commercial uses consisting of retail, service and/or office uses. Permitted Uses: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following primary uses: A. Principal Uses 1. Accounting (8721). 2. Adjustment and collection services (7322). 3. Advertising agencies (7311). 4. Amusement and recreation services (7999, bicycle and moped rental only). 5. Animal specialty services, except veterinary (0752, dog grooming and pedigree record services only) excluding outside kenneling. 6. Apparel and accessory stores (5611 - 5699). 7. Architectural services (8712). 8. Auditing (8721). 9. Auto and home supply stores (5531). 10. Banks, credit unions and trusts (6011- 6099). 11. Barber shops (7241). 12. Beauty shops (7231). 13. Bookkeeping services (8721). 14. Business associations (8611). 15. Business consulting services (8748). 7- Foodmart CPUD PUDZ- PL2013 -1352: PUD Document Page 1 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013 16. Business credit institutions (6153- 6159). 17. Child day care services (8351). 18. Civic, social and fraternal associations (8641). 19. Commercial art and graphic design (7336). 20. Commercial photography (7335). 21. Computer and computer software stores (5734). 22. Computer programming, data processing and other services (7371- 7379). 23. Credit reporting services (7323). 24. Dance studios, schools and halls, (7911). 25. Department stores (5311). 26. Direct mail advertising services (7331). 27. Drug stores (5912). 28. Eating places (5812, except contract feeding, dinner theaters, food service - institutional, industrial feeding). 29. Educational services. 30. Electrical and electronic repair shops, miscellaneous (7629 - except aircraft, business and office machines, large appliances, and white goods such as refrigerators and washing machines). 31. Engineering services (8711). 32. Federal and federally- sponsored credit agencies (6111). 33. Food stores (5411 - except supermarkets, 5421 - 5499). 34. Funeral service (7261). 35. Garment pressing, and agents for laundries and drycleaners (7212). 36. General merchandise stores (5331 - 5399). 37. Glass stores (5231). 7- Foodmwl CPUs PUD7_- PL2.013 -1352: PUD Document Page 2 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013 38. Group care facilities (category I and II, except for homeless shelters); care units, except for homeless shelters; nursing homes; assisted living facilities pursuant to F.S. § 400.402 and ch. 58A -5 F.A.C.; and continuing care retirement communities pursuant to F.S. § 651 and ch. 4 -193 F.A.C.; all subject to section 5.05.04 of the LDC 39. Hardware stores (5251). 40. Health services, offices and clinics (8011 -8049) 41. Home furniture and furnishings stores (5713 - 5719). 42. Home health care services (8082). 43. Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (6311 -6399, 6411). 44. Labor unions (8631). 45. Landscape architects, consulting and planning (0781). 46. Laundries and dry cleaning (7215). 47. Legal services (8111). 48. Loan brokers (6163). 49. Management services (8741, 8742). 50. Membership organizations, miscellaneous (8699). 51. Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents (6162). 52. Museums and art galleries (8412). 53. Musical instrument stores (5736). 54. Paint stores (5231). 55. Personal credit institutions (6141). 56. Personnel supply services (7361 & 7363). 57. Photocopying and duplicating services (7334). 58. Photofinishing laboratories (7384). 59. Photographic studios (7221). 7- Foodmart CPUD PL1DZ- PI,2013 -1352: PUD Document Page 3 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013 60. Physical fitness facilities (7991). 61. Political organizations (8651). 62. Professional membership organizations (8621). 63. Public administration (9111 -9199, 9229, 9311, 9411 -9451, 9511 -9532, 9611- 9661). 64. Public relations services (8743). 65. Radio, television and consumer electronics stores (5731). 66. Radio, television and publishers advertising representatives (7313). 67. Real estate (6521- 6541). 68. Record and prerecorded tape stores (5735). 69. Religious organizations (8661). 70. Retail services, miscellaneous (5912, 5942 -5961, 5992 - 5999). 71. Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (5261). 72. Secretarial and court reporting services (7338). 73. Security and commodity brokers, dealer, exchanges and services (6211- 6289). 74. Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors (7251). 75. Social services, individual and family (8322 - activity centers, elderly or handicapped; adult day care centers; and, day care centers, adult and handicapped only). 76. Social services, not elsewhere classified (8399). 77. Surveying services (8713). 78. Tax return preparation services (7291). 79. United State Postal Service (43 11 except major distribution center.) 80. Veterinary services (0742 veterinarian's office only, excluding outdoor kenneling.) 81. Videotape rental (7841, excluding adult oriented stores.) 82. Wallpaper stores (5231). 7- Foodmart CPUD PUDZ- PL2013 -1352: PIID Document Page 4 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013 83. Watch, clock and jewelry repair (7631). 84. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or the Hearing Examiner by the process outlined in the LDC. B. Prohibited Uses 1. Gasoline service stations (5541). C. Accessory Uses 1. Parking lots to accommodate on -site uses only. 2. Project signage pursuant to Division 5.06.00 of the LDC. 3. Essential services pursuant to Sections 2.01.03 of the LDC. 4. Water Management Facilities. 7- Foodmart CPUD PUDZ- PL2013 -1352: PUD Document Page 5 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013 EXHIBIT B DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: TABLE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Table I below sets forth the development standards for commercial land uses within the proposed Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD). Standards not specifically set forth within this application shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or Subdivision plat, consistent with C -2 zoning. Note: Permanent accessory structures, such as dumpster enclosures, shall not be permitted in the drainage and utility easement. If said easement ceases to exist, setback will occur from the right -of -way, alley or adjacent property line. S.P.S = Same and Principal Structure 7- Foodmart CPUD PUDZ- PL2013 -1352: PUD Document Page 6 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013 PRINCIPAL USE ACCESSORY USE MINIMUM LOT AREA 43,560 square feet N/A MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 100 feet N/A MINIMUM FLOOR AREA 1,000 square feet (ground floor N/A MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO N/A PUD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACK (FROM SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD) 25 feet S.P.S. MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACK (FROM NORTH BOUNDARY & SOUTH BOUNDARY 15 feet 10 feet MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACK (FROM TROPICAL WAY ALLEY) 15 feet 10 feet MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES 10 feet 0 feet (principal to accessory) INTERNAL DRIVES None None MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT • Zoned: 35 feet/2- stories 25 feet. • Actual: 42 feet/2- stories 32 feet Note: Permanent accessory structures, such as dumpster enclosures, shall not be permitted in the drainage and utility easement. If said easement ceases to exist, setback will occur from the right -of -way, alley or adjacent property line. S.P.S = Same and Principal Structure 7- Foodmart CPUD PUDZ- PL2013 -1352: PUD Document Page 6 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013 C� I z I n D � n x i �a i�1 M pl �m C ZI ao m m m r Q z o� co o� gP*.0 TYPE'B- LANDSCAPEBUFFER -.� — WATER — II I MANAGEMENT I I I I I I � 3 I FI I I I I I S I I y l z® I l i I mye I m I c ad I m I I Fj _I I Ii i WATER II � JI MANAGEMEM �I 0' TYPE 0' SIDE Y LANDSCAPE BUFFER SETBACK I I <� B m �Op 47 333 m O O o O Oz� 2 =_ E o a °D m ��C ;� s 0 5 s�Pm m� m ° D o v 0 y 2 g o A O 3 C G O z G D D C ~ O O> 0 Z 9. 0 41 ri r D 0 3 Z y asmmmm mmm TA za�� ° 0 8 ° n o m o v m a �8_ AS, py m m > mp ~000' O a �j0 A� M. zo�o0o0 ;$voomCs; MC sb > a r m T A A 3 om p z�- n � ~ y � D Sj �'cr m2F� �m1> O 0O g O �iRa E 0 �p CoC NPO ' I 0> Qy1 3 Z O p so Z X. 2 m m € � A ggg z 0 O> r n m r ' 00 C D p _j C. T w m m CA 1 mP m5 m < Q N3 1 m S^ p W C > o 0 D I o n m m 7C rn i $ s ° m Io a' o o e z 0 t. �3 r4? ° ® ® p o I- m�L9�o0o2pn3 poo�om °rp�ia °c° < i =om m >z�z smm no i a-O.y� D II (�x°ipmo�m z�c�h s yomam 5m,� 1 oz mm mzii�mz mNvm za° z z ! !I i ua i» y m3yOm�Dx >y�rt�i �x- �s��^2cm o p m > yy >m� m> z =m O C p Cm m < vczi�D� oamrn�o�f,000l> ggml �'rm o s* =o A3 oR3om 3m zoo$ > ic y m$ m z�$ 1 0 0�$ O C S 3 c� IQ ARD I O myy�1f �A - m -imm ti > =.O R D m m v v L$ Z; Z 2 A a u m y m O n 0 0 p 2 °y55�°+ pcyi S °$ 3m m iat Bs om9 5°: pA�$ °>� n n mtiti3 mA� Dm-1 m� Om=. p mo 2 1$$� A= p m Zj D yN O D >,� AC(�, m zCBp y=i SM£ M OCDS>Oy0 N N ; N A D fi A i= m�s4 yczi = o> m n A QQ5° '� m Z iiz O m 3 802 T a T> y D o O� FsA� 2m ; m N `s~' Fs-- o z 6 O O c mtim c 9 ; r ZA �:m . m 0 y ° D Z 5M 9 A m m 47 m <> z m m> a 7- FOOOMART CPUD e ¢ DEOIMPWE T ENiERPWE�INC. r.cx IeA0O1H �illUtE 9W EXHIBIT C: MASTER CONCEPT PLAN umop i z I n D co tam Do i �a i�1 M pl �m C ZI ao m m m r Q z o� co o� gP*.0 TYPE'B- LANDSCAPEBUFFER -.� — WATER — II I MANAGEMENT I I I I I I � 3 I FI I I I I I S I I y l z® I l i I mye I m I c ad I m I I Fj _I I Ii i WATER II � JI MANAGEMEM �I 0' TYPE 0' SIDE Y LANDSCAPE BUFFER SETBACK I I <� B m �Op 47 333 m O O o O Oz� 2 =_ E o a °D m ��C ;� s 0 5 s�Pm m� m ° D o v 0 y 2 g o A O 3 C G O z G D D C ~ O O> 0 Z 9. 0 41 ri r D 0 3 Z y asmmmm mmm TA za�� ° 0 8 ° n o m o v m a �8_ AS, py m m > mp ~000' O a �j0 A� M. zo�o0o0 ;$voomCs; MC sb > a r m T A A 3 om p z�- n � ~ y � D Sj �'cr m2F� �m1> O 0O g O �iRa E 0 �p CoC NPO ' I 0> Qy1 3 Z O p so Z X. 2 m m € � A ggg z 0 O> r n m r ' 00 C D p _j C. T w m m CA 1 mP m5 m < Q N3 1 m S^ p W C > o 0 D I o n m m 7C rn i $ s ° m Io a' o o e z 0 t. �3 r4? ° ® ® p o I- m�L9�o0o2pn3 poo�om °rp�ia °c° < i =om m >z�z smm no i a-O.y� D II (�x°ipmo�m z�c�h s yomam 5m,� 1 oz mm mzii�mz mNvm za° z z ! !I i ua i» y m3yOm�Dx >y�rt�i �x- �s��^2cm o p m > yy >m� m> z =m O C p Cm m < vczi�D� oamrn�o�f,000l> ggml �'rm o s* =o A3 oR3om 3m zoo$ > ic y m$ m z�$ 1 0 0�$ O C S 3 c� IQ ARD I O myy�1f �A - m -imm ti > =.O R D m m v v L$ Z; Z 2 A a u m y m O n 0 0 p 2 °y55�°+ pcyi S °$ 3m m iat Bs om9 5°: pA�$ °>� n n mtiti3 mA� Dm-1 m� Om=. p mo 2 1$$� A= p m Zj D yN O D >,� AC(�, m zCBp y=i SM£ M OCDS>Oy0 N N ; N A D fi A i= m�s4 yczi = o> m n A QQ5° '� m Z iiz O m 3 802 T a T> y D o O� FsA� 2m ; m N `s~' Fs-- o z 6 O O c mtim c 9 ; r ZA �:m . m 0 y ° D Z 5M 9 A m m 47 m <> z m m> a 7- FOOOMART CPUD e ¢ DEOIMPWE T ENiERPWE�INC. r.cx IeA0O1H �illUtE 9W EXHIBIT C: MASTER CONCEPT PLAN umop i EXHIBIT D LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 7, 8 AND 9, BLOCK 189 OF GOLDEN GATE, UNIT 6 A SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT 5, PAGE 124 THROUGH 134 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. 7- Foodmart CPUD PUDZ- PL2013 -1352: PUD Document Page 8 of ll Revised November 14, 2013 EXHIBIT E DEVIATIONS: 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 5.05.08 C.9.b., "Freestanding Building within a PUD," which requires all facades for freestanding structures within a PUD to be treated as a primary facade, except for secondary facades, to require only the facade facing Santa Barbara Boulevard to be treated as a primary facade. 2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC section 5.03.02 H., "Wall Requirement between Residential and Non - residential Development," which requires a masonry wall, concrete or pre - fabricated concrete wall and/or fence to be constructed on a non - residential property when it lies contiguous to or opposite a residentially zoned district, to instead allow a Type "B" buffer inclusive of a 6 -foot high hedge consistent with LDC section 4.06.02 C.2. where residential zoning occurs on the perimeter of the subject property. 3. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC section 4.06.02 CA., "Alternative D Landscape Buffer," which requires a 15 -foot wide Type "D" landscape buffer when the ultimate right -of -way is 100 or more feet, to instead provide a 10 -foot wide Type "D" buffer along Santa Barbara Boulevard. 4. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC section 4.06.02 C.2., "Alternative B Landscape Buffer ", which requires a 15 -foot wide Type `B" landscape buffer, to instead provide a 5 -foot wide buffer with the same planting materials on the west side of the dumpster enclosure, as shown on the Master Plan. 5. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC section 5.03.04.A.2 specifying dumpster enclosures not to encroach into the required landscape buffer area, to instead provide that the dumpster enclosure be allowed to minimally encroach into the landscape buffer along Tropical Way (alley) as shown on the Master Plan. 7- Foodmart CPI JD PIJDZ- PL2013 -1352: PUD Document Page 9 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013 EXHIBIT F DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS: PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development commitments for the development of the project. ENVIRONMENTAL Subject to a native vegetation tree survey performed on the subject property, 37 trees were found to be consistent with native vegetation requirements. 10% of said trees shall be retained, relocated or provided on site per Section 3.05.07.A.2 of the LDC as part of the required perimeter landscaping or elsewhere on -site. OUTDOOR LIGHTING Any lighting located within 50 feet of a neighboring residential property line will be limited to 15 feet in height. TRANSPORTATION The development of the land within this PUD shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: 1. The developer will restrict the Santa Barbara Boulevard driveway to preclude trucks from entering or exiting. All trucks, including waste management and delivery trucks, shall be guided to use the service alley behind the development as a primary means of accessing the site. 2. At the time of PUD approval, the future of Santa Barbara Boulevard is planned by the County to be four lanes, and the potential for a full or directional median opening is not currently determined. The owner acknowledges that installation of a full or directional median opening serving this development or the installation of a raised median shall be at the sole discretion of Collier County for the future design. If the developer elects to pursue a full or directional median opening during the future four -lane design, then the Developer agrees to do so at his own risk and cost (costs shall include design, permitting, and if approved by Collier County, construction). If a Southbound left turn lane is constructed by the County to serve this development, the owner agrees to reimburse the County for the aforementioned design, permitting, and construction costs at an equal value to what the County has paid for these services. 7- Foodmart CPUD PUDZ- P1.2013 -1352: PUD Document Page 10 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013 3. Should the developer wish to retain the existing median opening with intent to serve his site, then the design and construction a southbound left turn lane shall be at the expense of the developer. If the left turn lane is not desired and or required by the developer at this time, then signs and/or median restrictions prohibiting the Southbound left -turn movements shall be installed in the right -of -way per MUTCD and FDOT standards to promote safe traffic movements as part of the first SDP application on this site. 4. Notwithstanding the commitments in paragraph 2 and 3, the County reserves the right to close or modify the median openings at any time in its sole discretion. 5. The maximum trip generation allowed by the proposed uses (both primary and ancillary) may not exceed the summarized PM Peak Hour, two way trips as shown below: a. For a maximum of 10,000 SF, 262 PM Peak Hour, two way trips. SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT/MONITORING REPORT AND SUNSET PROVISION One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close -out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close -out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD approval, the Managing Entity is Deonarine Enterprise, "Inc." Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of the commitments required by the PUD 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 PUD are closed -out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. 7- Foodmart CPUD PUDZ- PL2013 -1352: PUD Document Page 11 of 11 Revised November 14, 2013