Agenda 11/27/2001 R COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CLERK TO BOARD
4TM FLOOR
FP:3 IND: 1 CV:0
AGENDA
November 27, 2001
9:00 a.m.
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY
MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE
ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL,
BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED
TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH
THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS
DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS
AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITI'ED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY
MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE
HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED
A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY
NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE,
WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE
APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES
UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN
ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST
TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE
COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301
EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1
November 27, 2001
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Swearing-in of Commissioner Fred Coyle by Judge Brousseau.
B. Reverend Grant Thigpen, New Hope Ministries
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended
B. November 6, 2001 Workshop
m
PROCLAMATIONS
Proclamation for Collier County Adoption Month. To be accepted by Terry
lamurri and Debbie Allen.
B. Proclamation for World Aids Day for December 1, 2001. To be accepted by
Andrea Taylor, Chris Hatch, Arlene Lindell and Betty Aubut.
SERVICE AWARDS
Five-Year Attendees:
1) Anne Viera, Emergency Medical Services
2) Archimed Valcin, Parks and Recreation
3) Juvert Calero, Emergency Medical Services
4) Penelope Costin, Library
5) Carolyn Allyn, Parks and Recreation
Fifteen-Year Attendees:
6) Linda Swisher, Emergency Medical Services
5. PRESENTATIONS
2
November 27, 2001
A. Recommendation to recognize Beverly Fields, Lieutenant, Emergency Medical
Services, as Employee of the Month for October 2001.
B. Recommendation to recognize Ray Higdon, Database Administrator,
Information Technology, as Employee of the Month for November 2001.
PUBLIC PETITIONS AND COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
A. Public Comments on General Topics
B. Public Petition request to discuss the efforts of local safety counselors to
promote safe practices among our general aviation pilots.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
This item was continued from the November 13~ 2001 BCC Meeting. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided
by Commission members. Petition SV-2001-AR1265, Bo Gallagher,
representing Bridgestone/Firestone Inc., requesting a 5 foot variance from the
required 150 foot road frontage for a pole sign to 145 feet for a property
located on 5495 Airport Road North in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range
25 East, Collier County, Florida. The property is an outparcel of the Bed, Bath
and Beyond Shopping Center.
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. PUDA-2001-AR-834, William L. Hoover,
Trustee, representing Bucks Run Land Trust and The Restoration Church Inc.
requesting an amendment to the Bucks Run PUD having the effect of adding a
child care center as a permitted use on the western 15+ acres or 60 dwelling
units, and a maximum of 288 affordable housing dwelling units on the eastern
24+ acres, for property located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951),
approximately 700 ft. North of Vanderbilt Beach Road, in Section 35, Township
48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 38.99+ acres.
B. This item has been deleted.
This item was continued from the November 13~ 2001 BCC Meeting. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided
by Commission members. Petition PUDA-2001-AR-500, R. Bruce Anderson,
Esq. Of.Young, VanAssenderp, Varnadoe and Anderson, P.A., representing
the Skinner and Broadbent Development Company, Inc., contract purchaser,
requesting to repeal the current Falling Waters Beach Resort PUD and to
3
November 27, 2001
adopt a new PUD for the purpose of adding self-storage (SIC #4225) to the list
of permitted uses and removing some of the permitted uses including
restaurants, fast foods restaurants, food markets and automobile service
stations from the community commercial tracts of the PUD. The subject
property is located in the East side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951)
approximately 400 feet North of Tamiami Trail and Collier Boulevard
Intersection in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida. The Falling Water PUD consists of 74.37 acres. The community
commercial tracts consist of 4+ acres.
This item was continued from the November 13~ 2001 BCC Meeting. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided
by Commission members. Petition RZ-2001-AR-1376, Carolos Morales of La
Quinta Homes of SW Florida, Inc., requesting a rezone from its current zoning
classification of "RSF-3" residential single family zoning district to "RMF-6"
residential multi-family district for a property located at 5211 24th Avenue SW
in Golden Gate City and is further described as Lot 1, Block 194, Golden Gate
Unit 6, Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
This site consists of 12500 square feet.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. PUDZ-2001-AR-986, Karen Bishop of
Project Management Services Inc., representing Kenneth P. Saundry, Jr.,
Trustee, requesting a rezone from "RSF-3" and "A" Rural Agriculture to
"PUD" Planned Unit Development to be known as Walnut Lakes PUD
permitting a 4.5 acre village center, a maximum of 612 residential dwelling
units and adult living facility units, and a 9-hole golf course with related lakes
and open space, for property located on the North side of US 41
approximately 3 miles East of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), in Section 12,
Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 204+
acres.
This item has been deleted.
This item was continued from the November 13~ 2001 BCC Meeting. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided
by Commission members. PUD2000-21, Robert L. Duane, A.I.C.P., of Hole
Montes Inc., representing Robert Vocisano and Angelo Favretto, requesting a
rezone from "A" Rural Agricultural to "PUD" Planned Unit Development to be
known as Terafina PUD for a maximum of 850 residential dwelling units, golf
course and clubhouse, for property located approximately 1.5 miles east of 1-
75, one mile North of Immokalee Road (CR 846) in Section 16, Township 48
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 646.5+ acres.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Recommendation that the Board take whatever steps are necessary to review
and make decisions regarding the three administratively approved variances
referenced in the Clerk of Courts Audit. (Commissioner Henning)
4
November 27, 2001
B. Appointment of members to the BayshoreJAvalon Beautification MSTU
Advisory Committee.
C. Appointment of members to the Contractors' Licensing Board.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
implementation of the proposed fiscal year 2002 budget reduction and
expenditure control plan. (Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager)
A Resolution authorizing the issuance of not exceeding $55,200,000 in
aggregate principal amount of Collier County, Florida Capital Improvement
Revenue Bonds, Series 2001 in order to effect such financing and refinancing;
providing certain terms and details of said bonds, including authorizing a
negotiated sale of said bonds; delegating certain authority to the Chairman for
the execution and delivery of a purchase contract; appointing the paying
agent and registrar for said bonds; providing an effective date; and selecting
underwriters (RFP 02-3312) in anticipation of issuing said bonds. (Michael
Smykowski, Director, Office of Management and Budget)
Request Board approval to purchase equipment and engineering services to
expand the Simulcast Component of the County's 800 MHz Radio System.
(Jo-Anne Leamer, Administrative Services Administrator)
Amend Professional Services Agreement with Hazen and Sawyer, PC, for
engineering services to expand the North County Water Reclamation Facility,
Project 73950. (Thomas G. Wides, Interim Public Utilities Administrator)
11.
12.
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. This item was continued from the November 13~ 2001 BCC Meeting. Hispanic
Affairs Advisory Board recommendation for adoption of a Resolution
requesting dialogue between Immokalee Growers and Farm Workers.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. FUTURE AGENDAS
5
November 27, 2001
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16.
CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be
removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
CARNY-2001-AR-1714, Sandra Ramos, Program Leader II, Immokalee
Collier County Parks and Recreation, requesting a permit to conduct the
8th annual Carnival Around the World, on December 8, 2001, at the
Immokalee Sports Complex.
2)
Petition CARNY-2001-AR-1699, Peg Ruby, Special Events Coordinator,
Collier County Parks and Recreation Department, requesting permit to
conduct the annual Snowfest Carnival on December 1, 2001, on county
owned property at the Golden Gate Community Park, 3300 Santa Barbara
Boulevard.
3)
Raymond Berube representing the Berube Brothers Inc. requesting a fee
waiver for an after-the-fact variance application for a swimming pool
encroaching into the required setbacks.
4) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Venezia at Grey Oaks".
5)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Cedar Hammock - Unit
6" and approval of the standard form construction and maintenance
agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
6) Approve an agreement to accept a derelict vessel removal grant from the
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
7) Final acceptance of Water and Sewer Facilities for Doubletree Hotel.
8)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Quail Phase III, Unit
Four" and approval of the standard form construction and maintenance
agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
9)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of "ibis Cove, Phase Two-
A" and approval of the standard form construction and maintenance
agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
10)
Approval of the mortgage and promissory note for a one hundred eighty
thousand ($180,000) dollar loan to the Shelter for Abused Women of
Collier County assisting in the construction of a 60 unit affordable
transitional housing shelter.
6
November 27, 2001
11) Fiscal Year 2002 Tourism Agreement between Collier County and the
Tourism Alliance of Collier County regarding advertising, promotion and
special events.
12) Request to review the Board's previous decision to present a Special
Treatment Permit and Final Plat for Little Palm Island simultaneously.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Request Board approval of a budget amendment transferring funds,
$15,500, from Reserves for the San Marco Road Culvert Project.
2)
Approve Change Order #1 to Work Order #BRC-FT-01-03 for Intersection
Improvements at Santa Barbara Boulevard/Golden Gate Parkway, Project
#60016, in the amount of $8,602.18.
3) Establishment of a "No Fishing" restriction on Bridge Number 030210,
Plantation Parkway over the Everglades Drainage Canal.
4)
Accept an access and maintenance easement from the Fountains
Condominium that will facilitate the county in maintaining an existing
drainage easement North of Rattlesnake Hammock Road.
5)
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the acquisition by gift or purchase of
right-of-way in fee simple title, as well as perpetual, non-exclusive
drainage and utility easements, temporary driveway restoration
easements, and temporary construction easements which will be required
for the construction of roadway, drainage, and utility improvements for
Phase One of the Immokalee Road four-laning project (from just West of
Wilson Boulevard to 43rd Avenue Northeast), Project No. 60018.
6) Award RFP01-3296 -Bayshore Street Lighting to Lumec Inc. in the amount
of $122,182 which are available in the Bayshore MSTU Fund 160.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
Award BID #01-3295 for the purchase of sodium chlorite for odor control
of hydrogen sulfide in sludge to Vulcan Performance Chemicals in the
amount of $44,900.
2)
Authorize Public Utilities Administrator to negotiate a binding agreement
with Florida Department of Environmental Protection related to reclaimed
water storage ponds at Eagle Lakes Park.
7
November 27, 2001
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Approve funding and an amendment to a Work Order for construction
engineering inspection services for a 12" water main on East US 41 from
Manatee Road to Boyne South and a 6" force main from Pump Station
3.17 to Boyne South, Projects 70862 and 73061 in the amount of $28,800.
Authorize funds for additional county utility relocations in conjunction
with US 41 road widening from Myrtle Road to Old US 41, Projects 70047,
70048 and 73048 in the amount of $275,960.62.
This item has been deleted.
Approve the emergency after-the-fact purchase of a line stop for a 24"
ductile iron force main in the amount of $25,900.
Approve funding for final payment for legal counsel related to Lawsuit
against Boyle Engineering Corporation for claims arising from the design
and construction of the original North County Regional Water Treatment
Plant, Project 70002 in the amount of $32,009.33.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Authorization to accept a position for Florida Yards and Neighborhoods
funded by a University of Florida grant at no cost to the County.
2)
Award Work Order PBS-01-03 to Professional Building Systems (PBS),
Inc., for the construction of South Marco Beach Access Restroom Facility
in the amount of $85,939.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) This item has been deleted.
2)
Award Contract #01-3235 Annual Contract for Architectural Services for
Collier County to Disney and Associates, Victor Latavish, Schenkel
Schultz Architecture and Barany, Schmitt, Summers, Weaver and Partners
Inc.
3) Award of Bid #01-3298 for Temporary Clerical Services to Coastal Staffing
Service Inc., Manpower, Kelly Services and Adecco Employment Services.
4)
Approve Shortlist of Firms for Contract 01-3289 Fixed Term Professional
Mechanical Electrical Engineering Services to CH2M Hill, Anchor
Engineering Consultants, TECO BGA Inc., and Tilden Lobnitz Cooper.
8
November 27, 2001
5)
Award of Bid #01-3287 for Office Supplies to Corporate Express and
Marco Office Supply.
6) Award of Bid #01-3286 for Handyman/Minor Carpentry Services to
Bradanna Inc., Wm. J. Varian and Made in Rio, Inc.
7) This item has been deleted.
F. EMERGENCY SERVICES
1)
For approval of a service agreement with Medtronic Physio-Control for the
Maintenance and Upgrade of Lifepak Monitors for the Emergency Medical
Services Department in the amount of $31,404 for FY02.
G. COUNTY MANAGER
H. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
I. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
J. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Approve the stipulated final judgment relative to the easement acquisition
of Parcel 13-70 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. John B. Fassett,
Trustee, et al, (Livingston Road Project, Project No. 65041).
2)
Authorize the making of an offer of judgment to respondents Peter B.
Frank and Ann T. Frank for Parcels 155 and 855 in the Lawsuit styled
Collier County v. Ronald G. Bender and Michele J. Bender, Trustees
Under That Certain Declaration of Trust Dated the 17~h Day of May, 1991, et
al, Case No. 98-1394-CA (Livingston Road Extension - Golden Gate
Parkway to Radio Road) Project No. 60061.
3)
Authorize the making of an offer of judgment to respondents, Kathleen G.
Sedlacek and Donald E. Cline, for Parcels 219 and 219T in the amount of
$5,100.00 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Kathryn Hankins, et al,
Case No. 99-1296-CA. Project No. 63041. (Golden Gate Boulevard
Project)
9
November 27, 2001
4)
Authorize the making of an offer of judgment to respondent, H.R. Moag,
Jr., for Parcel 218 in the amount of $800.00 in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. Kathryn Hank,ns, et al, Case No. 99-1296-CA. Project No. 63041.
(Golden Gate Boulevard Project)
5)
Approve the stipulated final judgment relative to the condemnation of
Parcel No. 169 in Collier County v. George Visnich, et al, Case No. 91-
2776-CA. (Pine Ridge Industrial Park MSTU Project from 1991)
17.
SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR
APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL
BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE BOARD,
PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS
ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO
SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. Petition PUDA-2001-AR-881, William L.
Hoover of Hoover Planning and Development Inc. representing the Salvation
Army, a not for profit organization, requesting to repeal the current Salvation
Army PUD and to adopt a new PUD for the purpose of increasing the site area
by 0.73 acres and adding motor vehicle display and sales to the list of
permitted uses for the Commercial Tract of the PUD. The subject property is
located on the West side of Airport Road South of Estey Avenue in Section 2,
Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. This property
consists of 8.51 acres.
This item was continued from the November 13~ 2001 BCC Meeting. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided
by Commission members. Petition RZ-2001-AR-1208, William L. Hoover,
AICP, of Hoover Planning and Development, Inc. representing Larry J. and
Marcy A. Gode requesting a rezone from its current zoning classification of
"C-3" Commercial Intermediate Zoning District to "RMF-6" residential multi-
family district for a property located on the North side of 109th Avenue North
approximately 275 feet West of Tam,ami Trail North and is further described
as Lot 9, Block 2, Naples Park Unit 1, Section 28, Township 48 South, Range
25 East, Collier County, Florida. This site consists of 6750 square feet.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. SNR-2001-AR-1503, the Operations
Department of the Community Development and Environmental Services
Division, representing the Transportation Administrator, requesting a street
name change for a portion of Livingston Road North and South to Old
Livingston Road, located in Unit 35, Golden Gate Estates, in Section 7,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, and also in Section 6, Township 49 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
10
November 27, 2001
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. Petition CU-2001-AR-371, RWA Inc.,
representing Hideout Golf Club Ltd., requesting a Conditional Use for earth
mining activity on a parcel of land zoned "A" Agricultural for a property
located at the Southeast intersection of Kean Avenue (A.K.A. Brantley
Boulevard) and Garland Road, approximately two miles East of Collier
Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 25, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida. This parcel consists of approximately 20.5 acres.
This item was continued from the November 137 2001 BCC Meeting. Approve
an Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, ratifying and further authorizing the more efficient administration of
the County's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program funded
by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by
providing for participation in the CDBG Program through Federal Fiscal Years
2001-2005, and by providing for more clearly defined delegation of signature
authority for CDBG Program documents to specified county officials;
providing for conflict and severability; and providing for an effective date.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
provided by Commission members. VA-2001-AR-1295, Robert L. Duane, AICP,
of Hole Montes Inc., representing Collier County Public Utilities/Wastewater
Administration, requesting a three (3) foot variance from the required thirty
(30) foot side yard setback to 27 feet for a proposed sludge holding tank in the
"A" Rural Agriculture Zoning district for property located at 5600 Warren
Street in Section 20, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida.
An Ordinance amending Collier County Ordinance No. 72-1, as amended,
which created the Collier County Lighting District; to add Willoughby Acres to
the Collier County Lighting District; to amend the existing district boundaries
to include those areas of Immokalee not currently part of the Collier County
Lighting District; providing for inclusion in Code of Laws and Ordinances;
providing for conflict and severability; providing an effective date.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADI=
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
11
November 27, 2001
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
November 27, 2001
CONTINUE ITEM 5(A) to DECEMBER 11, 2001 MEETING: Recommendation
to recognize Beverly Fields, Lieutenant, Emergency Medical Services, as
Employee of the Month for October, 2001. (Recipient request.)
WITHDRAW ITEM 10(C): Request Board approval to purchase equipment
and engineering services to expand the Simulcast Component of the
County's 800 MHz Radio System. (Staff request.)
MOVE 16(A)12 to 10(E) Request to review the Board's previous decision to
present a Special Treatment Permit and Final Plat for Little Palm Island
simultaneously. (Petitioner request.)
MOVE ITEM 17D to 7B: Petition CU-2001-AR-371, RWA Inc., representing
Hideout Golf Club Ltd., requesting a conditional use for earth mining
activity on a parcel of land zoned "A" Agricultural for a property located at
the Southeast intersection of Kean Avenue (a.k.a. Brantley Boulevard) and
Garland Road, approximately two miles east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951)
in Section 25, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
This parcel consists of approximately 20.5 acres. (Public request.)
MOVE ITEM 17G to 8H: An ordinance amending Collier County Ordinance
No. 72-1, as amended, which created the Collier County Lighting District; to
add Willoughby Acres to the Collier County Lighting District; to amend the
existing district boundaries to include those areas of Immokalee not
currently part of the Collier County Lighting District; providing for inclusion
in Code of Laws and Ordinances; providing for conflict and severability;
providing an effective date. (Staff request.)
PROCLA~A TION
WHEREAS, every child has the right to grow in a secure, loving fomiIy ond
adoption is o positive w~y to build o family; and,
WHEREAS, the Adoption Task Fo~e of 5outhwest Fl~/do, Xnc. is a
co/loboro~i~ e~ o~ communi~ ~ie$ ~d individuols m
create ~nd increase ow~n~ of ~doption; and,
WHEREAS, the Adoption T~sk Force of 5oufhwest Florida, Xnc. ~ purpose
to provide resources ond educoHon on the various ~$pect$ of
' adoption and m p~mote po$/tiw o~/mde$ towo~s ~dop~ion; and,
WHEREAS, adoption brings untold benefits fo Collier Coun~ res/dents that
birth porenta, odopHve ~rent$ and the children ~/oced in
odo~Hve homes, f~m//ie$: ~nd,
and odo~tion i$
WHEREAS, cr/$/~ to ~ I~ck of
posit~
NOW it :~:. .. ~ 2~1 be
FIO~Ma, that
.? ?? .........
DONE AND OR~ "~HI5 27th :b~y of
A TTE$ T:
JAARE$ D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHA£RA4AN
Di4/.~&HT E. 8ROc~ CLERK
-'--- AGENDA iTEM
1
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
NOW
PRO,LA/AA T£ON
the global epidemic of 14~V infection and AXD$ requires a worldwide effort to
increase communication, education and united action to stop the spread of
I~V/A_rD$; and,
the ,l'o/nt United Nations Program on 14~V/AID$ (t/NAXOS) observes December
I of each year ns World A-rD$ Day. a day to expand and strer~then
worldwide efforts to atop the spread of ~V/~D$; and,
UNA.rD$ estimates that over 36 million people worldwide are currently living
wHh t~V/A-rD$, with young people under the age of 2~ accounting for mare
than half of all new/nfect/on~; and,
the Amen'can Association for World Health is encouraging 'a better
understanding of the challenge of I~V/A-rD$ nationally as it recoanixes that
the number of people diagnosed with H-tV and A-rD$ in the United States
continues ta increase, w/th gO0, O00 people in the U. $. now infected; and,
Coil/er County has 742 A.rDs cases reported (as of O'uly 31, 20019; and,
World A-rOb Day provides an opportunity to focus local, national and
international attention on and A-rD$ and to disseminate
information on ' H~V; and,
an
Do
currently living with
US are among young
theme is, _r Care...
and those who
for
their friends and
County
designed to
global challenge,
and join the
H.rV/AID$.
DONE AND ORDERED THIS
BOARD OF COUNTY COtAM_r$$ZONER$
COLI~rER COUNTY. FLORZDA
A TTE$ T~
Dw-rGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
,TAAffE$ b. CARTER, Ph. b., CHA£R~
AN AGENDA_ ITEM
-.
~0¥ 27 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE BEVERLY FIELDS, LIEUTENANT, EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES, AS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR OCTOBER 2001.
OBJECTIVE: The "Employee of the Month" Program is designed to recognize.exceptional
performance plus uniquely identifiable contributions which produce significant results for the
County.
CONSIDERATIONS: Lieutenant Beverly Fields is a very honest, hard working individual who
performs her duties well above expectations. Her self-giving to others is what makes Lieutenant
Fields stand out from the rest of her colleagues.
Lieutenant Fields volunteers her time to assist her colleagues in many different ways. She has
on several occasions taken them to medical appointments when they lacked transportation.
She volunteers at the Immokalee Fire Department, thus sacrificing her time for the citizens of
Immokalee. Most importantly, Lieutenant Fields has raised money to purchase a motorized
wheelchair for Firefighter Jason Burr, who is disabled from a motor vehicle accident, and relies
on a wheelchair to get around. Lieutenant Fields not only found a motorized wheelchair that
was economical, but also saved $3000 by way of hard work, negotiating and searching for one
that suited Firefighter Burr's needs.
FISCAL IMPACT: "Employee of the Month" selectees receive a $50.00 cash award. Funds for
this award are available in the employee's department budget.
RECOMMENDATION: That Lieutenant Beverly Fields, be recognized as the "Employee of the
Month" for October/~:. ,.,
PREPARED BY: ?~-¢.zLz/~,,...-/'.~, ' ~ DATE:
Dawn Ragone, Ad~in'~rative Assistant
uman Resources Department
REVIEWED BY: ~~ DATE:
~ary B~~, Interim Dir~..~
Humar¥'Resources Department'-
APPROVED BY:
Jo-Anne Varcoe- Leamer, Administrator
Administrative Services Division
N A GE N D"""--"-"--'"'~.;'~I'-"--~
NOV 2 7 2001
Oct 23 O10l:05p p. I
Department of Public Information
3301 Esst Tamiaml Trail
Naples, FL 34112
(941) 774-8999
Contact: Deborah Wight, Coordinator
Public Information
774-83O8
OcL 23, 2001
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Beverly Fields, a lieutenant paramedic with the Emergency Medical Services Department,
has been selected Collier County government's Employee of the Month for October.
A county employee for the past five years, she previously worked for Collier Count>' EMS
from 1981 to 1989.
Also a volunteer with the Immokalee Fire Department, Fields was instrumental in raising
money to buy a motorized wheelchair for firefighter Jason Burr who is disabled as a result of
a motor vehicle accident.
"Through her search and negotiations, Lt. Fields not only found a wheelchair that best suited
firefighter Burr's needs, but she also saved $3,000," said EMS Director Jcff Page. "She is a
very honest and hard-working individual who performs her duties beyond expectations. She
often volunteers her time to help her co-workers, which makes Lt. Fields stand out from her
colleagues."
Employed by Lee County EMS from 1992 to 1996, Fields has received two Phoenix Awards
during her 20-year career as a paramedic.
Originally from Oregon, Fields moved to Florida at the age of 11 and graduated from Fort
Myers High School. She attended Edison Community College where she received
emergency medical techniciandparamedic training.
A resident of South Fort Myers, she has two daughters, 13-year-old Lauren and Erica, I 1.
' A~END,~, ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
pg. ~'~
NO 01
Pg.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE RAY HIGDON, DATABASE ADMINISTRATOR,
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, AS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR NOVEMBER 2001.
OBJECTIVE.: The "Employee of the Month" Program is designed to recognize exceptional
performance plus uniquely identifiable contributions which produce significant results for the
County.
CONSIDERATIONS: Ray Higdon is always there to help others. He has a great attitude and is
always up to the challenge of solving our most difficult computer problems. Ray has achieved
his MCSE certification and has great knowledge of his position. He is a true professional.
Ray Higdon is an asset to Collier County due to his excellent work habits and concern for his
fellow employees~
FISCAL IMPACT: "Employee of the Month" selectees receive a $50.00 cash award. Funds for
this award are available in the employee's department budget cost center.
RECOMMENDATION: That Ray Higdon, be recognized as the "Employee of the Month" for
November 2001.
PREPARED BY: .~~ ~ DATE:
Dawn Ragone, ~dministrative Assistant
Human Resources Department
Human'l~esources Department
10/23/01
10/23/01
APPROVED BY:
DATE:
Jo-Anne Varcoe Leamer, Administrator
Administrative Services Division
10~23~0
NOV 2 7 2001
£ OLLmR COtOwr¥
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
~ $ ~MINATION FORM
INSTRUCTIONS:
The objective of this program is to reco~t~nize significant contributions to the organization and/or
community by Collier County staff. All full time regular non-supervisory employees who have
completed the initial probationary period and have a good or better overall' rating on their most recent
performance appraisal are eligible to be nominated. Please complete all sections of this form and
forward the nomination form ~o your Department Director.
An employee may be nominated by a fellow employee, immediate supervisor and/or Department
Director if they satisfy some combination of the,, following criteria. The specific reasons for the
nomination should be documented below on this form. Attach additional pages ifnec'essary.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Sig-nificant accomplishments beyon.d normal work responsibilities.
Exemplary customer service.
Professional achievement (formal certification, award recipient, published articles, etc.).
Application of a uniquely innovative solution to a problem.
Implementation of a recommendation that resulted in cost savings, higher productivity, etc.
Active community service.
Service beyond the call of duty.
RAY HIGDON
POSITION TITLE: INFO TECH PROFESSIONAL
DEPART~MENT: INFO TECH DEPT
DATE OF EMPLOYMENT: 11-27-00
SUPERVISOR:
PAYROLL COST CENTER:
_Department Director:
DESCRIBE THE ACTIVITY/RESULTS AND WHY YOU BELIEVE THIS EMPLOYEE SHOULD
BE AWARDED THE EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH.
From the moment Ray Higdon comes to work in the early morning to the last minute of the day he is
there to help someone. He has a .great attitude and is truly concerned about our computer problems.
Some people when faced with a mountain will go around it, Ray Higdon climbs to the top when it come
to solving our computer problems. Ray Higdon has achieved his MCSE certification and has knowledge
of his position, he is a tree professional. Ray Higdon is an asset to Collier County due to his excellent
work habits and concern for his fellow employees/, for that reason I am nominating him for employee
of the month. ,, /7 ,.~- - ~ .
~fthe montt_ ~5W
Nominating StaffMember: ic ae . ignari Date:
/~ Date:
NO. /
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. ~
COLLIER COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE
November 19, 2001
Mr. Joe Bawduniak
803 Knollwood Court
Naples, FL 34108
3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112
(941) 774-8383
FAX (941) 774-4010
Re: Public Petition Request to Discuss the Efforts of Local Safety Counselors to
Promote Safe Practices Among our General Aviation Pilots
Dear Mr. Bawduniak:
Please be advised that you are scheduled to appear before the Collier County
Board of Commissioners at the meeting of November 27, 2001, regarding the
above referenced subject.
Your petition to the Board of County Commissioners will be limited to ten
minutes. Please be advised that the Board will take no action on your petition at
this meeting. However, your petition may be placed on a future agenda for
consideration at the Board's discretion. Therefore, your petition to the Board
should be to advise them of your concern and the need for action by the Board at
a future meeting.
The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. in the Board's Chambers on the Third Floor
of the W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F") of the government complex.
Please arrange to be present at this meeting and to respond to inquiries by
Board members.
If you require any further information or assistance, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Sincerely,
Thomas W. Olli~
County Manager
TWO:jeb
cc: County Attorney
John Drury, Executive Director, Airport Authority
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. /
Dear Jim:
I request a five (5) minute presentation to the County Commission to inform
them of the eforts of the FAA and local Safety Counselors to promote safe
practices among our General Aviation pilots.
We hold seminars at the Naples Airport and have held one at Marco.
Three out of the last four years, a local Counselor has been selected
"Counselor of the Year" for Flight Standards District Office 19 (South
Florida).
These safety efforts have been ongoing for several years and it is time our
local officials and citizens know about them.
Seminars are at no cost to our taxpayers, but come from aviation use taxes.
I believe our County Commissioners will enjoy some "upbeat" good news.
Thanks Jim!
0V 2 7 2'00l1
- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION SV-2001-AR1265, BO GALLAGHER, REPRESENTING BRIDGESTONE/
FIRESTONE, INC. REQUESTING A 5-FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 150-
FOOT ROAD FRONTAGE FOR A POLE SIGN TO 145 FEET FOR A PROPERTY
LOCATED ON. 5495 AIRPORT ROAD NORTH IN SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA. THE PROPERTY IS AN
OUTPARCEL OF THE BED, BATH AND BEYOND SHOPPING CENTER.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of Zoning Appeals consider an application for a sign variance to
allow the installation of a pole sign for a commercial development while maintaining the
community's best interest.
CONSIDERATIONS:
Section 2.5.5.2.5.1. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires a frontage
of 150 feet or more on a public street or a combined public street frontage of 220 linear
feet or more for corner lots for a pole sign. This standard has been placed in the LDC
since 1991 to control the sign proliferation and visual pollution. The site in question,
contains 145 foot of road frontage, and was recently developed with a tire center. A
building permit for a pole sign was issued on May 2, 2000. Staff, after discovering that
the application erroneously provided 150 foot of road frontage instead of the actual 145,
canceled the permit on October 13, 2001.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This request will have no fiscal impact.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
This request will have no Growth Management Impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
There are no environmental issues associated with this project.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is
required.
AGEI~A I~
NOV 2 7 2001
STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE CCPC:
Staff recommendation to the CCPC was to forward this petition to the Board of Zoning
Appeals with a recommendation for denial.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION:
This petition was not reviewed by the EAC, as there were no environmental issues with
this site.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The CCPC heard this petition on October 4, 2001 and after two rounds of voting by a
vote of 4-4 failed to forward a recommendation to the BZA regarding this variance. The
4 commissioners who voted in favor of this petition stated that since the site is the last
outparcel in the shopping center, there may be some visibility issues with the site, and
furthermore, the variance requested is only for five feet.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
SUSAN MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
DATE
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
//
JOHN jTvl. Du'N~ III DATE
INTE~M COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
2
AGENDA I'rFJ~
7,4
NOV 2.7 2001
AGENDA ITEM ~-G
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
September 11,2001
SV-2001-AR-1265
AGENT/APPLICANT:
Owner:
Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.
4219 Roswell road, Suite "A"
Marietta, Georgia, 30062
Agent:
Bo Gallagher, Real Estate manager
4219 Roswell Road, Suite "A"
Marietta, Georgia, 30062
REQUESTED ACTION:
The applicant is requesting a 5-foot variance from the required 150-foot road frontage for
a pole sign to 145 feet.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located on 5495 Airport Road South in Section 11, Township 49
south, Range 25 East, Collier County Florida. The property is an outparcel of the Bed,
Bath and Beyond Shopping Center.
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
Section 2.5.5.2.5.1. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires a frontage of
150 feet or more on a public street or a combined public street frontage of 220 linear feet
NOV 2 7 2001
or more for corner lots for a pole sign. This standard has been placed in the LDC since
1991 to control the sign proliferation and visual pollution. The site in question, containing
145 foot of road frontage, was recently developed with a tire center. A building permit for a
pole sign was issued on May 2, 2000. Staff, after discovering that the application and the
attached drawings erroneously provided 150 foot of road frontage instead of the actual
145, canceled the permit on October 13, 2001.
ANALYSIS:
Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code grants the authority to the Board of Zoning
Appeals to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes
the provisions of Subsection 4)(a) through (h) which are general guidelines to be used to
assist the Commission in making a determination. Responses to items (a) through (h) of
Subsection 11.1 4) are as follows:
Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar
to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building
involved?
No, there are multitudes of improved commercial properties similar to the one in
question. Those properties contain wall signs in compliance with the requirements
of the Land Development Code.
Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the
action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the
property which is the subject of the variance request?
Yes, the site was created many years ago with a lot width that would not allow for a
pole sign today, as it does not contain enough frontage as required by the Land
Development Code.
Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code
work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant? '
No, there are other commercial buildings with no pole signs throughout the County.
The Collier County LDC contains specific criteria that each property must meet in
order to qualify for a pole sign. This property does not meet those criteria.
Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible
the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote
standards of health, safety and welfare?
NOV 2 7 2001
No, as discussed above, a variance is not necessary to make possible the
reasonable use of the land.
Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special
privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings,
or structures in the same zoning district?
Yes, as discussed above, there are properties throughout the County in similar
situation, which do not have pole signs. This variance, if granted, will confer on the
petitioner privileges that would be denied to other properties, unless similar
variances are granted for them.
Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose
of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or
otherwise detrimental to the public welfare?
No, this variance will not be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the LDC in
that it will cause pole sign proliferation, which will have a deleterious effect on the
aesthetics of the road. However it will not be injurious to the neighborhood or
detrimental to the public welfare.
Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate
the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes,
golf courses, etc.?
No.
Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan.
Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth
Management Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition SV-2001-AR-1265 to the BZA with a
recommendation for denial.
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
Rtz ~!
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
SU~AN MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
.~HO~~ ~~/ ~
MAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
DATE
APPROVED BY:
JOl~[',l ~. DUNNUCK III DATE
INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
Petition Number: SV-2001-AR-1265
Staff Report for October 4, 2001 CCPC meeting.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION:
JOYCEA/qNA J. RAUTIO,ICHAIRMAN
NOV 2 7 2001
' p~. q
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER SV-2001-AR-1265,
FOR A SIGN VARIANCE ON PROPERTY
HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORDA.
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida
Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and
enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the
public, and
WHEREAS. the Count>' pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code
(Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular
geogq-aphic divisions of the County, among which is the ~anting of variances, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals being the duly elected constituted Board
of tke area hereby affected, bas held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations
made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 5-foot variance for a pole sign
from the required t S0-foot road frontage pursuant to Subsection 2.5.5.2.5.1. of the Land
Development Code to 145 feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A". in a C-5
Zoning District for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact
tha: satisfactou' provision and arrangement have been made concerning ail applicable
matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.5.11. of the Zoning
Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier
County, and
WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this
Board in public meeting assembled and the Board having considered all matters presented,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Zoning Appeals of
Collier County, Florida, that:
Petition SV-2001-AR-1265 filed by Bo Gallagher, representing
Bridgestone/Firestone, h~c. with respect to the property hereinafter described as:
Exhibit "B'
,i0V 2 ? 2001
be and the same hereby is approved for a 5-foot variance tbr a pole sign from the required
150-foot road frontage to 145 feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", of the
C-5 Zoning District wherein said property is located.
BE IT RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number SV-2001-AR-
1265 be recorded in the minutes of this Board.
This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote.
Done this __ day of ,2001.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK. Clerk
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORDA
Approved as to Fonn and Legal Sufficiency:
Assistant County Attorney
S\ -2,3,31 -All.-i 265' CB ia
J:U\IES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIK\IAN
-2-
Nov 2 7 2001
.tt~t
/1 PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUT~rl, RANGE
25 EAST, COLDER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND EEING &lORE PARUCUL/RLY DESCRIEED
AS FOLLOWS;
COMMENCING AT THE 'SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION ! ~, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLDER COUNTY, FLORIDA;
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH UNE OF SAIO SECTION 11, SOUTH 8~35'20' WEST
I J23.65'F[ET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST I/4 OF THE
50UTHEAST I/4 OF S410 SECTION 11;
THENCE ALONG THE WEST UNE OF THE SOUTHEAST I/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4
OF SAID'SEC170N 11, NORTH ~T22'II'EAST $7.5I FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT
OF WAY UNE OF COUNTY ROAD C-896 (PINE RIDGE ROAD) AS DF__SCRISED IN
O.R. EOOK 893, PAGE 0169, COLDER COUNTY.PUEUC RECORDS, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA; . ·
THENCE ALONG SAIO NORTH RIGHT OF WAY UNE NORTH 8~J5'20~ EAST 974.44 FEET,.
THENCE LEAWNG SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WA)' UNE NORTH 01'08'50' FAST 950.80 '
FEET TO THE POINT OF 8EGINNING OF THE PARCEL HERETN DESCRIBED:
THENCE CONTINUE NORTH 0 I'08'50' EAST 145.00
THENCE SOUTH 88'5l'~0, EAET. 250.O0 FEET TOT HE WEST RIGHT OF WAY UNE OF
STATE ROAD S-SI (AIRPORT ROAD);
THENCE ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY UNE SOUTH 01'08'50' WEST 145.00 FEET:
THENCE LE4VING SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY UNE NORTH 88'51'10, WEST 250 FEET TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEl. HER~N DESCRIBED;
CONTAINING 0.SJ ACRES OF I. AND, &lORE OR LESS.
SUEJECT TO EASET~ENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
EXHIBIT "B"
SV-2001-AR-! 265
NOV 2 7 2001
11
SIGN VARIANCE PETITION
Petition No.
Planner Assigned:
SV-2001-AR-1265
PROJECT #2001080006
Date Petition Received: DATE: 8/2/01
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN
ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF
Petitioner's Name:
eetitioner'sAddress: t/Z/~ ,ffoS,,/,tl ,,4
/~4r.'¢. ~ L"'/~ ..~ O0 ~* Telephone: ¢7o~ * Z / "~-~'0
Agent's Name:
Agent's Address:
~ t~ '~ oo/¢ '2- Telephone:
COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING
2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLES, FL 34104
PHONE (941) 403-2400fFAX (941) 643-6968
Application for Sign Variance Petition - 8/98
- pg._] -
Legal Description of Subject Property:
Subdivision: Unit
Section ]] Twp. 7~ Range
Lot (s)
Property I.D. #
Block (s)
ZSSo ]
Metes & Bounds Description:
Address of Sign Location:
Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Parcel:
Length & Height of wall upon which the Sign will be secured:
(If Wall Sign)
Width of Subject Property: / ~.5- /"' ¢ ¢
(Road Frontage)
Nature of Petition
Provide a detailed explanation of the variance request including what signs are existing and
what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce setback
from 15' to 10'; why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc.
Requesting a variance to allow one 59.79 square foot freestanding ground sign with a maximum overall height of S' feet.
The variance is requested to allow a freestanding ground sign on the subject property, which has 145 feet of frontage on
Airport Road; instead of the 150' feet of frontage required by the Collier County Land Development Code. All other
requirements of the Development Code will be adhered to. There are not any freestanding signs currently on the subject
property. There are signs on the building, located on the subject property, that are in compliance with the Development Code
(see attached Elevation Plan).
ACtA ITEM
NCV 2 7 2001
D
Application for Sign Variance Petition - 8/98 Page 2 of 6
-5
Please note that staff and the Collier County Planning Commission shall be guided in their recommendation to the
Board of zoning Appeals, and that the Board of zoning appeals shall be guided in its determination to approve or
deny a variance petition by the below listed criteria (1-6). (Please address this criteria using additional pages if
necessary.)
1. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and
characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved.
The subject property is a separately assessed tax parcel, but the subject property does not enjoy direct ingress/egress access
from Airport Road. Ingress/egress access to the subject property is through the adjacent shopping center by way on an
ingress/egress easement, making the identity of the subject property obscured.
Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant
such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request.
The subject property was issued a sign permit (Permit # 2000050033) from Collier County on 5/2/00 for a 15' foot high free
stanching pole sign. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. had the pole and sign designed and fabricated to the specifications of the
permitted plans. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. entered into a contract with a sign installer and was ready to begin the
installation of the Permitted sign, when Mike Vignari (Collier County Sign Specialist) canceled the sign pei'mit for the
subject property on 10/13/01. Currently this $40,000.00 sign is sitting in a warehouse in Naples, FL, awaiting installation.
3. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue
hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant.
Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc relied on the sign permit, which was issued by Collier County, for the subject property, to its
detriment. Now Bridgestone/Firestone, Ine has spent over $40,000.00 on a sign which it currently can not use. Furthermore,
Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc wouM not have entered into the land lease with the owner of the subject property had they known
there would not be allowed a freestanding sign on the subject propen'y. Without a freestanding sign, the ~ubject property
lacks identity, which ere. ales a hardsMp in lowered busines~ revenue.
4. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make poss~le the reasonable use of
the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety or welfare.
Yes. BridgestoneJF~-estone, Inc is requesting a compromise to allow a 8' foot overall height freestanding sign, instead of.a
15' overall height fxeestanding pole sign which was previously permitted by Collier County for the subject property. This $'
foot high sign is consistent with the zoning code in all respects, except for required road frontage, and we feel is a reasonable
request.
Application for Sign Variance Petition - 8/98
2 7 2001
5. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by
these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district.
Yes. The current zoning code only allows a freestanding sign if the property located in the C-5 zonning district has a
minimum of 150' feet of road frontage. The subject property has 145' feet of road frontage.
6. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be
injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
Granting this variance will satisfy all requirements of the zoning code, except the subject property has 145' feet of road
frontage, whereas the zoning code requires 150' feet of frontage to allow a freestanding sign. Otherwise, granting this
variance is consistent with all other requirements of the zoning code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or
otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
7. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate, the goals and
objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc.
The subject property has been developed with an attractive building and beautifully landscaped, consistent with the
regulations of Collier County. Previously the subject property was a patchy grassed field with no trees.
8. Will granting the variance be consistent with the growth management plan.
Application for Sign Variance Petition - 8/98
2 7 2001
Page 4 of 6
SIGN VARIANCE PETITION
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION
PACKET!
R E Q UIREMENTS # o F
COPIES REQUIRED
1. Completed Application 12
2. Completed Owner/Agent Affidavit, Notarized 1
3. Pre-application notes/minutes 12
'4. Survey or Site Plan of property depicting the follo~ving: 12
a) All property boundaries & dimensions
b) North arrow, date and scale of drawing
c) All existing and proposed signs-(labeled as such)
d) Existing sign setbacks & proposed sign setbacks
5. Location map depicting major streets in area for 1
reference
6. Pre-Application Fee, Application Fee, Data Conversion .
fee, checks shall be made payable to Collier County Board
of County Commissioners
7. Other Requirements - .
As the author/zed agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on thi~ checklist is
included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may
result in the delay of process this petition.
Applicant/Agent Signature
Date
Application for Sign Variance Petition - 8/98
NOV 2 ? 2001
Page 5 of 6
A FFIDA VIT
ship
~Ve/f. CRF Airport Pad Limited Partner/befng~rst duly sworn, depose and say that we/f
am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the
proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the
disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to
and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief.
lge/I understand that the. information requested on this application must be complete and'
accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall
not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete.
and all required information has been submitted.
As property owner We/I further authorize Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.
as our/my representative in any matters regarding this Petition.
to act
ature of Prop Owner Signature of Property Owner
~CRF,.' AIRPORT PAD' LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
y: Continental Realty Investors Corp., Manager
%: John A. Luetkemeyer, Jr., President
Typed or Printed Name of owner
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 7[/t'/) day o£ ~-7}~
1-~d2~' by w~J'lt l /4 J~x,~r_' ~-~,v ~r;~/~, ~/--~. who ix'personally know~-~ t-o m~or' hJ-s"Pro~uced
' - ' as/identification.
State of Florida
County of Collier
Application for Sign Variance Petition - 8~98
Page 6 of 6
o o
A PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, R,,~J~IGE
25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY. DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS;
COMMENCING AT THE 'SOUTHEAST 1/.4 OF SECTION 1 t, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
[t4dGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; '.
THENCE ALONG THE 50UTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 11. 50UTH 89',.,T5'20" WEST
'I,.72..7.65 FEET TO THE 50UTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAIO SECTION 1i;
THENCE ALONG THE WEST UNE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/'4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4
OF SAID 'SECTION 11, NORTH 0'22'11"EAST 67.51 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT
OF WAY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD C-896 (PINE RIDGE ROAD,} AS DESCRIBED IN
O.R. BOOK 89J, PAGE 0169, COLLIER COUNTY PUBUC RECORDS, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA; ' . ·
THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY UNE NORTH 89'.~5'20" EAST 974.44 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY UNE' NORTH 01'08'50' EAST 950.$0 '
.FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL HEREIN DESCRIBED;
THENCE.CONTINUE NORTH 01'08'50" EAST 145.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 88'51'10" EAST. 250.OQ FEET TOT HE WEST RIGHT OF WAY UNE OF
STATE ROAD S-,,Zl (AIRPORT ROAD);
THENCE ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY UNE SOUTH 01'08'50" WEST 145.00 FEc--~:
THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE NORTH 88'51'10" WEST 250 FEET TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL HEREIN DESCRIBED;
CONTAINING 0.$~ ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS.
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
NOV 2 7 2001
ExEcuTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION PUDA-01-AR-834, WILLIAM L. HOOVER OF HOOVER PLANNING AND WAY-NE
ARNOLD OF Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, REPRESENTING BUCKS RUN LAND
TRUST, RESTORATION CHURCH, INC., AND THE PINNACLE HOUSING GROUP,
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "PUD" TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE
KNOWN AS BUCKS RUN PUD FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING THE NUMBER OF
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS FROM 156 UNITS TO 348 UNITS VIA AN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING AGREEMENT AND TO ALLOW CHILD CARE CENTER AS A PERMITTED USE
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR-951) AND
APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET NORTH OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD (CR-862), IN SECTION
35, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners consider an application to rezone the subject site from
PUD to PUD as noted above to increase the maximum number of dwelling units subject to an
affordable housing density bonus agreement, and adding child care as a permitted use consistent with
all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained
in this residential community.
CONSIDERATIONS:.
The petitioner is requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD for the purposes of amending the Buck Run
PUD in order to increase the maximum number of residential dwelling units from 156 units to 348 units
via an Affordable Housing density bonus. Other permitted uses include a church, private school and a
proposed child care center. It should be noted that the proposed Master Plan depicts a 15-acre "West
Tract" that limits the number of dwellings to 60 units unless this tract is developed as a church, child-
care and/or school. If this tract is developed with non-residential uses, then four (4) dwelling units per
acre shall be subtracted from the maximum number of dwelling units permitted. The 24.06-acre "East
Tract" permits 288 dwelling units, via a density bonus for Affordable Housing. If the entire project is
developed with residential uses, the maximum number of dwelling units is limited to 348 units, which
results in a project density of 8.87 units per acre. If the "West Tract" is completely developed ~vith non-
residential uses, then the maximum number of dwelling units will be 288 units on the "East Tract"
resulting in a density of 11.97 units per acre on that tract.
A detailed Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) submitted by the applicant and reviewed by County staff
estimates the site-generated trips for the new uses to be approximately 1,152 Weekday Trips, 115 A.M.
Peak Hour Trips, and 133 P.M. Peak Hour Trips. These site-generated trips will only exceed 5% of the
LOS "C' design volume on Collier Boulevard (CR-951) from the project's entrance to Vanderbilt
Beach Road. However, this road segment is estimated to be operating at its ado 3ted level of service
standard at the project build-out in 2003.
NOV 2 7 2001
These site-generated trips do not appear to create a concurrency problem within the projects radius of
development influence (RDI) because the project trips don't lower the capacity below any road's
adopted LOS standard. The TIS did indicate some locations of operational deficiency but they were not
significantly or directly attributable to the proposed Bucks Run development. Therefore, the proposed
PUD will be in compliance with Policies 5.1 and 5.2, of the Transportation Element.
The Transportation Element currently lists Collier Boulevard (CR-951) as a 2-1ane arterial road in the
project area. At project build-out in 2003, CR-951 is projected to operate at an acceptable level of
service and meet the adopted level of service standard of LOS "D". Therefore, this petition is
consistent with the standards referenced in Policy 1.4 of the Transportation Element.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This PUD by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. However, if this request meets its
objective, a portion of the existing land will be further developed. The mere fact that new development
has been approved xvill result in future fiscal impact on County public facilities. The County collects
impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new
development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital
Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event
that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must
provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities.
The following impact fees will be applicable to this project:
Park Impact Fee:
· Library Impact Fee:
· Fire Impact Fee:
· School Impact Fee:
· Road Impact Fee:
· Correctional Facilities:
Radon Impact Fee:
EMS Impact Fee:
· Building Code Adm.:
· Micro Film Surcharge:
$578.00 per unit
$180.52 per unit
$0.15 per square feet of building
$827 per unit
$890 per unit
$117.98 per dwelling unit
$0.005 per square foot of building
$2 per unit
$0.005 per square foot of building
$1.50 per unit
For an average unit size of 1,000 square feet, the total fiscal impact will be $2,757.18 per unit. Since
this project proposes 348 units, the total amount of residential impact fees collected at build-out will
total $959,498.64. It should be noted that because impact fees vary by housing type and because this
approval does not provide this level of specificity as to the actual type of use, the total impact fee
quoted above is at best a raw estimate. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the project at build-out
will have maximized their authorized level of development. Other fees will include building permit
review fees and utility fees associated with connecting to the County's sewer and water system.
Building permit fees and utility fees have traditionally offset the cost of administering th,e_communi~
development review process, whereas utility fees are used on their proportionat ~.gl~ to thl~
County system.
/
NOV
2
Finally additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates. The revenue that will be
generated depends on the value of the improvements. At this point in time a model has not been
developed to arrive at a reasonable estimate of tax revenue based on ad Valorem tax rates.
Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that not withstanding the fiscal impact relationship, development
takes place in an environment of concurrency management. When level of service requirements fall
below adopted standards, a mechanism is in place to bring about a cessation of building activities.
Certain LOS standards apply countywide and would therefore bring about a countywide concurrency
determination versus roads that may have local geographic concurrency implications.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban Mixed - Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district)
on the Future Land Use Map and Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Relevant
to this petition, the Urban Mixed - Use District permits a variety of residential unit types at a base
density of 4 dxvelling units per acre, subject to the Density Rating System. This designation also
permits community facilities such as churches, schools and daycare consistent xvith the Land
Development Code (LDC). The provision of an Affordable Housing Density Bonus 'Agreement may
add up to 8 units per acre to the base density of 4 units per acre for a total of 12 units per acre. At a
maximum the project will be developed at 11.97 units per acre and that is less than the permitted
density the site is eligible to receive, therefore the proposed petition is consistent, with the FLUE of the
GMP.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and
Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no
Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment or a waiver is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
Environmental staff has deemed that this project is consistent with all Environmental policies. They
also stipulated that a minimum of 9.75 acres of native vegetation shall be preserved on site, including
all 3 strata, and emphasizing the largest contiguous area possible. The Environmental staff has
recommended approval subject to the conditions of approval contained in the PUD Document.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION:
The petition to amend the Bucks Run PUD was not required to go to the Environmental Advisory
Council (EAC) because of the project's consistency ~vith the policies of the Growth Management Plan.
NOV 2 7 2001
3
L'
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) reviewed this petition during their public hearing
on November 1, 2001. By a vote of 7 to 2, the CCPC forwarded Petition PUDA-01-AR-834 to the
Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to increasing the rear
buffer to 80 feet from the property line with the Vanderbilt Country Club along with the condition that
no structure will be closer than 100 feet from the property line. Other stipulations included allowing the
interconnection to adjacent properties were feasible and agreeable to the property owners along with
staff stipulations that have been incorporated into the PUD document. The Planning Commission
found that this petition is consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and is compatible with
the surrounding development.
It should be noted that over one hundred residents (mostly from the Vanderbilt Country Club)
expressed their opposition during the hearing. Their primary objection was the increase in density and
impacts that the additional traffic will have on Collier Boulevard. However, one or two individuals also
appeared to have objected because they felt that the site was not suitable for affordable 'housing and
that their property values would be adversely impacted. Some of the speakers objected to the staff
report because they felt that it did not contain adequate analysis of the traffic impacts or an analysis of
the impacts of the project on property values. Dawn Wolf from the Transportation Department
responded that a detailed TIS was reviewed and the traffic impacts are consistent with the currently
approved level of service standards. She noted that she was in the process of amending the
Transportation Element of the GMP to make the standards more restrictive, but at the present time, the
petition is consistent with the GMP. In addition, Greg Mihalic stated that the proposed income
guidelines that are required for the project are intended to serve the working class citizens of the
County.
The Planning Commissioners that recommended approval determined that the site is compatible with
the adjacent PUD to the south that permits a church and school and with the commercial activity node
to the west across Collier Boulevard that was recently approved. They also noted that the existing 3-
story condominium buildings to the west in the Vanderbilt Country Club are compatible with the
proposed housing project as presented during the meeting, subject to an increased buffer. The two
members voting against the petition felt that the increase in density would significantly impact Collier
Boulevard.
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Petition pUDA-01-AR-834 subject to the approval of the Affordable
Housing Agreement and the stipulations contained in the PUD document and as otherwise described by
the Ordinance of Adoption and Exhibits thereto.
4
NgV 2 7 200!
L ~_Z-~ _
PREPARED BY:
RAy ~'~_,6WS, CHIEF PLA
CLIRI~NT PLANNING SECTION
REVIEWED BY:
C~,~I~NT PLANNING SE,CTIO
THOMASE. KUCK, P.E., ACT-lNG DIREC
PLANN~G SER. V[CES,DEPARTMENT
T~,~SPORTATION ~WISION
~PROV[D BY:
CO~UNITY DEV. AND ENVmONMENTAL SVCS.
/I- ~-o/,_
DATE
DATE
5A~
DATE
PUDA-01 -AR-834/EX SUMMARY/RVB/rb
NOV 2 7 2001
AGENDA ITEM 8-E
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
OCTOBER 9, 2001
PETITION NO: PUDA-01-AR-834, BUCKS RUN PUD
AGENT/APPLICANT:
Agent: William L. Hoover
Hoover Planning
378 Airport Road North, Suite B-i
Naples, Florida 34105
Wayne Amold
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey
Bonita Springs, Florida 34134
Owner:
Michael Wohl, President
9400 S. Dadeland Blvd.
Suite i 00
Miami, Florida 33156
Donald E. Wiggins, Pastor
Restoration Church, Inc.
259 Airport Road
Naples, Florida 34104
Bucks Run Land Trust
378 Airport Road North, Suite B-1
Naples, Florida 34105
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject PUD is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (CR-951) and
approximately 700 feet north of Vanderbilt Beach Road (CR-862) in Section 35,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East. (See illustration on following page)
REQUESTED ACTION:
Buck Run PUD (Ordinance Number 99-79) in order to increase the
residential dwelling units from 156 units to 348 units. Other pemfitted
church, child-care, and/or school.
The petitioner is requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD for the purposes of amending the
maximum of
NOV 2 7 2001
J
I II I
I II I
Il.
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The approved Bucks Run PUD allows for a mix of residential dwelling types, a church,
and school facilities. The purpose of this petition is to rezone the subject site from PUD
to PUD in order to amend the Bucks Run PUD to increase the maximum number of
dwelling units from 156 units to 348 units subject to an affordable housing density bonus
and to add child d.ay care as a permitted use. It should be noted that the proposed Master
Plan depicts a 15-acre "West Tract" that limits the number of dwellings to 60 units.
However, if this tract is developed as a church, child-care and/or school, four (4) dwelling
units per acre shall be subtracted from the maximum number of dwelling units permitted.
The 24.06-acre "East Tract" permits 288 dwelling units, via a density bonus for
Affordable Housing. If the entire project is developed with residential uses, the
maximum number of dwelling units is limited to 348 units, which results in a project
density of 8.87 units per acre.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Existing Conditions:
Surrounding- North:
East:
South:
West:
The subject site is undeveloped and is zoned Bucks Run PUD.
A landscape nursery that is zoned "A" Rural Agricultural.
A golf course and residential community that is presently under
construction and zoned Vanderbilt Country Club PUD.
The undeveloped Mission Church PUD.
Collier Boulevard, canal and the undeveloped Golden Pond PUD
that is approved 75 dwellings at 4 units per acre.
2001
--
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
All of the subject property is located xvithin the Urban Mixed Use - Urban Residential
Sub-district on the Future Land Use Map (FLUE) to the Growth Management Plan
(GMP). A review of consistency relationships with elements of the GMP is as follows:
Future Land Use Element - A description of Urban Mixed Use District in the FLUE
advises that residential uses are permitted at a base density of 4-units per acre along with
certain nonresidential uses such as churches, schools, child care centers. The provision of
an Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement may add up to 8 units per acre to the
base density of 4 units per acre for a total of 12 units per acre. Since the proposed density
of 8.87 units per acre is less than the permitted density the site is eligible to receive, the
proposed petition is consistent with the FLUE of the GMP.
Transportation Element - The Transportation Department has reviewed the applicant's
Traffic Impact Statement. (TIS) and has the following comments. The site generated trips
for the new uses are estimated to be approximately 1,152 Weekday Trips, 115 A.M. Peak
Hour Trips, and 133 P.M. Peak Hour Trips. The project trips will have a significant
impact on COllier Boulevard from the project's entrance to Vanderbilt Beach Road.
However, all road segments within the project's radius of development influence will
operate at an acceptable level of service at the project build-out in 2003.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is
required. Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code if during the
course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a historic or
archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to
protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code
Enforcement Department contacted.
EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL,
INFRASTRUCTURE:
TRANSPORTATION &
This petition xvas referred to all appropriate County agencies for their revie;v. Since no
level of service (LOS) standard will be adversely affected by this amendment, these
agencies have recommended approval.
2 7 2001
10
EVALUATION:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on
which a favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an
objective, comprehensive overviexv of the impact of the proposed land use change, be
they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that overvie~v.
The listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.2.5 and Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the
Land Development Code thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and shall be used
as the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission to
the BCC. Each of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff
review are listed under each of the criterion noted and are categorized as either pro or
con, xvhichever the case may be, in the opinion of staff.
The review of each of the criterion is followed by a summary conclusion culminating in a
determination of compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These
evaluations are completed as separate documents and are attached to the staff report.
Appropriate evaluation of petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for
supportive action by appointed and elected decision-makers. The evaluation by
professional staff should typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the
community's future land use plan, and whether or not a rezoning action would be
consistent with the Collier County GMP in all Of its related elements (See Exhibit "A"
and Exhibit "B").
Other evaluation considerations should include an assessment of adequacy of
transportation infrastructure, other infrastructure, and compatibility xvith adjacent land
uses, a consideration usually dealt with as a facet of analyzing the relationship of the
rezoning action to the long range plan for future land uses. In addition, the Board of
County Commissioners has reviewed similar rezone requests within this "Urban
Residential" designated area where there is an opportunity to approve residential uses
when deemed appropriate. Notwithstanding the above, staff in reviewing the determinants
for'adequate findings to support a rezoning action advise as folloxvs: The subject site is
currently undeveloped, wooded, and is zoned PUD. The currently approved PUD alloxvs
for churches, private schools and residential land uses at a density of 4 units per acre. The
"East Tract" as designated on the Master Plan is proposed for an Affordable Housing
rental community. The "West Tract" is proposed for a church, child-care (120 students).
Based on staff's analysis, the proposed PUD project does not adversely impact any
adopted level of service standard.
Relationship to Future Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship, as it applies
specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship
of the proposed zoning action to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP). In the case at hand, and based upon the Future Land Use Plan,
we have an expectation that the land will be used and developed for those residential land
uses authorized within the PUD. The proposed density is consistent with tl
Rating System since it allows for a density bonus with the approval of an
NOV 2 7 2001
4
pREPARED BY ~.,,
kAY B~JL~OWS, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
CURI~T PLANNING SECTION
/o. I0. O/
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
SUSAN MURRAY, AICP, MANAGER
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E., ACTING DIRECTOR.
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DATE
DATE
A p,p, RO V.E___D' BY:
JOHN ~. DUNqflUCK, III, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR
COM~ITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS.
Staff Report for November 1, 2001 CCPC meeting.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION:
JOYCEANNA J. RAUTIO, CHAIRMAN
RVB/rb/STAFF REPORT/AR-g34
DATE
6
NOV 2 7 2001
FINDINGS FOR PUD
PUDA-01-AR-834
Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning
Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the following
criteria:
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed ia
relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access,
drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
Pro.__~ (i) Intensifying land development patterns produces economics of scale relative
to public utilities, facilities and services, which are currently available in this
area.
(ii) Development of land that has legal access, is adjacent to existing residential
uses is particularly suitable for a mixed-use development that includes a
church, school and residential.
Con.'. (i) Existing neighboring residents often perceive new development as an
intensification near their existing neighborhood as contributing factors to
inconveniencing traffic movements to and from their place of residence,
increasing noise and pollution, and reducing property values.
Findin~ Jurisdictional reviews by County staff support the manner and pattern of
development proposed for the subject property. Development conditions contained in the
pUD document give assurance that all infrastructure will be developed and be consistent
with County regulations. Any inadequacies that require supplementing the PUD
document will be recommended to the Board of County Commissioners as conditions of
approval by staff. Recommended mitigation measures will assure compliance with Level
of Service relationships as prescribed by the Groxvth Management Plan.
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.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Finding. Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control.
The PUD document makes appropriate provisions for continuing operation and
maintenance of common areas.
Exhibit "A"
p~._~ --
e
Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives
and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
Pro: (i) The development strategy for the subject property is entirely consistent with
the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP.
Con: None.
Finding: The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives and
policies of the GMP. A review of consistency relationships with elements of the GMP is
as follows: The subject PUD proposes to allow residential uses at a which is consistent
with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP (See Staff report).
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.
Pro: The subject 38.99-acre site has been designed to provide an architectural design and
development standards that reflect the approved Bucks Run PUD design character. In
addition, landscaping has been provided to buffer the adjaCent residential and non-
residential tracts.
Con: None.
Findine: The PUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize internal land use
relationship through the use of various forms of open space separation. External
relationships are automatically regulated by the Land Development Code to assure
harmonious relationships betxveen projects.
The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Finding: The amount of open space set aside by this project is consistent
with the provisions of the Land Development Code.
The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary. Finding: Timing or sequence of development in light
requirements automatically triggers the mechanism for ensuring tt
degradation is not allowed or the LOS deficiency is corrected.
2
NOV 2 7 2001
The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion.
Pro:. This petition seeks to modify the existing residential zoning on the subject site
that will allow for a more compatible project. Lastly, this project will not
adversely impact any adopted level of service standard.
Con:. None.
Summary Finding: Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure
such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property
relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from
urban development. This assessment is described at length in the staff report adopted by
the CCPC; Relative to this petition, development of the subject property is timely,
because supporting infrastructure is available.
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.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findin?.: This finding' essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which
development standards proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that
would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The development
standards in this PUD are similar to those standards.
FINDINGS FOR PUD-01-AR-834/RVB/rb
NOV 2 7 2001
REZONE FINDINGS
PETITION PUDA-01-AR-834
Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and
recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall
shoxv that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation
to the following, where applicable:
Whether the proposed change ~vili be consistent with the goals, objectives & policies
of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan.
Pro.'.
i. The subject property is located within the Mixed Use Urban Residential Sub-District
on the FLUE of the Growth Management Plan.
ii. Development Orders deemed consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE of
the GMP should be considered a positive relationship.
Con.: None
Summary Findings:. The proposed development is in compliance with the Future Land
Use Element of the Groxvth Management Plan. The density permitted within this PUD is
consistent with the Density Rating System contained in the Growth Management Plan.
The existing land use pattern;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable. (A detailed study is contained in the staff report.)
Summary Findings: The adjacent uses include residential to the northeast and east while
a landscape nursery is to the north and a church zoned property is to the south.
The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts;
Pro: The subject site is of sufficient size and is located within the Urban Residential
Sub-district on the Future Land Use Map.
Con[ None.
Summary Findines: The parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated
district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also consistent with expected land
uses by virtue of its consistency with the FLUE. ,~c_,rr.~ I~
EXHIBIT "B"
NOV 2 7 2001
Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Pro: The existing PUD district boundaries are logically drawn and they are consistent
witl~ the FLUE of the GMP. The proposed petition will not change these boundaries.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The boundaries are logically drawn by virtue that the subject PUD
provides an extension of the existing residential PUD to the east.
Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment necessary.
Pro: The proposed zoning change is appropriate based on the approved multi-family
residential land uses to the east. Furthermore, the subject PUD has a positive relationship
to the GMP.
e
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The proposed change in zoning is appropriate since it is consistent
xvith the FLUE and Growth Management Plan.
XVhether the proposed' change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood;
Pro: (i) The proposed development standards (i.e. setbacks and landscaping) made
a condition of approval will go a long way towards offsetting any potential
adverse influences by the Bucks Run PUD on the residential subdivision
to the east.
Con: (i)
The location of the subject site could cause increased noise and traffic
impacts on the nearby residences. However, due to the proposed landscape
and buffer areas, the proposed PUD should not adversely impact the
adjacent properties.
Summary Findings: The proposed PUD will not adversely influence living conditions
in the neighborhood because the recommended development standards and other
conditions for approval have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount
of adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments. Recommended mitigation
actions should serve to ameliorate impact on the adjacent residential area.
NOV 2 7 2001
__
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.
Pro,: (i)
An action to rezone the property as requested is consistent with the
Transportation Element. (See Staff Report)
(ii)
The property has legal access thereby providing access to Collier
Boulevard, which connects with the arterial road network over which
traffic from this development will draw and defuse traffic.
Con: (i)
As urban intensification increases, there is some loss of comfort and ease
of travel to the motoring public. However, law regulates this degree of
discomfort by concurrency requirements as adopted in the Growth
Management Plan.
(ii)
In the short run construction traffic made necessary for development may
be irritating to local residents.
Summary Findines: Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for
consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP and was found
consistent, a statement advising that this project when developed will not excessively
increase traffic congestion. Additionally certain traffic management system
improvements are required as a condition of approval (i.e. turn lanes, traffic signals,
dedications, etc.). In the final analysis all rezone actions are subject to the Concurrency
Management System.
Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem;
Pro: (i)
The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite
development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on
nearby properties. New development in and of itself is not supposed to
increase flooding potential on adjacent property over and above xvhat
would occur without development.
Con: (i)
Urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to
inter-county drainage appurtenances may increase the risk of flooding in
areas when the drainage outfall condition is inadequ, ate.
Summary Findings: Every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization
of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate
drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approv~
was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plato
meet County standards as a condition of approval.
all sub-surface
are required to (:~
NOV 2 7 2001
10.
Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas;
Pro: The proposed PUD development conforms to the approved zoning on the adjacent
property to the east. In addition, the maximum height for the structures as provided for in
the approved Bucks Run PUD is similar to the maximum height permitted within the
nearby projects to the east. The overall development standards are compatible with the
standards listed for the similar residential districts in the LDC, which are designed to
protect the circulation of light and air to adjacent areas.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: All projects in Collier County are subject to the development
standards that are unique to the zoning district in which it is located. These development
standards and others apply generally and equally to all zoning districts (i.e. open space
requirement, corridor management provisions, etc.) were designed to ensure that light
penetration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas.
Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent
area;
Pro: Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous underutilized
land.
11.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results,
xvhich may be internal or extemal to the subject property that can affect property values.
Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning, however zoning by
itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by la~v is driven by market
value. The mere fact that a property is given a new zoning designation may or may not
affect value.
XVhether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in
the zoning division of the LDC is that their sound application when combined with the
administrative site development plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a
change in zoning will not result in a deterrence to improvement of adjacent property.
No._ ~-~ ....
4
NOV 2 7 2001
12.
13.
14.
15.
Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findines: The proposed PUD complies with the Growth Management Plan,
which are public policy statements supporting zoning actions when they are consistent
with said plans. In light of this fact the proposed change does not constitute a grant of
special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare
relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest.
Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findines: The subject property can be developed in accordance with the
existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the opportunity to
maximize the development potential of the site as made possible by its consistency
relationship with the Growth Management Plan.
Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
the County;
Pro: The project is designed in a manner that is compatible with surrounding and
approved PUD property in size and scale.
Con: Existing neighbors within the adjacent subdivision to the east may feel that the
proposed change is out of scale with the neighborhood. However, no objections to this
petition have been received prior to the completion of the staff report.
Summary Findines: The subject PUD complies with the Growth Management Plan
while the intensity of land uses is deemed acceptable for this site.
Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findines: There are many sites, which are zoned to accommodate the
proposed development. This is not the determining factor when evaluating the
appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are co~~th
all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of infrastructure and to s ~me ~~
timing of the action and all of the above criteria, no. ?' .w~._
NOV 2 7 2001
16.
17.
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.
Pro: The .subject property is undeveloped. Presently exotic vegetation has invaded the
site, however the environmental impacts are minimal.
Con:. Development of the site may create a need for additional fill and site alteration for
infrastructure improvements.
Summary Findings: The extent of site alteration will be determined as a function of
obtaining a Site Development Plan approval to execute the PUD's development strategy.
The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and
services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth
Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findimzs: A multi-disciplined team responsible for jurisdictional elements of
the GMP has reviewed this petition and they have found it consistent with the GMP. The
conditions of approval have been incorporated into the PUD document. Staff reviews for
adequacy of public services and levels of service determined that required infrastructure
meets with GMP established relationships.
REZONE FIN DINGS/01 -AR-834/RVB/rb
NOV 2 7 2001
PETITIO]
R E-SUI~&I ITTAL
PUDA-2001-AR-834
BUCKS RUN
PUO_98o15, PROJECT #'19990120
DATE: 8/14t01
RAY BELLOWS
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING
FOR
PUD AMENDMENT/DO AMENDMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
PLANNING SERVICES
Name of Applicant #1 William L. Hoover, Trustee of the Bucks Run Land Trust
Applicant's Mailing Address 3785 Airport Road North, Suite B-I
City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34105
Applicant's Phone Number 941-403-8899 Fax Number 941-403-9009
and
Name Of Applicant #2 Donald E. Wiggins, Pastor of Restoration Church, Inc.
Applicant's Mailing Address 259 Airport Road South
City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34104
Applicant's Phone Number 941-643-8009 Fax Number 941-643-2941
and
Name of Applicant #3 Michael D. Wohl, President of Pinnacle Housing Group, Inc.
Applicant's Mailing Address 9400 S. Dadeland Boulevard, Suite 100
City Miami State Florida Zip Code 33156
Applicant's Phone Number 941-643-8009 Fax Number 941-643-2941
Is the applicant the oxvner of the subject property?
XX Yes (Appplicants #1 and #2 only) XX
No (Applicant #3 only)
XX
XX
__ (a) If applicant is a land trust, so indicate and name beneficiaries below.
(b) If applicant is a corporation other than a public corporation, so indicate
and name officers and major stockholders below.
_-- (c) If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity,
so h~dicate and name principals below.
_-- (d) If applicant is an owner, indicate exactly as recorded, and list all other
owners, if any.
(e) If applicant is a lessee, attach copy of lease, and indicate actual owners if
not indicated on the lease. ~'~.~.)'~
tnd In~
XX (f) If applicant is a contract purchaser, attach copy of contract,
actual owner(s) name and address below.
NOV 2 1 2001
Except for the north 8.0 acres of the 15.00-acre "West Tract" the subject property is owned
by a land trust with the description:
Trust Nam___~e is "The Bucks Run Land Trust Dated the 27th Day of July, 1999".
Trustee is William L. Hoover, 3785 Airport Road N., Suite B-l, Naples, FL 34105.
The Beneficiaries of the B~ucks Ruin Land Trust are___~'.
Thomas A. & Julie L. Hoover, 4025 Hillman Road, Morral, OH 43337.
Q. Grady Minor and Nancy P. Mh~or 5172 Seahorse Ave., Naples, Florida 34103.
Robert H. & Kay A. Hartman, 21109 Pargillis Road, Bowling Green, OH 43402.
William L. & Charlene S. Hoover, 5690 Wax Myrtle Way, Naples, FL 34110.
The north eight acres of the "West Tract" of the subject property xvas purchased by and the
south seven acres of the "West Tract" are under option to purchase contract by the
Restoration Church, Inc., a Florida non-profit corporation, 259 Airport Road South, Naples,
Florida 34104.
Donald E. \Virgins is Pastor and President, Robert W. Poulsen is Vice-President, and L.
Price Abbott is Secretary-Treasurer of the Restoration Church, Inc.
The west 13.33 acres of the 24.06-acre "East Tract" of the subject propertY is under purchase
contract by and the east 10.73 acres of the "East Tract" are under option to purchase contract
by Pinnacle Housing Group, Inc.
Pinnacle Housing Group, Inc. is a Florida corporation with the following officers who are
also the major stockholders.
Louis Wolfson III, Chairman; Michael D. Wohl, President; David O. Deutch; Executive
Vice President; Mitchell M. Friedman, Senior Vice President; Sean Schwinghanm~er, Vice
President of Development; and Felix Braverman, Vice President of Construction.
2. Name of Agent William__L. Hoover, AICP Firm Hoover p_lannh'~g__& Dev., Inc,
Agent's Mailing Address 3__785 Airport Road North, Suite B-!.
City ~ State Florida Zip Code 34105_
Phone Number 9_41-403-8899 Fax Number _941-403-9009
and
Name of Agent ~_~ayne Arnold AICP Firm Q. Grad,/Minor. & Associate__~s, P.A.
Agent's Mailing Address 3__800 Via Del Rey
City Bonit~a Sprin~s State F__lorida Zip Code 3_4134
Phone Number _941-947-114~44 Fax Number 941-947-037_5
NOV 2 7 2001
PUD ORDINA~CE NAME AND NUMBER: Bucks Run PUD, Ordinance No. 99-79
DETAILED LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THE
PPLICATION (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page. If
~equest involves change to more than one zoning district, include
separate legal description for property involved in each district.
If property is odd-shaped, submit five (5) copies of survey (1" to
400' scale).
THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPLYING THE CORRECT LEGAL
DESCRIPTION. IF QUESTIONS ARISE CONCERNING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION,
AN ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION SHALL BE REQUIRED.
SECTION 35 TOWNSHIP 48S P~ANGE 26E
Address or location of subject property The east side of Collier
Boulevard, about 700 feet north of Vanderbilt Beach Road.
Does property owner own contiguous property to t~e Subject
property? If so, give complete legal description of entire
contiq~uous property. -(If .space i.s inadequate, .attach on
separate page).
9 o
TYPE OF AMENDMENT:
]fW A. PUD Document Language Amendment
×W B. PUD Master Plan A~mendment
C. Development Order Language Amendment
DOES ~.[ENDMENT COMPLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLkN:
No If no, explain:
Yes
FLAS A PUBLIC HEARING BEEN HELD ON THIS PROPERTY WITHIN THE
LAST YEAR? IF SO, IN WHOSE NA}4E? Y~-~r William L. Hoover: Trustee
PETITION ~: PUD 98-15(1) DATE: Nov. 23, 1999 (BCC Meeting)
ACtA I lt.M
NOV 2 7 200i
10.
HAS ~IY PORTION OF THE PUD BEEN SOLD AND/OR
DEVELOPED? ARE ANY CHANGES PROPOSED FOR THE AREA SOLD AND/OR
DEVELOPED?Yes. XX No. IF YES, DESCRIBE: (ATTACH
ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NECESSARY)-
AFFIDAVIT
being first duly sworn,
William L. H~over. Trl~e
are 'th~ owners o~ the property described
depose and say that we
herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing;
that all the answers to the questions in this application, and all
sketches, data, and other Supplementary matter attached to and
made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best
of our knowledge and belief. We understand this application must
be completed and accurate before a hearing can be advertised. We
further permit the undersigned to act as our representative in any
matters regarding this Petition.
NOTE: SIGNATURES OF ALL OW~ERS ARE MA2~DATORY.
nIGNATURE OF OWNER SIGNATURE OF OWNER
SIGNATURE OF AGENT
State of Florida
County of Collier
The foreg9jng Application was acknowledged before me this
/F day of ~~~2]'/-'-' ,-2000 by d~l~ g. /~Db4~ , who
is personally ~nown to me or who hds produced
as identification and who did (~i~
take an oath. ~~
(si y Public)
PUD~DO APPLICATION/md/4128
NOTARY PUBLIC
Commission #
My Commission Expires:
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
NOTARIZED AUTHORIZATION LETTER/LETTER OF UNIFIED CONTROL
RE:
Proposed Wolf Creek PUD, Located in Section 34, Township 48S, Range 26E,
Unincorporated Collier County, Florida
To Whom It May Concern:
Please be advised that Mike Davis, Consultant, 6120 Cedar Tree Lane, Naples, Florida
34116; Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P.A., 4001 N. Tamiami Trail, Suite 300,
Naples, Florida 34103; Davidson Engineering, Inc., 1720 J.&C. Blvd., Suite 34109; and
Hoover Planning & Dev., Inc., 3785 Airport Road North, Suite B-l, Naples, Florida
34105; have been engaged by the applicant shown below to act as authorized agents
and to request necessary applications during the PUD Rezoning petition process for
the subject project. The applicant also acknowledges to have unified control over all of
the acreage within the Wolf Creek PUD via an option to purchase contract on one
parcel and purchase contracts on two parcels.
Sincerely,
William L. Hoover, Trustee
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
The foregoing instrument was
s~r/are !;~ , 2001 by
who i sonally known to me or have produced
as identification and who did (did not) take an oath.
acknowledged .before me this /~-z¢.~ day
Printed Name
.--,: :,=. MY COMMISSION # CC 909826
~t. :"~ . EXPIRES: February 13. 2004
Il. ..... ~ ....... ,onde~ Thru No,ary Pubhc Underw,ters /i
My Commission Expires:
SEAL
NOV 2 7 2001
of
AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM RESTORATION CHURCH, INC.
RE:
Proposed Amendment of the Bucks Run PUD (hereinafter referred to as the
"PUD"), Located in Section 35, Township 48S, Range 26E, Unincorporated
Collier County, Florida
To Whom It May Concern:
Please be advised that Mike Davis, Consultant, 6120 Cedar Tree Lane, Naples, Florida
34116; Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida
34134; and Hoover Planning & Dev., Inc., 3785 Airport Road North, Suite Bo1, Naples,
Florida 34105 (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Consultants") have been
engaged by the Bucks Run Land Trust, at the sole cost of Bucks Run Land Trust.
Restoration Church, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, (the "Church") is a co-
applicant and recent purchaser of the northwest 8 acres of the PUD and has an option
to purchase the southwest 7 acres of the PUD, the total of which consists of the west
15 acres of the PUD. The Church acknowledges and agrees that the aforementioned
consultants shall act as the Church's authorized agent for the purpose of representing
the Church's interest at the meeting(s) before the Planning Commission and the Collier
County Commissioners and to speak with County Staff and the County
Commissioners. Said authority is expressly limited to representing the entire PUD
during the PUD Amendment petition process and for the limited purpose of obtaining
a permitted use for a child care facility on the Church's west 15 acres and for the
purpose of expressing the Church's approval in the Bucks Run Land Trust obtaining
an affordable housing status on the rear or east 24 acres of the PUD.
The Church also acknowledges there is unified control over all of the acreage within
the Bucks Run PUD.
By:
RESTORATION CHURCH, INC., a Florida not-
/
for-profit corporation ..- .... . ~
Michael A. Baviello,,/J ./r~,Esquire
Attorney for Rest~,~on Church, Inc.
Page I of 2
NOV
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this .-~_i day of October,
2001, by Michael A. Baviello, Jr., Esquire, Attorney for RESTORATION CHURCH,
INC., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, on behalf of said corporation. He is:
(CHECK ONE): (~/ personally known to me, or
( ) who have produced as
identification,
and who did take an oath.
FAYE L. SCOTT
No{ary Public, State Of FIonda
My Commission Expires 7/8/05
Commission No. DD033688
Sign Above-' ~aye L. Scot1
Print Name:
NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida at Large
My Commission number is: (_: :~. .... ~. '~
My Commission expires: '-1 ! !:;(~: ,-_j
F:\MAB\RestorationChurch\Authorization Letter.wpd
Page 2 of 2
NOV 2-7 200~
pg.
Legal Description:.
The subject property being 39.06+ acres, is located in Section 35, Township 48 South, Range 26
East, and is fully described as:
The North half of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 35, Township
48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, less and except the West 100 feet thereof,
previously conveyed for a road and canal right-of-way.
The North half of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 35, Township 48
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, subject to an easement for public road right-of-way
over and across the East 30 feet thereof.
NOV 2 7 2001
Hu~ U~ U1 Ug: 1Ua ~, Hoover [941) 403-9009 p.2
NOTARIZED AUTHORIZATION LETTER
RE:
Proposed Amendment of the Bucks Run PUD, Located in Section 35, Township
48S, Range 26E, Unincorporated Collier County, Florida
To Whom It May Concern:
Please be advised that Michael Davis, Consultant, 212 Napa Ridge, Naples, Florida
34119; Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P.A., 4001 N. Tamiami Trail, Suite 300,
Naples, Florida 34103; Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita
Springs, Florida 34134; and Hoover Planning & Dev., Inc., 3785 Airport Road North,
Suite B-l, Naples, Florida 34105; have been authorized by the co-applicant shown
below to act as authorized agents and to request necessary applications during the
PUD Amendment petition process and Affordable Housing Density Bonus petition
process for the subject project.
Sincerely,
~'ignature
Printed Name and Title
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me
,j~:IL_, 2001 by 0.-~ ' ', ~i'~,. ' '
who is/af~ personally known to me or have produced
as identification and who did (did not) take an oath.
this
day of
My Commission Expires: ,L-:'. .... .,'
SEAL
NOV 2 7 2001
COLLIER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT
APARTMENT COMPLEX INVENTORY - FEBRUARY 2001
COASTAL URBAN AREA
A~ Walk of Napl~ 4~ 124 1BWI BA $68~7~ $500 $50 Y~
2277 A~r Walk Circle 280 2B~BA $~0~925 40 lb. ~ le~
$2~ dap. +
598-9944 $~ non~funda~e
~or View Apa~n~ 168 96 2B~BA $8~ $2~ $25 Yes
14~ Old 41 60 3B~2BA $910 ~e or I~s 20 lb. or less
594-7003 12 4B~4BA $952 ~p~ding $3~ n~-re~ndable
on ~dit
Bay Point So~h 161 2BR~ BA $675 $500 $25 Yes
20 lb. Or less
4631 Beyshom D~e $200 non~e~ndable
774~150
Bayshore Club 200 158 2BR/1BA $650-$675 $300 $25 Cats only
4500 Bayshore D~e 32 2BR/2BA $810 per adult
775-1400 carpo~ fee
Bear Cr~k Apafl~n~ 120 72 2B~1 BA $700 $300 $50 Yes
2367 Bear Creek DrNe 48 3B~BA $800 $350 de,sit +
$200 non-refundable
514-0600
Belvedere at Quail Run 162 48 1BR/1BA $695-$705 $4~ $25 Yes
260 Quail Forest Blvd. 24 1BRIDEN $720-$745 30 lb. full grown
434-0033 44 2B~IBA $75~$795 $400 deposit +
40 2B~2BA $800- $2~ non-refundable
6 2BR/2BA $845 additional $15.00 a
month with a pet
Be~hire Park 200 64 1B~I BA $715-$730 $400 $35 Yeast or dog
1600 Wellesley Circle 136 2BR/2BA $730-$795 $600 ~50 admin fee 20 lb. or less
$200 non-refundable
353-1211
Yes
Bermuda Island Apts. 144 1BRI1BA $780-$950. $500 $75 35 lb. Or less
3320 Bermuda Island Cir. 360 144 2B~I&2BA $964-$1175 $600 17" or under
594-18~ 72 3B~BA $12~-$1750 $7~ $200 de,sit +
$2~ non-refundable
B~n Ma~ of ~l~d 240 72 1BR/1BA ~-$705 $400 $45 or Yes up to 2 pets
7701 Davis Blvd. 1~ 2BR/2~A $8~815 ~00 $55 out 25 lb. or ]ess
455-1222 of state $2-~ de,sit +
$2-300 non-refund
NOV 2 7 2001
L
College P'ark Apts. 210 146 2BR/2BA $699 $400 :$35 Yes
~ College Park Circle 64 3BPJ2BA $780 $500 30 lbs. Or less
,_ $250 deposit +
[/ T07
$250 non-refundable
Coral Palms 288 144 1BPJ1BA $570-$630 $450 $50 Yes
4539 Meadowood Circle 144 2BR/2BA $730 $100 adm fee 35 lb. or less
455-4188 $300 non-refundable
Cricket Lake 188 1BPJ1BA $565 Equal to $35 Yes
701 Cricket Lake Drive one month's 20 lb. or less
775-8000 rent $250 non-refundable
Fountain View 456 184 1BR/1BA $675-$750 $200 $25 Yes
2602 Fountain View Lane 272 2BPJ2BA $789-$865 $100 hold fee 80 lb. or less
566-1551 $500 deposit +
$300 non-refundable
George Washington Carver 70 12 1BR/1BA Section 8 Based on $0 Only fish or birds
350 Tenth Sb'eet North 36 2BPJ1BA Subsidized Income
261-4595 22 3BP,/1.5BA Housing
Goodlette Arms 250 164 EFF/1BR $407 Equal $0 Yes
950 Goodlette Road 86 1BP,/1BA $494 to one One small pet
2,.--~3229 30% of income month's rent $200 refundable
Gordon River Apts. 96 48 2B~IBA $650 $275 $25 No
1400 5th Ave. No. 48 3BR/1 BA $725
262-8413
48 1BR $602 Variable
Heron Park Apartments 144 2BR $716 Based on $50
2155 Great Blue Drive 248 56 3BR $802 Credit & per adult Cats only
417-5500 pay for own Employment' $100 hold fee One cat per apt. must
water & sewer history non-refund have papers.
La Costa Apartments
3105 La Costa Circle 88 1 BR/1BA $799 $500 $75 Yes
435-4555 276 24 2BR/1BA $949 25 lb. or less
Off Pine Ridge Rd & I 75 116 2BPJ2BA $1,029 $200 deposit +
I 3BR/2BA $1,279 $200non-refundable~
Jasmine Cay Apartments 72 64 2BR/2BA $469-$735 $300 $35 No
100 Jasmine Cay Circle 8 3BPJ2BA $517-$824 $400
$43-3900
Page 2
NOV 2 7 2001
·
-' Yes
Laurel Ridge $300up to 30lb
5460 Laurel Ridge Lane 78 3BR/2BA $725 $500 $40 $400 301b-501b
353-7766 $500 50lb and up
$100 refundable
,Naples Place 52 2BR/1 .SBR $700 $700 $25 Yes
i4058 Bayshore Drive 20 lb. or less
775-9800 $350 deposit
Naples Place Apts. I 118 28 2BR/1.5BA $725 $725 $25 Yes
1900 "A" Sunshine Blvd. 52 2BR/2BA $750 $750 $200 non-refundable
!455-5155 § 2BR/2.SBA $775 $775
14 3BR/2BA $800 $800
18 3BR/2.SBA $850 $850
Naples Place Apts. II 26 2BR/2BA $750 $750 $25 Yes
1900 "A" Sunshine Blvd.
455-5155 $200 non-refundable
Northgate Club 120! 60 1BR/1BA $649 300+ $35 Yes
4300 Atoll Court 60 2BR/2BA $?59 $50 25 It). or less
455-8888 non-refundable $300 non-refundable
Osprey's Landing 176 16 1BR/1BA $602 $350 $150 Yes
100 Osprey's Landing 96 2BRI2BA $716 One cat
261-5454 64 3BR/2BA $802
--- Yes
River Reach 556 248 1BR/1BA $685-$785 $450 $40 up to two pets
2000 River Reach Drive 308 2BPJ2BA $810-$915 pet fees
643-2992 according to
weight $100 non-tel
River Park Apts. 104 67 1BR/1BA $430-$465 Equal to $25/person No
~02 11th Street N. 37 2BPJ1BA $525-$555 1/2 month rent $351married
!261-8532 couple
I ' '
Saddlebrook Village Apts. 140 20 2BR/1BA $602 $500 $50 Yes
8685 Saddlebrook Circle 96 2BP, J2BA $735 $500 $400 deposit
354-1122 24 3BR/2BA $824 $600 $200 non-refundable
Yes
Santa Barbara Landings 248 104 1BR/1BA $628-$730 $400 $50 Cat/dog under 40 lb.
145 Santa Clare Drive 144 2BR/2BA $778-$856 $500 $2-300 deposit +
;455-5131 $20 per month, 1 pet
$30 per month, 2 pets
Page 3
NOV 2 7 2001
St. Croix Apertmems 360 72 1BR/1 BA $819 $500 $75 Yes
4'"-" St. Croix Lane 216 2BPJ2BA $1,019 $500 deposit
5 434 72 3BR/3BA $1,309 $250 non-refundable
I Saxon Manor isles 252 81 1BR/1BA $619
$300
$50
Yes
under
35
lb.
1105 Manor Boulevard 60 2BR/2BA $735 2 pets max
403-4130 112 3BR/2BA $824 $200 deposit +
$200 non-refundable
ShadowWood Park 96 56 2BR/2BA $700 Equal to $25 Yes
6475 Seawolf Court 40 3BR/2BA $800 one month's per adult 25 lb. or less
775-3533 rent $250 non-refundable
South Bay Plantation 240 88 1BPJIBA $620-$650 $500 $40 Yes
1901 Rookery Bay Drive 80 2BR/2BA $715-$745 25 lb. or less
793-6555 72 2BR/2BA $775-$805 $2-300 non-refundable
(with den)
Summerwind Apartments 368 104 1BPJIBA $635-$690 Equal to $25 Yes up to 25 lbs.
5301 Summer Wind Drive 264 2BPJ2BA $740-$795 one months $200 deposit +
597-6605 rent $200 non-refundable
Turtle Creek Apartments 268 20 1BRtlBA $600 $250 + $25-$50 Yes
1130 Turtle Creek Blvd. 228 2BR/2BA $655-$715 one month's Dog 20 lb. or less or
= ~449 20 3BR/2BA $800 rent 2 cats
$300 non-refundable
Villas of Capri 235 31 1/BR1BA $508 $400 $50 Yes
7725 Tara Circle 96 2BP-J1BA $602 $500 20 lb. or less
455-4600 108 3BR/2BA $671 $600 $600 deposit+
I $300 non-refundable
I
Waverley Place 300 96 1BFU1BA $625-$635 $450 $35 Yes
300 Hemingway Lane 32 2BPJ1BA $695 $300-$400-$500
353-4300 142 2BRI2BA $715-$745 non-refundable
30 3BR/2BA $875 depending on
I size of pet
Whistler's'Cove 240 24 1BRIIBA $603 $250 with $30 Yes
I11400 Whistler's Cove 104 2BR/2BA $715 approved per person $350 deposit+
417-3333 ' Bird 88 3BR/2BA $799 credit $400 non-refundabl e
24 4BR/2BA $881
Whistler's Green 168 32 1BRI1BA $578 $250 $30 Yes
4700 Whistler's Green Cir. 80 2BPJ'2BA $700 $250 35 lb. or less
352-2999 56 3BPJ2BA $824 $400 $400 non-refundabl e
NOV 2 7 2001
Wild Pines of Naples 95 1§ 1 §P,/1BA $485 $25 Yes
2824 Davis Blvd. 80 '1BR/1BA $550 $500 per adult 30 lb. or less
793-7555 or 774-5022 (Larger Units) $100 non-refundable
Windsong Club 120 32 1BPJ1BA $619 $400 $50 No
11086 Windsong Circle 64 2BP-J2BA $710
566-8801 24 3BPJ2BA $809
Source; Collier County Housing & Urban Improvement Depadment (June phone survey)
COLLIER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT
3050 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE, SUITE 'I4E,
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34'104
PHONE (941) 403-2330, FAX (941) 403-2331
Revised :2/2001
Page 5
iI.E~'~ & AFFORDABI.,E tlO0~IAIG DEi/EI.~PMEN~ AND
COMMERCIAL ,T.,OIVI]Y(3 [..,OC~1'IOlV$
NOV 2 7 2001
Jokn gaujJ~nan
Linda Mack
402 George Washington Tpke.
Burlington, CT 06013
October 16, 2001
Collier County Current Planning Section
Development Services Building
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
East Naples, FL 34104
Re: Rezoning of PUDA-2001-AR-834 -- Bucks Run PUD
Dear Sirs:
We have just been notified of the possible rezoning of this property and most strenuously
object. We have no objection to the proposed school, child care center or church.
However, we do object to the proposed 348 dwelling units including 288 units of
affordable housing. This is much too dense of a population for the area.
This area consists of single family homes, a church and Vanderbilt Country Club. To
rezone this property to include 348 dwellings on less than 39 acres would be in complete
violation of why we purchased Florida property. We have lived in densely populated
areas of the country where no one has any privacy due to the close proximity of
neighbors and have no desire to return to this type of living. Approximating that 10 acres
of this land would be used for the construction of the school, church and day care center
leaves only 29 acres for the balance of the plan - housing. This allows only .08 acre per
unit (not allowing space for parking, roads and grounds)!
Please do not allow this rezoning to include the housing. We would appreciate being
advised of the outcome of the November 1 ~ meeting.
cc: Reta~ed
NOV 2 ? 200I
bellows r
From:
.,-,Sent:
O;
Subject:
GOLF4NOLE@aol.com
Tuesday, October 30, 2001 8:13 AM
RayBellows@colliergov.net
St. Agnes Mission Church
Subject: Bucks Run PUD Comments
Date: 10/29/01
From: St. Agnes Mission Church
To: RayBellows@colliergov.net
Dear Mr. Bellows:
St. John The Evangelist Catholic Church is the owner of the property south &
adjacent to subject property and are building the St. Agnes Catholic Mission
Church.
Our mission church PUD has been approved without such an access point and
approved with a continuous 50 ft. wide green space buffer. Our approved
circulation system does not provide for any accommodation of through traffic.
We also have provided a Linsar Wildlife Corridor which links the isolated
wetlands to be preserved within Bucks Run.
We therefore are opposed to any south access through our property.
-~incerely yours,
St. John The Evangelist Catholic Church
Rev. Thomas Glackin
Pastor
NOV 2 7 2001
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NUMBER 91-102, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR
THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE
OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP NUMBERED 8635S
BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM
"PUD" TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
KNOWN AS BUCKS RUN PUD, FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF COLLIER
BOULEVARD (C.R. 951), APPROXIMATELY 700
FEET NORTH OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD (C.R.
862), IN SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
CONSISTING OF 38.99-a: ACRES; PROVIDING FOR
THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 99-79, AS
AMENDED, THE FORMER MAURIEL PUD; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, William L. Hoover of Hoover Planning & Development, Inc., representing Bucks
Run Land Trust, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of
the herein described real property.
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
48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit
Development in accordance with the PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", which is
incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof. The Official Zoning Atlas Map numbered
8635S, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code; is
hereby amended accordingly.
SECTION TWO:
Ordinance Number 99-79, as amended, known as the Bucks Run PUD, adopted on November
23, 1999 by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, is hereby repealed in its entirety.
SECTION THREE:
This ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the De ~artment of State.
NOV 2 7 2001
PASSED AND DUL~' ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier Co
Florida, this __ day of ,2001.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Approved as to Form and
Legal Sufficiency
Marjor~ M. Student
Assistant County Attorney
g/admin/PUD-98-15(2)/RB,~im
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, PhD., CHAIRMAN
-2-
NOV 2 ? 2001
BUCKS RUN PUD
A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PREPARED FOR:
PASTOR DONALD WIGGINS
RESTORATION CHURCH, INC.
259 AIRPORT ROAD SOUTH
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PRESIDENT MICHAEL D. WOHL
PINNACLE HOUSING GROUP, INC.
9400 S. DADELAND BLVD., SUITE 100
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33156
WILLIAM L. HOOVER, TRUSTEE
BUCKS RUN LAND TRUST
3785 AIRPORT ROAD N., SUITE B-1
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34105
PREPARED BY:
WILLIAM L. HOOVER, AICP
HOOVER PLANNING & DEV., INC.
3785 AIRPORT ROAD N., SUITE B-1
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34105
and
Q. GRADY MINOR, P.E./WAYNE ARNOLD, AICP
Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
3800 VIA DEL REY
BONITA SPRINGS, FLORIDA 34134
DATE FILED BY APPLICANT: November 15, 2000
DATE REVISED BY APPLICANT: September 19, 2001
DATE REVISED BY COLLIER COUNTY: October 4, 2001
DATE APPROVED BY BCC:
ORDINANCE NUMBER:
EXHIBIT "A"
-- ! I
NOV
L ~,,._~. _
'TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF EXHIBITS
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
SECTION I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION
SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
SECTION IIIRESIDENTIAL AREAS PLAN
SECTION IV PRESERVE AREAS PLAN
SECTION ¥ DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
PAGE
i
ii
1
3
6
9
15
16
AGE, ITIDAITE~
NOV 2 7 2001
EXHIBIT "a"
EXHIBIT "B"
LIST OF EXHIBITS
PUD MASTER PLAN
PUD WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
NOV 2 7 2001
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
The development of approximately 39.06+ acres of property in Collier County, as a
Planned Unit Development to be known as Bucks Run PUD will be in compliance with
the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as set forth in the Collier County
Growth Management Plan. The residential facilities of the Bucks Run PUD will be
consistent with the growth policies, land development regulations, and applicable
comprehensive planning objectives for the following reasons:
The subject property's location in relation to existing or proposed community
facilities and services permits the development's residential density as described
in Objective 2 of the Future Land Use Element.
The project development is compatible and complimentary to surrounding land
uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element.
Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable sections of the
Collier County Land Development Code as set forth in Objective 3 of the Future
Land Use Element.
The project development will result in an efficient and economical allocation of
community facilities and services as required in Policies 3.1 .G of the Future Land
Use Element.
The project development is planned to protect the functioning of natural drainage
features and natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas as described in
Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element.
The project is located within the Urban Residential Mixed Use District on the
Future Land Use Map. The "East Tract" of the project is designated as an
Affordable Housing Density Bonus project. The projected density of 11.97
dwelling units per acre on the "East Tract" is in compliance with the Future Land
Use Element of the Growth Management Plan based on the following
relationships to required criteria:
"East Tract" with an Affordable Housin.cl Project
Base Density 4 dwelling units/acre
Affordable Housing Density Bonus +8 dwellinq units/acre
Maximum Permitted Density 12 dwelling units/acre
Requested density = 11.97 dwelling units/acre
Maximum permitted units = 24,06 acres x 11.97 dwelling units/acre = 288
units.
NOV 2 7 2001
The projected density of 4.0 dwelling units per acre, for each acre residentially
developed, on the "West Tract" is in compliance with the Future Land Use
Element of the Growth Management Plan based on the following relationships to
required criteria:
"West Tract" with a Residential Project
Base Density 4 dwellinq units/acre
Maximum Permitted Density 4 dwelling units/acre
Requested density = 4.0 dwelling units/acre
Maximum permitted units = 15.0 acres x 4 dwelling units/acre = 60 units.
(For every acre of residential area that is developed for non-residential
uses, 4 dwelling units shall be subtracted from the maximum of 60
dwelling units on this tract.)
The Urban designation allows for a variety of community facilities, such as
churches, schools, and child care centers.
All final local development orders for this project are subject to Division 3.15,
Adequate Public Facilities, of the Collier County Land Development Code.
NOV 2 7 2001
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
SECTION I
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the
property, and to descdbe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be
developed under the project name of Bucks Run PUD.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The subject property being 39.06_+ acres, is located in Section 35, Township 48
South, Range 26 East, and is fully described as:
The North half of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of
Section 35, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,
less and except the West 100 feet thereof, previously conveyed for a road
and canal right-of-way.
The North half of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of
Section 35, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Flodda,
subject to an easement for public road right-of-way over and across the
East 30 feet thereof.
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
The subject property is owned as follows:
The north 8.0 acres of the western 15.0 acres, labeled "West Tract" on Exhibit
^", of the subject property is owned by Restoration Church, Inc. and the south
7.0 acres of the West Tract is under option to purchase contract by Restoration
Church, Inc., Pastor Donald Wiggins, 259 Airport Road South, Naples, Florida
34104. The south 7.0 acres of the West Tract and the 24.06 acres labeled "East
Tract" on Exhibit "A" is owned by the Bucks Run Land Trust dated July 27, 1999,
Trustee William L. Hoover, 3785 Airport Road North, Suite B-l, Naples, Flodda
34105. Pinnacle Rousing Group, Inc., President Michael D. Wohl, 9400 S.
Dadeland Boulevard, Suite 100, Miami, Flodda 33156 has the west 13.33 acres
of the 24.06-acre "East Tract" under purchase contract and the east 10.73 acres
of the "East Tract" under option to purchase contract.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA
NOV ~ 7 2001
1.5
Ao
The subject property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard,
approximately 700 feet north of Vanderbilt Beach Road (unincorporated
Collier County), Florida.
Bo
The entire project site is zoned PUD, Bucks Run, approved by Collier
County Ordinance No. 99-79.
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
The project site is primarily located within the 951 Canal North Drainage Basin
according to the Collier County Drainage Atlas; the eastern portion of the site is
located within the Cypress Canal Drainage Basin. The proposed outfall for the
project is the CR-951 roadside ditch located at the west property line of the
project.
Natural ground elevation varies from 12.0 NGVD within the onsite wetland areas
to 13.0 NGVD at the CP,-951 right-of-way line constituting the west property line;
average site elevation is 12.4 NGVD. The entire site is located within FEMA
Flood Zone "X" with no base flood elevation specified.
The water management system of the project proposes the construction of a
perimeter berm with crest elevation set at or above the 25-year, 3-day peak flood
stage. Water quality pretreatment is proposed in the on-site lake system prior to
discharge.
The water management system will be permitted by South Florida Water
Management District (SFWMD) through the Environmental Resource Permit
process. All rules and regulations of SFWMD will be imposed upon this project
including but not limited to: storm attenuation, minimum roadway centerline,
perimeter berm and finished floor elevations, water quality pre-treatment, and
wetland hydrology maintenance.
Per Collier County Soil Legend dated January 1990, the soil type found within
the limits of the property is predominately #2 - Holopaw Fine Sand, Limestone
Substratum with a small area of #10 - Oldsmar Fine Sand at the extreme
eastern portion of the site.
The site vegetation consists primarily of slash pine, cabbage palm, and Cypress
trees with upland areas of Slash Pine and Saw Palmetto. Due to artificial
lowering of the water table by the CR-951 canal, grape vine and poison ivy
groundcover have infested the site. The site is also heavily infested with
Brazilian Peppers and Melaleuca trees, both exotic species.
NOV 2 ? 2001
1.6
1.7
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The westerly portion of the Bucks Run PUD is comprised of 15.00 acres labeled
"West Tract" on Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan and is limited to a maximum of 60
residential units. A church, child care, and/or school may also be developed on
all or a portion of the West Tract. For each residential acre developed as a
church, child care, and/or school use, 4 residential units shall be subtracted from
the maximum number of dwelling units permitted in the West Tract.
The eastedy portion of the Bucks Run PUD is comprised of 24.06 acres labeled
"East Tract" on Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan and is. limited to a maximum of 288
residential units, via an accompanying Affordable Housing Density Bonus
petition. Recreational facilities will be provided in conjunction with the dwelling
units.
The residential and other principal land uses, recreational uses, and signage are
designed to be harmonious with one another in a natural setting by using
common architecture, quality screening/buffering, and native vegetation,
whenever feasible.
SHORT TITLE.
This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "Bucks
Development Ordinance".
Run Planned Unit
NOV 2 7 2001
2.1
2.2
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project
plan of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the
respective land uses of the tracts included in the project, as well as other project
relationships.
GENERAL
Regulations for development of the Bucks Run PUD shall be in
accordance with the contents of this document, PUD Planned Unit
Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier
County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan in effect
at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations
relate which authorizes the construction of improvements, such as but not
limited to Final Subdivision Plat, Final Site Development Plan, Excavation
Permit and Preliminary Work Authorization. Where these regulations fail
to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most
similar district in the Land Development Code shall apply.
Bo
Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as
the definitions set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code in
effect at the time of building permit application.
All conditions imposed and graphic material presented depicting
restrictions for the development of the Bucks Run PUD shall become part
of the regulations which govern the manner in which the PUD site may be
developed.
All applicable regulations, unless specifically waived through a variance or
separate provision provided for in this PUD Document, shall remain in full
force and effect.
Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a
concurrency review under the provisions of Division 3.15 Adequate Public
Facilities of the Collier County Land Development Code at the earliest, or
next, to occur of either Final Site Development Plan approval, Final Plat
approval, or building permit issuance applicable to this development.
No, .: ])
NOV 2 7 2001
2.3 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY
2.4
2.5
2.6
The "West Tract" of 15.00 acres is limited to a maximum of 60 dwelling units. For
each residential acre of the "West Tract" developed as a church, child care,
and/or school use, 4 residential units shall be subtracted from the maximum
number of dwelling units permitted. The "East Tract" of 24.06 acres is limited to
a maximum of 288 dwelling units, via an accompanying Affordable Housing
Density Bonus Agreement. If the entire project of 39.06 acres is developed for
residential uses, the dwelling units shall be limited to a maximum of 348 units
with a maximum gross residential density of 8.87 units per acre.
RELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS
The general configuration of the land uses are illustrated graphically on.
Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan, which constitutes the required PUD
Development Plan. Any division of the property and the development of
the land shall be in compliance with the PUD Master Plan, Division 3.2
Subdivisions of the Land Development Code, and the platting laws of the
State of Florida.
The provisions of Division 3.3, Site Development Plans of the Land
Development Code, when applicable, shall apply to the development of all
platted tracts, or parcels of land as provided in said Division 3.3 prior to
the issuance of a building permit or other development order.
Co
Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructural
improvements regarding any dedications to Collier County and the
methodology for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities.
MODEL UNITS AND SALES FACILITIES
In conjunction with the promotion of the development, residential units
may be designated as models. Such model units shall be governed by
Section 2.6.33.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Bo
Temporary sales trailers and construction trailers can be placed on the
site after Site Development Plan approval and prior to the recording of
Subdivision Plats, subject to the other requirements of Section 2.6.33.3 of
the Land Development Code.
PROVISION FOR OFF-SITE REMOVAL OF EARTHEN MATERIAL
The excavation of earthen material and its stock-piling in preparation of water
management facilities or to otherwise develop water bodies is hereby permitted.
Off-site disposal is also hereby permitted subject to the following conditions.
NOV 2 ? 2001
Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a "Development
Excavation" pursuant to Section 3.5.5.1.3 of the Land Development Code,
whereby off-site removal shall be limited to 10% of the total volume
excavated but not to exceed 20,000 cubic yards.
All other provisions of Division 3.5 Excavation of the Land Development
Code shall apply.
NOV 2 7 2001
3.1
3.2
3.3
SECTION III
RESIDENTIAL AREAS PLAN
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the
Residential Areas as shown on Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan.
MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS
The maximum number of residential dwelling units within the Residential Areas
of the PUD shall be 348 units. For each acre of the "West Tract" developed as a
church, child care and/or school use, 4 residential units shall be subtracted from
the maximum number of dwelling units permitted.
PERMITTED USES
No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land
used, in whole or part, for other than the following:
A.
Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1.
2.
3.
o
5.
6.
7.
Single-family dwellings (includes zero-lot line).
Two-family dwellings and duplexes.
Multi-family dwellings (includes townhouses, garden apartments,
villas, coach homes, and carriage homes).
Churches and houses of worship ('~Jest Tract" only).
Schools, pdvate and public ("VVest Tract" only).
Child care centers ("West Tract" only).
Any other use deemed comparable in nature by the Development
Services Director.
Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1. Customary accessory uses and
garages, and utility buildings.
structures including carports,
NOV 2 7 200!
o
10.
11.
12.
Recreational uses and facilities including swimming pools, tennis
courts, volleyball courts, children's playground areas, tot lots, boat
docks, walking paths, picnic areas, recreation buildings, verandahs,
and basketball/shuffle board courts.
Manager's residences and offices, temporary sales trailers, and
model units.
In conjunction with a church and/or school only, a bookstore,
recording studio, printing shop, counseling center, church bus/van
parking, parsonage and caretaker's residence (all such uses shall
be related to and incidental to the church and/or school).
Gatehouse.
Essential services, including interim and permanent utility and
maintenance facilities.
Water management facilities, including such facilities within any
Native Habitat Preserve Areas.
Recreational facilities, such as boardwalks, walking paths and
picnic areas, within any Natural Habitat Preserve Areas, after the
appropriate environmental review.
Supplemental landscape planting within Natural Habitat Preserve
Areas, after the appropriate environmental review.
Any other accessory use deemed comparable by the Development
Services Director.
Carports are permitted within parking areas.
Garages are permitted at the edge of vehicular pavement.
3.4
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
ko
Table I sets forth the development standards for land uses within the
Bucks Run PUD. Front yard setbacks in Table I shall be measured as
follows:
10
NOV 2 7 2001.
o
If the parCel is served by a public or private right-of-way, the
setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line.
If the parcel is served by a non-platted private drive, the setback is
measured from the back of curb or edge of pavement. If the parcel
is served by a platted private ddve, the setback is measured from
the road easement or property line.
11
NOV 2 ? 2001
TABLE I
RESlDENTIALDEVELOPMENTSTANDARDS
STANDARDS
Minimum Lot Area (per unit)
Minimum Lot Width
Front Yard Setback
Side Yard Setback
1 Story
2 Story
3 Story
Rear Yard Setback
Principal Structure
Accessory Structure
PUD Boundary Setback
Principal Structure
Accessory Structure
Lake Setback (3)
Wetland Preserve Area Setback
Distance Between Structures
SINGLE-FAMILY
TWO-FAMILY
MULTI-FAMILY (4), CHURCHES,
CHILD CARES AND SCHOOLS
5,000 Sq. Ft. 5,000 Sq. Ft. NA
50' Interior Lots (1) 90' Interior Lots (1) NA
(45')(2)
60' Comer Lots 110' Comer Lots NA
(55')(2)
20' 20' 20'
0' & 12' or both 6' 0' & 12' or both 6' Greater of 7.5' or 1/2 BH
0' & 15' or both 7.5' 0' & 15' or both 7.5' Greater of 10' or 1/2 BH
NA NA Greater of 12.5' or 1/2 BH
20' 20' 20'
10' 10' 10'
NA NA
NA NA
20' 20'
25' 25'
Main/Principal
1 -Story 12' 12'
2-Story 15' 15'
3-Story NA NA
Accessory Structures 10' 10'
Maximum Heiqht:
Principal Building 35' and 2 stories 35' and 2 stories
Accessory Building
Minimum Floor Area
20'/Clubhouse 35'
1200 Sq. Ft.
(1) May be reduced on cul-de-sac lots.
Greater of 20' or BH
10'
20'
25'
20'/Clubhouse 35'
1100 Sq. Ft.
Greater of 15' or 1/2 SBH
Greater of 20' or 1/2 SBH
Greater of 25' or 1/2 SBH
10'
40' and 3 stories except
48' and 3 stories for churches
20'/Clubhouse 35'
1 bedroom = 600 Sq. Ft.
2 Bedroom = 800 Sq. Ft.
3 Bedroom = 1000 Sq. Ft.
(2) Minimum lot frontage in parenthesis applies in cases where a dwelling unit in a 2-family
structure is on an individually platted lot.
(3) Lake setbacks are measured from the control elevation established for the lake.
(4) All multi-family structures shall be setback 100 feet from the eastern PUD property line.
Note: "BH" refers to building height and "SBH" refers to sum of the building heights.
NOV 2 ? 2001
B. Off-Street Parkinq and Loadin,q Requirements:
Subject to the requirements of Division 2.3 of the Collier County Land
Development Code.
Landscaping and Buffedng Requirements:
If landscape buffers are determined to be necessary adjacent to
wetland preserve areas, they shall be separate from those preserve
areas.
Where two separate two-family or multi-family projects within the
PUD abut each other, buffering and screening between them shall
not be necessary, due to the unified architectural theme throughout.
the residential portion of the PUD, as described within Section
3.4E. of this PUD Document. Where a single-family or two-family
project within the PUD abuts a multi-family project within the PUD,
a ten (10) foot buffer shall be provided between them on the first
project constructed, with trees provided at twenty-five (25) feet on
center and a single hedge also provided within such buffer. Such
trees and shrubs shall meet the standards for plantings, as
described within Section 2.4.4, Plant Material Standards and
Installation Standards, of the Land Development Code.
Si.qns
Signs shall be permitted as described in Section 2.5 of the Collier County
Land Development Code.
Amhitectural Standards
All multi-family residential buildings and residential lighting, signage,
landscaping and visible architectural infrastructure shall be
architecturally and aesthetically unified.
AGENDA ~..
No. '
I '
NOV 2 7 2001
Said unified architectural theme shall include: a similar architectural
design and use of similar materials and colors throughout all of the
residential buildings, signs, and fences/walls to be erected on all of
the Residential Areas parcels. Landscaping and streetscape
materials shall also be similar in design throughout the Residential
Areas. Within any residential project all roofs, except for carports,
shall be peaked and finished in tile, metal, or architecturally-
designed shingles (such as Timberline).
All pole lighting, within the Residential Areas, shall be
architecturally designed, limited to a height of thirty (30) feet except
for church, child care, and school lighting which is limited to a
height of forty (40) feet.
]4
AC~r. NDA I'rr~
NOV 2 7 2001
4.1
4.2
SECTION IV
PRESERVE AREAS PLAN
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the
Preserve Areas as shown on Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan.
PERMITTED USES
No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land
used, in whole or part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1. Passive recreational areas.
2. Biking, hiking, and nature trails, and boardwalks.
3. Water management structures.
4. Native preserves and wildlife sanctuaries.
Supplemental landscape planting, screening and buffering within
the Natural Habitat Preserve Areas, may be approved after
Planning Services Environmental Staff review. All supplemental
plantings within the Preserve Areas shall be 100% indigenous
native species and shall meet the minimum planting criteria set
forth in Section 3.9.5.4.4 of the Land Development Code.
Any other use deemed comparable in nature by the Development
Services Director.
NOV 2 7 2001
5.1
5.2
5.3
SECTION V
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the commitments for the development
of this project.
GENERAL
All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with Final Site Development
Plans, Final Subdivision Plans and all applicable State and local laws, codes,
and regulations applicable to this PUD, in effect at the time of Final Plat, Final
Site Development Plan approval or building permit application as the case may
be. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and
specifications of the official County Land Development Code shall apply to this
project even if the land within the PUD is not to be platted. The developer, his
successor and assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this
document.
The developer, his successor or assignee, shall follow the PUD Master Plan and
the regulations of this PUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications
as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor
in title or assignee is subject to the commitments within this Agreement.
PUD MASTER PLAN
Ao
Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is
conceptual in nature. Proposed area, lot or land use boundaries or
special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be
varied at any subsequent approval phase such as Final Platting or Site
Development Plan approval. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5
of the Collier County Land Development Code, amendments may be
made from time to time.
All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be
granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service
utilities and all common areas in the project.
]6
AGE~NDA ITEM
I'
NOV 2 7 2001
PS.,,~
5.4 SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT/MONITORING REPORT
5.5
5.6
A Site Development Plan shall be submitted per County regulations in effect at
time of site plan submittal. The project is projected to be completed in several
phases.
Ao
The landowners shall proceed and be governed according to the time
limits pursuant to Section 2.7.3.4 of the Land Development Code.
Monitodn.q Report:
pursuant to Section
Code.
An annual monitoring report shall
2.7.3.6 of the Collier County Land
be submitted
Development
ENGINEERING
This project shall be required to meet all County Ordinances in effect at
the time final construction documents are submitted for development
approval.
Bo
Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to
compliance with appropriate provisions of the Collier County Land
Development Code, Division 3.2. Subdivisions.
WATER MANAGEMENT
A copy of the South Florida Water Management Distdct (SFWMD)
Surface Water Permit Application shall be sent to Collier County
Development Services prior to the Site Development Plan approval.
Bo
A copy of the SFWMD Surface Water Permit, SFWMD Right-of-Way
Permit, and SFWMD Discharge Permit shall be submitted pdor to Final
Site Development Plan Approval.
An Excavation Permit will be required for the proposed lake(s) in
accordance with Division 3.5 of the Collier County Land Development
Code and SFWMD rules.
Lake setbacks from the perimeter of the PUD may be reduced to twenty-
five (25) feet where a six (6) foot high fence or suitable substantial barder
is erected.
The proposed perimeter berm and/or swale should not be continuous
through the wetland Preserve Areas.
]7
5.7
5.8
5.9
Fo
The project should provide for a north-south flow-way through the
Preserve Area.
UTILITIES
Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and intedm water
and/or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project are to be designed,
constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with Collier
County Ordinance No. 88-76, as amended, and other applicable County
rules and regulations.
TRAFFIC
The applicant shall be responsible for the installation of arterial level street
lighting at any project entrance onto C.R. 951, pdor to the issuance of any
Certificates of Occupancy or Compliance.
Drainage shall not be permitted to discharge directly into any roadway
drainage system but may discharge into the 951 Canal with necessary
permits.
If the developer constructs a Con Span bridge across the canal in order to
gain direct access onto C.R. 951 then turn lanes, both northbound and
southbound, shall be constructed by the developer prior to any
development or construction traffic utilizing this bridge onto C.R. 951.
However, if the 4-1aning of C.R. 951 has commenced, prior to any
construction traffic utilizing this bridge, the turn lanes may be delayed
during construction of the subject project but shall be in place prior to any
Certificates of Occupancy being issued for any permanent buildings.
Such turn lanes shall be designed to provide capacity for the ultimate
project traffic.
Road Impact Fees shall be paid in accordance with Ordinance 92-22, as
amended, and shall be paid at the time building permits are issued,
except for Affordable Housing Density Bonus units, unless otherwise
approved by the Board of County Commissioners.
PLANNING
Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code, if during
the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a
historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the
minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately
stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted.
NOV 2 ? 2001
5.10 ENVIRONMENTAL
Ao
Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida
Environmental Resource Permit Rules and be subject to review and
approval by the Current Planning Environmental Review Staff. Removal
of exotic vegetation shall not be counted towards mitigation for impacts to
Collier County jurisdictional wetlands.
All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation
tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the
plat with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the
Florida Statutes. Buffers shall be provided in accordance with Section
3.2.8.4.7.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
In the event the project does not require platting, all conservation areas
shall be recorded as conservation/preservation tracts or easements
dedicated to an approved entity or to Collier County with no responsibility
for maintenance and subject to the uses and limitations similar to or as
per Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes.
Buffers shall be provided around any wetlands, extending at least fifteen
(15) feet landward from the edge of wetland preserves in all places and
averaging twenty-five (25) feet from the landward edge of wetlands.
Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided
in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit
Rules and be subject to review and approval by the Current Planning
Environmental Staff.
An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic-free)
plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas,
shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and
approval prior to Final Site Development Plan/Construction Plan approval.
The perimeter berm as located on the PUD Master Plan, shall be entirely
outside of all upland and wetland preserve areas.
A minimum of 9.75 acres of native vegetation shall be preserved on-site,
including all 3 strata, and emphasizing the largest contiguous area
possible. The PUD Master Plan identifies 5.00 acres. The remaining
acreage (a minimum additional 4.75 acres) shall be identified on the site
plan, at the time of the next development order submittal. If mitigation
plantings will be used to make up any of the acreage, the landscape plans
with mitigation-sized plantings (in accordance with Section 3.9.5.5.3 of the
Collier County Land Development Code) shall also be submitted at that
time.
19
AGENDA
NOV 2 ? 2001
5.11 FIRE REVIEW
Ao
No infrastructure shall be installed until proper permits am applied for and
obtained.
20
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION PUDA-2001-AR-500. R. BRUCE ANDERSON, ESQ. OF YOUNG,
VANASSENDERP, VANADOE & ANDERSON, P.A. REPRESENTING THE SKINNER
& BROADBENT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., CONTRACT PURCHASER,
REQUESTING TO REPEAL THE CURRENT FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT
PUD AND TO ADOPT A NEW PUD FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADDING SELF-
STORAGE (SIC # 4225) TO THE LIST OF PERMITTED USES AND REMOVING
SOME OF THE PERMITTED USES INCLUDING RESTAURANTS, FAST FOODS
RESTAURANTS, FOOD MARKETS AND AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATIONS FROM
THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TRACTS OF THE PUD. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE EAST SIDE OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR-951)
APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET NORTH OF TAMIAMI TRAIL AND COLLIER
BOULEVARD INTERSECTION, IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. THE FALLING WATER PUD CONSISTS OF
74.37 ACRES. THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TRACTS CONSIST OF 4+ ACRES.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners consider an application seeking to repeal
the current Falling Waters Beach Resort PUD and to adopt a new PUD for the purpose
of removing some of the permitted uses and adding additional uses to the list of the
permitted uses in the commercial tract of the PUD while maintaining the community's
interest.
CONSIDERATIONS:
This PUD was originally approved in 1988 (Ordinance No. 88-86) and was amended in
1992 (92-76) and in 1998 (98-33). The permitted uses for the commercial tracts allow all
principal uses permitted in the C-1, Commercial Professional zoning district, automobile
service stations, food markets, and restaurants including fast food. The applicant is
proposing to keep C-1 uses, delete automobile service station, food market and
restaurant uses and to add self-storage facilities to the list of permitted principal uses.
The applicant is also proposing to reduce the maximum height from 50 feet to 36 feet,
increase the commercial building areas from 49,000 square feet to 73,000 square feet
and reduce the front yard setback along Collier Boulevard (CR-951) from 50 feet to 20
feet.
· This PUD contains a residential tract and 2 commercial tracts at the entrance to the
residential development. The commercial tracts currently share a single entrance with
the residential development.
NOV 2 ? 2001
Self-storage use is a permitted conditional use in the C-4 zoning district and a permitted
use in the C-5 and Industrial districts. This project by virtue of its location within an
activity center, under the Collier County Growth Management Plan, qualifies for the full
array of commercial uses allowed in C-1 through C-5, provided certain criteria are met.
This property is located at the northeastern end of the activity center and to the north it
is adjacent to the Marco Island water-supply property with a Iow potential for
development. This use will be a step down in intensity from the higher traffic generating
uses occurring at the center of the activity center which, at the present time, includes
automobile service stations, fast food restaurants, convenience store, fruit stand and a
large drug store.
The site-generated tdps from the commercial tracts, with 73,000 square feet of self-
storage buildings will be 180 Average Weekday Trips. The highest intensity use
proposed by this amendment will generate 260 Average Weekday Trip. The proposed
amendment results in a decrease of 4400 site generated trips over the amount that
could be generated by the currently approved PUD with uses such as restaurant and
food store. As a result, this petition will reduce the number of trips on Collier Boulevard.
Therefore, this petition is consistent with Policies 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation
Element of the Growth Management Plan. Collier Boulevard is currently a 4-lane arterial
road with a 1999 traffic count of 33,727 and is operating above the adopted level of
service standard of LOS "D".
This PUD is located along a portion of Collier Boulevard that the GMP requires a
minimum of 660 feet between any two driveways. A second access to the site from the
northern portion of the property will put the new driveway closer than 660 feet from an
existing driveway on Marco Island water supply site. The CCPC directed the applicants
to investigate the feasibility of a common driveway with, or an easement allowing the to
use the existing Marco Island water supply site driveway by the commercial tract of this
PUD. Staff believes that there should be only one access on Collier Boulevard (CR-
951). The second access will be required on US-41.
In 1998 when the PUD was amended to add a tract of land to the PUD, which provided
frontage on Tamiami Trail, a language was added to the PUD Document requiring a
second access point from Tamiami Trail. Several of the residents strongly objected to
the new requirement.
Historically the board approved commercial PUDs with 10,000 to 12,000 square feet of
building per acre. This request is to build around 18,250 square feet per acre. The
applicant is requesting a higher building area based on the fact that they are Iowedng
the height and removing most high intensity uses, hence reducing the need for a larger
parking and paved area.
2
NOV 2 ? 2001
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is a commercial development for up to 73,000 square feet of self-storage facility;
the following Impact Fees will be applicable to this project:
Road Impact fee:
Correctional facilities impact fee:
Fire Impact Fee:
EMS Impact Fee:
Radon Gas
Buildin.q Code Administration
Total
$41,391.00
$2,277.00
$21,9OO.OO
$ 949.00
$365.00
$365.00
$67,247.00
In addition to the Impact Fees described there are building permit review fees and utility.
fees associated with connecting to the County sewer and water system. Building permit
fees have traditionally offset the cost of administrating the community development
review process. Whereas utility fees are based on their proportionate share of impact to
the County system.
Finally additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates. The
revenue that will be generated by the ad valorem tax depends on the value of the
improvements. At this point in time, staff has not developed a method to arrive at a
reasonable estimate of tax revenue based on ad valorem tax rates.
The above discussion deals with revenue schemes. A fiscal impact analysis is
incomplete without an estimate of costs that will be generated by a particular land use
development project.
Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that not withstanding fiscal impact relationship,
development takes place in an environment of concurrency relationship. When level of
service requirements fall below then developed standard a mechanism is in place to
bring about a cessation of building activities. Certain LOS standards apply countywide
and would therefore bdng about a countywide concurrency determination versus roads,
which may have geographic concurrency implications.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use
Activity Center Subdistdct), as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth
Management Plan. The Urban Commercial District allows the full array of commercial
uses (C-1 through C-5), subject to certain criteria.
Based on the above analysis, the proposed PUD amendment is deemed consistent with
the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
3
NOV 2 ? 2001
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
There are no environmental issues with this PUD amendment request.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is
required.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommended that the CCPC forward Petition PUDA-2001-AR-500 to the Board of
County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval. The main reason for this
recommendation is the fact that the residential portion of the project shares a single
entrance with the two existing commercial tracts. A reduction in the intensity of the
proposed uses will have a positive effect in reducing the number of trips generated by
these commercial tracts.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION:
This petition was exempt from the review by the EAC.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed this petition on August 16, 2001 and
by a unanimous vote recommended approval. Several people spoke against this
petition at the CCPC hearing and staff received several letters of objection which are
attached tothis report.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
REVIEWED BY: -
/gL)SAN MURRAY, AICP
× CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
DATE
DATE
NOV 2 7 2001
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
[A~I E. ~EDER, AICP DA~Ez
TR~ ISPORTATION ADMINISTRATOR
AI~PROVED BY:
J(~N M. DUNNUCK III DATE
IN~FERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
DATE
Petition Number: PUDA-2OO1-AR-500
A~A ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
, AGENDA ITEM 7-D
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
MEMORANDUM
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
June 21,2001
PETITION NO: PUDA-2001-AR-500
OWNER/AGENT:
Agent:
Owner:
R. Bruce Anderson, Esq.
Young, VanAssenderp, Vanadoe & Anderson, P.A.
801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 300
Naples, FL. 34108
Albert Hubschman, contract seller
The Skinner & Broadbent Development Company, Inc., Contract purchaser
(George P. Broadbent sole shareholder)
201 North Illinois Street, 23r~ Floor
Indianapolis, In. 46204-1950
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner seeks to repeal the current Falling Waters Beach Resort PUD and to
adopt a new PUD for the purpose of adding Self-storage (SIC # 4225) to the list of
'permitted uses and removing some of the permitted uses including restaurants, fast
foods restaurants, food markets and automobile service stations from the Community
Commercial tracts of the PUD.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located in the west east side of Collier Boulevard (CR-951)
approximately 400 feet north of Tamiami Trail and Collier Boulevard intersection, in
Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This site
consists of 74.37 acres.
AGENDA ~
NOV 2 ? 2001
NOV 2 7
NOV 2 7 2001
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
This PUD was originally approved in 1988 (Ordinance No. 88-86) and was amended in
1992 (92-76) and in 1998 (98-33). The permitted uses for the commercial tract (5.05
acres) allow all principal uses permitted in the C-1, commercial professional zoning
district, automobile service stations, food markets, and restaurants including fast food.
The applicant is proposing to keep C-1 uses, delete automobile service station, food
market and restaurant uses and to add self-storage facilities to the list of permitted
principal uses. The applicant is also proposing to reduce the maximum height from 50
feet to 36 feet, increase the commercial building areas from 49,000 square feet to
73,000 square feet and reduce the front yard setback along Collier Boulevard (CR-951)
from 50 feet to 20 feet.
This PUD contains a residential tract and 2 commercial tracts at the entrance to the
residential development. The commercial tracts share a single entrance with the
residential development. The residents, in the past, had voiced their concerns with
regards to the potential traffic generated by the permitted commercial uses on
commercial tracts. They were trying to remove automobile service stations and fast
foods from the list of permitted uses.
Self-storage use is a permitted conditional use in the C-4 zoning district and a permitted
use in the C-5 and Industrial districts. This project by virtue of its location within an
activity center, under the Collier County Growth Management Plan, qualifies for the full
array of commercial uses allowed in C-1 through C-5, provided certain cdteda are met.
This property is located at the northeastem end of the activity center and to the north it
is adjacent to the Marco Island water-supply property with a Iow potential for
development. This use will be a step down in intensity from the higher traffic generating
uses occurring at the center of the activity center which, at the present time, includes
automobile service stations, fast food restaurants, convenience store, fruit stand and a
large drug store.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Existing: Residential with a.5.05 acre of commercial tract,
zoned PUD
Surrounding: North -Marco Island water supply property, zoned "A"
Agricultural
East Vacant, zoned "A" Agricultural
.South - Fruit stand, zoned c-3 and vacant, zoned, "C-5",
"C-4", and "A" Agricultural
West - Collier Boulevard ROW, Commercial, zoned PUD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use
Activity Center Subdistrict), as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth
2
NOV 2 7 2001
Management Plan. The Urban Commercial Distdct allows the full array of commercial
uses (C-1 through C-5), subject to certain criteria.
Based on the above analysis, the proposed PUD amendment is deemed consistent with
the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
Transportation Element:
The site-generated tdps from the commercial tracts, as proposed, will be 180 Average
Weekday Tdps. The proposed amendment results in a decrease of 4403 site generated
tdps over the amount that could be generated by the currently approved PUD. As a
result, this petition will reduce the number of tdps on Collier Boulevard. Therefore, this
petition is consistent with Policies 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation Element of the
Growth Management Plan.
Collier Boulevard is currently a 4-lane artedal road with a 1999 traffic count of 33,727
and is operating at LOS "B". This road segment is not projected to be deficient by the
build-out of this project. Based on this data, this petition is consistent with Policies 1.3
and 1.4 of the Transportation Element.
Conservation and Open Space:
PUD development commitments provide open space consisting of at least thirty (30)
percent of the gross land area. Native vegetation preservation or re-vegetation
requirements of the LDC will be achieved by the design for preservation areas and by
re-vegetation of native species, therefore, the Conservation and Open Space Elements
of the GMP will be achieved through PUD development commitments.
Utility and Water Management:
Development of the land will proceed on the basis of connection to the County's sewer
and water distribution system. These facilities are to be designed, constructed,
conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with the Collier County Ordinance
Number 88-76.
Water management facilities will be constructed to meet County Ordinances and they
will be reviewed and approved as a function of obtaining subsequent development order
approvals. The above-prescribed course of action makes this petition consistent with
this element of the GMP.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is
required.
3
AC..~:NDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 20131
ENVIRONMENTAL, TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE EVALUATION:
The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff responsible for
oversight related to the above referenced areas of critical concern. This includes a
review by the Community Development environmental and engineering staff, and the
Transportation Services Division staff. The comments and concerns of these reviewing
agencies have helped to shape the content of the PUD Document.
ANALYSIS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on
which a favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide
an objective comprehensive overview of the impact of the proposed land use change,
be they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that
comprehensive overview. The list of criteda is specifically noted in Section 2.7.2.5. and
Section 2.7.3.2.5. of the Land Development Code thus requiring staff evaluation and
comment, and shall be the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the
Planning Commission to the BCC. Each of the potential impacts or considerations
identified during the staff review are listed under each of the criterion noted and are
categorized as either pro or con, whichever the case may be, in the opinion of staff.
Staff review of each of the criterion is followed by a summary conclusion culminating in
a determination of compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These
evaluations are completed as separate documents and are attached to the staff report.
Appropriate evaluation of petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for
supportive action by appropriate evaluation of decision makers. The evaluation by
professional staff should typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the
community's future land use plan, and whether or not a rezoning action would be
consistent with the Collier County GMP in all of its related elements. Other evaluation
considerations should include an assessment of adequacy of transportation
infrastructure, other infrastructure, and compatibility with adjacent land uses, a
consideration usually dealt with as a facet of analyzing the relationship of the rezoning
action to the long range plan for future land uses.
Followings are staff findings for this PUD amendment:
Relationship to Future and Existin.q Land Uses:
This refers to the relationship of the proposed zoning action to the Future Land Use
Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. As discussed above, this area
is located within a Mixed Use Activity Center, allowing commercial activities. This
amendment will only affect the permitted uses within the commercial tracts of the PUD
and should not have any affect on the surrounding properties.
Traffic:
4
NOV 2 7 2001
The site-generated tdps from the commercial tracts, as proposed, will be 180 Average
Weekday Trips. The proposed amendment results in a decrease of 4403 site generated
tdps over the amount that could be generated by the currently approved PUD. As a
result, this petition will reduce the number of tdps on Collier Boulevard.
Infrastructure:
The subject property is served by the County water and sewer system. Storm water
management will be provided on site.
PUD Document and Master Plan:
PUD Document:
The Falling Waters Beach Resort PUD Document is modeled after a County Planning
Services model PUD Document in terms of format, general provisions covedng
references to GMP and LDC. The PUD document provides the required format for
addressing land uses and development standards and development commitments. The
PUD contains all of the recommendations of reviewing staff.
Master Plan:
The Master Plan is designed around several lakes. There is one entrance to the site.
The commercial tracts will share the same entrance with the residential tracts
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUDA-2001-AR-500 to the Board of
County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
/(SUSAN MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
/ DATE
5
AGENDA IlEa
NOV 2 7 2001
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
APPROVED BY:
JOI-~M. DUNNUCK III DATE
INTI~RIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
Petition Number: PUDA-2001-AR-500
Staff Report for August 16, 2001 CCPC meeting.
NOTE: This Petition has been tentatively scheduled for the September 11, 2001 BCC meeting.
6
NOV 2 7 2001
FINDINGS FOR PUD
PUDA-2001-AR-500
Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning
Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the
following criteria:
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.
Pro: (i)
Intensifying land development patterns produces economics of scale
relative to public utilities, facilities and services, which are currently
available in this area.
(ii)
The subject property is served by a network of County roads, all of
which are within the urbanized area providing easy access to a host of
community services and facilities.
(iii) Comprehensive multi-disciplined analysis supports the suitability of the
land for the uses proposed.
Con: (i) As with all actions that intensify urban development pattems there is
some loss to travel time for users of the same arterial road system.
Summary Findina: Jurisdictional reviews by County staff support the manner
and pattern of development proposed for the subject property. Development
conditions contained in the PUD document give assurance that all infrastructure
will be developed and be consistent with County regulations. Any inadequacies
which require supplementing the PUD Document will be recommended to the
Board of County Commissioners as conditions of approval by staff.
Recommended mitigation measures will assure compliance with Level of Service
relationships as prescribed by the Growth Management Plan.
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.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
NOV 2 7 2001
Summary Finding: Documents submitted with the application provide evidence
of unified control. The PUD .document makes appropriate provisions for
continuing operation and maintenance of common areas.
Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals,
objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan.
Pro:
The development strategy for the subject property is entirely consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management
Plan.
Con: None.
Summary Finding: The subject petition has been found consistent with the
goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. A more detailed
description of this conformity is addressed in the Staff Report.
Additional Finding: The subject property is designated Urban Commercial
District, Activity Center Subdistrict on the FLUE to the GMP. As such it
authorizes zoning actions aimed at allowing the land to be used for commercial
purposes.
This petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff for compliance with the
applicable elements of the Growth Management Plan, as note below:
Future Land Use Element - Consistency with FLUE requirements is further
described as follows:
Land Use - The Activity Subdistrict allows commercial land use and related
activities.
Transportation Element - Analysis of the subject petition concluded with a finding
that with development phasing this petition is consistent with the policies of the
TE.
Recreation and Open Space Element - Thirty (30%) percent or more of the land
area is to be developed as open space consisting of a wetland areas, lakes and
landscape buffers.
This area is exclusive of the amount of open space that remains as each
development parcel or tract is developed. Said amount of open space is equal to
the open space requirement of 30 percent for commercial and industrial PUDs.
NOV 2 7 2001
Other Applicable Element (s) - By virtue of development commitments and
master plan development strategy, staff is of the opinion that the Falling Waters
Beach Resort PUD is entirely consistent with provisions of the Collier County
GMP.
Staff review indicates that this petition has been designed to account for the
necessary relationships dictated by the GMP. Where appropriate, stipulations
have been generated to ensure consistency with the GMP dudng the permitting
process. Therefore, this petition has been deemed to be consistent with the
Growth Management Plan.
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.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findin_cl: The PUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize
internal land use relationship through the use of various forms of open space
separation. External relationships are automatically regulated by the Land
Development Code to assure harmonious relationships between projects.
The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to
serve the development.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinq:The amount of open space set aside by this project is
consistent with the provisions of the Land Development Code.
The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the
adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinq: Timing or sequence of development in light of concurrency
requirements is not a significant problem. (See Staff report)
The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to
accommodate expansion.
ProlCon:
Evaluation not applicable.
3
AGEJT~DA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
Se
Summary Finding: Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting
infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies,
characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is
supportive of conditions emanating from urban development. This assessment is
described at length in the staff report adopted by the CCPC. Relative to this
petition, development of the subject property is timely, because supporting
infrastructure is available.
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.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinc~: This finding essentially requires an evaluation of the extent
to which development standards proposed for this PUD depart from development
standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district.
The development standards in this PUD are similar to those standards used for
in the Commercial zoning district.
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
REZONE FINDINGS
PETITION PUDA-2001-AR-500
Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report
and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County
Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered
the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable:
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives,
and policies and Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth
Management 'Plan.
Pro:
Development Orders deemed consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE
of the GMP should be considered a positive relationship.
Con: None
Summary Findincls: The proposed development is in compliance with the
Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
The existing land use pattern;
Pro: The parcel in question is located within a Mixed Use Activity Center with
commercial properties to the south and a shopping center across the street.
Con: None.
Summary Findincls: The proposed land uses are generally consistent with the
existing and future land use pattern in the area.
The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and
nearby districts;
Pro: The proposed changes is for the commercial tract of the PUD. This
commercial tract is across the street from a PUD with a large commercial tract,
therefore, this rezone will not create an isolated district.
Con: Evaluation not applicable.
NOV 2 ? 2001
Summary Findincls: The parcel will not result in an isolated district unrelated to
adjacent and nearby districts because it is located within close proximity of other
approved commercial zoned properties. It is also consistent with expected land
uses by virtue of its location within the "commercial District, Mixed Use Activity
Subdistrict" on the Future Land Use Element.
Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to
existing conditions on the property proposed for change.
Pro: The district boundaries are logically drawn and they are consistent with the
FLUE of the GMP.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The boundaries are logically drawn by virtue of the site's
location within the "Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Subdistrict" on the
Future Land Use Element.
Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the
proposed amendment necessary.
Pro: The proposed zoning change is appropriate based on the existing
conditions of the property and because its relationship to the FLUE (Future Land
Use Element of the Growth Management Plan) is a positive one.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: Consistent with the Growth Management Plan.
Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in
the neighborhood;
Pro
Recommended mitigation actions included in the PUD Document will go a
long way towards offsetting any potential adverse influences on the
residential communities in the area.
Con:
The additional commercial activity could cause increased noise and traffic
impacts on the nearby properties. However, due to it's location and the
proposed preserve and buffer areas, the proposed PUD should not
adversely impact the adjacent properties.
NOV 2 7 2001
Summary FindinCls: The proposed change will not adversely influence living
conditions in the neighborhood because the development standards of the PUD
Document have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of
adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments.
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.
Pro: (i)
An action to rezone the property as requested is consistent with ali
applicable traffic circulation elements.
(ii)
The property fronts directly on a public road thereby providing an
immediate access to the artedal road network over which traffic
from this residential development would be defused.
Con: (i)
Urban intensification results in greater volumes of traffic on the
local, arterial and collector road system serving the PUD. Other
projects dependent upon the same street system may perceive this
result as one which will reduce their perceived comfort levels.
Summary Findinas: Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement
for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Traffic Element of the GMP and was found
consistent, a statement advising that this project when developed wilt not
excessively increase traffic congestion. Additionally certain traffic management
system improvements are required as a condition of approval (i.e. turn lanes,
traffic signals, dedications, etc.). In the final analysis all rezone actions are
subject to the Concurrency Management System.
Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem;
Pro:
The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite
development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on
nearby properties. New development in and of itself is not supposed to
increase flooding potential on adjacent property over and above what
would occur without development.
Con:
Urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to
intra-county drainage appurtenances would increase the risk of flooding in
areas when the drainage outfall condition is inadequate.
3
AGED~A
NOV 2 7 2001
Summary Findings: Every project approved in Collier County involving the
utilization of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate
all sub-surface drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of
approval. This project was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and
constnJction plans are required to meet County standards as a condition of
approval.
Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to
adjacent areas;
Pro: The proposed commercial development conforms to the similar commercial
development standards of the LDC which are designed to protect the circulation
of light and air to adjacent areas.
Con: None.
10.
Summary Findinqs: All projects in Collier County are subject to the
development standards that are unique to the zoning distdct in which it is located.
These development standards and others apply generally and equally to all
zoning districts (i.e. open space requirement, corridor management provisions,
etc.) were designed to ensure that light penetration and circulation of air does not
adversely affect adjacent areas.
Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the
adjacent area;
Pro: Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous
underutilized land, a condition which exists on the north and east sides.
Con: None.
Summary Findim3s: This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated
results which may be internal or external to the subject property that can affect
property values. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including
zoning, however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value
determination by law-is driven by market value. The mere fact that a property is
given a new zoning designation may or may not affect value.
11.
Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations;
12.
13.
14.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The basic premise underlying all of the development
standards in the zoning division of the LDC is that their sound application when
combined with the administrative site development plan approval process, gives
reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in a deterrence to
improvement of adjacent property.
Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to
an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare;
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinqs: The proposed PUD complies with the Growth
Management Plan, a public policy statement supporting Zoning actions when
they are consistent with said plan. In light of this fact the proposed change does
not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further
determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with
plans are in the public interest.
Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning;
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The subject property can be developed in accordance with
the existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the
opportunity to maximize the development potential of the site as made possible
by its consistency relationship with the FLUE as contained in the Growth
Management Plan.
Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the
neighborhood or the County;
Pro: The proposed development complies with the GMP.
Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: A policy statement which has evaluated the scale and
intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable for this site.
AGENDA ITEM
N~. ,,
NOV 2 7 2001
15.
16.
17.
Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findincjs: There are many sites which are zoned to accommodate
the proposed commercial development. This is not the determining factor when
evaluating the appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of
zoning are consistency with all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of
infrastructure and to some extent the timing of the action and all of the above
criteria.
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.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: Physical alteration is a product of developing vacant land
which cannot be avoided.
The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities
and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier
County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through
the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of
service determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established
relationships.
AGENDA I'l'~J~
NOV 2 7 2001
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NI. JM2BER 91-102, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR
THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE
OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP(S) NUMBERED
1603N BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF ~ HEREIN DESCRIBED
REAL PROPERTY FROM "PUD' TO "PUD"
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS THE
FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT PUD, FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF
COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951) AND U.S. 41, IN
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING
OF 74.37+ ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL
OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 98-33, THE FORMER
FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT PUD; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, R. Brace Anderson of Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson,
representing The Skinner and Broadbent Development Company, Inc., petitioned the Board of County
Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property.
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 3, Township
51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit
Development in accordance with the PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", which is
incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof. The Official Zoning Atlas Map(s) numbered
1603N, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code, is
hereby amended accordingly.
SECTION TWO:
Ordinance Number 98-33, known as the Falling Waters Beach Resort PUD, adopted on April
28, 1998 by the Board of County Coramissionem of Collier County, is hereby repealed in its entirety.
SECTION THREE:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
AGENOA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, this __ day of ,2001.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Ci~rk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Approved as to Form and
Legal Sufficiency
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
Marjori¢ M. Student
Assistant County Attorney
CBIcw
-2-
NOV 2 7 2001
FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT
A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
BY
FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT, LTD.
NAPLES, FLORIDA
PREPARED BY:
WILSONMILLER, INC.
3200 BAILEY LANE, SUITE 200
NAPLES, FL 34105
and
YOUNG, VANASSENDERP, VARNADOE & ANDERSON, P.A.
801 LAUREL OAK DR.
NAPLES, FL 34108
REVISED MARCH 9, 2001
EXHIBIT 'A"
NOV 2 ? 2001
SECTION I
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, DESCRIPTION AND STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
1.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this section is to provide a legal description of the parcel, state the ownership
and provide a description of the existing conditions of the parcel.
1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION
A. PHASE h COMMERCIAL
(Parcel "A')
A Portion Of Land Located In Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida Being More Particularly Described As Follows:
Commencing At The East 1/4 Corner Of Said Section 3;
Thence Run South 00°41'31" West 629.67 Feet Along The East Line Of Said Section 3;
Thence Run North 54°20'16'' West On A Line 400 Feet North Of And Parallel With The North
Right-Of-Way Line Of Flodda State Road 90; (U.S. 41) Fora Distance Of 608.25 Feet To The
East Line Of A Outfall Drainage Easement As Recorded In Official Records Book 83, Page 125
Of The Public Records Of Collier County, Florida;
Thence Continue North 54°20'16'' West 3503.15 Feet To The Point Of Beginning Of The Parcel
Of Land Herein Described;
Thence Continue North 54°20'16'' West 239.00 Feet To The East Right-Of-Way Line Of State
Road 951 (100.00' Right-Of-Way);
Thence North 35°40'08'' East 220.00 Feet Along Said East Right-Of-Way Line;
Thence South 54°20'16" East 239.00 Feet;
Thence South 35°40'08'' West 220.00 Feet To The Point Of Beginning.
Less And Except The Westedy 50.00 Feet Thereof.
(Parcel 'B')
A Portion Of Land Located In Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida Being More Particularly Described As Follows:
Commencing At The East 1/4 Comer Of Said Section 3;
Thence Run South 00°41'31" VYest 629.67 Feet Along The East Line Of Said Section 3;
Thence Run North 54°20'16" West On A Line 400 Feet North Of And Parallel W~th The North
Right-Of-Way Line Of Florida State Road 90; (U.S. 41) For A Distance Of 608.25 Feet To The
East Line Of A Outfall Drainage Easement As Recorded In Official Records Book 83, Page 125
Of The Public Records Of Collier County, Florida;
Thence Continue North 54°20'16" West 3742.15 Feet To The East Right-Of-Way Line Of State
Road 951 (100' Right-Of-Way);
Thence North 35°40'08" East 320.00 Feet Along Said East Right-Of-Way Line To The Point Of
Beginning Of The Parcel Of Land Herein Described;
Thence Continue North 35°40'08" East 600.00 Feet Along Said East Right-Of-V~
Thence South 54°D20'16" East 239.00 Feet;
Thence South 35°40'08.' West 600.00 Feet;
NOV 2 ? 2001
Thence North 54°20'16" West 239.00 Feet To The Point Of Beginning.
Less And Except The Westerly 50.00 Feet
B. PHASE Ih RESIDENTIAL
A tract of land lying in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,
being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the East % corner of Section '3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida; thence run South 00° 41' 31' West for 629.67 feet; thence run North 54° 20' 16"
West on a line 400 feet North of and parallel with the North right-of-way line of Florida State
Road 90, (U.S. 41) for a distance of 608.25 feet to the East line of a Outfall Drainage Easement
as recorded in Official Records Book 83, Page 125 of the Public Records of Collier County,
Florida and the Point of Beginning;
thence continue along said line North 540 20' 16" West 3503.06 feet;
thence North 35° 40' 08" East 220.00 feet;
thence North 540 20' 16" West 189.00 feet to the Easterly right-of-way line of State Road S-951;
thence run North 35° 40' 08' East 100.00 feet along said right-of-way line;
thence South 540 20' 16" East 189.00 feet;
thence North 35° 40' 08' East 600.00 feet;
thence South 540 20' 16' East 3249.77 feet to the Easterly line of said Outfall Drainage
Easement;
thence South 20° 16' 12' West 954.23 feet along said easement line to the Point of beginning.
Subject to easements, restrictions and dedications of record.
C. PHASE IIh RECREATION PARCEL
A parcel in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Flodda.
From the East Quarter comer of Section 3 run with Section line South 0°41'31' West, a distance
of 612.57 feet; thence North 89°18'29' West, a distance of 722.35 feet to the intersection of the
West right-of-way line of a County Drainage Canal with the North right-of-way line of State Road
90 (Tamiami Trail); thence with said Trail right-of-way line North 54°20'16" West, a distance of
1327.51 feet to the true POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue with the Trail right-of-way line
North 54°20'16- West, a distance 220.00 feet; thence North 35°39'44' East, a distance of
400.00 feet; thence South 54°20'16- East a distance of 220.00 feet; thence South 35°30'44-
West, a distance of 400.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 2.02 acres more or
less.
1.3 OWNERSHIP
The subject property is owned by Falling Waters Beach Resort, Ltd.
1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA
NOV 2 ? 2001
The subject property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) approximately
400 feet north of Tamiami Trail East (US 41). The site is further described as being bounded on
the West by Collier Boulevard (CR 951), on the East by Henderson Creek; on the South by
numerous small parcels fronting US 41 which are about 400 feet deep; and on the North by a
parcel controlled by Deltona Corporation. The project site contains approximately 76.87 acres
of land presently zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District. The subject property lies
within the urban area of Collier County, is serviced with water and sanitary sewer by Collier
County and is within the Collier County Water Management District I~io. 6.
1.5 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
The subject site is relatively fiat with the exception of a swale along Collier Boulevard, CR 951.
Elevations range from 5.2 feet to 8.6 feet with the average grade an being elevation of 5.5 feet.
Topographic data indicates that the land probably drained southerly before construction of US
41, but that sheetflow pattern is presently obstructed. The property adjacent to the north
boundary appears to drain into the abandoned quarry presently being used to store untreated
drinking water for the Marco Island public water system and into Henderson Creek.
Three soil types are present on the subject property, as depicted by the soil survey for Collier
County, Florida. These are 1) Broward fine sand, shallow phase 2) Ochopee fine sand marl,
shallow phase and 3) cypress swamp.
A natural plant community of slash pine flatwood with palmetto occur on this site along with
invading exotic hardwood species. The majodty of the site is pine flatwood and cabbage palm.
In the areas of the site where scattered pines exist, the understory is composed of saw palmetto
along with wax myrtle, saltbush and Brazilian pepper. Where cabbage palms are the dominant
canopy, the understory is wild grape and Brazilian pepper. Species of oaks are intermixed
throughout the site.
There is a small special treatment area in the northeast portion of the site, which will be
preserved during development.
7/2~x~01- ~7301 Vm*: 01k ~T~
AC:ENDA rrEM
NOV 2 7 2001
1.6 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE:
The Falling Waters Beach Resort Planned Unit Development is consistent with the Collier
County Growth Management Plan for the following reasons:
A. The project site is designated Urban Residential and Mixed Use Activity Center on the
Future Land Use Map and in the Future Land Use Element. The permitted uses in the
commercial portion of the PUD are permitted in the Mixed Use Activity Center designation. The
permitted uses in the residential portion of the PUD are permitted in the Urban Residential and
Mixed Use Activity Center designations. Properties designated Urban Residential are permitted
a base density of up to 4 units per acre. The property lies within the Traffic Congestion Area
resulting in the subtraction of one unit per acre (from 4 units/acre to 3 units/acre). Properties
designated Mixed Use Activity Center are permitted a density of up to 16 units per acre which
can be spread over the entire project. The full density of 16 units per acre is deemed
appropriate and is awarded to this site. Fifteen (15) acres of the residential portion of the PUD
are within the Mixed Use Activity Center land use designation resulting in 240 units (15 acres X
16 units/acre). Fifty-four and three-tenths (54.3) acres of the residential portion of this PUD are
within the Urban Residential land use designation resulting in 216 units (54.3 acres X 4
units/acre). The total number of units permitted by the Density Rating System for this site is 456
for a density of 6.6 units/acre as no other provisions of the Density Rating System to add or
subtract density are applicable. Therefore, the density of 6.5 units/acre (451 units) permitted by
this PUD conforms to the Density Rating System contained in the Future Land Use Element.
B. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses as required by Policy 5.4 of the
Future Land Use Element.
7~gl. ~3m
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
2.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to describe the general plan of development of the project,
including land uses, density and phasing.
2.2 GENERAL
Regulations for development of Falling Waters Beach Resort shall be in accordance with the
contents of this document, PUD Planned Unit Development distdct and other applicable
sections and parts of the 'Collier County Land Development Code.' Unless otherwise noted,
the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the Land Development
Code.
2.3 PROJECT PLAN
The project conceptual plan is shown on the accompanying Exhibit "A", 'Master Concept Plan".
The drawings show the land use tracts which also include the road right-of-way. In addition to
the various areas and specific items shown on Exhibit 'A", utility, private, semi-public easements
shall be established within the project as necessary for the service, function or convenience of
the owners and tenants.
2.4 PHASING
Lake excavation will begin upon receipt of the required Excavation Permit. Excavated material
may be permitted to be hauled off-site in accordance with Division 3.5 of the Land Development
Code.
Falling Waters Beach Resort Phase I (Commercial) will be developed as the lake excavation
nears completion.
Falling Waters Beach Resort Phase II (Residential) will be developed in approximately four (4)
phases. Estimates of the construction periods and number of dwelling units in each phase are
included in Table I.
The sequence, number of units in each phase and type of units in each phase may change
during the course of the project as dictated by market conditions, or as demand for certain types
of housing becomes evident.
NO¥ 2 7 2001
TABLE I
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT PHASING SCHEDULE
Phase
Completion No. of Un~s Sta~
1 112 1994
2 112 1996
3 112 1998
4 115 2003
The 21.5+ acre lake will be excavated in accordance with Division 3.5 of the Land Development
Code. The excavated lake depth will be (-) 6.5 feet NGVD. Excavation matedal may be
permitted to be hauled off-site in accordance with Division 3.5 of the Land Development Code.
2.5 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS
The procedures outlined in Division 3.3 of the land Development Code shall be followed for Site
Development Plan approval.
A. In the case of residential structures with a common architectural theme, required
property development regulations may be reduced provided a site plan is approved by the
Collier County Planning Commission in accordance with Section 2.6.27.4.6 of the Collier County
Land Development Code.
NOV t 7 001
7~'to 6730t
SECTION III
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
3.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to indicate the development plan and regulations for the area
designated on Exhibit 'A' as Community Commercial.
3.2 MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE
A maximum of 74,000 square feet of floor space may be constructed.
3.3 USE PERMITTED
A. All permitted (principal) uses and structures as allowed by C-1, Commercial Professional
District, as it exists on the date of adoption of this amendment, and also the following:
1. Self storage (SIC 4225).
B. Accessory Uses:
Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with self storage facilities
including resident manager's quarters.
Signs as permitted in Division 2.5 of the Land Development Code except that a pylon
sign shall be allowed in the front yard, No portion of the pylon sign shall be beyond
the property line. Pylon signs must be oriented toward traffic on Collier Boulevard
(CR 951 ).
3.4 REGULATIONS
Ao
GENERAL
Dimensional requirements, yards and set-backs shall be in accordance with the
following:
Bo
MINIMUM LOT AREA
1.0 acre
Co
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH
200 feet
MINIMUM YARDS
1. Abutting Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) - 20 feet
2. Access road between commercial tracts - 25 feet
3. Side or rear yard - 15 feet.
NOV 2 7 2001
MINIMUM FLOOR AREA
Ground floor - Minimum 700 square feet.
OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS
As required by Division 2.3 of the Land Development Code in effect at the time Site
Development Plan approval is sought.
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
Thirty-Six (36) feet above the first finished floor of the building.
H
Section 2.8.3.5.2. Building orientation standards, - shall allow for the facilities to have a
minimum of ten percent (10%) glass and to substitute pitched roofs elements (partial) in
lieu of covered public entry and covered walkway.
Section 2.8.3.5.5.(3) Massing standards, - The pdmary facades on the ground floor shall
not be required to be provided along 50 percent of the effected side. In lieu of this
requirement, no horizontal length of a building fac,,ade shall exceed 70 linear feet,
additional deeper recesses shall be provided, and tower elements shall be added.
Section 2.8.3.5.11.2., Entryway standards, - the intended use of the buildings over
20,000 square feet is self storage. They are not intended for retail, walk-in customers
and therefore no benches, decorative landscape planters, structural or vegetative
planters shall be required. In lieu of this requirement, additional landscaping (all trees
shall be a minimum of 16-18 feet in height) shall be planted in the perimeter buffers.
Section 2.8.4.4.2, Building orientation standards, - shall allow for the facilities to have a
minimum of ten percent (10%) glass and in lieu of other requirements, additional
landscaping (all trees shall be a minimum of 16-18 feet in height) shall be planted in the
perimeter buffers. The office use shall comply with the Architectural Guidelines.
Section 2.8.4.4.5., Massing standards, - No horizontal length of the ground floor fac,,ade
shall exceed 50 feet and a minimum total width of 20 percent of the fac~ade shall have
vaded lengths. In lieu of additional massing standards, trees shall be placed at 20 foot
intervals.
Section 2.8.4.4.10.2., Entry standards, - the intended use of building I
20,000 square feet (other than office) is self storage. It is not intended fo
customers and therefore no benches, decorative landscape planters, struclural or
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES
1. Exceptions to the provisions of the Architectural Guidelines may be granted by
the board of county commissioners in the form of a PUD zoning district where it
can be demonstrated that such exceptions are necessary to allow for innovative
design which, while varying from one or more of the provisions of the
Architectural Guidelines, nonetheless are deemed to meet the overall purpose
and intent set forth herein.
2. Due to the linear orientation of the property, non-public pedestrian aspect of the
primary use (renters access only to the storage facilities) and the desire to
minimize visual and use related impacts to both the residents of Falling Waters
Beach Resort and the general public, while at the same time following the intent
of the ^rchitectural Guidelines, the following standards shall be met:
vegetative planters shall be required. The office use shall comply with the Architectural
Guidelines.
3. Other sections of the ^rchitectural Guidelines shall apply.
NOV 2 7 2001
SECTION IV
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
4.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations for the development of Residential
uses, Tract B, within Falling Waters Beach Resort as designated on Exhibit 'A".
4.2 PERMITTED USES
There will be a maximum of 451 dwelling units and one office on the site.
No building or structure or part thereof shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used,
in whole or in part, other than the following:
A. PRINCIPAL USES
1 ) Multiple family dwellings, villas, cluster housing and one office.
2)
Recreational areas - tennis courts, swimming pool, clubhouse, and other
facilities commonly associated with residential development.
3) Commonly owned open tracts (jogging tract, lake, cypress preserve).
4) Water management facilities (owned by owners' association).
5) Commercial excavation.
B. ACCESSORY USES
1)
2)
3)
4)
Customary accessory uses and structures.
Signs as permitted by Division 2.5 of the Land Development Code.
Models shall be permitted in conjunction with the promotion of the development,
so long as the developer has units for sale.
Walls and fences constructed of materials and finished architecturally compatible
with the principal structures to which they are accessory, shall be permitted
subject to the provisions of Section 2.6.11 of the Land Development Code and
this document.
4.3 MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND DENSITY
Since the property will not be subdivided, there will be no minimum lot width, depth or area
except as established by setback requirements set forth below:
4.4 BUILDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS N&
NOV 2 ? 2001
The dimensions for minimum building setback shall be as follows:
1)
2)
3)
4)
From all paved streets - 35 feet from pavement edge.
From all property lines - 35 feet.
From the Henderson Creek maintenance easement - 25 feet.
Between structures - 20 feet or ½ the combined heights, whichever is greater.
4.5 MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES
The maximum height of all dwelling structures shall be 35 feet as measured from the finished
floor of the first dwelling level as determined from the Flood Insurance Rate Maps.
4.6 MINIMUM FLOOR AREA
The minimum habitable floor area of each dwelling unit shall be 1000 square feet.
4.7 OFF STREET PARKING
Off-street parking shall be provided as required by Division 2.3 of the Land Development Code
in effect at the time of application for Site Development Plan approval.
4.8 PROJECT LIGHTING
Project lighting shall consist of appropriate street and pedestrian odented site illumination.
4.9 COMMON AREA
No structure shall be erected, altered, or used, or land or water uses, in whole or in part, for
other than the following:
^. Principal Uses
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Jogging tracts and walking paths.
Picnic areas.
Tennis courts, swimming pool and similar recreational and sporting activities.
Storage of equipment for maintenance of common areas.
Uses associated with maintenance of utility services as approved by the
Development Services Director.
Water management areas and facilities.
Preservation area.
4.10 COMMON AREA OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE
Common areas will, upon completion of the project, or sooner as agreed to by all parties
concerned, come under the ownership of a property owners' association or some sm :n sIvA ~Tr.~
NOV 2 7 2001
organization of residents. This organization will be responsible for the maintenance of common
areas under the conditions set forth in Subsection 2.2.20.3.8 of the Land Development Code.
The common areas shall not include or be interpreted to include the recreational facilities.
4.11 RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
Principal Uses
1) Jogging tracts and walking paths.
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Picnic areas.
Tennis courts, swimming pool and similar recreational and sporting activities.
Storage of equipment for maintenance of common areas.
Uses associated with maintenance of utility services as approved by the
Development Services Director.
Water management areas and facilities.
Preservation area.
~.,rr.~A rrEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
SECTION V
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
5.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the standards for the development of this project.
5.2 GENERAL
All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with the Final Development Plan and all
applicable State and local laws, codes, and regulations. Except where specifically noted or
stated otherwise, the standards and specifications of the current official County Subdivision
Code shall apply to this project.
5.3 PUD MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
A. Exhibits 'A", 'B" and "C" Master Concept Plans, illustrate the proposed development.
B. The design criteria and system design illustrated on Exhibit "A" and stated herein shall
be understood as flexible so that the final design may best satisfy the project the neighborhood
and the general local environment. Minor site design alterations may be permitted subject to
approval by the Development Services Director in accordance with Subsection 2.7.3.5 of the
Land Development Code.
C. Ali necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure
the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities and all areas in the project.
D. The roadways shown are to remain pdvate.
E. The surface water management system will be owned and maintained by a property
owners' association. The water management system will utilize a man-made lake for detention
of'storm flows. Discharge will be to Henderson Creek. The swale along the CR-951 right-of-
way will remain and a culvert will be installed at the entrance road. The culvert will be of
sufficient size to maintain existing flow.
5.4 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
The proposed construction shall comply with the standards set forth herein and meet Collier
County Land Development Code and Building Regulations.
5.5 ENVIRONMENTAL AND DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
A. Petitioner shall be subject to the Division 3.9 of the Land Development Code
land cie
requirement for the acquisition of a vegetation removal permit prior to any
clearing plan shall be submitted to the Planning Services Department for its review~an~ .~~
NOV 2 ?
I
2001
prior to any substantial work being done on the site. This plan may be submitted in phases to
coincide with the development schedule. The site cleadng plan shall clearly depict the final site
layout, retained native vegetation, roads, buildings, lakes, parking lots, and other facilities to
accommodate this goal.
B. Native species shall be utilized, where available, to the maximum extent possible in the
site landscaping design. A landscaping plan will be submitted to the Planning Services
Department for its review and approval. This plan will depict the incorporation of native species
and their mix with other species, if any. The goal of the site landscaping shall be the re-creation
of native vegetation and habitat characteristics lost on the site during construction or due to past
activities.
7~2~d01 - ~IT}01 V~ Ot k ~T~xl
(~S~,-~I- EBBS- ~BOet
NOV 2 7 2001
C. All exotic plants, as defined in Division 3.9 of the Land Development Code, shall be removed
during each phase of construction from development areas, open space areas, and preserve areas.
Following site development, a maintenance program shall be implemented to prevent reinvasion of the
site by such exotic species. This plan, which will descdbe control techniques and inspection intervals,
shall be filed with and subject to approval by the Planning Services Department.
D. If during the course of site clearing, excavation, or other constructional activities, an
archaeological or historical site, artifact, or other indicator is discovered, all development at the
location shall be immediately stopped and the Planning Services Department Staff notified.
Development will be suspended for a sufficient length of time to enable the Planning Services
Department, or a designated consultant, to assess the find and determine the proper course of
action in regard to its salvageability. The Planning Services Department will respond to any
such notification in a timely and efficient manner so as to provide only a minimal interruption to
any constructional activities.
E. The boundaries of the "ST" preserve area shall be flagged by the petitioner, and subject
to the review and approval of the Planning Services Department. The area shall be fenced off
pdor to development activity. Only conservation-oriented uses, approved by the Planning
Services Department, will be allowed in this preserve area.
F. The petitioner shall consult the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida State
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) concerning the possibility of wetlands
jurisdiction over some areas on site.
G. In the site development plan process, the petitioner shall make every effort to
incorporate mature oak trees in their existing locations into the project landscaping. This may
require the relocation of buildings, parking areas, or other impervious surfaces to allow for the
preservation of the trees. Oaks, which cannot be accommodated as such, may be transplanted
to other areas on site.
H. Littoral zones of the lakes shall maintain a slope of 6:1 to a depth of 4 feet. All littoral
zones shall be revegetated with native aquatic species, and the encroachment of exotic
vegetation in these areas shall be controlled.
I. Detailed site drainage plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Department for
review. No construction permits shall be issued unless and until approval of the proposed
construction in accordance with the submitted plans is granted by the Planning Services
Department.
J. The stormwater generated by this proJect shall be directed toward the south/southwest
section of the project site.
K. There shall be no on-site disposal of sewage effluent.
L. A twenty (20) foot wide strip of land along the entire Henderson Creek fronta
reserved for use as a future easement for canal widening and maintenance purpose
]e shall be
NOV 2 7 2001
M. The Collier County Pollution Control Department shall review future site development
plans and plats associated with the commercial parcel.
If the Collier County Pollution Control Department, or any other County department, requests or
requires the monitoring of the wells near the rock quarry pit to the north, the petitioner shall
provide such monitoring of the wells and submit the resulting data to the appropriate County
departments.
7)'2S~01- ~01 Vi~. 01 ~- ~TwGq
NOV 2 7 2001
5.6 EASEMENTS FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
Easements for underground utilities such as power, telephone, 'IV cable, wastewater collection
and transport, water distribution lines and other similar utilities necessary for the service of the
project shall be located as required and granted for those Purposes. Clearing of vegetation
within the easements for installation of underground utilities shall be selective so as to protect
the maximum number of trees and natural vegetation.
5.7
WATER AND SEWER
1) Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission facilities to serve the
project are to be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance
with Collier county Ordinance No. 88-76, as amended, and other applicable County rules
and regulations.
2) All customers connecting to the water distribution and sewage collection facilities
will be customers of the County and will be billed by the County in accordance with the
County's established rates.
3) The on-site water distribution system to serve the project must be connected to
the District's 20 inch water main on the north side of S.R. 951 consistent with the main
sizing requirements specified in the County's Water Master Plan and extended
throughout the project. During design of these facilities, dead-end mains shall be
eliminated by looping the internal pipeline network.
4) The utility construction documents for the project's sewerage system shall be
prepared so that all sewage flowing to the County's master pump station is transmitted
by one (1) main on-site pump station. The developer's engineer shall meet with the
County staff prior to commencing preparation of construction drawings, so that all
aspects of the sewerage system design can be coordinated with the County's Sewer
Master Plan.
5) The existing off-site water facilities of the district must be evaluated for hydraulic
capacity to serve this project and reinforced as required, if necessary, consistent with the
County Water Master Plan to insure that the District's water system can hydraulically
provide a sufficient quantity of water to meet the anticipated demands of the project and
the District's existing committed capacity.
6) The existing off-site sewage transmission facilities of the District must be
evaluated for hydraulic capacity to serve this project and improved as required to provide
adequate capacity to transport the additional wastewater generated without adverse
impact to the existing transmission facilities.
5.8
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
NOV 2 7 2001
The County's approved solid waste disposal service shall provide for solid waste collection
service to the Falling Waters Beach Resort project area.
5.9 OTHER UTILITIES
Telephone, power, and TV cable service shall be made available. All such utility lines shall be
installed underground.
5.10 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Accessory structures may be constructed simultaneously with or following the construction of
the principal structure and shall conform with the setbacks and building separations as
delineated by Section 2.6.2 of the Land Development code.
5.11 SIGNS
All signs shall be in accordance with Division 2.5 of the Land Development code except as
provided in Section III.
5.12 LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING
All required landscaping and buffering shall be in accordance with Division 2.4 of the Land
Development code.
5.13 WATER MANAGEMENT
Detailed site drainage plans for each individual parcel shall be submitted to the Planning
Services Department for review at the time of development. No construction permits shall be
issued unless and until approval of the proposed construction in accordance with the submitted
plans is granted by the Planning Services Department.
5.14 TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
Subject to Collier County Department of Transportation approval, the developer, his assigns or
successors, shall provide the following:
1) There shall be only one access to Collier Boulevard (CR 951). It shall serve all of the
commercial parcels and the residential portion of the project. The access shall be subject to
permitting in accordance with Ordinance 82-91. The access point shall align with the access
point in Lely Resort PUD across Collier Boulevard, CR.951 to the west.
2) The developer has provided left and right turn lanes on Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) at
the project entrance. If at all feasible, this construction shall be coordinated with the four-laning
of that roadway. The entrance road intersection with Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951)
arterial level street lighting.
NOV 2 7 2001
3) The developer shall provide a fair share contribution toward the capital cost of a traffic
signal at the project entrance when deemed warranted by the County Engineer. The signal will
be owned, operated and maintained by Collier County.
4) The developer has provided 50 feet of right-of-way along the east side or Collier
Boulevard (C.R. 951) for turn lanes, bikeways, and drainage purposes
5) These improvements are considered "site related" as defined in Collier County
Ordinance No. 2001-13, and shall not be applied as credits toward any impact fees required by
that Ordinance. Transportation impact fees shall be in accordance with the fee schedule set
forth in Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance No. 2001-13.
5.15 ACCESS TO U.S. 41
Access shall be provided to U.S. 41 East generally in the area shown on the PUD Master
Concept Plan, Exhibit "A", with the following conditions:
1) Left and right turn lanes shall be provided at the entrance if and when required by FDOT.
The entrance road intersection with U.S. 41 shall include arterial level street lighting at the time
it is constructed.
2) The developer shall provide a fair share contribution toward the capital cost of a traffic
signal at the emergency entrance when deemed warranted by the County Engineer. The signal
will be owned, Operated and maintained by Collier County.
3) These improvements are considered "site related" as defined in Collier County
Ordinance No. 2001-13, and shall not be applied as credits toward any impact fees required by
that ordinance. Road Impact Fees shall be in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in
Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance No. 2001-13.
5.16 POLLING PLACES
Polling places shall be permitted as provided for in Section 2.6.30 of the Land Development
Code.
5.17 ISSUANCE OF FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
All commitments in the PUD document shall be met by the developer prior to issuance of the
final Certificate of Occupancy.
5.18 PLATTING
Platting, if required, shall be in accordance with Division 3.2 of the Land Development Code.
Platting shall be required, if units are to be sold fee simple or if the project is develo 3ed as an
integrated phased development, in accordance with Section 3.2.4.4 of the Land De~ ;iopraeat~oA i~tJa
Code. ta~.~
NOV 2 7 2001
5.19 BUFFERING
A landscape buffer in accordance with Section 2.4.7, Alternative B, of the Land Development
Code, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of the site except a more stringent buffer
shall be provided if required by Section 2.4.7.
O:MS~-O00-~01- E88M-
NOV 2 7 2001
pg.~/-4~
~' SR 951
J
NOV 2 7 2001
w,-- 'm-soo
PETITION N PUD.87.4~mrs Beach Resort
DATE: 3/15/01
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING
FOR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN~ DMSION
PLANNING SERVICES
1. Name of Applicant(s) The Skinner and Broadbent Development Company, Inc.
Applicant's Mailing Address 201 North Illinois Street, 23'~ Floor
City Indianapolis State IN Zip 46204-1950
Applicant's Telephone Number: (317) 237-2900
Is the applicant the owner of the subject property? [] Yes [] No
~ (a) If applicant is a land trust, so indicate and name beneficiaries below.
__ O)
~ (c)
~ (d)
~ (e)
If applicant is corporation other than a public corporation, so indicate and
name officers and major stockholders below.
If applicant is a parmership, limited partnership or other business entity, so
indicate and name principals below.
If applicant is an owner, indicate exactly as recorded, and list all other
owners, if any.
If applicant is a lessee, attach copy of lease, and indicate actual owners if
not indicated on the lease.
x (0
If applicant is a contract purchaser, attach copy of contract, and indicate
actual owner(s) name and address below.
Name of Agent
R. Bruce Anderson
Firm Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson, P.A.
Agent's Mailing Address 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 300
City Naples
IO
Agent's Telephone Number:
2/19/01-91145 V~:. OZ-ffry~on
State FL Zip
(941) 597-2814, Fax. (941) 597-10~
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. ~
PUD Ordinance and Number: 88-86
(Previously amended by Ordinance #'s 92-76 and 98-33
Detailed legal description of the property covered by the application (if space is
inadequate, attach on separate page; if request involves change to more than one zoning
district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district; if
property is odd-shaped, submit five (5) copies of survey; 1' to 400' scale).
The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questiom arise
concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification shall be required.
Section 3 Township 51 South Range 26East
See attached legal description
5. Address or location of subject property:
Does property owner own contiguous property to the subject property? If so, give
complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach
on separate page.)
See attached legal description
o
Type of Amendment:
X A. PUD Document Language Amendment
X B. PUD Master Plan Amendment
C. Development Order Language Amendment
Does amendment comply with the comprehensive plan:
If no, explain:
[] Yes [] No
Has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year?
name? No
Petition Number: N/A Date:
If so, in whose
NO¥ 2 7 2001
10.
Has any portion of the PUD been sold and/or
changes proposed for the area sold and/or developed?
additional sheets if necessary.)
developed?
If yes, describe.
Are any
(Attach
No portions of the commercial area within the PUD have been sold or built upon.
Portions of the residential area have been built and sold.
~/19/01.91145 V~n~.
AFFIDAVIT
I, David A. Cheslyn, as Agent for The Skinner & Broadbent Development Company,
Inc., being first duly sworn, depose and say that The Skinner & Broadbent Development
Company, Inc. is the contract purchaser of the property described herein and which is the subject
matter of the proposed hearing; that all answers to the questions in this application, and all
sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application,
are honest and true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I understand this application must be
complete and accurate before a hearing can be advertised. I further permit the undersigned to act
as our representative in any matters regarding this Petition. '
The Skj.'/gner-~ B~,~db,,~t Development
13a~id A. Cheslyn
Agent for The Skinner & Broadbent
Development Company, Inc.
R. Bruce Anderson, Esq.
personally known
~ion.
STATE OF
COUNTY OF ~ ,q,l~/~/~
The foregoing Application was acknowledged before mc this ~ day of March, 2001,
by David A. Cheslyn as Agent for The Skinner & Broadbent Development Company, Inc. He is
to me .-or-- .has ~d --as-'
[Seal]
Signature of Notary Public
Printed or Stamped Name of Notary
AGFd40A ITEM
No. c" C2~
NOV 2 7 2001
WRITTEN CONSENT TO RESOLUTIONS
OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE SKINNER & BROADBENT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC.
The undersigned, being the sole elected and qualified Director of The Skinner & Broadbent
Development Company, Inc., an Indiana corporation (hereinafter called the "Corporation"), acting
under the provisions of the Indiana Business Corporation Law and the Corporation's Code of
Bylaws, as amended from time to time, does hereby consen~ to the taking of the following actions.
and adoption of the following resolutions without and in lieu. of a special meeting of the Boar~l of
Directors of the Corporation:
WHEREAS,
The Corporation from time to time enters into contracts to purchase real estate in
various locations in the U.S.A. (hereinafter called the "Real Estate") for construction
of shopping centers, self-storage facilities and other commercial enterprises;
WHEREAS,
Various zoning approvals, permits, signage approvals, plan development approvals,
environmental use and wetlands mitigation approvals and other permits and
approvals of governmental authorities having jurisdiction (hereinafter called the
"Approvals") may be required in order for the Corporation to cause the Real Estate
to be improved for use as shopping centers, commercial self-storage facilities and
other commercial enterprises.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Corporation hereby designates 'and authorizes
David A. Cheslyn to prepare, execute and deliver, on behalf of the Corporation, to
governmental authorities having jurisdiction, each and every application, document,
agreement, certificate and/or instrument which may be required in order for the
Corporation to obtain the Approvals.
RESOLVED, That this consent shall be filed with the minutes of the proceedings of the Board of
Directors of the Corporation.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Written Consent to Resolution
of the Board of Directors of the Corporation effective as of January 24, 2001, thereby agreeing that
the foregoing recitals and resolutions shall be of the same force and effect as if adopted at a meeting
of the Board of Directors of the Corporation held upon due notice on such date.
George ~l~ro'adb"ent
NOV Z'7 2001
CERTIFICATE
Dan G. Sterner hereby certifies that he is an attorney for The Skinner & Broadbent
Development Company, Inc., and that the foregoing resolutions became effective as of January 24,
2001, have not been modified or rescinded, and remain in full force and effect.
Dated: January 24, 2001.
Dan G. Sterner
X:XDG$\7216\000 IXlVlinutes\Consent Resolution 1-2001 .wpd
2
AGENDA I1T~
No,
NOV 2 ? 2001
AFFIDAVIT
I, Albert Hubschman, a general partner of Falling Waters Beach Resort, Ltd., a Florida
I,imited Partnership, being first duly sworn, depose and say that Falling Waters Beach Resort, Ltd.,
a Florida Limited Partnership, is the owner of the commercially zoned parcel of the Falling Waters
Beach Resort PUD mad wlfieh is thc subjeut matter of the proposed PUD Amendment Petition, and
that The Skinner & Broadbent Development C. ompany, Inc. is a contract purchaser of'said parcel.
Falling Waters Beach Resort, Ltd., a Florida Limited Partnership, authorizes The Skinner &
Broadbent Development Company, Inc. to act as its representative in any matter regarding tiffs
Petition.
Failing Waters Beach Resort, Ltd., a Florida
By:
Albert Hubschman, General Partner
R. Bruce Anderson, Esq.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF <:.ot-t.I
The foregoing Application was acknowledged before me this "7 day of MarCh, 2001,'by
Albert llubsehman as a general partner of Falling Waters Beach Resort; Ltd., a Florida Limited
Pamaership. 1 le is personally known to me or has produced
as identification.
[seal]
Si.t,matdr[ o~Notary Public
Printed or Stamped Name of~qotary
AGF. NOA I'l'~d
No. '- ~
NOV 2 7 2001
MAR-136-20131 18:05 941 597 1060 96Z P.02
SECOND AMEND~JNT TO CONTRACT
FOR PURCHASE OF REAL ESTATE,
THIS Second Amendment to Contract for Purchase of Real Estate ("Amendment"), is made
and entered into this ~'~day of January, 2001, by and between The Skinner & Broadbent
Development Company, Inc., an Indiana corporation ("Purchaser"), and Falling Waters Beach
Resort Ltd., a Florida limited partnership ("Vendor"),
WITNESSETH THAT:
WHEREAS, Purchaser and Vendor entered into a Contract for Purchase of Real Estate
("Contract"), signed by Purchaser on June 29, 2000, and signed by Vendor on June 30, 2000; and
WHEREAS, Purchaser and Vendor entered into a First Amendment to Contract for Purchase
of Real Estate; and -
WHEREAS, Purchaser and Vendor wish to further amend the aforesaid Contract as
hereinafter contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, Purchaser and Vendor agree as follows:
1. In the second and third lines of paragraph 2, the words and figures "two hundred ten
(210)" are deleted and the words and figures "two hundred seventy (270)" are inserted in lieu
thereof.
2. Paragraph 7.1 is deleted in its entirety and is replaced with the following:
7.1 ~. Closing shall occur at a place acceptable to the parties in Naples, Florida on
or before March 27, 2001, provided, however, that if Purchaser is diligently pursuing obtaining the
Zoning, Permits and Development Approvals, as demonstrated by reasonable evidence including
Purchaser's application for such Permits and Approvals, but has not obtained same, in order to so
obtain same Seller agrees to extend the Due Diligence Period under this Agreement, if requested by
Purchaser, for six (6) additional periods, all of which shall be for thirty (30) days each, one extension
period a time, whereupon Purchaser shall deposit on or before the expiration of the Due Diligence
Period or the applicable extension period, ~with Escrow Agent for the benefit of Vendor, lat
~and no/100 Dollars ~or each of the extension periods. All of the foregoing
deposits shall become part of the r. That portion of the Earnest Money in the sum of
~ and no/100 Dollars pursuant to paragraph 1.1 shall be
non-refundable in anY event (but shall be applied to the Purchase Price and credited thereto at time of
closing). Any portions of the Earnest Money paid pursuant to this paragraph 7.1 shall be non-
refundable (except in the event Purchaser fails to obtain the Zoning, Permits and Development
Approvals, such portions shall be returned to Purchaser), (but if otherwise non-refundable shall be
applied to the Purchase Price and credited thereto at time of closing). Notwithstanding the foregoing
provisions with regard to extension of the Due Diligence Period, if Purchaser has not filed for PUD
approval on or before forty-five (45) days from the date hereof, Vendor may terminate the Contract at
any time prior to March 27,1 2001. Notwi~standing the foregoing provisions with r,
Earnest Money, it is understood that Purchaser may terminate this Contract at any ti]
NOV 2 7 2001
any reason. In the event the Dui i}iligence Period is extended as aforesaid, Closing shall take place
within ten (10) days from the extension period last in force, but in no event later than September 23,
2001.
Vendor shall not agree to or execute any agreements, approvals or consents whatsoever
concerning the Real Estate or any portion thereof from the Acceptance Date to the time of closing
except upon the written approval of Purchaser. At the date of closing, Vendor shall execute and
deliver the Deed in recordable form conveying the Real Estate and improvements constituting a part
thereof in the same condition as they now are, ordinary wear and tear excepted, a Vendor's Affidavit
in the form required by Chicago Title, a non-foreign affidavit pursuant to Section 1445 of the Internal
Revenue Code, and any other instrument as reasonably required or requested by Purchaser or Chicago
Title. DocumentarTstamps on the Deed will be paid for by yendor. Ptirchaser will pay the cost of
recording the Deed, and Vendor will pay the costs of recording .any necessary corrective title - -
documents required by Chicago Title. Purchaser shall pay for the title insurance commitment. ;''
THE SKINNER & BROADBENT
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC.
Georg~yBroadl~ent, President
FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT LTD.
By:
HarriSon HFubschman, General Partner
XAI)G~7~ 16~dlh~ Wet e*~.~ecoadAme~d. ToC.~atraca2.wln:l
2
NOV 2 ? 2001
GRUBB ~ ELLIS
Hub~,-hman
GKOBB .'LF~ ELLIS
1~002/003
p.1
~ ~M~mM~-r TO CONTR~.cr
Tills l:ll~,qT AMENDMENT T~ CONTP, ACrI' FOP,. PUK~B OF ~ ~TA~
WITNE-S-8~TH THAT:
~IERF~, V~r ~ Pv~ ~e~d ~to a Co~ f~ P~ of~ ~
(~c."C~t~), ~ ~ ~c~on J~e29~ 2000, ~.si~.~.V~ on ~une 30. 2000;
and
NOV/, TJIlaRI-,FOKB, in couMderation of tbs mutusd
and 'for =~hcr good ~3nd w~dunble-con.ddera~on; ~e ~c__~p~ an~ .~dT'~ie~ey of whi ch hereby nrc=
~k~owlcdged, Porcha~r pad Vendor altec ns
t. In thc s,~and and thizd llnc~ ofpnraBraph ~ the words and figures "one hundrcd
cichty (,l-BOY,' ~ delet~l, and t~.wotdxnd, figtttcs "cwo,hundre&.ten.~lO) * ~o it~sodod In ti~u
t~er=oC
2. ln-~he n~.oUd, nnA.tldrd rme. s. ol~.l~ml~S~h.7,.l, o~..t}m C0ntrnct,'the wot'~ ~
figures "one hundred ninety (190)' hereby are dclet'~ nncl the v~rds and ffgux~ "txv~ htmdt~
~wcnty (220)'~ iascn't'fn llu~ ~f:
3. In elt. o-~~. ~hc ~ntra~ d~nll t~mi~ in full forco and
THE SK~ & BROADBIRqT
AGENDA ITEM
No.
NOV 2 7 2001
_~.,,]-~/21.~00 14:54 FA.,T .9412617579
IDac: 21 OO O1=4:DIc, Har"r'ison
12/19/00 19:~3 FAT 9¢1261757r~
us:.u-J.r,-uU IUi: UO,.:~l~ fill
~003/003
p.2
~oo~
FALLI~O WA~ ~..~CI4~ ~F_~OKT I.~.
AGENOA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF REAL ESTATE
The Skinner & Broadbent Development Company, Inc., an Indiana corporation, whose
address is 2300 Capital Center South, 201 North Illinois Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204-1950,
Facsimile No. (317) 237-2912 ("Purchaser"), offers to purchase from Falling Waters Beach Resort
Ltd., a Florida limited partnership, whose address is c/o Siesky, Pilon & Wood, 1000 Tamiami Trail
North, Suite 201, Naples, Florida 34102, Facsimile No. (941) 263-7611 ("Vendor"), including all
easements and rights benefitting same, all improvements located thereon, and all fixtures and
personal property appertaining thereto which are owned by Vendor and which are permanently
installed or which belong to or are used in connection therewith, that certain real estate consisting
of approximately four (4) acres located in Collier County, l~lorida, outlined in red on Exhibit "A".
attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof, and easem6nt or access thereto for that ceWaln
real estate cross hatched on Exhibit "A" (it being understood that final legal descriptions for same
shall be part of the "Survey" as defined in paragraph 2.1 hereof) (the "Real Estate"), to be conveyed
by a Warranty Deed approved by Purchaser (the "Deed"), subject to the following terms and
conditions:
1. Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Real Estate shall be
~ and no/100 Dollars ~ (the "Purchase Price") to be paid as follows:
1.1 Earnest Money Deposit. Within five (5) ts from the Acceptance
Date, Purchaser shall tender to Vendor and no/100 Dollars
~ (the "Eamest Money"). The Earnest Money shall be held in the trust
account of Henderson, Franklin, Statues & Holt, P.A., 1715 Monroe Street, Fort
Myers, Florida 33901 ("Escrow Agenff). The Earnest Money shall be placed in an
interest-bearing account with a national bank. Interest earned shall be considered
part of the Earnest Money. The Eamest Money shall be applied to the Purchase Price
and shall be credited thereto at the time of closing. The Earnest Money shall be
returned immediately to Purchaser if any condition or requirement as hereinafter set
forth in this Contract is not satisfied, or waived by Purchaser, except as specifically
hereinafter provided. Purchaser's only Other remedy shall be the right of specific
performance unless specific performance is unavailable because of Vendor's actions,
in which case Purchaser shall be entitled to recover damages. The Earnest Money
shall be forfeited as liquidated damages, which shall be Vendor's sole remedy at law
or in equity, in the event that all conditions and requirem, ents of this Contract have
been satisfied, or waived by Purchaser, and Purchaser shall fail or refuse to perform
its obligations herein specified at closing.
1.2 Payment on ClOsing. On closing this transaction, Purchaser shall pay
the Purchase Price, less the Earnest Money, credits and prorations as herein provided,
in cash.
ACtA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
1.3 Acceptance Date. The date this offer is accepted by Vendor
hereinafter is referred to as the "Acceptance Date".
2. Conditions of Offer. Vendor's and Purchaser's obligations hereunder are
subject to the satisfaction of the following conditions. On or before the one hundred
eightieth (180th) day following the Acceptance Date (the "Due Diligence Period") Pm'chaser
shall notify Vendor in writing whether or not the following conditions have been satisfied
as determined by Purchaser, in Purchaser's sole discretion, or such conditions shall be
deemed waived, except for "Zoning, Permits and Development Approvals" as defined and
provided for in paragraphs 2.5 and 7.1 hereof. If Purchaser fails to so notify Vendor during
the Due Diligence Period that any condition, other than Zoning, Permits and Development
Approvals in paragraph 2.5 hereof, has not been shtisfied or if Purchaser waives said-
conditions, then the portion of the Earnest Money paid pursuant to paragraph 1.1 sha}t'
become non-refundable (but shall be applied to the Purchase Price and credited thereto'at
time of closing), except in the event of Vendor's default under this Contract. In the event
Purchaser notifies Vendor during the Due Diligence Period that any condition, other than
Zoning, Permits and Development Approvals in paragraph 2.5, has not been satisfied,
Purchaser may terminate this Contract or waive satisfaction of the condition. If Purchaser
terminates this Contract, the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser, and the parties
shall have no further rights or obligations hereunder.
2.1 Survey and Engineering Studies. Within ten (10) days from the
Acceptance Date, Vendor, at Vendor's expense, shall furnish Purchaser with a copy
of any survey in its possession relating to the Real Estate. ~.Thereafter, Purchaser, at
i Pdrchas~$ expense, may order a staked boundary survey meeting the Minimum
Standards applicable to Florida land surveyors (the "Survey") of the Real Estate
prepared by a registered land surveyor acceptable to Purchaser certified as of a
current date, showing the location of all easements and rights-of-way located thereon
and showing all utilities and building setback lines. The legal description of the Real
Estate shown on the Survey shall be the legal description used in the Deed. The
Survey shall certify that the Real Estate is not located in a special flood hazard area
as established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Flood
Insurance Program. Purchaser, at Purchaser's expense, shall obtain such further
engineering studies, topographical and wetlands studies, and such inspections and
soil tests as Purchaser shall deem desirable (the "Engineering Studies") concerning
the Real Estate, all of the results of which must be satisfactory to Purchaser.
2.2 Title and Easements. Within ten (10) days from the Acceptance Date,
Vendor shall furnish Purchaser with an abstract of title or title ir~suranee policy in its
possession relating to the Real Estate. In the event Vendor does not have an abstract
of title or title insurance policy in its possession, it shall notify Purchaser in writing
within said ten (10) day period and it shall be the Purchaser's obligation and expense
to obtain a base of title. Thereafter, Purchaser, at Purchaser's expense, may order a
binder for an ALTA owner's policy of title insurance (the "Title Binder") issued by
Chicago Title Insurance Company ("Chicago Title") in which Chicago Title shall
NOV 2 7 2001
agree to insure marketable title to the Real Estate (including any appurtenant
easements necessary for the full utilization thereof), free and clear of all liens and
encumbrances of any nature whatsoever for the full amount of the Purchase Price,
after execution of the Deed to Purchaser from Vendor. Chicago Title shall furnish
Purchaser with copies of all recorded documents shown on the Title Binder.
2.3 Contracts; Affidavits. Purchaser, within thirty (30) days after the
Acceptance Date, shall receive, without anyexpense to Pumhaser, from Vendor (a)
copies of all contracts in force concerning the Real Estate or any portion thereof, as
to the terms and conditions of which Vendor is bound in any manner (collectively,
the "Contracts"), with an affidavit of Vendor'so stating and stating that the same are.
true and complete, with further statements by'Vendor as to the status of s,~e,
existence of defaults, offsets, defenses or counterclaims, if any, and such other
information as Purchaser may reasonably request, (b) written certification by Vendor
of delinquent and current real and personal property taxes concerning the Real Estate,
and (c) written certification by Vendor that no notice has been received from any
governmental agency (that has not been fully satisfied, complied with or resolved)
that any work is required to be done on the Real Estate; there are no claims or
litigation pending that, if decided adversely to the owner of the Real Estate, would
affect title or become a lien on the Real Estate. All of the foregoing Contracts and
certificates, (i) must be in form and substance satisfactory to Purchaser, and (ii) if
satisfactory to Purchaser shall be updated and recertified as true and correct by
Vendor in form and substance satisfactory to Purchaser at time of closing.
2.4 Feasibility Studies. Pumhaser, at Purchaser's expense, must be able
to determine to the satisfaction of Purchaser that the Real Estate is suitable for
Purchaser's contemplated use as a commercial self-storage facility and that financing
and other conditions satisfactory to Purchaser exist or are favorable so as to make
such use feasible in Purchaser's sole discretion.
2.5 Zoning, Permits and Development Approvals. Purchaser, at
Purchaser's expense, but with the full cooperation of Vendor, shall obtain such
zoning, permits, signage, plan development, environmental use, wetlands mitigation
plans, access, curb cuts and governmental approvals in form satisfactory to Purchaser
and evidence satisfactory to Purchaser of the availability, and cost of all utilities and
proposed road work and improvements to adjoining streets (in. eluding the timing of
said improvements), which Purchaser deems necessary or appropriate for Purchaser's
contemplated use of the Real Estate as a commercial self-storage facility (the
"Zoning, Permits and Development Approvals").
2.7 Environmental Inspection. Purchaser shall obtain, at Purchaser's
expense, an environmental inspection report as to the Real Estate in form and
substance and from an engineering firm acceptable to Purchaser in its Ji,:,iil~l~,ffroa
3
NOV 2 ? 2001
From such report Purchaser must be able to determine to its satisfaction that: (a) the
Real Estate is not in any way contaminated with any hazardous substances,
ha?ardous wastes, contaminants or pollutants (as defined by any federal, state or local
environmental law); (b) the Real Estate is not subject to any federal, state or local
"superfund" or other environmental lien, proceedings, claim, liability or action, or the
threat or likelihood thereof, for the clean-up, removal and remediation of any
hazardous substance, contaminant or pollutant from same; (c) there is no asbestos or
polychlorinated biphenyl present on the Real Estate; (d) there is no underground
storage tank on the Real Estate; (e) the Real Estate has not been used to dispose of
any :hazardous substances or hazardous wastes, toxic _substances, pollutants or
contaminants of any kind (as defined by an~ federal, state or local environmental..
law, ordinance, rule or regulation); and (f) the Real Estate is not in violation of ~afly
local, state or federal law, code, ordinance or regulation dealing with human health
or the environment. ,
3. Taxes and Assessments. Purchaser assumes and agrees to pay all assessments
for improvements as to the Real Estate becoming a lien after the date of closing and so much
of the real estate taxes assessed for and becoming a lien as to the Real Estate during the
calendar year in which closing occurs as shall be allocable to the Real Estate on or after the
day of closing and Vendor shall pay the balance of such taxes. Such taxes shall be prorated
through the day before closing based on the current year's tax with due allowance made for
the maximum allowable discount. If closing occurs at a date when the current year's milage
is not fixed and the current year's assessment is available, taxes will be prorated based upon
such assessment and prior year's milage. If current year's assessment is not available, then
taxes will be prorated on prior year's tax. All real estate taxes for the previous calendar year
which are payable no later than March 31 of the calendar year in which closing occurs shall
be paid by Vendor. Any such taxes prorated on an estimated basis shall be reprorated by the
parties when and as the actual amount of such item becomes known. Any adjustment due
to reproration shall be effected promptly after final determination for the amount of such
item and demand by the party to whom the credit is due. Any real estate taxes not assumed
by Purchaser and which are not due and payable at the time of closing shall be allowed to
Purchaser as a credit on the cash payment required on closing. The provisions of this
paragraph shall survive closing.
4. Rents, Insurance and Risk of Loss. Rents, if any, shall be prorated at closing.
Insurance shall be cancelled as of the date of closing. Vendor shall bear risk of loss until
closing.
5. Damage and Condemnation. If at any time after the Acceptance Date (a) the
Real Estate shall be damaged or destroyed, (b) the Real Estate shall be condemned in whole
or in part, or (c) any notice of condemnation shall be given, then Purchaser, at its sole option,
may terminate this Contract or proceed with closing. If Purchaser elects to proceed with
closing, then Purchaser may (a) apply the proceeds of any condemnation awm ~ r~r ir,~,,~,-"~
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
policy to reduce the Purchase Price, or (b) accept an assignment of such proceeds. If
Purchaser elects to terminate this Contract, then notwithstanding any other provision of this
Contract, the Earnest Money in its entirety shall be immediately refunded to Purchaser.
6. Right of Entry. Purchaser shall have the fight to permit surveyors, engineers,
soil testing companies and other agents to enter upon the Real Estate for the purpose of
obtaining surveys, soil tests, inspection reports and other information. Purchaser, to the
exclusion of all others, may place leasing and other signs on any portion of the Real Estate
after the expiration of the initial due diligence period.
7. Closin~ and Possession. '
7.1 Closing. If this offer is accepted as herein provided, the transaction
shall be closed at a place acceptable to the parties in Naples, Florida, within one
hundred ninety (190) days from the Acceptance Date; provided, however, that if
Purchaser is diligently pursuing obtaining the Zoning, Permits and Development
Approvals, as _demonstrated by reasonable evidence including Purchaser's
application for such Permits and Approvals, but has not obtained same, in order to
so obtain same Seller agrees to extend the Due Diligence Period under this
Agreement, if requested by Purchaser, for two (2) additional periods, the first to be
sixty (60) days (the "First Extension Period"), and the second to be thirty (30) days
(the "Second Extension Period"), one extension period at a time, whereupon
Purchaser shall deposit on or before the expiration of the Due Diligence Period or the
First Extension Period, as applicable, with Escrow Agent for the benefit of Vendor,
~ and no/100 Dollars ~ for each of the extension periods.
All of the foregoing deposits shall become part of the Earnest Money. If during the
First Extension Period Purchaser fails to notify Vendor in writing that Purchaser is
terminating this Contract (which it may do for any reason), then all of the Earnest
Money shall become non-refundable (but shall be applied to the Purchase Price and
credited thereto at time of closing); if Purchaser does so notify Vendor in writing of
such termination, then the portion of the Earnest Money paid to obtain the First
Extension Period shall be retumed immediately to Purchaser. If during the Second
Extension Period Purchaser fails to notify Vendor in writing that Purchaser is
terminating this Contract (which it may do for any reason), then all of the Earnest
Money shall become non-refundable (but shall be applied to the Purchase price and
credited thereto at time of closing); if Purchaser does so notify Vendor in writing of
such termination, then the portion of the Earnest Money paid to obtain the Second
Extension Period shall be returned immediately to Purchaser. Closing shall take
place within ten (10) days from the extension period last in force.
Vendor shall not agree to or execute any agreements, approvals or consents
whatsoever concerning the Real Estate or any portion thereof from the Acceptance
Date to the time of closing except upon the written approval of Purchaser. At the
date of closing, Vendor shall execute and deliver the Deed in re 2orclalalo f~'~"~
5 -
NOV 2 7 2001
L~
conveying the Real Estate and improvements constituting a part thereof in the same
condition as they now are, ordinary wear and tear excepted, a Vendor's Affidavit in
the form required by Chicago Title, a non-foreign affidavit pursuant to Section 1445
of the Internal Revenue Code, and any other instrument as reasonably required or
requested by Purchaser or Chicago Title. Documentary stamps on the Deed will be
paid for by Vendor. Purchaser will pay the cost of recording the Deed, and Vendor
will pay the costs of recording any necessary corrective title documents required by
Chicago Title. Purchaser shall pay for the title insurance commitment.
7.2 Possession. Complete possession of the Real Estate shall be delivered
to Purchaser at time of closing. ·
8. Brokers. Vendor shall pay only the real estate finder's fees or commissions
with respect to this transaction earned by Purchaser:s broker Craig D. Timmins of Grubb
and Ellis IPC. Vendor warrants and represents that it has not contacted or dSalt with any
other realtors or brokers related to this transaction.
9. Vendor ~,epresentations and Warranties. Vendor represents and warrants that
as of the Acceptance Date:
mo
(I) Vendor has not caused and will not cause the release of hazardous
substance, hazardous waste, pollutant or contamination on the Real Estate,
and (II) to the best of Vendor's knowledge, without having made any
independent investigation (i) the Real Estate is not contaminated on the
surfa, ge or subsurface wit~ any hazardous substance, ha?ardous waste,
pollutant or contaminant '(as define~l by any federal, state or local
environmental law, ordinance, rule or regulation); (ii) there has not occurred
the release of any hazardous substance, ha?ardous waste, pollutant or
contaminant on the Real Estate; (iii) the Real Estate is not subject to any
federal, state or local "superfund" or other environmental lien, proceeding,
claim, liability or action or the threat or likelihood thereof, for the clean-up,
removal or remediation of any ha?ardous substance, hazardous waste,
pollutant or contaminant from the Real Estate; (iv) there is no asbestos on the
Real Estate; (v) there is no underground storage tank on the Real Estate: (vi)
the Real Estate has not been used to dispose of any hazardous substances,
hazardous wastes, toxic substances, pollutants or contaminants of any 'kind;
(vii) the Real Estate is not in violation of any local, state or federal law, code,
ordinance or regulation dealing with human health or the environment; (viii)
the Real Estate has not been used for the purpose of, and there has been no
surface or subsurface contamination due to, the generation, storage, disposal
or treatment of any hazardous waste (as defined by any federal, state or local
environmental law, ordinance, rule or regulation); (ix) in connection with the
ownership or use of the Real Estate, there is not a present or past failure by
any person to comply with any federal, state or local environmental law,
ordinance, or any rules or regulations adopted pursuant thereto; (x) by
6
ITEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
acquiring the Real Estate, Purchaser will not incur or be subjected to any
"superfund" liability for the clean-up, removal or remediation of any
hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant from the Real Estate or any
liability, cost or expense for the removal of asbestos or under.ground storage
tanks from the Real Estate.
There is no litigation or claims pending or threatened against Vendor which
would adversely affect the Real Estate or the rights of Purchaser hereunder.
Co
There is not pending against Vendor any petition in bankruptcy, whether
voluntary or otherwise, any assignment for the benefit of creditors or any
other action brought under the aforesaid .laws.
All of the foregoing representations in this paragraph 9 shall be considered to be true
and correct as of the Acceptance Date and as of the time of closing hereunder and
shall survive the closing. Vendor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless
Purchaser from and against any and all claims, demands, liabilities, damages, suits,
actions, judgments, fines, penalties, loss, cost and expense (including, without
limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees) arising or resulting from, or suffered, sustained
or incurred by Purchaser as a result (direct or indirect) of, the untruth or inaccuracy
of any of the foregoing representations by Vendor to Purchaser as of the Acceptance
Date and as of the time of the closing hereunder, which indemnity shall survive the
closing hereunder.
10. Recording. This document shall not be recorded. Vendor and Purchaser
shall enter into a written memorandum in recordable form setting forth the terms and
conditions of this document, except for the Purchase Price, which may be recorded by
Purchaser at its expense. The memorandum shall terminate at the end of the due diligence
period and shall be extended through the EXtension Periods and date of closing if said
Extension Periods are exercised by Purchaser. The memorandum date shall be extended by
Vendor's attorney recording an affidavit in the Public Records for Collier County, Florida.
11. Notices. All notices required under this Contract shall be deemed to be
properly served if sent by registered or certified mail with return receipt requested or by
facsimile, provided an original of the required notice is sent via overnight mail with a
responsible company specializing in overnight delivery the same day such facsimile is sent,
to Vendor or Purchaser at the addresses as specified on the first.page of this Contract, or to
such other addresses which Vendor or Purchaser may designate in writing delivered to the
other party for such purpose. Date of service of a notice served by mail or via facsimile shall
be the date on which such notice is deposited in a post office of the United States Postal
Service or sent via facsimile.
12.
parties is of the essence of this Contract.
Time of the Essence. Time for the performance of the obligations of the
AGEI~A ITEM
7 NOV 2 7 2001
I
13. Assignment; Successor of Obligations. The rights and obligations of Purchaser under
this Contract may be assigned to an entity controlled by George P. Broadbent. All terms of this
Contract shall be binding upon the heirs, legatees, devisees, personal representatives and assignees
of the parties.
14. Miscellaneous. This document including all attachments fully sets forth all
agreements and understandings of the parties to this Contract with respect to the subject matter
hereof. Whenever used herein, the singular shall indicate the plural, the plural shall include the
singular, the plural and singular and any gender shall include all genders and the neuter. Captions
to the provisions of:this Contract are intended and used solely for purposes of identification and do
not limit or enlarge upon the written provisions of this Confract.
15. Duration of Offer. This offer shall expire if written acceptance endorsed hereOn is
not delivered to Purchaser on or before 5:00 o'clock P.M.,4mao "7, 2000.
DATED: June Z~ , 2000
X:~X3S\72 ! eqassignment page skinner.wpd
THE SKINNER & BROADBENT
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC.
By:
~Geor~P. Broadbent, President
AGENDA ITEM
No. ': ~
NOV 2 7 2001
I
ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER AND
RECEIPT FOR EARNEST MONEY
The undersigned, Ven~accepts the foregoing offer and acknowledges that ~
~ and no/100 Dollars ~ Earnest Money shall be held in the Henderson, Franklin,
Statues & Holt Trust Account and either applied or forfeited according to the terms of this Contract
for Purchase of Real Estate.
Dated:fie9 .M., ~""~' ~.e
,2000
FALLING WATE. RS BEACH RESORT LTD.
' ~- Partner
BY:H~bschman, General
"Vendor"
I
& Holt acknowledge receipt of the sum of~ and
no/100 Dollars as the Earnest Money which shall be held by it in its trust account and
either applied or forfeited according to the terms of the foregoing Contract for Purchase of Real
Estate.
Dated: I 0 .M., ,To ! ~, ,2000
/
FRANKLIN, STARNES & HOLT
"Escrow Agent"
MATEMlSO~lleach ~ Lid st Skinner - Purchase Ag~-ement- 6-23-00.wpd 9
NOV 2 ? 2001
Exhibit "A"
Site Plan
M:VI~MIR2a3~meh Resmt Ltd st Skinner - Purchase As~eement- 6-23-O0.wpd l 0
NOV 2 ? 2001
LEGAL DESCRIPTION -
PARCEL
A portion ot'lm~d located in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida being more particularly de.scribed as Follows:
Commencing at thc East V, comer of'said Seclion 3; Thence run South 00°41'31" Wesl 629.67
feet along lhe cut IL~e of~d Section 3; Thencr ?ha North 54~ 20' I6"; ~'~'t'-on'a line' 400 fe~--'
North of'and ptnllIcl with the North right-of-way line ot' Florida State Road 90;.(U.S. 41) for a
distance of 608.25 feet to the East line ofa Outfall Drainage Zasermnt as r~:orded ha Official
Re¢orda Book 83, Page 12.5 of~e Public Recor& ofColLler Cotmty, Florida; Thence continue
North $4°20'16" West 3503.15 feet to the Point o£Begh'ming 0fthe p~¢el ofl~-~:! herein
de~cn'bed; Thence continue North 54~20'16" W~-t 239.00 f~et to the E~mt Right-of-Way line of
Slate Road 951 (100.00' Right-of-Wiy); Them:e North 35'40'08" Ea~ 220.00 ~,:t along ~aid
East Righl..of-w~y line; Thence South 54~20'16'' East 239.00 feet; Thence South 35°40'08" We~t
220.00 feet to the Point of Begirming.
Less ~nd Except the Westerly 50.00 feet thereof.
Bearings m-c b~ed on the E~t Right-of-Way line oFStale Road 951 i~ being North 35°40'05''
East
· lifci~d'~.-.15,~.iflcat¢ No. 4520
~b~ko.iw~
NOV 2 7 2001
Exhibit A - Page 1 'of 4
LEGAL DE$CR/PTION
PAR(~£L "B'
A portion of land loCated in Section 3, Tow~-.~ip 51 South/Range 26 Fa.st, Collier County,
Florida l~g more pa.,'ticuia~ly dc~cn'b~ a.s follows: .-
Commencing at the East ¼ corner of said Section 3; Thence 'run South 00°41'31- We. st 629.67.
feet along thc east line of ~aid Section 3; Thence run North 54° 20'16" West ou a line 400 feet
North of'and pax~¢l with the North right-of-way line of Fl~rtda State l~afl 90, (U.S. 41) for a
distance of 60g.25 feet to the East Rne ora Oul~ll Draim~c ~m~t as recorded in Official
RecorcLs Book 83, Page 125 of~e Pub§c Records of CoYier County, Florida; Thence continue
North 54°20'16" West 3742.15 feet to the East Right-of-Way IL, ac of State Road 951 (100'
Right-of-Way); The~e North 35640'08'' East 32,0.00 fe~t along said East Rigln..of-Way Une to
th~ Point of Beginning of the paxcel of land here~ desc'Hbed; Thence continue North 35°40'0g''
East 600.00 fe~ along $~id East Right-of-Way I~e; Thence South 54"20'16" East 239.00 feeg
Thence South 35°40'05'' West 600.00 feet; Thence North 54~20' 16" West 239.00 feet to the
Point of Begln-;ng.
Less aml Except thc Westerly 50,00 feel thereoi
Bear:rags are based on the East Right-of-Way line of State Road 951 as being North 35°40'08''
East.
Florida Certi.fieatc No. 4520
August 18, 1999
t~rb~k~4.1wp
lNOV 2 7 2001
Exhibit A - Page 2 of 4
I~,
f
.!
I
!
!
!
" NOV 7 2001
Exhibit A -
Exhibit A - Page 4 of 4
badamtchian_c
.:
Subject:
Paul Martella [ampmnaples@yahoo.com]
Thursday, August 02, 2001 9:28 AM
chahrarnbadamtchian@colliergov.net
Fwd: [Fwd: Fwd: Falling Waters...A must read!l!]
> Collier County Government
> Planning Services Dept.
> 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
> Naples, FL 34104
>
>
> Dear Planning Board:
>
> Please regard this email as our disapproval of
> the following TWO PUD
> changes to the Planned Unit Development known as the
> Falling Waters Beach
> Resort:
>
> 1. Decreasing minimum front setback from 50 ft. to
> 20 ft.
>
> 2. Increasing sq. ft. from 49,000 to 73,000, for
> PUDA-2001-AR-500 for
> property located at the intersection of Collier
> Boulevard (C.R.951) and U.S.
> 41, in section 3 Township 51 South, Range 26 East,
'~-~ollier County, Florida.
~ We feel that decreasing the setback will detract > from the ambience of our
> entrance and with the influx of increased traffic it
> will be a major concern
> for an already congested and dangerous intersection
> on Collier Boulevard.
>
We feel very strongly about this issue!
Alice & Paul Martella
6730 Beach Resort Drive 915
Naples, Florida 34114
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
NOV 2 7 2001
FSrom:
ent:
To:
Subject:
Edward Calkins [ednclo@juno.com]
Thursday, August 02, 2001 9:11 AM
chahrambadamtchian@colliergov.net
jandjstan@aol.com; Bricks646@cs.com; Charlsmail@aol.com; Salzepalz@aol.com;
Byronorig@aol.com
PUDA-2001-AR-500
Mr. Chahram Baddamtchian
Planning Services Dept.
Collier County Govt.
2800 No. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples , FL 34104
August 2 , 2001
Dear Mr · Baddamtchian :
Please accept this email as our strong disapproval of the proposed
changes suggested in PUDA-2001-AR-500.
In particular , there are two areas that really offend us :
1. Decreasing the minimum front setback from 50 feet to 20 feet ; and
2. Increasing the square footage from 49,000 to 73,000
We are very happy with our property at FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT
These proposed changes , in our opinion , would dramatically change :
A. The beauty of our falling waters entrance ;
B. The feeling of being "stuffed" between two self-storages ;
C. The increase in traffic at a very congested and dangerous
intersection ; and ,
D. Most probably , by effecting a substantial decrease in our property
values-- all 400 + of us '
For these reasons , we strongly encourage you to deny the proposed
changes
Thank you for your consideration
Very truly yours ,
Edward & Clotilde Calkins
6700 Beach Resort Drive - #8
Naples , FL 34114
NOV 2 7 2001
July 30, 2001
Collier County Government
Planning Services Dept.
Dear Planning Board:
Please regard this letter as our disapproval of the following two PUD changes to the
Planned Unit Development known as Falling Waters Beach Resort:
We are totally in opposition to decrease minimum from setback from 50 ft. to 20 ft. for
fear of obstructing our beautiful front view of our magnificent waterfalls which was a
point made by the sales personnel when purchasing our condos· With this in mind, we
would be the only residential community sandwiched between a commercial parcel,
which in turn lowers the value of "our" property.
Increasing the sq. ft. from 49,000 to 73,000, for PUDA-2001-AR-500 for property
located at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) and U.S. 41 in section 3
Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Our objection to this
proposal axe as follows:
a. At completion the Falling Waters Beach Resort will consist of 430 families with a
possibility of 2 vehicles per household.
b. Capital Storage proposes 800 storage units with 30% designated for commercial
US~.
c_. Has the DOT taken into consideration this tremendous increase in volume entering
and exiting Collier Blvd? Our entrance was designed to accommodate 430 families
at completion. As per a survey taken in Bonita Daily News, the intersection of 951
and 41, which is approximately 1/10t~ mile from our entrance, has been rated one of
the 5 most d~gerous intersections in Collier County,
Thank you for your consideration,
· PhaseJoseph P Geoffroy, V~ce President o II, Board of Directors
Sandra A. Geoffi'oy, Treasurer of Phase II, Board of Directors
6650 Beach Resort Drive 82
Naples, FL 34114
(941) 732-7573
NOV 2 ? 2001
RECEIVED
JUL ? 2001
Dear Sirs:
This response is in reference to the PUD development at Falling Waters Beach Resort at
S.R. 41 and CR 951 - No. PUDA-2001-AR500.
First of all, we do not know how a commercial development in fi.om of a private
community ever got passed a zoning board in the first place. We have not been able to
f'md another one in Naples since we heard of this development.
We are very much against any increases of building out more space towards the property
lines or fi.ontage set backs. Also, the height of any buildings should be kept to a
minimum. If this project proceeds to move forward, the ambience of the road frontage
should be made as attractive as the community it will be representing.
We hope that the planning board and t.he county commissioners will think of this project
with their own good tastes and feelings involved.
Sincetel~ ~.
Robert B. LaFortune
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
A~iE. ND A ITEI~
NOV 2 7 2001
Ot4/~LD B. CURRAN,
9 l vc.
LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR & DESIGNER
Sod Lawns · Walls · Patios · Wood Decks
Sprinkler Systems · Retaining WalLs · Foundation Planting
~aENOA I~
NOV 2 7 2001
........ w~,a ,. T ..... ie-h Massachusetts 01938 ° Telephone: (508) 356-1125 ° Fax: (508) 356-8893
badamtchian_c
Subject:
Relelmore@aol.com
Wednesday, August 01, 2001 12:58 PM
chahrarnbadamtchian@colliergov.net
Falling Waters Beach Resort
Dear Planning Board:
Please regard this email as our disapproval of the following TWO PUD changes
to the Planned Development known as the Falling Waters Beach Resort:
1. Decreasing the minimum setback from 50 to 20 feet.
2. Increasing square feet from 49,000 to 73,000 for PUDA-2001-AR-500 for
property located at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) and U>S>
41 in section 3 Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from the ambiance of our
entrance and with the influx of increased traffic, it will be a major safety
concern for an already congested intersection on Collier Boulevard.
Very truly yours,
Roger S. Elmore
Leah R. Elmore
6560 Beach Resort Drive Unit 7
Naples, FL 34114
NOV 2 7 2001
badamtchian_c
Subject:
Russ Anderson [roamsa@yahoo.com]
Wednesday, August 01,2001 11:07 AM
chahrarnbadamtchian@colliergov.net
PUD Changes
August 2, 2001
Collier County Government
Planning Services Department
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Dear Planning Board:
Please regard this email as our disapproval of the
following TWO PUD changes to the Planned Unit
Development known as the Falling Waters Beach Resort:
1. Decreasing minimum front setback from 50 feet to
20 feet.
2. Increasing square feet from 49,000 to 7~,000 for
PUDA-2001-AR-500 for property located at the
intersection of Collier Boulevard (C. R. 951) and
U.S. 41, in section 3 Township 51 South, Range 26
East, Collier County, Florida.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from
he ambience of our entrance and with the influx of
ncreased traffic it will be a major concern for an
already congested and dangerous intersection on
Collier Boulevard.
Russell O. Anderson
Mildred S. Anderson
6710 Beach Resort Drive
Naples, FL 34114
roamsa@yahoo.com
%11
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
· ~.NDA ITEM _
NOV 2 7 2001
badamtchian_c
Subject:
FittChic7@aol,com
Tuesday, July 31, 2001 9:25 PM
FittChic7@aol,com; chahrambadamtchian@colliergov.net
Protest of Falling Waters setback changes
Collier County Government
Planning Services Dept.
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL , 34104
Dear Planning Board:
Please regard this letter as our disapproval of the following TWO PUD
changes to the Planned Unit Development known as Falling Waters Beach Resort:
1. Decreasing minimum front setback from 50 ft. to 20 ft.
2. Increasing sq. ft. from 49,000to 73,000, for PUDA-2001-AR-500 for
property located at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (C>R>951) and U.S>
41, in section 3 Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from the ambiance of our
entrance and with the influx of increased traffic, it will be a major concern
for an already congested and dangerous intersection on Collier Boulevard.
Si~ned,
· Thady and Martha Thady
6650 Beach Resort Road
Bldg. #9, Unit #3
Naples, Florida 34113
NOV 2 7 2001
badamtchian_c
From:
Cc-'
Subject:
Yurko2@aol.com
Wednesday, August 01, 2001 8:27 AM
Chahrambadamlchian@colliergov.net
BYRONORIG@aol.com
PUD CHANGES
Planning Services Dept.
As residents of FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT my wife and I strongly
opose any changes that would :
#1. Decrease the minimum set back from 50FT. to 20FT.
#2. Increase sq. footage from 49,00 to 73,000 for PUDA2001-ar-50 for the
property located at the intersection of Collier Bld. [ CR 951 ] and US 41
Sec. 3 Township 51 south , range 26 east , Collier county
ANY DECREASED SETBACK AND INCREASED SQ. FOOTAGE WILL MAKE THE
ENTRANCE TO OUR HOME , COMMUNITY , DANGEROUS , ,CONJESTED , AND TAKE AWAY
FROM THE APEARANCE WE NOW HAVE .... IT WILL LOWER OUR PROPERTY VALUES
AND FOR US [ MAKE OUR COMMUNITY UNLIVABLE ]. WHEN WE PURCHASED HERE WE WERE
ASSURED BY THE DEVELOPER AND COUNTY AUTHORITIES THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY
ZONING CHANGES THAT WOULD HAVE A NEGATIVE EFFECT OUR COMMUNITY.
CAROLE YURKO
RESORT DRIVE #1
FLORIDA 34114
JOSEPH AND
6690 BEACH
NAPLES ,
AG~A ITEM
No. ~'~ ~
NOV 2 7 2001
badamtchian_c
Cc:
Subject:
Lee Willson [Iwaw48@yahoo.com]
Wednesday, August 01, 2001 8:43 AM
chahrambadamtchian@colliergov.net
rkkidd@naples.infi.net
Setback Issues
Good morning Chahram Baddamtchian, Our names are
Lee and Anne Willson and since December 8th of 2000
reside at Falling Waters Beach Resort, Building
6770, Unit #14. We have been permanent residence of
Naples, Florida since December 10th,2000.
We both were initially ok with the original plans
of the storage units that were going to be built on
Rt 951 (Fifty Feet back and to the left of the
entrance to Falling Waters) now we find out that
the Storage units will be on both sides of the
Falling Waters entrance and the right side units
will actually use the Falling Waters entrance, also
the units will be 30 Feet CLOSER TO RT 951
We both feel this situation is totally
unacceptable because of #1 Safety issues both
entering and especially leaving Falling Waters
going onto Rt 951. 50% of the cars leaving Falling
Waters go across to the speed lane in order to do a
U-Turn approximately 200 yards up Rt 951 . With the
Storage units 30 ft closer to the road will impede
~ visibility of drivers leaving Falling Waters. I
erstand the intersection of 41 and 951 is one of
~e worst intersections IN THE COUNTRY for serious
accidents and with the addition of these storage
units being 20 ft from the road only increases the
chances of additional accidents! furthermore, our
thoughts when'we initially saw the 50 ft setback
was that these units were somewhat hidden by the
foliage. This proposal about having these units
only 20 Ft from the road tells us that these units
will stand out like a SORE THUMB and certainly take
away the naturalness and aesthetics of the Falling
Waters entrance.
In summary , we are totally against "1 changing
the setback from 50 ft to 20 ft. and $2 having
storage units on the right side of the Falling
waters entrance(as you come into Falling Waters)
and $3 having to share the entrance.
Our E-Mail address is lwaw48@yahoo.com
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
NOV 2 ? 200!
Erika Zybell
6650 Beach Resort Dr.
Naples FI. 34114
July 23, 2001
Planning Services Department
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples Fl. 34104
Att: Chahram Baddamtchian,
In response to your letter dated July 13, 2001 I Erika Zybell want to express my
STRONG OPPOSITION to the proposed set back of the front yard from 50 ff
to 20 ft. on the property located at the intersection of Collier [C.IL951] and
U.S. 41, in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East Collier County, Florida..
Sincerely,
AGENDA ITEM
No,
NOV 2 7 2001
Page 1 of 1
badamtchian_c
From: jeffrey heintzman [jheintzman@sprint.ca]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 12:03 AM
To: chahrambadamtchian@colliergov.net
Subject: Re:Commercial storage facilaty
Dear Sirs/Madam
As I understand it,there will be a new commercial storage facility located at US 41 + 951 next to Falling Waters
at the same Iocation. I also understand that the Naples Daily News has stated that that particular intersection is
the fifth most dangerous in all of Collier county. Being an owner of a condo in Falling Waters I do not think it
prudent to be allowing such a facility to be located in such close quarters to Falling Waters as this would be a
dangerously high volume of traffic in an already high volume intersection.
Jeffrey Heintzman
6640 Beach Resort Drive,
Naples
08/02/2001
AGENDA ITF. J~
NOV 2 7 2001
Page 1 of 1
badamtchian_c
From: Genejudy45@cs.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 5:22 PM
To: chahrambadamtchian@colliergov.net
Cc: cscherry@liggett.com
Subject: (no subject)
Collier County Government
Planning Services Dept.
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
Dear Planning Board:
Please regard this email as our disapproval of the following TWO PUD changes
to the Planned Unit Development known as the Falling Waters Beach Resort:
1. Decreasing minimum front setback from 50 ft. to 20ft.
2. Increasing sq. ft. from 49,000 to 73,000, for PUDA-2001-AR-500 for
property located at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (C.R.951) and U.S.
41, in section 3 Township 51 South, range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from the ambiance of our
entrance and with the influx of increased traffic it will be a major concern
for an already congested and dangerous intersection on Collier Boulevard.
Eugene B. and Judith A. Scherry
6670 Beach Resort Drive
Suite #4
Naples, Florida 34114
08/02/2001
AGENDA
NOV 2 ? 2001
REC [] i'.'E F';
AUG 0 ~ 200~
August 1, 2001
t
Mr. Chahram Baddamtchian - Principal Planner
Collier County Current Planning Section
Development Services Building
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
East Naples, FL 34104
Re: Falling Waters Beach Resort PUDA-200I-AR-500
Dear Sir:
We want to express our opposition to the proposed rezoning of the parcels of land located on both sides of
the one and only entrance into our community. We object to
#l o increasing the commercial sq. footage from 49,000 to 73,000 and
#2 - decreasing the minimum front yard setback from 50 ft. to 20 ft.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from the ambiance of our entrance. Also, with the influx of
increased traffic, we believe it will be a major concern for an already congested and dangerous intersection
on Collier Blvd.
We trust the Planrdng Commission will take our conch'ns into consideration.
Thank you,
AO~A {Y~.M_
NOV 2 7 200I
AUG 0 ~ 2001
Collier County Government
Dear Planning Board:
Please regard this letter as our disapproval of the following two PUD changes to the
Planned Unit Development known as Falling Waters Beach Resort:
1. Decreasing minimum front setback from 50 ft. to 20 t~.
Increasing sq. ft. bom 49,000 to 73,000, for PUDA-2001-AR-500 for property located
at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (C.1L 951) and U.S. 41 in section 3 Township
51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
Thank you for your consideration.
AC~=NDA fi'EM
NOV 2 7 2001
RECEIVED
AUG 0 Z 2001
Collier County Government
p~o._~-;_eg Se..-,.~.ces Dept.
Dear Planning Board:
Please regard this letter as our disapproval of the following two PUD changes to the
Planned Unit Development known as Falling Waters Beach Resort:
Decreasing minimum fi'ont setback fi'om 50 tt. to 20 ft.
Increasing sq. ft. fi.om 49,000 to 73,000, for PUDA-2001-AR-500 for property located
at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (C.1L 951) and U.S. 41 in section 3 Township
51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
Thank you for your consideration.
~A ITEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
Collier County Government
~ 1~
Dear Planning Board:
Please regard this letter as our disapproval of the following two PUD changes to the
Planned Unit Development known as Falling Waters Beach Resort:
1. Decreasing minimum from setback fi'om 50 fl. to 20 fl.
Increasing sq. fi. from 49,000 to 73,000, for PUDA-2001-AR-500 for property located
at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (C.1L 951) and U.S. 41 in section 3 Township
51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
Thank you for your consideration.
NOV 2 7 2001
RECEIVED
AUG 0 / 2001
Collier County Government
Dear Planning Board:
Please regard this letter as our disapproval of the following two PUD changes to the
Planned Unit Development known as Falling Waters Beach Resort:
Decreasing minimum front setback fi'om 50/t. to 20 ~t.
Increasing sq. fc from 49,000 to 73,000, for PUDA-2001-AR-500 for property located
at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) and U.S. 41 in section 3 Township
51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
Thank you for your consideration.
NOV 2 ? 2001
August 1, 2001
Mr. Chahram Baddamtchian - Principal Planner
Collier County Current Planning Section
Developmem Services Building
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
East Naples, FL 34104
Re: Falling Waters Beach Resort PUDA-20OI-AR-500
Dear Sir:
We want to express our opposition to the proposed rezoning of the parcels of land located on both sides of
the one and only entrance into our community. We object to
#I - increasing the commercial sq. footage fi.om 49,000 to 73,000 and
#2 - decreasing the minimum front yard setback from 50 ft. to 20 ft.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract fi.om the ambiance of our entrance. Also, with the influx of
increased traffic, we believe it will be a major concern for an already congested and dangerous intersection
on Collier Blvd.
We trust the Planning Commission will take our concerns into consideration.
Thank you,
NOV 2 7 2001
August 1, 2001
Mr. Chahram Baddamtchian - Principal Planner
Collier County Currem Planning Section
Development Services Building
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
East Naples, FL 34104
Re: Falling Waters Beach Resort PUDA-2001-AR-500
Dear Sir:
We want to express our opposition to the proposed rezoning of the parcels of land located on both sides of
the one and only entrance into our community. We object to
/ti - increasing the commercial sq. footage from 49,000 to 73,000 and
#2 - decreasing the minimum front yard setback from 50 ft. to 20 ft.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from the ambiance of our entrance. Also, with the influx of
increased traffic, we believe it will be a major concern for an already congested and dangerous intersection
on Collier Blvd.
We trust the Planning Commission will take our concerns into consideration.
Thank you,
NOV 2 7 2001
August 1, 2001
Mr. Chahram Baddamtchian - Principal Planner
Collier County Current Planning Section
Development Services Building
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
East Naples, FL 34104
Re: Falling Waters Beach Resort PUDA-2001-AR-500
Dear Sir:
We want to express our opposition to the proposed rezoning of the parcels of land located on both sides of
the one and only entrance into our community. We object to
#l - increasing the commercial sq. footage from 49,000 to 73,000 and
#2 - decreasing the minimum front yard setback from 50 ft. to 20 ft.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from the arr~biance of our entrance. Also, with the influx of
increased traffic, we believe it will be a major concern for an already congested and dangerous intersection
on Collier Blvd.
We trust the Planning Commission will take our concerns into consideration.
Thank you,
ACURA ITE.I~
NOV 2 7 2001
August 1,2001
Mr. Chahram Baddamtchian - principal Planner
Collier County Current Planning Section
Development Services Building
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
East Naples, FL 34104
Re: Falling Waters Beach Resort PUDA-2001-AR-500
Dear Sir:
We wish to express our thanks for the courtesy you extended during our visit this past Monday.
We want to express our opposition to the proposed rezoning of the parcels of land located on both sides of
the one and only entrance into our community. We object to increasing the commercial sq. ft. from 49,000
to 73,000 and decreasing the minimum from yard setback from 50 ff. to 20 ff.
When all our residential units are complete, we will have close to 450 units. At least half of these units have
2 cars. Approx. 675 resident cars will be entering and exiting many times during the day as well as renters,
visitors (who will not expect cars cutting across the access lane in a private entranceway), misc. service
repair personnel, UPS deliveries, etc., etc. This will create an extremely hazzardous condition for an aging
resident population. I can think of no other community that shares their entrance/exit area with a
commercial establishment. This traffic flow doesn't look that bad on paper, but when you have to live with
the reality on a daily basis it will be a very dangerous situation.
We hope you will take our concerns to the Planning Commission and they will make a fair and just decision.
Thank you.
Ronald and Geraldine Krisanda
6560 Beach Resort Dr. #3
Naples, FL 34114
AGENDA I'I~.M
NOV 2 ? 2001
August l, 2001
Mr. Chahram Baddamtchian - Principal Planner
Collier County Currem Planning Section
Development Services Building
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
East Naples, FL 34104
Re: Falling Waters Beach Resort PUDA-2001-AR-500
Dear Sir:
We want to express our opposition to the proposed re. zoning of the parcels of land located on both sides of
the one and only entrance into our community. We object to
# l - increasing the commercial sq. footage from 49,000 to 73,000 and
#2 - decreasing the minimum front yard setback fi-om 50 ft. to 20 ft.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from the ambiance of our entrance. Also, with the influx of
increased traffic, we believe it will be a major concern for an already congested and dangerous intersection
on Collier Blvd.
We trust the Planning Commission will take our concerns into consideration.
Thank you,
AGENDA I'W.M
NOV 2 7 2001
pi. ~)~
August 1, 2001
Mr. Chahram Baddamtchian - Principal Planner
Collier County Current Planning Section
Development Services Building
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
East Naples, FL 34104
Re: Failing Waters Beach Resort PUDA-200 I-AR-500
Dear Sir:
We want to express our opposition to the proposed rezoning of the parcels of land located on both sides of
the one and only entrance into our community. We object to
#! - increasing the commercial sq. footage from 49,000 to 73,000 and
#2 - decreasing the minimum front yard setback from 50 ft. to 20 ft.
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from the ambiance of our entrance. Also, with the influx of
increased trmffic, we believe it will be a major concern for an already congested and dangerous intersection
on Collier Blvd.
We trust the Planning Commission will take our concerns into consideration.
Thank you,
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
Pe. ¢~
August L 200l
Mr. Chahram Baddamtchian - Principal Planner
Collier County Current Planning Section
Development Services Building
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
East Naples, FL 34104
Re: Failing Waters Beach Resort PUDA-2001-AR-500
Dear Sir:
We want to express our opposition to the proposed rezoning of the parcels of land located on both sides of
the one and only entrance into our community. We object to
#l - increasing the commercial sq. footage from 49,000 to 73,000 and
#2 - decreasing the minimum front yard setback from 50 fL to 20 fL
We feel that decreasing the setback will detract from the ambiance of our entrance. Also, with the influx of
increased traffic, we believe it will be a major concern for an already congested and dangerous intersection
on Collier Blvd.
We trust the Planning Commission will take our concerns into consideration.
Thank you,
AGE. I~ A ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION RZ-2001-AR-1376. CARLOS MORALES OF LA QUINTA HOMES OF SW
FLORIDA, INC. REQUESTING A REZONE FROM ITS CURRENT ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF "RSF-3" RESIDENTIAL S~NGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT
TO "RMF-6" RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 5211 24TM AVENUE SW IN GOLDEN GATE CITY AND IS FURTHER DESCRIBED
AS LOT 1, BLOCK 194, GOLDEN GATE UNIT 6, SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 49
SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. THIS SITE CONSISTS OF
12500 SQUARE FEET.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners consider a request for a rezoning of land
from its current zoning classification of "RSF-3" residential single-family to "RMF-6"
residential multi-family, while maintaining the community's best interest.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The petitioner wishes to rezone the subject property from "RSF-3" Residential Single-
Family Zoning District to "RMF-6" Residential Multi-Family Zoning District to allow the
construction of a residential duplex. This lot is a corner lot located at the end of a block
and surrounded on three sides by multi-family zoned lots. The applicant applied for a
building permit to build a duplex on the lot. A permit was erroneously issued for the
duplex. The construction commenced and continued on the building until a Spot Survey,
as required by Code, was submitted to the County, which alerted the County to the fact
that a duplex was being build on a Lot zoned for single family.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Should this rezone be granted, the applicant will be able to finish a duplex residence,
which will generate the following impact fees.
Road Impact fee:
Public SChools Impact fee:
Regional Parks, Impact fee:
Community Parks Impact fee:
Libraries Impact fee:
Correctional facilities impact fee:
Fire Impact Fee:
EMS Impact Fee:
Radon Gas
Building Code Administration
Total
$3,600.00
$1,778.OO
$179.00
$399.0O
$180.52
$117.98
$6oo.oo
$14.00
$1o.oo
$1o.oo
$6,888.5O
NOV 2 7 2001
In addition to the Impact Fees described there are building permit review fees. Building
permit fees have traditionally offset the cost of administrating the community
development review process. There are no utility impact fees associated with this
residence, as there are no utilities available to the site at this time.
Finally additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates. The
revenue that will be generated by the ad valorem tax depends on the value of the
improvements.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict), as identified on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP). 'The Urban Residential Subdistrict permits residential
development at a base density of 4 dwelling units per acre. The subject site is located
within one mile of the Activity Center # 15. The property is entitled to 4 dwelling units
per acre, plus it may be eligible for a density bonus of up to 3 additional units for a total
of 7 dwelling units per acre. Therefore, this request to rezone the property to RMF-6 is
deemed consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
There are no environmentally sensitive areas on the site.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is
required.
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommended that the CCPC review RZ-2001-AR-1376 and forward it to the BCC
with a recomme;ndation for approval
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION:
There were no environmental issues involved with this request; therefore, this petition
was exempt from the EAC review.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed this petition on October 18, 2001
and by a vote of 5-2 recommended approval. At the CCPC hearing 3 people spoke
against the requested rezone stating that a duplex will bring higher traffic volume to the
2
AGENOA ITEM
No._ .P"~'
NOV 2 7 2001
area than a single-family would. They also objected to the design of the building. Two of
the Planning Commissioners agreed with the objecting neighbors and voted against the
requested rezone.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
REVIEWED BY:
~ --I'""SUS~N MURRA , AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
THOMA~S E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
I0' U'L'ol
DATE
DATE
APPROVED BY:
C
J NNUOK, III DATE
IN'I~ERIM OOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL ,SERVIOES
ADMINISTRATOR
3
AGENDA ITEM 8-D
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
SEPTEMBER 27, 2001
RZ-2001 -AR- 1376
OWNER/AGENT:
OWNER:
La Quinta Homes of SW Florida, Inc.
Carlos Morales (100%)
2861 4th Street NW
Naples, FL. 34120
REQUESTED ACTION:
The applicant is requesting to change the zoning classification of the subject property
from "RSF-3" Residential Single-Family Zoning District to "RMF-6" Residential Multi-
. Family District.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located at 5211 24t~ Avenue SW in Golden Gate City and is
further described as Lot 1, Block 194, Golden Gate Unit 6, Section 21, Township 49
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This site consists of 12500 square feet.
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The petitioner wishes to rezone the subject property from "RSF-3" Residential Single-
Family Zoning District to "RMF-6" Residential Multi-Family Zoning District to allow the
construction of a residential duplex. This lot is a corner lot located at the end of a block
and surrounded on three sides by multi-family zoned lots. The applicant applied for a
building permit to build a duplex on the lot. A permit was erroneously issued for the
duplex. The construction commenced and continued on the building until a Spot Survey,
as required by Code, was submitted to the County, which alerted the County to the fact
that a duplex was being build on a Lot zoned for single family.
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
-I
NOJV 2
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Existing: Duplex under construction, zoned "RSF-3" Residential Single-family
Surrounding:
North-
East -
South-
West-
Single Family dwelling, zoned "RSF-3" Residential Single-family
Duplex, Zoned "RMF-6" Residential Multi-family
Duplex, Zoned "RMF-12" Residential Multi-family
Duplex, zoned "RMF-6" Residential Multi-family
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict), as identified on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP). A consistency review analysis with applicable elements of
the GMP is as follows:
FLUE and Density:
The Urban Residential Subdistrict permits residential development at a base density of
4 dwelling units per acre. The subject site is located within one mile of the Activity
Center # 15. The property is entitled to 4 dwelling units per acre, plus it may be eligible
for a density bonus of up to 3 additional units for a total of 7 dwelling units per acre.
Therefore, this request to rezone the property to RMF-6 is deemed consistent with the
requirements of the Growth Management Plan.
Transportation Element:
The proposed RMF-6 zoning will result in 20 trips per day. Based on this data, the site-
generated traffic will not exceed the significance test standard (5 percent of the LOS "C"
design volume) on any County roads. In addition, this project will not lower the level of
service below any adopted LOS "D" standard on any road within the project's radius of
development influence (RDI).
The proposed rezone will not create or excessively increase traffic congestion on the
arterial road system at build-out and complies with Policies 1.3, 1.4, 5.1 and 5.2 of the
Transportation Element.
Sewer and water:
Water and sewer is available to this site.
Draina.qe:
Water management requirements will
review and approval. Such approvals will
drainage requirements.
be addressed at the time of Building Permit
be made consistent with Collier County
2
Open Space:
Due to the small size of the property this requirement is not applicable to this property.
Conservation.'.
Conservation goals, objectives and policies are achieved by applying LDC requirements
to required subsequent approvals.
Other applicable elements
Staff's review indicates that this petition has been designed to account for the
necessary relationships dictated by the Future Land Use Element of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP). Mitigation measures and stipulations have been developed
(where appropriate) to ensure consistency with the GMP during the permitting process.
Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency
review under the provisions of Section 3.15 of the Collier County Land Development
Code, Adequate Public facilities, at the earliest or the next to occur of either Final SDP
approval, final plat approval, or building permit applicable to this development.
Therefore, this proposed rezone is consistent with the goals and policies of the GMP.
Staff has concluded that no level of service standards will be adversely affected by this
rezone request. Appropriate mitigation measures and stipulations will assure that the
County's interests are maintained. Consistency with the goals, objectives and policies of
other applicable elements of the GMP and level of service relationships are to be
achieved by stipulations and/or development commitments made a part of the approval
of this development order.
HiSTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitio, ler's property is located within an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. However, a waiver of Historical/Archaeological Survey and
Assessment was recommended for approval by the Collier County Historical and
Archaeological Board.
TRANSPORTATION AND
EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL,
INFRASTRUCTURE.'.
The subject petition hasbeen reviewed by the appropriate staff responsible for
oversight related to theabove referenced areas of critical concern. This primarily
includes a review by the Community Development Environmental staff, and the
Transportation Division staff. This petition was administratively reviewed on behalf of
the E_AC and staff recommended approval.
CRITERIA EVALUATION:
Appropriate evaluation ot petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for
supportive action by appointed and elected decision-makers. The evaluation by
3
NOV 2 7 2001
--
professional staff should typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the
community's future land use plan, and whether or not a rezoning action would be
consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan in all of its related
elements. Other evaluation considerations should include an assessment of adequacy
of transportation infrastructure, other infrastructure, and compatibility with adjacent land
uses, a consideration usually dealt with as a facet of' analyzing the relationship of the
rezoning action to the long range plan for future land uses.
The most important facet of the rezoning is that it constitutes a legislative statement that
authorizes the use of land for a specific development strategy, provided the
development of the land can go forward. It may or may not affect the timing of
development because of subsequent permitting requirements. Staff completed a
comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria upon which a
favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an
objective, comprehensive overview of the impacts of the proposed land use change, be
they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that
comprehensive overview. The listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.3.2.5.
(Rezone Findings) of the LDC thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and form
the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission.
Each of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff review are
listed under each of the criterion noted and are categorized as either pro or con or not
applicable, whichever the case may be, in the opinion of staff. Staff review of each of
the criterion is followed by a summary conclusion culminating in a determination of
compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These evaluations are
completed as separate documents and have been attached to the staff report as Exhibit
"A". (See Attached)
Relationship to Future and Existing Land Uses: A discussion of this relationshiP, as it
applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning refers to the
relationship of the proposed zoning action to the Future Land Use Element of the Collier
County Growth Management Plan.
A rezoning action having the effect of rezoning approximately 2400 square feet to
residential duplex will be consistent with the provisions of the FLUE.
~ The subject property abuts other RMF-6 residential multi-family zoned
and developed properties on two sides, and RMF-12 zoned properties on the south
side. This lot is surrounded on three sides by multi-family zoned and developed
properties. Additionally, this property qualifies for residential multi-family under the
Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, for these reasons this
residential multi-family rezoning is compatible with surrounding and nearby land uses.
4
A~A ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
~0~/2 7 200i
Timing: Clearly the timing of a rezoning action from "RSF-3" residential is present
when the land is impacted with nearby multi-family residential land uses.
Traffic: The site-generated traffic will not exceed the significance test standard (5
percent of the LOS "C" design volume). The added trips will not lower the level of
service below adopted standards within the project's radius of development influence
(RDI). Therefore, the rezoning action will be consistent with the TE.
Infrastructure: All required infrastructures are already in place.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition RZ-2001-AR-1376 to the BCC with a
recommendation for rezoning this property from "RSF-3" Residential Single-Family to
"RMF-6" Residential Multi-Family zoning district.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICt-' DATE
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
REVIEWED BY:
S~SAN MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
5
NOV 2 7 2001
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
~)A?E '
APPROVED BY:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
A~MINISTRATOR
Petition RZ-2001-AR-1376
This petition has been tentatively scheduled for November 13, 01 BCC Public Hearing.
COLDER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION:
JoYCE~ANNA J. RAUTIO~, CHAIRMAN
6
NOV 2 7 2001
REZONE FINDINGS
PETITION RZ-2001-AR-1376
Section 2.7.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report
and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County
Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered
the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable:
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives,
and policies and Future Land Use Map and .the elements of the Growth
Management Plan.
Pro: It is the opinion of the Comprehensive Planning Section that a rezone to RMF-6
will be in compliance with the Growth Management Plan.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The proposed rezone to RMF-6 will be in compliance with the
Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
2. The existing land use pattern.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: This property is surrounded on three sides by multi-family zoned
properties and on one side with a single-family zoned lot.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts.
Pro: This property is adjacent to properties developed with duplexes.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: This property is adjacent on two sides to parcels zoned RMF-6
and developed with duplex residential structures.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Pro: The district boundaries are logically drawn and consistent with the GMP.
NOV 2 ? 2001
Con: None.
Summary Findings: This project will be adjacent to residentially developed properties.
5, Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment necessary,
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The proposed zoning change is appropriate because its
relationship to the FLUE is a positive one.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
ProlCon' Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions
in the area because the recommended development standards and other conditions for
approval have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of adverse
impact on adjacent and nearby developments.
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.
Pro: An action to rezone the property as requested is consistent with all applicable
transportation elements.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for
consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP and was found
consistent a statement advising that this project when developed will not increase traffic
congestion.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
Pro: The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite development
standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby-properties. New
NOV 2 7 2001
development in and of itself is not supposed to increase flooding potential on adjacent
property over and above what would occur without development.
Con: Urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to intra-
county drainage appurtenances would increase the risk of flooding in areas when
drainage outfall condition is inadequate.
Summary Findings: Every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization of
land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate ail sub-surface
drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project
was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plans are required
to meet County standards as a condition of approval. In the event area wide
deficiencies develop, which deficiencies would be further exacerbated by developing
vacant land, the County is required to react through its Concurrency Management
system.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent
areas,
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: All projects in Collier County are subject to the development
standards that are unique to that zoning district. These development standards and
others apply generally and equally to all zoning districts and were designed to ensure
that light penetration and air circulation are minimally affected by development.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the
adjacent area.
Pro: Typically urban intensification increases the valub of contiguous land.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: This is a subjective determination based upon factors, which may
be internal or external to the subject property. Zoning is only one component, which
may affect property values.
'11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
NOV 2 7 2001
Summary Findings: The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in
the zoning division of the Land Development Code is that their sound application when
combined with the administrative site development plan approval process, gives
reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not act as a deterrent to
improvement or development of adjacent property.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The proposed development is in compliance with the Growth
Management Plan a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does
not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further
determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with the GMP
are in the public interest.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The subject property can be developed in accordance with the
existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the opportunity to
maximize the development potential of the site as made possible by its consistency
relationship with the FLUE.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the
neighborhood or the County.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: A policy statement, which has evaluated the scale, density and
intensity of land uses, deemed to be acceptable for this site.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: There are many sites, which are zoned to accommodate the
proposed residence. This is not the determining factor when evaluating the
NOV 2 7 2001
i
--
appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are consistency
with all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of infrastructure and to some
extent the timing of the action and all of the above criteria.
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.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: Development of the land will necessitate alteration of the site in
some form.
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and
services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Growth Management
Plan and as defined and implemented through the Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance, as amended.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of service
determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established relationship.
Y
NOV 2 ? 2001
ORDINANCE NO. 01 -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
91-102, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE
ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCOP~OKATED
AREA OF COLLIER COLrNTY, FLOR.IDA, BY AMENDING
THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP NUMBERED 9621
BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE
HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5211 24TH
AVENUE S.W., IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLOILIDA, FROM
RSF-3 TO RMI::-6 FOR A DUPLEX; PROVIDING FOR STAFF
A_ND PLANNING COMMISSION STIPULATIONS; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Carlos Morales, presenting La Quinta Homes, petitioned the Board of
County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE.'.
The zoning classification of the real property as more particularly described by Exhibit
"A", attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, and located in Section 21, Township
49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from RSF-3 to RMF-6 and the
Official Zoning Atlas Map numbered 9621, as described in Ordinance 91-102, the Collier County
Land Development Code is hereby amended accordingly. The herein described real property is the
same for which the rezone is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
SECTION TWO:_
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, this ~ day of .,2001.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, PhD., CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
NOV 2 ? 2001
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
Marjorie M. Student
Assistant County Attorney
^C~.~A ~T~.~
NOV 2 7 2001
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: STANDA1U) REZONE
RZ-2001-AR-1376
Petition No.'
Commission District:
Date Petition Received:
Planner Assigned:
PROJECT #2001080060
DATE: 8/24/01
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN
ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF
General Information:
Name of Applicant(s) ~~'
Applicant's Mailing Address ~ ~ r. A/Cc)
City_ /~4QL~9/¢ ~ State E~_. Zip
Name of Agent ~'~ ~/~&
Ag~t's Mail~g Ad~ess~ ~
Ag~t's Tel~hone ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ F~ ~
Agent's E-Mail Address:
COLLIER COUNTY COlVIMUN1TY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING
2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE-NAPLES, FL 34104
PHONE (941) 403-2400fFAX (941) 643-6968
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 02/2000
NOV 2 7 2001
Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition.
sheets if necessary)
Name of Homeowner Association:
(Provide additional
Mailing Aud :',.ss __ ._ City _ State ~ Lb,_
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address City State ~ Zip.
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
City State __ Zip.
Name of Master Association:
Mailing Address
City State ~ Zip
Name of Civic Association:
Mailing Address
City State __ Zip
Disclosure of Interest Information:
ao
If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety,
tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as
well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary).
Name and Address . .,Percentage of Ownership
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 02/2000
PA~
NOV 2 7 2001
.b.
If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders
and the percentage of stock owned by each.
Name andACdress, and Office .
Percentage of Stock
Co
If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with
the percentage of interest.
Name and Address
Percentage of Interest
If the property is in the name of a GENERAL Or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list
the name of the general and/or limited partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
/
eo
If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a
Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers
below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners.
Name and Address
Date of Contract:
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC itEARI~G FOR STANDARD REZONE
Percentage of Own~r~kip
NOV 2 7 2001
If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all
individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust.
Name and Address
g. Date subjeci property, acquired [--] leased ['--]
Term of lease
yrs./mos.
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate dale of option:
terminates: , or anticipated closing date
and date option
o
Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur
subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public
hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit
a supplemental disclosure of interest form.
Detailed leeal description of the property covered by the application: (If space is
inadequate, attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning
district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district.
'Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six
months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting.
NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If
questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed
survey may be required.
Section: ~,~/' Township: ~q Range:
Lot: / Block: /~z//Subdivision: ~
/,at/-
Plat Book .~ Page #:/~'~-/ Property I.D.#:
Metes & Bounds Description:
4. Size of pronertv: /,P ~' f. X ,/c~ fi' ff. = Total Sq. Ft. //~,.(~ff'~ ff Acres~
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 01/20O~
NOV 2 7 2001
'1
Adiacent zoning and land use:
Zoning
Land use
Does the owner of the subject property oxvn property contiguous to the subject property?
If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is
inadequate, attach on separate page). A/o
Section: Township: Range:
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book Page #:__ Property I.D.#:
Metes & Bounds Description:
Rezone Request: This appli.,cation is requesting a rezone fxom the
zoning district (s) to the ~'/~.~ F~ zoning district(s).
Present Use of the Property: ~9,'7~/ ~/~'~/~ ~/
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property:
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 02/2000
EValuation Criteria: Pursuant to Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land
Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission,
and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners
shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a
narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific referer ~
noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in suppm
NOV 2 7 2001
RZ-2001-AR-1376
PROJECT #2001080060
DATE: 8/24/01
~o
~Z
, NO~2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION PUDZ-01-AR-986, KAREN BISHOP OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.,
REPRESENTING KENNETH P. SAUNDRY, JR., TRUSTEE, REQUESTING A REZONE FROM
"RSF-3" RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND "A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL TO "PUD"
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS WALNUT LAKES PUD FOR THE
PURPOSE OF PERMITTING RESIDENTIAL LAND uSES, AN ADULT LIVING FACILITY AND
A GOLF COURSE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL
(US-41) AND APPROXIMATELY TWO MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR-951), IN
SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 5 ! SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners consider an application to rezone the subject site from
the RSF-3 and the Rural Agricultural Zoning Districts to PUD as noted above to allow for 612
dwelling units, an adult living facility and a golf course consistent with all the applicable codes and
regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained in this residential
community.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The proposed 204-acre Planned Unit Development (PUD) permits a maximum of 612 dwelling units at
a density of 3 units per acre, an assisted living facility, and golf course that is designed around lakes,
open space, and preserve areas. The residential/golf course areas consist of approximately 119-acres
while the ALF areas comprise 11-acres. The open space areas include water management areas,
landscaping and buffering totaling the minimum required open space for residential PUDs. The access
to the project is provided from an existing 80-tbot right-of-way extending from US-41 along the west
side of the project. In addition, most of the property is within the Deltona Settlement Agreement and
farmed historically and later partially developed as the Naples Isle project. A lake was excavated in the
center of the property and fill material deposited on the adjacent farm field.
The Traffic Impact Study (TIS) indicates that the proposed residential project at build-out in 2009 will
generate approximately 5,674 weekday trips and 540 trips during the PM Peak Hour. Based on staWs
analysis of the applicant's TIS, the project trips exceed the significance test on US-41 at build-out but
will not lower the level of service below this segment of US-41 adopted level of service "C" standard.
As a result, this petition is consistent with Policy 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation Element. In
addition, US-41 is currently a 2-lane arterial road with a current traffic count of 10,789 AADT for the
segment fronting the project entrance. The projected traffic volumes for this segment at the project
build-out will still operate at an acceptable level of service. As a result, this petition is consistent with
Policies 1.3 and 1.4, of the Transportation Element. Lastly, Policy 9.3 encourages the interconnection
of local streets between developments when feasible. Since the project abuts a golf course project to
the north, an existing mobile home park to the east and an access road to the west.
does not appear to be feasible at this location.
an interconnection ,,,
NOV 2 7 2001
FISCAL IMPACT:
This rezone by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. However, if this request meets its
objective, a portion of the existing land will be further developed. The mere t~act that new development
has been approved will result in future fiscal impact on County public facilities. The County collects
impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new
development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital
Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event
that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must
provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities.
The following impact fees will be applicable to this project:
· Park Impact Fee:
· Library Impact Fee:
· Fire Impact Fee:
· School Impact Fee:
· Road Impact Fee:
· Correctional Facilities:
· Radon Impact Fee:
· EMS Impact Fee:
· Building Code Adm.:
· Micro Film Surcharge:
$578.00 per unit
$180.52 per unit
$0.15 per square feet of building
$827 per unit
$890 per unit
$117.98 per dwelling unit
$0.005 per square foot of building
$2 per unit
$0.005 per square foot of building
$1.50 per unit
For an average unit size of 1,000 square feet, the total fiscal impact xvill be $2,757.18 per unit. Since
this project proposes 612 units, the total amount of residential impact fees collected at build-out will
total $1,687,394.16 It should be noted that because impact fees vary by housing type and because this
approval does not provide this level of specificity as to the actual type of use, the total impact fee
quoted above is at best a raw estimate. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the project at build-out
will have maximized their authorized level of development.
Other fees will include building permit review fees and utility fees associated with connecting to the
County's sewer and water system. Building permit fees and utility fees have traditionally offset the cost
of administering the community development review process, whereas utility fees are used on their
proportionate share of impact to the County system. Finally additional revenue is generated by
application of ad Valorem tax rates. The revenue that will be generated depends on the value of the
improvements. At this point in time a model has not been developed to arrive at a reasonable estimate
of tax revenue based on ad Valorem tax rates. Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that not
withstanding the fiscal impact relationship, development takes place in an environment of concurrency
management. When level of service requirements fall below adopted standards, a mechanism is in
place to bring about a cessation of building activities. Certain LOS standards apply countywide and
would therefore bring about a countywide concurrency determination versus roads that may have local
geographic concurrency implications.
AGF~A ITEM
NOV ? 2301
2 Pg. ~
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban Mixed - Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district)
on the Future Land Use Map and Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Relevant
to this petition, the Urban Mixed - Use District permits a variety of residential unit types at a base
density of 4 dwelling units per acre, subject to the Density Rating System. This designation also
permits recreation and open space uses; community facilities uses, including assisted living facilities at
a density consistent with the Land Development Code (LDC).
Since the subject site is located xvithin a Traffic Congestion Area, as depicted on the Future Land Use
Map and described in the FLUE, a reduction of one dwelling unit per acre from the base density of 4
units per acre is required and the site is also not eligible for any density bonuses. Therefore, this
project is limited to a maximum density of 3 units per acre. Based upon the above analysis, staff
concludes the proposed uses and density may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. Staff evaluation
for consistency with applicable elements of the GMP advises that this PUD as structured is consistent
with applicable elements of the GMP.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACI?:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and
Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no
Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment or a waiver is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
Since the site is within the boundaries of the Deltona Settlement Agreement, impacts to jurisdictional
wetlands were previously mitigated. Hoxvever, the petitioner is providing additional compensation for
wetland impacts by creating 11.52 acres of wetlands, enhance and preserve 11.41 acres of wetlands,
and preserve 0.11-acre uplands. The northern preserve xvetlands will be located adjacent to the larger
wetland preserve on the adjacent PUD project to the north. Environmental staff has deemed that this
project is consistent with Policy 6.4.6 that requires 25 percent on-site native vegetation preservation.
This petition xvas reviewed and heard by the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) on August 7,
2001. The EAC recommended approval of the project by a 6 to 1 vote and the Florida Department of
Transportation prior to Site Development Plan approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION:
The Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) heard this item on August 7, 200I and they recommended
approval by a 6 to 1 vote subject to staff's stipulation that the petitioner obtain all the required permits
from the South Florida Water Management District. The primary reason expressed by the EAC for the
recommendation of approval was based on the project's consistency with the policies of the Growth
Management Plan and that the project is part of the Deltona Settlement Agreement. ~^ rrL~
3 NOV 2 7 2001
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) reviewed this petition during their public hearing
on October 18, 2001.. By a vote of 6 to 0 (with one abstention), the CCPC forwarded Petition PUDZ-
01-AR-986 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to staff
stipulations that have been incorporated into the PUD document. The Planning Commission found that
this petition is consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and is compatible with the
surrounding development. It should be noted that no one spoke in opposition during the hearing,
hmvever, since one EAC member recommended denial, this petition could not be placed on the
summary agenda.
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Petition PUDZ-01-AR-986 subject to the stipulations contained in the
PUD document and as other~vise described by the Ordinance of Adoption and Exhibits thereto.
PREPARED BY;.
RAY ~,ELLOWS, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
Io.
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
MT.n~kAY, AICP, MANAGER
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E., ACTING DIRECTOR
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DATE
/.5 - -..
DATE
APPROVED BY:
JOHN M: I~rNUCK, III, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR
COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS.
DATE
PUDZ-01-AR-986/EX SUMMARY/RVB/rb
NOV 2 7 2001
MEMORANDUM
AGENDA ITEM 8-B
TO:
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRON. SERVICES DIVISION
DATE:
SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
PETITION NO: PUDZ-2001-AR-986, WALNUT LAKES PUD
OWNER/AGENT:
Agent:
Karen Bishop Owner:
PMS, Inc. of Naples
2335 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 408
Naples FL 34103
Kenneth P. Saundry, Jr. Trustee
8610 Pebblebrooke Drive
Naples, FL 34119
REQUESTED ACTION:
To have the Collier County Planning Commission consider a proposed rezone of the subject site
from "RSF-3" Residential Single-Family and "A" Rural Agricultural to Planned Unit
Development (PUD) for the purpose of permitting residential land uses, an adult living facility,
and a golf course facility.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject site is located north side of US-41 and approximately 2.5 miles east of Collier
Boulevard (CR-951) in Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East. (See illustration on
following page)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The proposed 204-acre Planned Unit Development (PUD) permits a mix of residential dwelling
units including an assisted living facility that is designed around a golf course, lakes, open space,
and preserve areas. The residential/golf course areas consist of approximately 119-acres while the
ALF areas comprise 11-acres. If approved, the development plan will allow the following:
1. A maximum of 612 dwelling units at a density of 3 units per acre.
2. Open space that includes water management areas, landscaping and buffering totaling
the minimum required open space for residential PUDs.
Access to the project is provided from an existing 80-foot right-of4
from US-41 along the west side of the project.
~.xt~nrtlnE
NOV 2 7 2001
N
!
!
!
~XHIBIT A
NOV 2 7 2001
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Existing: The property is presently zoned "RSF-3" & "A" Rural Agricultural. In addition, most of
the property is within the Deltona Settlement Agreement and farmed historically and
later partially developed as the Naples Isle project. A lake was excavated in the center
of the property and fill material deposited on the adjacent farm field.
Surrounding: North - The undeveloped Naples Reserve Golf Club PUD allowing 550 units at a
density of 1.5 units per acre.
South - US-41 and the Imperial Wilderness RV Park and zoned "TTRVC".
East - The existing West Wind Mobile Home Park that is zoned "MH".
West - An 80-foot road right-of-way and vacant land zoned "A" Rural
Agricultural.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use and Density.: The subject property is designated Urban (Urban Mixed - Use
District, Urban Residential Sub-district) on the Future Land Use Map and Element (FLUE) of the
Growth Management Plan (GMP). Relevant to this petition, the Urban Mixed - Use District
permits a variety of residential unit types at a base density of 4 dwelling units per acre, subject to
the Density Rating System. This designation also permits recreation and open space uses;
community facilities uses, including assisted living facilities at a density consistent with the Land
Development Code (LDC). ~. ~ ~
NOV 2 7 2001
2
Since the subject site is located within a Traffic .cgggestion Area, as depicted on the Future Land
Use Map and described in the FLUE, a reduction of'one dwelling unit per acre from the base
density of 4 units per acre is required and the site is also not eligible for any density bonuses.
Therefore, this project is limited to a maximum density of 3 units per acre.
Base Density
Traffic Congestion Area
Total Eligible Density
4 du/acre
-1 du/acre
3 du/acre
Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses and density may be deemed
consistent with the FLUE. Staff evaluation for consistency with applicable elements of the GMP
advises that this PUD as structured is consistent with applicable elements of the GMP.
Transportation Element: The Traffic Impact Study (TIS) indicates that the proposed residential
project at build-out in 2009 will generate approximately 5,674 weekday trips and 540 trips during
the PM Peak Hour. Based on staff's analysis of the applicant's TIS, the project trips exceed the
significance test on USo41 at the project build-out but will not lower the level of service below
the roads adopted level of service "C" standard. As a result, this petition is consistent xvith Policy
5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation Element. In addition, US-41 is currently a 2-lane arterial road
with a current traffic count of 10,789 AADT for the segment fronting the project entrance. The
projected traffic volumes for this segment at the project build-out will still operate at an
acceptable level of service. As a result, this petition is consistent with Policies 1.3 and 1.4, of the
Transportation Element. Lastly, Policy 9.3 encourages the interconnection of local streets
betxveen developments when feasible. Since the project abuts a golf course project to the north,
an existing mobile home park to the east and an access road to the west, an interconnection does
not appear to be feasible at this location.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and
archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Maps.
Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment of this site is required to be
submitted for staff review.
EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL~ TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE
The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff responsible for oversight related
to the above referenced areas of critical concern. This includes a review by the Community
Development Environmental and Engineering staff, and the Transportation Department. These
reviews help shape the content of the PUD document and cause development commitments to be
formulated to achieve GMP and LDC requirements. Approximately 71.46-acres of jurisdictional
wetlands have been identified on the property. Development of the project will result in impacts
to 84 percent of the wetlands on site. Since the site is within the boundaries of the Deltona
Settlement Agreement, impacts to jurisdictional wetlands were previously mitigated. However,
the petitioner is providing additional compensation for wetland impacts by creating 11.52 acres
of wetlands, enhance and preserve 11.41 acres of wetlands, and preserve 0.11-acre u 31ands. The
northern preserve wetlands will be located adjacent to the larger wetland preserve on ti
PUD project to the north. 1,4o. ? ~-'~-.
3 NOV 2 7 2001
Environmental staff has deemed that this project is consistent with Policy 6.4.6 that requires 25
percent on-site native vegetation preservation. This petition was reviewed and heard by the
Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) on August 7, 2001. The EAC recommended approval
of the project by a 6 to 1 vote subject to staffs stipulation that the petitioner obtain all the
required permits from the South Florida Water Management District and the Florida Department
of Transportation prior to Site Development Plan approval.
ANALYSIS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on which a
favorable detemfination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an objective,
comprehensive overview of the impact of the proposed land use change, be they positive or
negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that overview. The listed criteria are
specifically noted in Section 2.7.2.5 and Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Land Development Code thus
requiring staff evaluation and comment, and shall be used as the basis for a recommendation of
approval or denial by the Planning Commission to the BCC.
Each of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff review are listed under
each of the criterion noted and are categorized as either pro or con, whichever the case may be, in
the opinion of staff. The review of each of the criterion is followed by a summary conclusion
culminating in a determination of compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation.
These evaluations are completed as separate documents and are attached to the staff report.
Appropriate evaluation of petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for supportive
action by appointed and elected decision-makers. The evaluation by professional staff should
typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the community's future land use plan,
and xvhether or not a rezoning action xvould be consistent with the Collier County GMP in all of
its related elements (See Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B").
Other evaluation considerations should include an assessment of adequacy of transportation
infrastructure, other infrastructure, and compatibility with adjacent land uses, a consideration
usually dealt with as a facet of analyzing the relationship of the rezoning action to the long range
plan for future land uses. This evaluation includes an analysis of past zoning actions in the
project area. In addition, the Board Of County Commissioners has reviewed similar rezone
requests. Notxvithstanding the above, staff in reviewing the determinants for adequate findings to
support a rezoning action advise as follows:
Relationship to Future Land Uses - A discussion of this relationship refers to the relationship
of the proposed zoning action to the FLUE of the GMP. In the case at hand, and based upon the
Future Land Use Plan, we have an expectation that the subject site and adjacent land will be used
for single and multi-family residential purposes, and in fact the subject property is near existing
residential lands to the south and east. The PUD Master Plan illustrates a development permitting
a mix of single and multi-family dwelling units and designed around a golf course. In addition,
the proposed project density of 3 units per acre is consistent with the Density Rating System and
is compatible with the future development plans for the area. Therefore, the subject residential
project and its density are consistent with the FLUE.
4
Relationship to Existing Land Uses: The surrounding land uses of the adjacent properties are
as follows: To the north is the Naples Reserve Golf Club that permits a golf course and 550
dwelling units at a density of 1.5 units per acre. To the east is an existing mobile home
subdivision while the Imperial Wilderness R.V. Resort is south of US-41. To the west is
undeveloped land zoned Rural Agricultural. Lastly, the current "RSF-3" zoning will permit a
similar number of dwelling units. Based on the intensity and densities of the surrounding
developments, staff is of the opinion that the subiect PUD is consistent with the surrounding
developments. With respect to the matter of compatibility, this is an evaluation whose primary
focus is the similarity of land use and not necessarily just a density issue. To improve the
relationship with adjacent land uses, the location of future dwelling units are to be designed with
a common architectural theme and with a maximum height of 35-feet. Since the properties to the
east are developed with a 35-foot limitation, this petition is consistent with the adjacent
development. The ALF facility is limited to Tract RA, which is at the southwest comer of the
project as depicted on the Master Plan. The ALF shall not exceed a Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
factor of 0.45 as provided for in Section 2.6.26.2.1 of the Collier County Land Development
Code. The PUD document also requires a rear yard setback of 20 feet for single-family detached
dxvellings and 10 feet for zero lot line units. This is similar to other zero lot line developments
that have been approved in Collier County.
It should be noted that the PUD development strategy is one that allows for multi-family and
single-family dwelling types. Development standards relative to these housing structure types are
generally consistent with the standards in the area. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the
project's development standards are compatible with the adjacent properties and with the Land
Development Code. Furthermore, the application of PUD development standards and
architectural theme requirements should remove any perception that there are any
incompatibilities in dwelling types with adjacent land areas.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition
Number: PUDA-2001-AR-986 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation
for approval.
NOV 2 ? 2001
PREPARED BY:
RAYfl~EL£OWS, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
CURi~NT PLANN1N6 SECTION
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
SUKAN MURRAY, AICP, MANAGER t
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E., ACTING DIRECTOR
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
/o -3 -0/
DATE
DATE
· DUNNUCK, III, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR
TY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS.
Staff Report for October 18, 2001 CCPC meeting·
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION:
DATE
JOYCEANNA J. RAUTIO, CHAIRMAN
RVB/rb/STAFF REPORT/AR-986
NOV 2 7 2001
FINDINGS FOR PUD
PUDZ-01-AR-986
Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning
Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the following
criteria:
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.
Pro: (i) Intensifying land development patterns produces economics of scale relative
to public utilities and facilities, which are currently available in this area.
(ii)
Development of land that has legal access, is adjacent to existing residential
uses is particularly suitable for a residential development that includes a golf
course.
Con: (i)
Existing neighboring residents often perceive new development as an
intensification near their existing neighborhood as contributing factors to
inconveniencing traffic movements to and from their place of residence,
increasing noise and pollution, and reducing property values.
Finding: Jurisdictional reviews by County staff support the manner and pattern of
development proposed for the subject property. Development conditions contained in the
PUD document give assurance that all infrastructure will be developed and be consistent
with County regulations. Any inadequacies that require supplementing the PUD
document will be recommended to the Board of County Commissioners as conditions of
approval by staff. Recommended mitigation measures will assure compliance xvith Level
of Service relationships as prescribed by the Growth Management Plan.
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.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Finding: Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control.
The PUD document makes appropriate provisions for continuing operation and
maintenance of common areas.
Exhibit "A"
AC.,FJ~A
NOV 2 7 2001
e
Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives
and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
Pro: (i) The proposed residential development strategy and project density is entirely
consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP.
e
Con'.. None.
Findinl~: The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives and
policies of the GMP. A review of consistency relationships with elements of the GMP is
as follows: The subject PUD proposes to allow residential uses at a density of 3 units per
acre, which is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP.
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.
Pro: The subject site has been designed to provide development standards that reflect the
Land Development Code. In addition, landscaping has been provided to buffer the
adjacent properties.
Con: None.
Finding:. The Walnut Lakes PUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize internal
land use relationship through the use of various forms of open space separation. External
relationships are automatically regulated by the Land Development Code to assure
harmonious relationships betxveen projects.
The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Finding:. As noted in the Staff Report, the amount of open space set aside by
this project is consistent with the provisions of the Land Development Code.
The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinff: The proposed project will not lower the level of service below any
adopted standard. In addition, the timing or sequence of development in light of
concurrency requirements that automatically triggers the mechanism for ensurin that
further LOS degradation is not allowed or the LOS deficiency is corrected. I ~^ rlt~
2 NOV 2 7 2001
,,.Iq-
m
The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion.
Pro:,
This petition seeks to modify the existing residential zoning on the subject site
that xvill allow for a mom compatible project. Lastly, this project will not
adversely impact any adopted level of service standard.
Con: None.
Summary Finding: Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure
such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property
relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from
urban development. This assessment is described at length in the staff report adopted by
the CCPC. Relative to this petition, development of the subject property is timely,
because supporting infrastructure is available.
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.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Finding: This finding essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which
development standards proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that
xvould be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The development
standards in this PUD are similar to those standards.
FINDINGS FOR PUD-01 -AR-986/RVB/rb
3
2001
REZONE FINDINGS
PETITION RZ-01-AR-986
Section 2.7.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and
recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall
show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation
to the following, where applicable:
Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies and Future Land Use map and the elements of the Growth Management
Plan (GMP).
Pro: Development Orders deemed consistent with all applicable elements of the Future
Lan~l Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP should be considered a positive relationship.
Con: Not applicable.
Summary Findings: The proposed "PUD" Zoning District is in compliance with the
FLUE of the GMP by meeting the Density Rating System as noted in the StaffReport.
2. The existing land use pattern;
Pro: There are existing residential uses to the south and east of the subject site. (See Staff
Report)
Con: The. adjacent residential zoned properties to the southeast and east are part of an
existing mobile home and TTRVC subdivision.
Summary Findings:. A portion of the subject site was previously farmed for a number of
years~ The site also contains some wetland areas, however, the site is part of the Deltona
Settlement Agreement in which mitigation was approved.
e
The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts;
Pro.'. The proposed rezone is adjacent to the approved residential properties to the east.
Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findines: The parcel will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent
and nearby districts because it is adjacent to residential zoning.
EXHIBIT "A"
NO¥ 2 7 2001
_
e
Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Pro:. The district boundaries are logically drawn and they are consistent With the FLUE of
the GMP.
e
e
Con[ None.
Summary Findings:. Adjacent lands to the south and east include residential uses while
lands to the north are approved for golf course uses.
Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment necessary.
Pro: The proposed zoning change is appropriate based on the existing conditions of the
property. In addition, the proposed rezone serves as an extension of the existing
residential development to the east. Therefore, the relationship of the proposed zone
change to the FLUE of the GMP is a positive one. (See Growth Management Plan
Consistency in Staff Report)
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The site was previously farmed for many years. Now the owner
xvishes to develop the site consistent with the current residential development trends in
the area.
Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood;
Pro: Existing residential land uses in the area operate without being adversely impacting
the existing tennis club facility on site. The proposed residential dwellings will have less
impact on noise.
Con: The proposed residential dwellings will increase traffic impacts on the adjacent
road network.
Summary Findings: The proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions
in the adjacent residential areas because the required development standards as contained
· in the Land Development Code have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least
amount of adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments.
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 sa
NOV 2 7 2001
Pro.'.
(i)
(ii)
The petition to rezone the prOperty as requested is consistent with all
applicable policies in the Transportation Element. (See Staff Report)
The property fronts directly on a public road thereby providing an
immediate access to the arterial road network over which traffic from this
commercial facility would be defused.
Con.'. (i)
Urban intensification results in greater volumes of traffic on the local and
arterial road system serving the subject site.
Summary Findings: Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for
consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Traffic Circulation Element. As a result, this petition
will not excessively increase traffic congestion on any County road. In the final analysis
all rezone actions are subject to the Concurrency Management System.
Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem;
Pro: The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite development
standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby properties. New
development in and of itself is not supposed to increase flooding potential on adjacent
property over and above what ~vould occur without development.
Con: Urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to intra-county
drainage appurtenances would increase the risk of flooding in areas when the drainage
outfall condition is inadequate.
Summary Findinl~s:. Every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization
of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface
drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project
was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plans are required to
meet County standards as a condition of approval.
Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas;
Pro: The proposed rezone will not impact the circulation of light and air to adjacent
areas.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: All projects in Collier County are subject to the development
standards that are unique to the zoning district in which it is located. These development
standards and others apply generally and equally to all zoning districts (i.e. open space
requirement, corridor management provisions, etc.) were designed to ensure that light
penetration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas. ~^ I~-~
NOV 2 7 2001
3 P~. ~ ~..g~~
10.
11.
12.
13.
Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent
area;
Pro: Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous underutilized
land, a condition that exists on the southeast side.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results
that may be internal or external to the subject property that can affect property values.
Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning, however zoning by
itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by law is driven by market
value. The mere fact that a property is given a new zoning designation may or may not
affect value.
Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations;
Pro:/Con: Not applicable.
Summary Findings: The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in
the LDC is that their sound application when combined ~vith the administrative site
development plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning
xvili not result in a deterrence to improvement of adjacent property.
Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The petition is consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Therefore,
the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency xvith the
FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent
with these plans are in the public interest.
Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning;
Pro:/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findin£s: The subject property can be developed in accordance with the
existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the opportunity to
maximize the development potential as made possible by its consistency with the GMP.
AGENDA fiE.hi
NOV 2 7 2001
14.
15.
16.
17.
Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
the County:
Pro: The proposed change to a PUD zoning district provides development standards that
complies with the GMP and is in scale with the residential properties in the area.
Con: The proposed density of 3 units per acre is higher than the 1.5 units per acre of the
approved PUD to the north.
Summary Findings: A policy statement, which has evaluated the scale, density and
intensity of land uses, is deemed to be acceptable for this site.
Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use?
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summarv Findings: There are many other sites that are zoned to accommodate the
residential use. Hoxvever, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the
appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are consistency with
all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacY of infrastructure.
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.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: Physical alteration of the site is a product of developing vacant
land that cannot be avoided. However, the site xvas previously altered when it was
farmed.
The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and
services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth
Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findines: Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of service
determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established relationships.
AR-986/RVB/rb
5
NOV 2 7 2001
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: PUD REZONE
Petition No.:
Commission District:
PUDZ-2001-AR-986
WALNUT LAKES PUD
Date Petition Received: PROJECT #19990022
DATE: 6/7/01
RAY BELLOWS
Planner Assigned: __
General Information:
Name of Applicant(s):
ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF
Kenneth P. Saundry, Jr. Trustee
Applicant's Mailing Address: 8610 Pebblebrooke Drive
City: Naples
Applicant's Telephone #
State: FL Zip: 34119
Fax #
Name of Agent: Karen Bishop
Agent's Mailing Address:
City: Naples
Agent's Telephone # 435-9080
Firm: Proiect Management Services, Inc.
2335 North Tamiami Trail, Suite 408
State: FL Zip: 34103
Fax'# 435-9082
COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING
2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE-NAPLES, FL 34104
PHONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98
PAG'
NOV 2 7 2001
Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional
sheets if necessary)
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
NA
City State ~ Zip
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
NA
City State Zip
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
NA
City State ~ Zip
Name of Master Association:
Mailing Address
NA
City State ~ Zip
Name of Civic Association:
Mailing Address
NA
City State ~ Zip
o
Disclosure of Interest Information:
If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety,
tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well
as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary).
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98
PAGE 2
NOV 2 7 2001
Fl6
If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and
the percentage of stock owned by each.
Name and Address, and Office
Percentage of Stock
If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with
the percentage of interest.
Name and Address
Percentage of Interest
do
If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the
name of the general and/or limited partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of O~mership
eo
If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a
Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers
below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners.
Name and Address
Kenneth P. Saundry, Jr., Trustee
8610 Pebblebrook Drive
_Naples, FL
Percentage of Ownership
100%
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98
Date of Contract:
PAGE 3
NOV 2 7 2001
Bm-den Equities
Kenneth P. Saundry, Jr.
Raymond O. Antos, Trustee
James A. O'Connor, Trustee
Karen Rosborough
Debbie Par -khurst
Zohn Pazkhurst
Beck)' Martini
Peter Saundry
Dean Roche]eau
Toml
# of?Voting
285
· 285
:0
~0
0
.0
~0
0
570
# of Non-vodng
90
90
60
30
30
30
30
30
30
lO
430
Percentage
Tnt~re~
37.50
37.50
6.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
! .00
100%
2
AGE. NOA IT~
NOV 2 7 2001
If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties,
individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust.
Name and Address
list
all
go
Date subject property acquired ( ) leased ( ): Term of lease yrs./mos.
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: 3/22/00 and date option
terminates: NA , or anticipated closing date 180 days at~er rezone.
ho
Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur
subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public
heating, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit
a supplemental disclosure of interest form.
Detailed legal description of the property covered bv the application: (If space is
inadequate, attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning
district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant
shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum
1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting.
NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions
arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be
required. See Exhibit 'B'
Section: Township: Range:.
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book Page #:~
Property I.D.#:
Metes & Bounds Description:
Size of orooertv: _~
fL -- Total Sq. Ft.
Acres+/- 203.77
Address/general location of sub,iect prooerty.'.
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98
The Project site includes portions of Sections 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East. Generally, the Project is
located immediately adjacent to and North of U.S. 41, approximately 3 miles East of Collier Boulevard (C.R.
951 - ~GEIqO~ ff~
u0¥ 2 7 2001
PAGE 4 F 161~__~
Ad,iacent zoning and land use:
Zoning
Land use
S TTRVC/PUD
E_A, MH & C-2
.rNaples Reserve Golf Club
RV Resort(s)_incl. Paradise Point PLrD
__A-developed, MH-West Wind MH Park, C-2 developed
W A __undeveloped
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? If
so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate,
attach on separate page). No.
Section: Township: Range:
Block: Subdivision:
Lot:
Plat Book . Page #: Property I.D.#:
Metes & Bounds Description:
Rezone Request: This application is requesting a rezone from the
...... PUD
zoning district(s) to the _ L.- .......
RSF-3 & A
zoning district(s).
Present Use of the Property: Vacant with prior excavation operations,
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Mixed use PUD with Single-famil¥~
Multi-famil Assisted Livin Facilities Retail office and recreational uses. .
_APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98
Evaluation Criteria.' Pursuant to Section 2.7.2.5 and Sec. 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County
Land Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning
Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County
Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria ~ renCf~ot-°.°.°_the '/~"~1
Provide a nan'ative statement describing the rezone request with specific reft
NOV 2 7 2001
PAGE 5 0 16 p~. ~;)~(~t __
criteria noted below.
request.
Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the
Standard Re[one Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7.2. 5)
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies
and future land use map and the elements of the growth management plan. The
proposed change is within the density allowed in the GMP. Further, it encourages
mixed use neighborhood community that will serve to reduce trips outside the
community. This is in contrast to the existing plat that would allow for 612 single-
family homes with no preservation qf sensitive areas, and a single point Of entry on US
41.
The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern is a mix o_f TTR VC and
Mobile Home to the East and South. The recent rezoning of the Naples Reserve Golf
Club to the North will provide for a similar set of land uses, making this project a
transitional one.
The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
The e.risting zoning of single_family lots is the same density that is proposedfor this
pro/ect, with the surrounding mobile home and TTR VC sites having much greater
densities. The proposed pro/ect is both lower than and consistent with the density
allowed on the surrounding properties.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property for the proposed change. No..
Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
(rezone) necessary. Single point o_f access homogenous single-_family communities are
not in the best interests qf the County. This rezone moves toward a more desirous
mixed-use approach to development.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood No.
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. As indicated
in the TIS, there will be no adverse impact to the surrounding road system.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. No. Permits from the
South Florida Water Management District must be acquired prior to development.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjac,
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98
PAGE 6
NOV 2 7 2001
10. Whether the proposed change will seriously affect property values in the adjacent area.
No.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. No.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. No, the proposed project is
consistent with the GMP and the LDC.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning. Market conditions aside, the existin~ zonin~l does not allow the
mix of uses proposed, nor does it incorporate the preserve areas as proposed.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county. No._
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use
in districts already permitting such use. While other sites may exist, this project is in an
area that is already served b¥ Collier County Utilities and as such, is anticipated to be
developed.
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. The property has been disturbed in the past
due to excavation. Additional clearing and some excavation will be required_for
development.
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 growth management
plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. ! 06, art. Iii, as amended. The pro/ect will be required
to obtain a certificate o_f adequate public_facilities prior to commencing construction.
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. The proposed
design is far superior to that which exists today.
PUD Re~one Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7.3.2.5)
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. See above
they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continu
and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98
PAGE
Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as
ng otat~lffi~'r~
r ma~.tained
NO',/2 7 2001
at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after
consultation with the county attorney. The applicant is a contract purchaser.
Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth
management plan. The proposedpro[ect con_forms with the objectives o_f the GMP and
furthers the promotion of mixed-use development.
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 project proposes adequate buffering where adjacent uses
are dissimilar.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development. The project will meet or exceed the Counties open space requirement
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private. See above
The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion. Vacant, un-zoned property exists adjacent to the property if expansion or
interconnection in the future is warranted. The petitioner does not own any o_f that
land.
Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations
in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as
meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such
regulations. Please see the PUD document.
Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions,
however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the
civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in
order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions.
10.
Previous land use petitions on the subiect property..: To your knowledge, has a public
hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that
hearing? No,
11.
Additional Submittal requirements: In addition to this completed application, the
following shall be submitted in order for your application to be deemed sufficient, unless
otherwise waived during the pre-application meeting.
A copy of the pre-application meeting notes;
If this rezone is being requested for a specific use, provide fifteen (15) copies of a 24"
x 36" conceptual site plan [and one reduced 8V2" x 11" copy of site plan], drawn to a
maximum scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet, depicting the following [Additional copies of
the plan may be requested upon completion of staff evaluation for distribution to the
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - ! 0/98
PAGE 8 OF 16
EXHIBIT B
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
O.R. 1203 PG. 1699
That portion of the west 1/2 of section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, located north of
U.S. Highway 41 (Tamiami Trail), and the west I/2 of the west ¥5 of the northwest lA of the
northeast ¼ of Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
Together with all the units created by the declaration of condominium of Naples Isle, a
condominium, as recorded in official records book 596, pages 254 through 315, inclusive, of the
Public Records of Collier County, Florida.
Subject to restriction, reservations and easements of record and ad valorem taxes for the calendar
year 1986.
and
The east 1/2 of the west V2 of the NW ¼ if the NE ¼ of Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26
East, containing ten (10) acres, more or less excepting the north 30 feet thereof, which is reserved
for road purposes, in Collier County, Florida.
Subject to restrictions, reservations and easements of record and ad valorem taxes for the
calendar year 1986.
NOV 2 7 2001
PUD REZONE APPLICATION
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION
PACKET!
tt E Q UIREMENTS # OF
COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED
1. Completed Application 15 X
2. Copy of Deed(s) and list identifying Owner(s) and all 1 On file
Partners if a Corporation
3. Completed Owner/Agent Affidavit, Notarized 1 On file
4. Pre-application notes/minutes 15 On file
5. Conceptual Site Plans 15 X
6. Environmental Impact Statement- (EIS) 4 X
7. Aerial Photograph - (with habitat areas identified) 4 On file
8. Completed Utility Provisions Statement (with required 4 X
attachments and sketches)
9. Traffic Impact Statement- (TLS) 4 X
10. Historical & Archaeological Survey or Waiver 4 X
Application
11. Copies of State and/or Federal Permits 4 X
12. Architectural Rendering of Proposed Structure(s) 4 X
13. Application Fee and Data Conversion Fee Check shall - Previously
be made payable to Collier County Board of Submitted
Commissioners
14. Other Requirements - Survey on File. Previously
Submitted,
As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the reformation indicated on this checklist is
included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in
the delay of processing this petition.
Agent/Applicant Signature
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PVD REZONE - 10/98,
Date
PAGE 15
AG~A ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
Item V.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
STAFF REPOR~T
MEETING OF AUGUST 7, 2001
II.
III.
IV.
NAME OF pETITIONER/PRO CT:
Petition No.:
Petition Name:
Applicant/Developer:
Engineering Consultant:
Environmental Consultant:
Planned Unit Development
No. PUDZ-2001-AR-986
Walnut Lakes PUD
Kenneth P. Saundry, Jr. Trustee
Vanasse & Daylor, LLP
Passarella and Associates, Inc.
LOCATION:
The subject pwperty is an undeveloped 204 acre parcel located on the north side
of U.S. 41, approximately 2 1/2 miles east of Collier Boulevard, in Section 12,
Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES:
Surrounding properties include both developed and undeveloped parcels with the
following zoning classifications.
ZONING
pUD (Naples Reserve Golf Club)
R.O.W.
A
TTRVC (Imperial Wilderness)
pUD (Paradise Point)
A
MH (West Wind MHP)
C-2
W- A
DESCRIPTION_
Undeveloped
U.S. 41
Undeveloped
Developed
Developed
Undeveloped
Developed
Developed
Undeveloped
PRO~;CT DESCRIPTION:
EAC Me. ting
Page 2 of I 0
Ve
Tl~e proposed 240-acre PUD is a mixed-use development consisting of single
family and multi-family residential, ALF, golf cotlrse, and a Neighborhood
Village Center. The residential dwellings are designed around the golf course and
preserve areas. The residential/recreation lands are comprised of 125.5-acres
while the Neighborhood Village Center is on 4.5 acres. The site is north of the
Naples Reserve Golf Club, which is also approved for a golf course and
residential development. To the east is the Westwind Mobile Home Park and
properties zoned C-2. The petitioner has indicated that the primary objective is to
develop a maximum of 612 dwelling units while the PUD Master Plan also
provides 14-acres for the ALF and 21-acres for the preserve areas. Lastly, the
subject site is accesse, d from US-41 and from a proposed north/south public road
along the west side of the project.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element.'.
The subject site is located within the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban
Residential Sub-district that is intended to provide locations for the development
of higher densities. This district permits a base density of four (4) dwelling units
per acre pursuant to the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element
(FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). A consistency analysis with
applicable elements of the GMP is as follows:
FLUE and Densit~'~: The FLUE permits residential dwellings such as those units
proposed for Walnut Lakes PUD. The project density is also consistent with the
Density Rating System contained in the FLUE and is based on a Base Density of 4
units per acre and subtracting one unit per acre for a total of 3 units per acre. The
PUD document and Master Plan indicate that the project is intended for 612
dwelling units at a density of affi~i'~~ere' As a result, staff is of
the opinion that the requested density is consistent with the Density Rating
System of the Growth Management Plan.
Conservation & Coastal Mana ement Element:
Objective 2.2. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the
Growth Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging
into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality
standards.
To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and
cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be de~
in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters
NOV 2 7 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 3 of 10
attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water
(discharge) to the estuarine system.
This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to
mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing
lakes and interconnected wetlands to provide water quality retention and peak
flow attenuation during storm events.
With regards to native vegetation preservation and wetland issues, the following
Objectives and Policies apply:
Objective 6.2 states, "There shall be no unacceptable net loss of viable naturally
functioning marine and fresh water wetlands, excluding transitional zone wetlands
which are addressed in Objective 6.3".
Policy 6.2.10 states, "Any development activity within a viable naturally
functioning fresh-water wetland not part of a contiguous flow way shall be
mitigated in accordance with current SFWMD mitigation rules. Mitigation may
also include restoration of previously disturbed wetlands or acquisition for public
preservation of similar habitat".
Policy 6.2.13 states, "Proposed development on parcels containing viable
naturally functioning freshwater wetlands shall cluster development to maintain
the largest contiguous wetland area practicable and shall be designed to disturb
the least amount of native wetland vegetation practicable and to preserve the pre-
development hydroperiod".
Objective 6.3 states, "A portion of the viable, naturally functioning transitional
zone wetlands shall be preserved in any new non-agricultural development unless
otherwise mitigated through the DEP and the COE permitting process and
approved by the County".
Objective 6.4 states, "A portion of each viable, naturally functioning non-wetland
native habitat shall be preserved or retained as appropriate".
Policy 6.4.6 states, "All new residential developments greater than 2.5 acres in the
Coastal Area and greater than 20 acres in the Coastal Urban Area shall retain 25%
of the viable naturally functioning native vegetation on site, including both the
understory and the ground cover emphasizing the largest contiguous area possible.
When several different native plant communities exist on site, the development
plans will reasonably attempt to preserve examples of all of them if possible.
Areas of landscaping and open space which are planted with native plant species
shall be included in the 25% requirement considering both understor~ ~.,dAc, Ca~An-r:.~
groundcover. Where a project has included open space, recreational ameniti '~s, o~ ~. ~
NOV 2 7 200l
EAC Meetiag
Page 4 of I 0
preserved wetlands that meet or exceed the minimum open space criteria of
Collier County, this policy shall not be construed to require a larger percentage of
open space set aside to meet the 25% native vegetation policy. This policy shall
not be interpreted to allow development in wetlands, should the wetlands alone
constitute more than 25% of the site. Exceptions shall be granted for parcels that
cannot reasonably accommodate both the native vegetation and the proposed
activity".
This petition is consistent with staff's policy, as directed by the Board of County
Commissioners, to allow for impacts to jurisdictional wetlands when State and
Federal agency permits are issued. The petition is consistent with Objective 6.4 in
that it provides for 25% on-site native vegetation preservation pursuant to Policy
6.4.6.
VI. _MAJOR ISSUES.:
Water Mana£ement:
The proposed surface water management system utilizes a series of interconnected
lakes and swales to achieve water quality retention and peak flow attenuation.
Discharge will be into the US 41 north side canal at the rate of 0.15 cfs per county
ordinance 90-10. Permits from SFWMD and FDOT will be necessary for the
surface water management and for discharging into the canal
Environmental.:
Site Descriotion:
Most of the subject property is within thc Dcltona Settlement Agreement and
farmed historically and later partially developed as the Naples Isle project. A lake
was excavated in the center of the property and fill material deposited in the
adjacent farm field. Most of the property is now overgrown with weedy and exotic
vegetation.
NOV 2 7 2081
EAC Meeting
Page 5 of 10
Open borrow pit on subject property with disturbed land (FLUCFCS Code 740) in
background.
Native habitats on site are mostly found in the north-east portion of the property,
in the area not within the Deltona Settlement Agreement. Native habitats in this
area include pine flatwoods, pine-cypress and palmetto prairie. Also within the
confines of the PUD are areas of cypress, wax myrtle/willow and live oak.
FLUCFCS Code 4151
Pine, Hydric
NOV 2 7 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 6 of ! 0
FLUCFCS Code 6249
Pine-Cypress, Disturbed
According to the Collier County Soils Map prepared by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS), four soil types occur on the project site. These are
Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum (Unit 2), Pineda fine sand, limestone
substratum (Unit 14), Oldsmar fine sand (Unit 16), and Ft. Drum and Malabar,
High, fine sand (Unit 20). The majority of the soils on site are Holopaw fine sand,
limestone substratum (Unit 2), which is listed as a hydric soil by the NRCS. A
description of each of the soil types found on site is provided in Exhibit D of the
environmental impact statement (ELS).
Nails marking biological indicators (i.e., lichen lines, adventitious rooting,
buttress on cypress trees, etc.) of were set in the field on January 15, 2001 and
subsequently surveyed to determine wetland seasonal water levels. Based on these
nail elevations, it is estimated that the seasonal high water elevation on the north
part of the property is 5.9 feet NGVD and that on the south is 5.1 feet NGVD. The
control elevation for the project is proposed as 4.0 feet NGVD.
Approximately 71.46 acres of SFWMD/ColIier County jurisdictional wetlands
have been identified on the property. These include hydric pine flatwoods (11.85
acres), disturbed land (46.89 acres), pine-cypress (6.41 acres), wax myrtle/willow
(4.75 acres) and cypress (1.56 acres). Development of the project will result in
impacts to approximately 60.05 acres (84%) of the wetlands on site.
With respect to wetland impacts, it should be noted that the property (excluding
the 21 acres in the north-east portion of the site) is located within the boundaries
of the Deltona Settlement Agreement. Per discussions with SFWMD staff,
impacts to jurisdiction wetlands on that portion of the property wil :L':._ "-~j~A~ I
Settlement Agreement were previously mitigated as part of the )elt~.a
NOV 2 7 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 7 of 10
Settlement. However, to incorporate wetlands into the site plan and to provide
additional compensation for wetland impacts, the petitioner is proposing to create
11.52 acres of wetlands,, enhance and preserve 11.41 acres of wetlands, and
preserve 0.11 acre of uplands. The northern preserved wetlands will be located
adjacent to the larger wetland preserve within the Naples Reserve PUD
immediately north of the project.
Wetland creation will involve grading the historic farm fields to appropriate
wetland elevations and planting with native wetland vegetation. Preserved
wetlands will be enhanced by hand removal of exotic plant species.
FLUCFCS Codes 740/7401
Looking north at disturbed land on the subject property. The forested area in the
background is the future preserve within Naples Reserve Golf Club.
The petitioner is proposing to create forested wetlands. Planting in the wetland
enhancement and creation areas will include all three strata (trees, shrubs and
ground covers). Tree plantings will include slash pine, cypress, and red maple.
Shrub and ground cover plantings will include wax myrtle, sand cord grass
~_baked), saw grass ~ ~' gulfdune paspalum P~(_P_..~._~..q~
~, and wiregrass ~ stricta).
Preservation Requirernen~:
Approximately 21 acres of native vegetation are found on the project site, outside
the limits of the Deltona Settlement Agreement. pursuant to section 3.9.5.5.3 of
the Land Development Code, a minimum of 25% (5.25 acres) of native vegetation
shall be retained on site. This requirement is fully satisfied by the 21 acres
identified for preservation on the PUD master plan.
NOV 2 ? 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 8 of 10
VII.
A listed plant and wildlife species survey was conducted on May 31 and
November 6, 2000 to determine whether the site was b~ing utilized by state and
federal listed species. Additional listed species observations were made during
vegetative mapping and wetland flagging conducted July 24 and 25, 2000. The
survey methodology and results are found in Exhibit E of the EIS. No listed
wildlife species were observed on the property during the survey or during other
on-site visits.
RECOMMENDATIONS':
Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2001-AR-
986 "Walnut Lakes PUD" with the following stipulations:
Water Mana£ement:
The petition must obtain permits
Approval.
from SFWMD and FDOT prior to SDP
Environmental:
No additional stipulations.
AGF. NDA ITEM
No. ~" ~'
NOV 2 7 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 9 of 10
PKEPARED BY:
s~-~ c~xz,~owsr~,
SENIOR ENGINEER
~ERGER
ENVI]q. oNMEI'qTAL SPECIALIST
REVIEWED BY:
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
q-ll--Ol
DA~
DATE
NOV 2 7 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 10 of 10
APPROVED BY:
~RIM cOMIV~ DEVELOPMENT
ADNi[NISTRATOR
ENVYRO~~~ ADVISORY cOUNCII,
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
THOMAS W. SANSBURY, CHAIRMAN
SL/gdh/c: Sm/IRc'port
ACne, IDA
NOV 2 ? 2001
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-102 THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH
INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR
THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP
NUMBERED 161 IN; BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL
PROPERTY FROM "RSF-Y' AND "A' RURAL AGRICULTURE TO
"PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS WALNUT
LAKES PUD LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF U.S. 41, IN
SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUN'I~, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 204_+ ACRES; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Karen Bishop, of Project Management Services Inc., representing Kenneth P.
Saundry, Jr. Trustee, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification
of the herein described real property.
NOW, THEREFORE BE 1T 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 12, Township
51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "RSF-3" and "A" Rural Agriculture to
"PUD" Planned Unit Development in accordance with the Walnut Lakes PUD Document, attached he,'eto
as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein. The Official Zoning Atlas Map numbered 161 IN,
as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby
amended accordingly.
SECTION TWO:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, this __ day of ,2001.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
ATrEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
Approved as to Form
and Legal Sufficiency
Marjonfd M. Student ~
Assistant County Attorney
g/admin/PUDZ-2001 -AR-986/RB~o
NOV 2 ? 2001
WALNUT LAKES
A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AND SUPPORTING MASTER PLAN
GOVERNING
THE WALNUT LAKES PUD
A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS
OF
THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
PREPARED FOR:
Kenneth P. Saundry, Jr., Trustee
8610 Pebblebrook Drive
Naples, Florida 34119
PREPARED BY:
Karen K. Bishop
PMS, Inc. of Naples
2335 N. Tamiami Trail
Suite 408
Naples, FL 34103.
REVISED BY COLLIER COUNTY ON OCTOBER 3, 2001
DATE REVIEWED BY CCPC
DATE APPROVED BY BCC
ORDINANCE NUMBER
AMENDMENTS & REPEAL
"EXHIBIT A"
-1-
AC,~DA ITF. M
NOV 2 7 2001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
SECTION I
SECTION II
SECTION III
SECTION IV
SECTION V
SECTION VI
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
RESIDENTIAL A1LEA PLAN
COMMON AREAS
PRESERVE ARES
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
Page 3
Page 4
Pages 5-6
Pages 7-9
Pages 10o12
Page 13
Page 14
Pages 15-17
-2-
NOV 2 ? 2001
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLE,S.
EXHIBIT A:
PUD MASTER PLAN
-3-
NOV 2 7 2001
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
The Walnut Lakes Planned umt Development (PUD) consists of +/- 204 acres of land located immediately North of
U.S. 41, approximately 3 miles East of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) in Collier County, Florida.
The development of this Project will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as
set forth in the County's Growth Management Plan. This compliance includes:
1. The land is located wholly in the Urban Residential Sub-district of the Urban Mixed Use District as
identified on the Future Land Use Map as required in Objective 1, Policy 5.1, and Policy 5.3 of the Future
Land Use Element.
2. The subject property's location in relation to existing or proposed community facilities and services pervcfits
the development's residential density as required in Objective 2 of the Furore Land Use Element.
3. The Project development is compatible with and complementary to existing and future surrounding land
uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element.
4. The Project development will result in an efficient and economical extension of community facilities and
services as required in Policies 3. !.H and L of the Future Land Use Element.
5. The project is planned to incorporate natural systems for water management in accordance with their
natural functions and capabilities as required by Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-element of the Public
Facilities Element.
6. The Urban Residential District allows for a base residential density of 4 units per gross acre less 1 unit per
acre because the property is located in the Traffic Congestion Area. This results in a maximum density of
three (3) dwelling units per acre. The Project development allows a maximum of 612 dwelling units on the
gross project area of 204 acres, which results in a project density of 3 units per acre. The projected density
is in compliance with the Density Rating System of the Future of the Land Use Element of the Growth
Management Plan.
7. The Project meets the intent of the Urban Residential Sub-district of the FLUE in that all the proposed uses
and development standards are in compliance with guidelines as set forth in the Future Land Use Element.
8. All final local development orders for this Project are subject to the Collier County Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinance.
NOV 2 7 2001
1.1
1.2
SECTION I
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the property, and to
describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the Project name
of the Walnut Lakes PUD.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The subject property being +/- 204 acres, is described as:
O.R. 1203 PG. 1699
THAT PORTION OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, LOCATED NORTH OF US HIGHWAY 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL), AND THE
WEST ONE-HALF OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF
THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
TOGETHER WITH ALL OF THE UNITS CREATED BY THE DECLARATION OF
CONDOMINIUM OF NAPLES ISLE, A CONDOMINIUM, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL
RECORDS BOOK 596, PAGES 254 THROUGH 315, INCLUSIVE OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
AND
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE WEST ½ OF THE NW ~A OF THE NE 'A OF SECTION 12,
TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, EXCEPTING THE NORTH 30 FEET THEREOF,
WHICH IS RESERVED FOR ROAD PURPOSES, IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
1.3
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
The subject property is under the ownership of:
Kenneth P. Saundry, Jr., Trustee
8610 Pebblebrooke Drive
Naples, FL 34119.
The applicant is:
Kenneth P. Saundry, Jr., Trustee
8610 Pebblebrooke Drive
Naples, FL 34119
-5-
ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
1.4
1.5
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA.
Bo
The Project site includes portions of Sectionsl2, Township 51 South, Range 26 East.
Generally, the Project is located immediately adjacent to and North of U.S. 41,
approximately 3 miles East of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951).
The zoning classification of the subject property prior to the date of this approved PUD
document was A - Agriculture and RSF-3.
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
The project site will consist of a residential subdivision, assisted living facility and service uses, a
golf course, maintenance facility and clubhouse. The proposed site utilizes a wet detention lake
system for water quality and quantity storage. The control elevation is proposed as 4.0 feet
NGVD. The Project is in the Henderson Creek Basin, therefore, the control structure will be
designed to lirmt the project discharge to 0.15 cfs per acre per Collier County Ordinance 90-10
requirements. The project is within FEMA Zone AE with a base flood elevation of 7.0.
1.6
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 204 +/- Walnut Lakes PUD is a mixed use community that provides for the development of
single family, multi-family and recreational amenities including but not limited to a golf course.
Assisted living facilities and associated service space may also be allowed for development.
1.7
SHORT TITLE
This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "Walnut Lakes Planned Unit Development
Ordinance."
-6-
AGENDA
NOV 2 7 2001
_
SECTION ~
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
2.1
2.2
2.3
pURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development,
relationships to applicable County ordinances, and the respective land uses of the tracts included
in the Project, as well as other project relationships.
GENERAL
A. Regulations for the development of the Walnut Lakes PUD shall be in accordance with
the contents of this document, Planned Unit' Development District and other applicable
sections and parts of the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth
Management Plan in effect at the time of building permit application. Where these
regulations fail to provide developmental standards then the provisions of the most
similar disu-ict in the County Land Development Code shall apply.
B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set
forth in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of building
permit application.
C. All conditions imposed and all graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the
development of the Walnut Lakes PUD shall become part of the regulations, which
govern the manner in which the PUD site may be developed.
D. Unless modified, waived or excepted by this PUD, the provisions of other sections of the
Land Development Code, where applicable, remain in full force and effect with respect to
the development of the land, which comprises this PUD.
E. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency
review under the provisions of Division 3.15, Adequate Public Facilities, at the earliest or
next to occur of either final SDP approval, final plat approval, or building permit issuance
applicable to this development.
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PLAN AND PROPOSED LAND USES
A. The Project Master Plan, including layout of streets and various land uses for the project, is
illustrated graphically by Exhibit "A," PUD Master Development Plan.
-7-
NOV 2 7 2001
TRACT (S)
Residential
TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT ..
Residential, ALF, Sales Center
and Golf Course
Preservation / Open Space / Buffeting and
Lakes
Roads Rights-of-way
ACREAGE
· 130. ac
+ 63 ac
+llac
2.4
2.5
TOTAL
B.
+ 204 ac
Areas illustrated as lakes by Exhibit "A' shall be constructed as lakes or, upon approval,
parts thereof may be constructed as shallow, intermittent wet and dry depressions for
water retention purposes. The Master Development Plan (Exhibit "A") shows proposed
land uses for each parcel. Minor modification to all tracts, lakes or other interior
boundaries may be permitted at the time of preliminary subdivision plat or site
development plan approval, subject to the provisions of applicable sections of the Collier
County Land Development Code or as otherwise permitted by this PUD document.
C. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown in Exhibit "A," such easements,
as necessary (utility, private, semi-public) shall be established within or along the various
tracts as may be necessary.
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY OR INTENSITY OF LAND USE
A maximum of 612 residential dwelling units shall be constructed in the total project area. This
includes all single family or multi-family units, each to be considered a single dwelling unit.
Should the Project include an Assisted Living Facility, a conversion ratio of one (1) dwelling unit
= four (4) assisted living units shall be permitted.
The gross project area is +/- 204 acres. The gross project density, therefore, will be 3 units per
acre for equivalent dwelling units.
RELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS
A. Prior to the recording of a record plat, and/or condominium plat for all or part of the
PUD, final plans of all required improvements shall receive approval of the appropriate
Collier County governmental agency to insure compliance with the PUD Master Plan, the
Collier County Subdivision Code and the platting laws of the State of Florida.
B. Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan constitutes the required PUD Development Plan.
Subsequent to or concurrent with PUD approval, a preliminary subdivision plat if
applicable, shall be submitted for the entire area covered by the PUD Master Plan. Any
division of property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with Division
3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code, and the platting laws of the State of
Florida.
-8-
NOV 2 7 2001
The provisions of Division 3.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code, when
applicable, shall apply to the development of all platted tracts, or parcels of land as
provided in said Division in effect prior to the issuance of a building, permit or other
development order.
The development of any tract or parcel approved for residential development
contemplating fee simple ownership of land for each dwelling unit shall be required to
submit and receive approval of a preliminary subdivision plat in conformance with the
requirements of Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code in effect
prior to the submittal of construction plans and a final plat for any portion of the tract or
parcel.
Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructure improvements
regarding anY dedications and methods for providing perpetual maintenance of common
facilities.
2.6
MODEL HOMES AND SALES FACILITIES..
Model homes/model home centers including sales centers shall be permitted in conjunction with
the promotion of the development subject to the following:
A. One "wet" and four "dry" models may be constructed prior to recording of a plat for each
residential project or phase. Location is limited to future, platted lots. The project owner
must apply for temporary use permits for all models.
B. The models permitted as "dry" models must obtain a conditional certificate of occupancy
for model purposes only. The "wet" model may not be occupied until a permanent
certificate of occupancy is issued.
C. The "wet" model may be served by a temporary utility system with ultimate connection
to the central system. Interior fire protection facilities in accordance with NFPA
requirements are required unless a permanent water system is available. A water
management plan must be provided which accommodates the runoff from the model
home, parking, access road/driveway and other impervious surfaces. The system shall be
designed and constructed so that it is integrated with the master system for the entire
development.
D. All other regulations pertaining to model homes shall be consistent with applicable
Sections of the Land Development Code.
¸2.7
2.8
AMENDMENTS TO PUD DOCUMENT OR PUD MASTER PLAN.
Amendments may be made to the PUD as provided in the Collier County Land Development
Code, Section 2.7.3.5.
ASSOCIATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS FOR COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE
Whenever the developer elects to create land area and/or recreation amenities whose ownership
and maintenance responsibility is a common interest to all of the subsequent purchasers of
property within said development in which the common interest is located, that developer entity
shall provide appropriate legal instruments for the establishment of a Property Owners'
Association whose function shall include provisions for the perpetual care and maintenance of all
common facilities and open space subject further to the provisions of the Collie _
Development Code.
2 7 2001
3.1
3.2
3.3
SECTION III
RESIDENTIAL AREAS PLAN
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for areas designated on
Exhibit "A" as Residential Tracts.
MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS
The maximum number of residential units allowed within the PUD shall be 612. This includes
Single Family and Multi-Family. An Assisted Living Facility (ALF) may be developed in lieu of
residential dwellings. For every acre of residential uses convened to an ALF use, 3 residential
dwelling units shall be subtracted from the maximum of 612 dwelling units.
USES PERMITTED
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or
part, for other than the following:
A. Principal Uses:
1. Residential single family detached dwelling units.
The clustering or grouping of housing structure types identified in Section 3.3 of
this Document may be permitted on parcels of land under unified ownership, or
as may be otherwise provided in the Collier County Land Development Code,
subject further to the Site Development Plan provisions of Division 3.3 of the
Collier County Land Development Code and Table 1 of this Document.
3. Multiple family housing, including two family structures.
Assisted living facilities (ALF) attached to a central facility or detached with on-
site care. The ALF uses are limited to Tract RA as depicted on the Master Plan
and shall not exceed a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.45.
B. Accessory Uses:
1. Customary accessory uses and structures, including private garages.
May include common recreational amenities such as tennis courts, swimming
pools, clubhouse facilities, fitness centers, playgrounds, basketball courts,
boardwalks, and similar passive and active recreational facilities.
3. Models and/or a sales center.
4. Golf course.
-10-
NOV 2 7 2001
3.4
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. General:
All yards and setbacks shall be in relation to the individual parcel boundaries, except as
otherwise provided.
B. Front Yard Setbacks (measurement):
Front yard setbacks shall be measured as follows:
1. If the parcel is served d~ectly by and is immediately adjacent to a public right- of-
way, the setback will be measured from the right-of-way line.
2. If the parcel is served by a non-platted, private drive, the setback will be measured
from the back of curb or edge ofpavcme.nt.
3. If the parcel is served by a plat'ted, private drive, the setback is measured from the
road easement or property line.
4. Principal buildings shall be set back a distance sufficient to provide for two back-to-
back parking spaces, one of which may be an enclosed space, the other of which
shall be of sufficient length not to cause an automobile to encroach into a sidewalk.
-11-
NOV 2 7 2001
TABLE 1
Single
Family Single Family Duplex
Detached Zero Lot Line
Category 1 2 3
Minimum Lot Area 6,000 SF 5,000 SF 3,500 SF
Minimum Lot 45 50 35
~Vidth *5
Front Yard 25 *3 25 *3 25 *3 25 *3
Front Yard for Side 10 10 10 10
Entry Garage
Side Yard 10 *6 0 or 7.5 0 or .5 BH
Rear Yard Principal 20 10 20 20
Rear Yard 10 5 10 10
i Accessory
Rear Yard *1 10 5 10 10
Maximum Building 35 35 35 35
Height *2
Distance Between I0 10 0 or 15 .5 SBH
Principal Structures
Floor Area Min. 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF
Single Family
Attached and ALF
Townhouse
4 5
3,000 SF 20,000 SF
30 N/A
Multi-Family
Dwellings
6
20,000 SF
N/A
2O 25
N/A 15
0.5 BH 0.5 BH
BH BH
15 15
.5 BH .5 BH
45 35*7
.5 BH .5 SBH
400 SF 750 SF
BH: Building Height
S~'H: (Sum of Building Height): Combined height of two adjacent buildings for the purposes of determining setback
requirements.
All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted.
'1 - Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots which abut reserve areas may be zero feet (0').
Front yards shall be measured as follows:
A. If the parcel is served by a public right-of-way, setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line.
B. If the parcel is served by a private road, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of
pavement (if not curbed).
*2 - Building height shall be the vertical distance measured from the first habitable finished floor elevation to the
uppermost finished ceiling elevation of the structure.
*3 o Single-family dwellings which provide for 2 parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking
other than in private driveways may reduce the front yard requirement to ten feet (10') for the garage and fifteen feet
(15') for the remaining structures.
*4 - Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3,500 square feet for a total minimum lot area of 7,000 square
feet; 3,000 square feet lot area allocation per dwelling unit for single family attached and townhouse dwelling units
and 3,000 square feet per dwelling unit for single family attached and townhouse dwelling units.
*5 - Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20% for cul-de-sac lots provided minimum lot area requirement is still
maintained.
*6 - Zero feet (0') or a minimum of five feet (5') on either side except that where the zero foot (0') yard option is utilized, the
opposite side of the structure shall have a ten foot (10') yard. Zero foot (0') yards may be used on both sides of a
structure provided that the opposite ten foot (10') yard is provided.
*7-The maximum building height for multi-family structures constructed within Tract "RA" is 45 feet.
The golf maintenance facility shall be located fifty feet (50') from any single-family residential lot.
-12-
NOV 2 7 2001
SECTION IV
4.1
4.2
4.3
COMMON AREAS PLAN
PURPOSE.
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development plans and development standards for
areas that are created for the enjoyment of the community. These areas can exist within RA and
RG designated areas on the PUD Master Development Plan, Exhibit "A." The primary function
and purpose of these tracts will be to provide aesthetically pleasing open areas and recreational
opportunities for residents except in areas to be used for water impoundment and principal or
accessory use areas. All natural trees and other vegetation as practicable shall be protected and
preserved. -
USES PERMITTED.
No building or smacture, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used in whole or
in part, for other than the following:
A. Principal Uses:
Lakes
Open spaces / preserve areas / buffers
Pedestrian and bicycle paths or boardwalks constructed for purposes of access to
or passage through the common areas and preserves.
Small docks, piers or other such facilities constructed for purposes of lake
recreation for residents of the Projec.t.
Shuffleboard courts, tennis courts, swimming pools, and other t~es of facilities
intended for outdoor recreation.
Clubhouse with meeting rooms, restaurant, card rooms, health and fitness
facilities, golf accommodations and general-purpose areas for residents of the
Project.
Golf course, including maintenance facilities.
B. Accessory uses:
1. Small docks, enclosures or other structures constructed for the purposes of
maintenance, storage, recreation or shelter with appropriate screening and
landscaping.
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
A. Overall site design shall be harmonious in terms of landscaping, enclosures for structures,
location of access streets and parking areas and location and treatment of buffer areas.
B. Buildings shall be set back a minimum of fifty feet abutting an external residential
district. A landscaped and maintained buffer shall be provided.
C. MaximUm Height: Any Structure: 35 feet
D. Minimum Off Street Parking: As required by Division 2.3 of the Land Development
Code in effect at the time of building permit application, k~A ITEM
- z3- NOV 2 7 2001
5.1
5.2
SECTION V
PRESERVE AREAS
PURPOSE
Preserve A~ea (P) - The purpose is to preserve viable, naturally functioning habitat and to promote
or improve areas through the planting o£ native vegetation per the Collier County Land
Development Code.
USES PERMITTED
No building or structure of part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or
in part, for other than the following, subject to regional, state and federal permits when required:
A. Principal Uses:
Open spaces / nature preserves
Boardwalks subject to appropriate approvals by permitting agencies.
Roadway crossings as noted on Exhibit "A,' PUD Master Plan.
- 14-
ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
SECTION VI
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth specific development commitments for the development
of the Project.
GENERAL
All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with final site development plans, final
subdivision plats and all applicable State and local laws, codes and regulations applicable to the
PUD. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and specifications of
Division 3.2 of the Land Development Code shall apply to this Project even if the land within the
PUD is not to be platted. The Developer, his successor and assigns, shall be responsible for the
commitments outlined in this document.
Thc Developer, his successor or assignee, shall follow the Master Plan and the regulations of the
PUD as adopted, and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of
the property. In addition, any successor or assignee in title to the developer is subject to the
commitments within this agreement.
PUD MASTER PLAN
A. Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in
nature. Proposed tract, lot and land use boundaries or special land use boundaries shall
not bc construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as
final platting or site development plan application. Subject to the provisions of Section
2.7.3.5 of the Land Development Code, amendments may bc made from time to time.
B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to ensure the
continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities in all common areas in thc
Project.
SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENTfMONITORING REPORT AND SUNSET PROVISION
A. The project is proposed to start construction of infrastructure in 2002. Model homes
construction will commence in 2002/2003 with build-out estimated at seven years.
B. The PUD shall be subject to the Sunset Provisions of Section 2.7.3.4 of the Land
Development Code.
C. An annual monitoring report shall be submitted pursuant to Section 2.7.3.6 of the Collier
County Land Development Code.
6.5
SUBSTITUTION TO DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
A. Street right-of-way (Section 3.2.8.4.16.5 of the Land Development Code): Roads within
the Project will be designed and built as private roads with no maintenance responsibility
by Collier County. These roads shall have a minimum right-of-way of 50 feet and
pavement width shall be a minimum of 14 feet for one-way traffic and 20 feet for two-
way traf c.
NOV 2 7 2001
6.6
Minimum distance for right-of-way from lakes (Section 3.5.7.1.1 of the LDC): Internal
roads that mn parallel to water management lakes or detention areas shall be allowed a
setback of less than 50 feet from the top of bank or control elevation, whichever in
greater. Setbacks shall be a minimum of 20 feet unless appropriate justification can be
shown through the use of walls or guardrails to reduce the setback to as little as 5 feet.
Sidewalks (Section 3.2.8.3.17 of the LDC): Sidewalks may be provided on the one side
of the main road from US 41 to the primary access road on the West side of the property.
Sidewalks will be required on one side only of all other internal roadways in order to
provide pedestrian access throughout the Project.
TRANSPORTATION
A. All accesses and roadways not located within County rights-of-way will be privately
maintained by an entity created by the project developer or his assigns.
B. Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with the Collier County Impact Fee
Ordinance in effect at the time of building permit issuance, unless otherwise approved by
the Board of Commissioners.
A shared vehicular access and road interconnect ~vill be provided to the Naples Reserve
property at the time of platting.
6.7
6.8
6,9
6.10
WATER MANAGEMENT
In accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD),
Chapters 40E-4 and 40E-40, this Project shall be designed for a storm event of 3-day duration and
25 year return frequency and shall be reviewed and permitted by the SFWMD.
UTILITIES
A. County water and sewer is available within the right-of-way of US 41.
B. All facilities extended to the site and which lie in planed rights-of-way shall be owned
and maintained by the Collier County Water/Sewer District. The facilities, whether
owned by the District or privately owned, shall be reviewed and installed in accordance
with the requirements of Collier County Ordinance No. 97-17 and all federal, state and
other existing rules and regulations.
ENGINEERING
A. Prior to development, a re-plat of the property will be required.
B. Work within Collier County rights-of-way shall meet the requirements of Collier County
Right-of Way Ordinance No. 93-64
ENVIRONMENTAL
Bo
An appropriate portion of the native vegetation shall be retained on-site as required in the
Collier County Land Development Code.
An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic-free) plan for the
site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current
Planning Section Staff for review and approval prior to final site plan/c~ petmetinn r*l~n .
- 16- NOV 2 ? 2001
6.11
6.12
6.13
approval. This plan shall include methods and time schedule for removal of exotic
vegetation within conservation/preservation areas.
L,-~qDSCAPING FOR OFF STREET AREAS
All landscaping for off-street parking areas shall be in accordance with the Division 2.4 of the
Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit application except
where otherwise noted in this Document.
POLLING PLACES
Pursuant to Section 2.6.30 of the Land Development Code, provisions shall be made for the future
use of a building within the common area of the Project for the purpose of accommodating an
electoral polling place.
An agreement recorded in the official records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Collier County,
which shall be binding on any and all successor owners in interest that acquire ownership of such
common areas including, but not limited to, condominium associations, and homeowners'
associations. This agreement shall provide for a common space sufficient in size to meet the
needs of the Supervisor of Elections in providing space for electors residing within the
development.
HISTORICAL / ARCHAEOLOGICAL
If during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity, a historic or
archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the
discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department
contacted as noted in Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code..
NOV 2 7 2001
I -' U "' --' "'" ' """
NOV 2 7 2001
,.,. O0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION PUD-00-21, ROBERT L. DUANE OF HOLE MONTES, INC., REPRESENTING
ROBERT VOCISANO, REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL AND
"A-ST" RURAL AGRICULTURAL WITH A SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY TO "PUD"
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS THE TERAFINA PUD ALLOWING FOR
850 DWELLING UNITS, GOLF COURSE, AND CLUBHOUSE FACILITIES FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED EAST SIDE OF THE LOGAN BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND
APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE NORTH OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR-846), IN SECTION 16,
TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26-EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF
646 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners consider an application to rezone the subject site from
the Rural Agricultural Zoning District to PUD as noted above to allow the development of single and
multi-family homes consistent with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the
community's interests are maintained in this residential neighborhood.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The proposed residential PUD allows a mix of dwelling types within thc 646-acre project area. The
PUD also permits a maximum of 850 dwelling units, which results in a density of 1.3 units per acre.
Thc residential tract comprises 141-acres and is designed around 126-acres of golf course and open
space areas. The Master Plan also provides a 274.43-acre preserve and flow-way along thc eastern
boundary that is designed in conjunction with thc adjacent projects in order to improve storm water
drainage in the area. Access to the PUD is from the northerly extension of Logan Boulevard from
Immokalee Road (CR-846) along thc western property linc of thc Olde Cypress PUD and extending
past the Parklands PUD to the north.
The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) estimates the site-generated trips to be approximately $,795
Average Vehicle Trip Ends at the proposed build-out in 2005. These site-generated trips will exceed
5% of the LOS "C" design volume on Immokalee Road (CR-846) after trip assignments arc made. The
site-generated trips do not appear to create a concurrency problem within the projects radius of
development influence (R.D1) because the project trips don't lower the capacity below any road's
adopted LOS standard based on a detailed TIS submitted by the applicant and reviewed by County
staff. The TIS did indicate some locations of operational deficiency but they were not significantly or
directly attributable to the proposed Terafina development. Therefore, the proposed PUD will be in
compliance with Policies 5.1 and 5.2, of the Transportation Element.
NOV 2 ? 2001
The Transportation Element currently lists Immokalee Road (CR 846) as a 2-1ane arterial road in the
project area and is currently being improved to a 4-lane facility. At project build-out in 2008, CR-846
east of 1-75 is projected to operate at an acceptable level of service and meet the adopted level of
service standard of LOS "D". Therefore, this petition is consistent with the standards referenced in
Policy 1.4 of the Transportation Element.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This PUD by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. However, if this request meets its
objective, a portion of the existing land will be further developed. The mere fact that new development
has been approved will result in future fiscal impact on County public facilities. The County collects
impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new
development on public facilities. These impact fees~ are used to fund projects in the Capital
Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event
that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must
provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. The
following impact fees will be applicable to this project:
· Park Impact Fee:
· Library Impact Fee:
· Fire Impact Fee:
· School Impact Fee:
· Roadimpact Fee:
· Correctional Facilities:
· Radon Impact Fee:
· EMS Impact Fee:
· Building Code Adm.:
· Micro Film Surcharge:
$578.00 per unit
$180.52 per unit
$0.15 per square feet of building
$827 per unit
$890 per unit
$117.98 per dwelling unit
$0.005 per square foot of building
$2 per unit
$0.005 per square foot of building
$1.50 per unit
For an average unit size of 1,000 square feet, the total fiscal impact will be $2,757.18 per unit. Since
this project proposes 850 units, the total amount of residential impact fees collected at build-out will
total $2,343,603. It should be noted that because impact fees vary by housing type and because this
approval does not provide this level of specificity as to the actual type of use, the total impact fee
quoted above is at best a raw estimate. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the project at build-out
will have maximized their authorized level of development.
Other fees will include building permit review fees and utility fees associated with connecting to the
County's sewer and water system. Building permit fees and utility fees have traditionally offset the cost
of administering the community development review process, whereas utility fees are used on their
proportionate share of impact to the County system. Finally additional revenue is generated by
application of ad valorem tax rates. The revenue that will be generated depends on the value of the
improvements. At this point in time a model has not been developed to arrive at a reasonable estimate
of tax revenue based on ad valorem tax rates.
2
NOV 2 7 2001
Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that not withstanding the fiscal impact relationship, development
takes place in an environment of concurrency management. When level of service requirements fall
below adopted standards, a mechanism is in place to bring about a cessation of building activities.
Certain LOS standards apply countywide and would therefore bring about a countywide concurrency
determination versus roads that may have local geographic concurrency implications.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
The site is designated Urban - Mixed Use District (Urban Residential Sub-district) on the Future Land
Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). This district permits a base density of 4
dwelling units per acre pursuant to the Density Rating System of the FLUE of the GMP. A consistency
analysis with applicable elements of the GMP is as follows: The proposed 646.5-acre development
allows 850 dwelling units, golf and ancillary recreational uses. The proposed density is 1.3 dwelling
units per acre, which are 2.7 units per acre less than the base density the project is eligible to receive.
Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed project is consistent with the Density Rating System
of the GMP.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and
Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no
Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment or a waiver is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) indicates that the proposed project will preserve 252.58-
acres while impacting 280.52-acres or approximately 52.6 percent of the jurisdictional wetlands. The
project related wetland impacts shall be compensated for by the restoration of the remaining on-site
wetlands. The preservation of 247.43 acres of wetlands and 26.92 acres of uplands is proposed. All
preserved wetlands will be cleared of exotics and hydraulic improvements made. In addition, the PUD
allows for additional mitigation to be purchased (approximately one million dollars) from an approved
mitigation bank. The project design also provides for water storage capacity within the preserve
acreage internal to the project as well as in the flow-way preserve along the east side of the project.
This flow-way will recreate the historic hydroperiods on site and those in the surrounding areas. An
interconnected lake system with controlled gate structures will be developed within the preserve areas
to increase the conveyance capability of the flow-way during storm events. The system within the
Terafina preserve will average 200 feet in width and will be 4 feet deep. This flow-way is designed to
be compatible with the flow-way approved in the Mirasol PUD. This additional mitigation is to be
purchased fi'om an approved mitigation bank.
NOV 2 ? 2001
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL 0~AC} RECOMMENDATION:
The Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) heard this item on March 7, 2001 and they recommended
denial by a vote of 5 to 2. The primary reason expressed by the EAC for the denial was what they
deemed to be an excessive impact of the project to the wetlands on site. It should be noted that the
BCC approved the adjacent Mirasol PUD to the east, which had similar concerns raised by the EAC.
The BCC determined during their public hearing for that item that the proposed mitigation was
acceptable and the area-wide benefits derived by the flow-way are necessary.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) reviewed this petition during their public hearing
on September 7, 2001. By a vote of 7 to 0, the CCPC forwarded Petition PUD-00-21 to the Board of
County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to staff stipulations. The Planning
Commission found that this petition is consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and is
compatible with the surrounding development. It should be noted that no one spoke in opposition
during the hearing and Staff has not received any letters opposing the project. Because the EAC
recommended denial, this petition could not be placed on the summary agenda.
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Petition PUD-00-21 subject to thc stipulations contained in the PUD
document and as otherwise described by thc Ordinance of Adoption and Exhibits thereto.
NOV 2 ? 2001
PREPARED BY:
RAYdtreL~ws, VVa~ClV A~ PErU
CUUaUNT vr~eeaiN~ SECTiOn/
REVIEWED BY:
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E., ACTING DIRECTOR
PLUG SERVICES DEPARTMENT
TN~-F~T~ER, AICP, ADMINISTRATOR
RTATION DIVISION
/o . ?.3.0/
DATE
DATE
DATE
DATE
APPROVED BY:
IOHN l(~. DUNNUCK, Ill, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR
CO~Y DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS.
DATE
PUDO0-21/EX SUMMARY/RVB/rb
5
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
MEMORANDUM
TO:
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
DATE: AUGUST 14, 2001
PETITION NO: PUD-00-21, TERAFINA PUD
AGENT/APPLICANT:
Agent: Mr. Robert L. Duane Owner:
Hole Montes, Inc.
P.O. Box 111629
Naples, Florida 34108
Robert Vocisano & Angelo Favretto
Place Venier, Suite 103
333 River Road
Ottawa, Ontario Canada, K1L8B9
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject site is located one mile north of Immokalee Road (CR-846) and
approximately one mile west of Collier Boulevard (CR-951) in Section 16, Township 48
South, Range 26 East.
REQUESTED ACTION:
To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward their
recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) for a proposed rezone
fi.om "A" Agriculture, "A-ST" and PUD to Planned Unit Development (PUD) allowing
residential dwelling units, golf course, and clubhouse facilities.
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The petitioner proposes.a residential development allowing a mix of dwelling types
within the 646-acre PUD. The petitioner proposes a maximum of 850 dwelling units
which results in a density of 1.3 units per acre. The residential tract comprises 141-acres
and is designed around 126-acres of golf course and open space areas. The Master Plan
also provides a 274.43-acre preserve and flow-way along the eastern boundary that is
designed in conjunction with the adjacent projects in order to improve storm water
drainage in the area. Access to the PUD is fi.om the northerly extension of Logan
Boulevard from Immokalee Road (CR-846) along the western property line of the Olde
Cypress PUD and extending past the Parklands PUD to the north.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
NOV 2 7 2001
I Il;
NOV 2 ? 2001
Existing Conditions:
Surrounding:
North:
East:
South:
West:
As indicated in. the photograph below, the site is currently
undeveloped and is zoned Agricultural.
The undeveloped Parklands PUD is approved for 1,603 units at a
density of 2.50 units per acre.
The recently approved Mirasol PUD provides for 799 units at a
density of 0.51 units per acre.
The Olde Cypress PUD is approved for 1,100 units at a density of
2.10 units per acre.
Developed residential zoned RSF-2.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
This PUD has been distributed to the appropriate jurisdictional review entities
specifically for review of the PUD for consistency with the current Growth Management
Plan and land development regulations.
Future Land Use Element: The site is designated Urban - Mixed Use District (Urban
Residential Sub-district) on the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP). This district permits a base density of 4 dwelling units per acre
pursuant to the Density Rating System of the FLUE of the GMP. A consistency analysis
with applicable elements of the GMP is as follows: The proposed 646.5-acre
development allows 850 dwelling units, golf and ancillary recreational uses. The
proposed density is 1.3 dwelling units per acre, which are 2.7 units per acre less than the
base density the project is eligible to receive. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the
proposed project is consistent with the Density Rating System of the GMP.
NOV 2 7 2001
.,
Transportation Element: The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) estimates the site-
generated trips to be approximately 5,795 Average Vehicle Trip Ends at the proposed
build-out in 2005. These site-generated trips will exceed 5% of the LOS "C" design
volume on Immokalee Road (CR-846) after trip assignments are made. The site-generated
trips do not appear to create a concurrency problem within the projects radius of
development influence (RDI) because the project trips don't lower the capacity below any
road's adopted LOS standard. However, the TIS did not specifically find that the proposed
PUD rezone would not create or excessively increase traffic congestion on the arterial
road system at build-out. The proposed PUD will only be in compliance with Policies 5.1
and 5.2, of the Transportation Element if the additional conditions for further detailed
analysis are provided prior to the next level of development approval. The Transportation
Element currently lists Immokalee Road (CR 846) as a 2-lane arterial road in thc project
area and is currently being improved to a 4-lane facility. At project build-out in 2005,
CR-846 east of 1-75 is projected to operate at an acceptable level of service and meet thc
adopted level of service standard of LOS "D". Therefore, this petition is consistent with
the standards referenced in Policy 1.4 of the Transportation Element.
The Transportation Department has reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement
(TIS) and has the following comment. While the TIS meets the minimum requirements
and standards of the Growth Management Plan, the Transportation Planning Department
requests that the following conditions be included as part of the PUD approval.
Prior to preliminary site plan or plat approval, the developer shall provide a
detailed Traffic Analysis to evaluate the operational conditions and level of
service of Collier County Road systems. The detailed operational analysis shall at
a minimum include the Immokalee Road corridor fi.om Livingston Road to Collier
Boulevard including intersection and arterial evaluation of the existing and build
out peak season/peak hour conditions.
Should the detailed analysis identify a deficiency, the developer shall be required
to provide mitigation, or be limited to the amount of development, which may
occur until such time that the deficiency is resolved. However, if traffic analysis
demonstrates that there are no deficient intersections with the Immokalee Road
Corridor fi.om Livingston Road to Collier Blvd. through project build out no
further traffic analysis will be required.
The Logan Boulevard alignment right-of-way shall be dedicated to the county for
the purposes of a public roadway. The developer shall provide for a collector road
fight-of-way. The width shall be consistent with the current County roadway
standards. Compensating right-of-way for mm lanes shall also be provided above
and beyond the minimum width.
Open
minimum thresholds required for open space
provision of 213-acres will not reduce those levels.
Space/Conservation Element: The proposed Terafina PUD far exceeds the
and conservation preservation. The
NOV 2 7 2001
, .lO
Sewer and Water: The subject property will be connected to Collier County's sewer and
water system. Should the County not be in a position to provide sewer service to the
project, the sewer customers shall be customers of the interim utility established to serve
the project until the County's off-site sewer facilities are available to serve the project.
Other Applicable Elements: Staff review indicates that this petition has been designed
to account for all the necessary relationships dictated by the GMP. Mitigation measures
and stipulations have been developed to ensure consistency with the GMP during the
permitting process. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject
to a concurrency review under the provisions of Section 3.1'5 of the LDC, Adequate
Public Facilities, at the earliest or the next to occur of a final local development order.
Therefore, this petition is consistent with the goals and policies of the GMP. Furthermore,
staff has determined that no level of service standards will be adversely affected by this
project. Appropriate mitigation measures and stipulations will assure that the County's
interests are maintained. Consistency with the goals, objectives and policies of other
applicable elements of the GMP and level of service relationships are to be achieved by
stipulations and/or development commitments made a part of the approval of this
development order.
HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. Therefore, no Cultural Survey and Assessment is required.
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL,
INFRASTRUCTURE:
TRANSPORTATION AND
The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff responsible for oversight
related to the above referenced areas of critical concern. This includes a review by the
Community Development Environmental and Engineering staff, and the Transportation
Services Division. The Transportation Services staff has recommended approval subject
to an additional traffic study at the time of site development plan or plat approval. The
petitioner has also submitted an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the entire
PUD. The EIS indicates that the site contains 533.1-acres of SFWMD jurisdictional
wetlands out of a total 646.5 project acres. These consist of hydric pine flatwoods, pine
flatwoods, cypress-pine-cabbage palm and melaleuca.
The staff report for the Environmental Advisory Council meeting (Exhibit "C") indicates
that the proposed project will preserve 252.58-acres while impacting 280.52-acres or
approximately 52.6 percent of the jurisdictional wetlands. The project related wetland
impacts shall be compensated for by the restoration of the remaining on-site wetlands.
The preservation of 247.43 acres of wetlands and 26.92 acres of uplands is proposed. All
preserved wetlands will be cleared of exotics and hydraulic improvements m~ ~,' ~u~O~-~,~ A~- '
4 NOV 2 7 2001
In addition, the PUD allows for additional mitigation to be purchased (approximately one
million dollars) from an approved mitigation bank. In addition, the project design
provides for water storage capacity within the preserve acreage internal to the project as
well as in the flow-way preserve along the East Side of the project. This will recreate the
historic hydroperiods on site and those in the surrounding areas. An interconnected lake
system with controlled gate structures will be developed within the preserve areas to
increase the conveyance capability of the flow-way during storm events. The system
within the Terafina preserve will average 200 feet wide and 4 feet deep. This flow-way is
designed to be compatible with the flow-way approved in the Mirasol PUD.
The Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) heard this item on March 7, 2001 and they
recommended denial by a vote of 5 to 2 (See attached EAC minutes/Exhibit "D"). The
primary reason expressed by the EAC for the denial was the excessive impact of the
project to the wetlands on site.
It should be noted that the Mirasol PUD to the east had similar concerns raised by the
EAC. However the BCC determined that the area-wide benefits derived by the flow-way
are necessary and they approved that petition. In addition, additional mitigation is to be
purchased from an approved mitigation bank.
EVALUATION:
Staff .completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on
which a favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an
objective, comprehensive overview of the impact of the proposed land use change, be
they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that overview.
The listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.2.5 and Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the
Land Development Code thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and shall be used
as the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission to
the BCC. Each of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff
review are listed under each of the criterion noted and are categorized as either pro or
con, whichever the case may be, in the opinion of staff. The review of each of the
criterion is followed by a summary conclusion culminating in a determination of
compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These evaluations are
completed as separate documents and are attached to the staff report. Appropriate
evaluation of petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for supportive action
by appointed and elected decision-makers. The evaluation by professional staff should
typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the community's future land
use plan, and whether or not a rezoning action would be consistent with the Collier
County GMP in all of its related elements (See Exhibit "A' and Exhibit "B').
Other evaluation considerations should include an assessment of adequacy of
transportation infrastructure, other infrastructure, and compatibility with adjacent land
uses, a consideration usually dealt with as a facet of analyzing the relationship of the
rezoning action to the long range plan for future land uses. In addition, the ,ua,~
5
NOV 2 7 2001
_
County Commissioners has reviewed similar rezone requests within this "Urban
Residential" designated area where there is an opportunity to approve residential uses
when deemed appropriate. Notwithstanding the above, staff in reviewing the determinants
for adequate findings to support a rezoning action advise as follows:
Relationship to Existing Land Uses - In regards to compatibility, this PUD is similar to
the recently approved Mirasol PUD to the east. Both of these projects provide a water
management flow way to improve the area-wide drainage. Furthermore, the adjacent PUD
project to the south (Olde Cypress PUD) has been approved for 1,100 dwelling units and
permits similar dwelling types. The proposed PUD is designed to be compatible with the
approved flow-way within the Mirasol PUD. Lastly, the development regulations,
landscaping, screening and buffering requirements contained in this PUD are consistent
with the LDC.
Relationship to Future Land Uses - A discussion of this relationship, as it applies
specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship
of the proposed zoning action to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP). The property is located within the Urban Residential Sub-
district as depicted on the Future Land Use Map. Since this district permits residential
uses with a base density of 4-units per acre. The proposed rezone from Agriculture to the
Terafina PUD is consistent with the GMP. Given the urban influence impacting this area,
the proposed PUD is consistent with those uses approved in this area and is also
consistent with requirements of the FLUE to the GMP.
Traffic Cimulation and Impact - An additional twenty (20') feet of fight-of-way will be
provided along the western edge of Terafina to provide for a total of eighty (80') feet of
right-of-way along the extension of Logan Blvd. A sixty (60') foot right-of-way presently
exists. The developer of Terafina will construct the extension of Logan Blvd. to the
proposed project entrance for Terafina. The additional road right-of-way will be
dedicated to Collier County at the time of platting. This road also provides access through
the Olde Cypress PUD to the south and connecting with Immokalee Road. This road will
also be extended northward in order to provide future access to the vacant undeveloped
Parklands PUD. Furthermore, the proposed project will not have a significant impact on
any county road by virtue of the fact that vehicular site generated trips resulting from the
rezone petition will not lower the level of service below adopted standards.
However, Prior to preliminary site plan or plat approval, the developer shall provide a
detailed Traffic Analysis to evaluate the operational conditions and level of service of
Collier County Road systems. The detailed operational analysis shall at a minimum
include the Immokalee Road corridor from Livingston Road to Collier Boulevard
including intersection and arterial evaluation of the existing and build out peak
season/peak hour conditions. Should the detailed analysis identify a deficiency, the
developer shall be required to provide mitigation, or be limited to the amount of
development, which may occur until such time that the deficiency is resolved.
NOV 2 7 2001
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Collier
Petition Number: PUD-2000-21 to
recommendation for approval.
County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward
the Board of County Commissioners with a
PREPARED BY: .
RAY ~i~ows, P
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
REVIEWED BY:
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E., ACTING DIRECTOR
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
A~VED BY:
JOI-I~ 1~. D~CK, lYI, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR
CO~TY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS.
Staff Report for September 7, 2001 CCPC meeting.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANN~COTSSION:
JOYCEAN~A J. KAUTI~,, CH. kIKMAN
PUD-00-2 i/STAFF REPORT/RVB/rb
DATE/
DATE
DA'rE '
DAT~
NOV 2 7 2001
FINDINGS FOR PUD
PUD-00-21
Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning
Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the following
criteria:
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.
Pro: (i)
Intensifying land development patterns produces economics of scale relative
to public utilities, facilities and services, which are currently available in this
area along Immokalee Road (CR-846).
(ii) Development of land that is located on an arterial road and is adjacent to other
residential uses is particularly suitable for this mixed use PUD.
(iii) The pattern of development of surrounding properties is similar to the type of
development proposed including the proposed density of 1.3 units per acre.
Con:
Adjacent and nearby neighborhoods often perceive a mixed use development
as an intensification near their neighborhood as contributing factors to
inconveniencing traffic movements to and fi.om their place of residence,
increasing noise and pollution, and reducing property values.
Finding: Jurisdictional reviews by County staff support the manner and pattern of
development proposed for the subject property. Development conditions contained in the
PUD document give assurance that all infi.astrucmre will be developed and consistent
with County regulations. Recommended mitigation measures will assure compliance
with Level of Service relationships as prescribed by the Growth Management Plan.
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.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Exhibit "A"
NOV 2 ? 2001
e
o
w
Findim~: Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control.
The PUD document makes appropriate provisions for continuing operation and
maintenance of common areas within this project.
Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives
and policies of the Growth Management Plan.
Pro: (i) The development strategy for the subject property is entirely consistent with
the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan.
(ii) The subject site is subject to the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance.
Con: None.
Finding: The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives and
policies of the GMP. A review of consistency relationships with elements of the GMP is
as follows: The subject PUD proposes to allow residential uses and density that is
consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan.
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.
Pro: The PUD has been designed to provide similar uses and development standards as
the approved Olde Cypress PUD to the south. In addition, the preserve area and flow-way
is contiguous with the Mirasol PUD to the east.
Con: None.
Finding: The PUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize internal land use
relationship through the use of various forms of open space separation. External
relationships are automatically regulated by the Land Development Code to assure
harmonious relationships between projects.
The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary, Finding: The amount of open space set aside by this project is consistent
with the provisions of the Land Development Code.
e
The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring t
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
e ad~~
NOV 2 7 2001
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary, Finding: Timing or sequence of development in light of concurrency
requirements automatically triggers the mechanism for ensuring that further LOS
degradation is not allowed or the LOS deficiency is corrected.
The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion.
Pro: This petition seeks to provide residential zoning that is adjacent to existing
residential uses. In addition, this project will not adversely impact any adopted level of
service standard.
Con: None.
Summary Finding: Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure
such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property
relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from
urban development. This assessment is described at length in the staff report adopted by
the CCPC.
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.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Finding: This finding essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which
development standards proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that
would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The development
standards in this PUD are similar to those standards.
FINDINGS FOR PUD-00-21/RVB/rb
3
NOV 2 ? 2001
REZONE FINDINGS
PETITION PUD-00-21
Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and
recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall
show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation
to the following, where applicable:
Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives & policies
of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan.
Pro:
i. The subject property is located within the Mixed-Use Urban Residential Sub-District
on the FLUE of the Growth Management Plan.
ii. Development Orders deemed consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE of
the GMP should be considered a positive relationship.
Con: None
Summary Findings: The proposed development is in compliance with the Future Land
Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The density permitted
within this PUD is consistent with the Density Rating System contained in the GMP.
2. The existing land use pattern;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable. (A detailed Study is contained in the staff report.)
Summary Findin£s: The subject 646.5-acre site is similar to the adjacent residential
PUD projects to the north, south, west and east.
0
The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts;
Pro: The subject site is of sufficient size (One Section) and is located within the Urban
Residential Sub-district on the Future Land Use Map.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated
district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also consistent with expected land
uses by virtue of its consistency with the FLUE. '
NOV 2 ? 2001
a
Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Pro: The district boundaries are logically drawn and they are consistent with the FLUE of
the GMP.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The boundaries are logically drawn by virtue that the subject PUD
provides an extension of the existing residential PUD to the north, south and east.
Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed-
amendment necessary.
Pro: The proposed zoning change is appropriate based on the approved residential land
uses surrounding the subject site. Furthermore, this PUD has a positive relationship to the
GMP.
Con: None.
Summary, Findings: The proposed change in zoning is appropriate since it is consistent
with the FLUE and Growth Management Plan.
Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood;
Pro: (i)
The proposed development standards (i.e. setbacks and landscaping) made
a condition of approval will go a l°ng way towards offsetting any potential
adverse influences by the Terafina PUD on the adjacent and nearby
residential subdivisions.
(ii)
The proposed flow-way along the east side of the project will improve
storm water management of the area.
Con: (i)
The location of the subject site could cause increased noise and traffic
impacts on the nearby residences. However, due to the proposed landscape
and buffer areas, along with the low-density areas, the proposed PUD
should not adversely impact the adjacent properties.
Summary Findings: The proposed PUD will not adversely influence living conditions
in the neighborhood because the recommended development standards and other
conditions for approval have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount
of adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments. Recommended mitigation
actions should serve to ameliorate impact on the adjacent residential are:y i~~~--~u~
NOV 2 7 2001
e
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.
Pro: (i)
The proposed rezone as requested is consistent with the Transportation
Element. (See Staff Report)
(ii)
The property has legal access to the right-of-way for the extension of
Logan Boulevard, which connects to the arterial road network (Immokalee
Road) over which traffic fi.om this development will draw and defuse
traffic.
go
Con: (i)
As urban intensification increases, there is some loss of comfort and ease
of travel to the motoring public. However, by law this degree of
discomfort is regulated by concurrency requirements as adopted in the
Growth Management Plan.
(ii)
In the short mn construction traffic made necessary for development may
be irritating to local residents.
Summary. Findings: Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for
consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP and was found
consistent, a statement advising that this project when developed will not excessively
increase traffic congestion. Additionally certain traffic management system
improvements are required as a condition of approval (i.e. turn lanes, traffic signals,
dedications, etc.). In the final analysis all rezone actions are subject to the Concurrency
Management System.
Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem;
Pro: (i)
The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite
development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on
nearby properties. New development in and of itself is not supposed to
increase flooding potential on adjacent property over and above what
would occur without development.
Con:
(i)
Urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to
inter-county drainage appurtenances may increase the risk of flooding in
areas when the drainage outfall condition is inadequate. However, the
proposed flow-way will improve area-wide drainage.
NOV 2 7 2001
e
10.
Summary Findin~s: Every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization
of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface
drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project
was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plans are required to
meet County standards as a condition of approval.
Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas;
Pro: The proposed PUD development conforms to the approved zoning on the adjacent
property to the north, south and east. In addition, the maximum height for the structures
as provided for in the approved Terafina PUD is similar to the maximum height permitted
within the nearby projects. The overall development standards are compatible with the
standards listed for the adjacent residential districts in the LDC, which are designed to
protect the circulation of light and air to adjacent areas.
Con: None.
Summary Findint~s: All projects in Collier County are subject to the development
standards that are unique to the zoning district in which it is located. These development
standards and others apply generally and equally to all zoning districts (i.e. open space
requirement, corridor management provisions, etc.) were designed to ensure that light
penetration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas.
Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent
area;
Pro: Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous underutilized
land.
11.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results,
which may be internal or external to the subject property that can affect property values.
Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning, however zoning by
itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by law is driven by market
value. The mere fact that a property is given a new zoning designation may or may not
affect value.
Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable, i~.n~~
NOV 2 7 2001
12.
13.
14.
Summary Findings: The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in
the zoning division of the LDC is that their sound application when combined with the
administrative site development plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a
change in zoning will not result in a deterrence to improvement of adjacent property.
Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The proposed PUD complies with the Growth Management Plan,
which are public policy statements supporting zoning actions when they are consistent
with said plans. In light of this fact the proposed change does not constitute a grant of
special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare
relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest.
Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The subject property can be developed in accordance with the
existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the opportunity to
maximize the development potential of the site as made possible by its consistency
relationship with the Growth Management Plan.
Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
the County;
Pro: The project is designed in a manner that is compatible with surrounding and
approved PUD property in size and scale.
Con: Existing neighbors within the adjacent subdivisions may feel that the proposed
change is out of scale with the neighborhood. However, no objections to this petition
have been received at this time.
15.
Summary Findings: The subject PUD complies with the Growth Management Plan
while the intensity of land uses is deemed acceptable for this site.
Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
NOV 2 7 2001
16.
17.
REZONE
Summary Findings: There are many sites, which are zoned to accommodate the
proposed development. This is not the determimng factor when evaluating the
appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are consistency with
all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of infrastructure and to some extent the
timing of the action and all of the above criteria.
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.
Pro: The subject property is undeveloped. Presently exotic vegetation has invaded the
site while the environmental impacts require mitigation as noted in the Environmental
Advisory Board Staff Report.
Con: Development of the site may create a need for additional fill and site alteration for
infrastructure improvements.
Summary Findings: The extent of site alteration will be determined as a function of
obtaining a Site Development Plan approval to execute the PUD's development strategy.
The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and
services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth
Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: A multi-disciplined team responsible for jurisdictional elements of
the GMP has reviewed this petition and they have found it consistent with the GMP. The
conditions of approval have been incorporated into the PUD document. Staff reviews for
adequacy of public services and levels of service determined that required infrastructure
meets with GMP established relationships.
FINDINGS/PUD-00-21/RVB/rb
6
NOV 2 7 2001
Item IV
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING OF MARCH 7~ 2001
mo
NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT:
Petition No.:
Petition Name:
Applicant/Developer:
Engineering Consultant:
Environmental Consultant:
Planned Unit Development
No. PUD-2000-21
Terafina PUD
Robert Vocisano &
Angelo Favretto
Purse Associates, Inc.
Turrell & Associates, Inc.
LOCATION:
The subject property is an undeveloped 646 acre parcel located approximately 1.5
miles east of Interstate 1-75 and one (1) mile north of Immokalee Road,
immediately north of Olde Cypress development, in Section 16, Township 48
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES:
Surrounding properties include residential golf course communities to the south
and west and undeveloped land zoned Agricultural and PUD to the north and east.
ZONING
DESCRIPTION
PUD (Parklands PUD)
Undeveloped
Actively farmed
PUD (Olde Cypress PUD)
Partially developed
E - Agricultural (proposed Mirasol PUD) Undeveloped
W - RSF-2 & GC Developed
(Quail Creek Estates)
PVRPOSEfDESCRI?TION OF PROJECT:
EAC Meeting
Page 2 of 11
The proposed 646.5-acre PUD is a planned residential development that is
designed around a golf course and preserve areas. The residential lands are
comprised of 141-acres supporting single family and multi-family residential units
and recreational amenities. The site is north of the Olde Cypress PUD, which is
also approved for a golf course and residential development. The petitioner has
indicated that the primary objective is to develop a maximum of 850 dwelling
units. The PUD Master Plan also provides 126.76-acres of golf course/open space
areas and a 6.99-acres clubhouse. Lastly, the subject site is accessed from a
proposed north/south public road along the west-side of the project that provides
access to Immokalee Road.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
The subject site is located within the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Sub-district that is intended to provide locations for the development of higher
densities. T~s district permits a base density of four (4) dwelling units per acre
pursuant to the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of
the Growth Management Plan (GMP). A consistency analysis with applicable
elements of the GMP is as follows:
FLUE and Density: The FLUE permits residential dwellings such as those units
proposed for Terafina PUD. The project density shall also be consistent with the
Density Rating System contained in the FLUE and is based on a Base Density of 4
units per acre. The PUD document and Master Plan indicate that the project is
intended for 850 dwelling units at a density of approximately 1.3 units per acre. It
should be noted that the project density is less than the base density of 4 dwelling
units per acre the project is eligible to receive. As a result, staffis of the opinion
that the requested density is consistent with the Density Rating System of the
Growth Management Plan.
Conservation & Coastal Management Element:
Objective 2.2. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the
Growth Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging
into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality
standards.
To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and
cumulative impacts of stormwater nmos stormwater systems should be designed
in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an
attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fxesh water
(discharge) to the estuarine system.
NOV 2 ? 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 3 of 11
This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to
mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing
lakes and interconnected wetlands to provide water quality retention and peak flow
attenuation during storm events.
With regards to native vegetation preservation and wetland issues, the following
Objectives and Policies apply:
Objective 6.2 states, "There shall be no unacceptable net loss of viable naturally
functioning marine and fresh water wetlands, excluding transitional zone wetlands
which are addressed in Objective 6.3".
Policy 6.2.10 states, "Any development activity within a viable naturally
functioning fresh-water wetland not part of a contiguous flow way shall be
mitigated in accordance with current SFWMD mitigation rules. Mitigation may
aiso include restoration of previously disturbed wetlands or acquisition for public
preservation of similar habitat".
Policy 6.2.13 states, "Proposed development on parcels containing viable naturally
functioning freshwater wetlands shall cluster development to maintain the largest
contiguous wetland area practicable and shall be designed to disturb the least
amount of native wetland vegetation practicable and to preserve the pre-
development hydroperiod".
Objective 6.3 states, "A portion of the viable, naturally functioning transitional
zone wetlands shall be preserved in any new non-agricultural development unless
otherwise mitigated through the DEP and the COE permitting process and
approved by the County".
Objective 6.4 states, "A portion of each viable, naturally functioning non-wetland
native habitat shall be preserved or retained as appropriate".
Policy 6.4.6 states, "All new residential developments greater than 2.5 acres in the
Coastal Area and greater than 20 acres in the Coastal Urban Area shall retain 25%
of the viable naturally functioning native vegetation on site, including both the
understory and the ground cover emphasizing the largest contiguous area possible.
When several different native plant communities exist on site, the development
plans will reasonably attempt to preserve examples of all of them if possible. Areas
of landscaping and open space which are planted with native plant species shall be
included in the 25% requirement considering both understory and groundcover.
Where a project has included open space, recreational amenities, or preserved
xvetlands that meet or exceed the minimum open space criteria of Collier County,
this policy shall not be construed to require a larger percentage of open
aside to meet the 25% native vegetation policy. This policy shall not be i~
;pace~
NOV 2 7 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 4 of 11
to allow development in wetlands, should the wetlands alone constitute more than
25% of the site. Exceptions shall be granted for parcels that cannot reasonably
accommodate both the native vegetation and the proposed activity".
This petition is consistent with staWs policy, as directed by the Board of County
Commissioners, to allow for impacts to jurisdictional wetlands when State and
Federal agency permits are issued. The petition is consistent with Objective 6.4 in
that it exceeds the 25% on-site native vegetation preservation pursuant to Policy
6.4.6.
VI.
MAJOR ISSUES:
Water Management:
This project's water management system uses a standard design of interconnected
lakes and wetlands to accomplish water quality retention and peak flow
attenuation.
An explanation of the use of the wetland preserve as a flow-way for the offsite
flows can be found under the Wetland section, under Major Issues.
This project must be permitted by the SFWMD.
Environmental:
Site Description:
The project site is located in north Naples, one mile north of Immokalee Road and
approximately 1.5 miles east of 1-75. To the north and east are undeveloped
parcels, the Parklands PUD to the north and the proposed Mirasol PUD to the
east. Both are residential golf communities and currently under review by the
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), for Environmental
Resource Permitting. To the south is the Olde Cypress development and to the
west is Quail West.
The natural hydrologic regime on the property has been considerably altered by
development and agricultural practices in the upstream watershed as well as by
berms and development downstream from the project. Where forested wetlands in
the east Bonita Springs area were cleared for farming, the water storage capacity
was lost such that properties in the watershed to the south are inundated for longer
periods of time during the rainy season.
Elevations of historic wet season high water levels have been obtained by locating
high watermarks, sediment lines, lichen and moss lines or adventitious roo~.~~.
tqOV 2 ? 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 5 of 11
approximately 14 trees throughout the site. The average wet season high water
elevation was determined to be 13.4 feet NGVD with historic high water at 14.9
feet NGVD. Natural ground elevations on site, according to the survey provided in
the ElS, range fi.om 12.6 feet to 13.7 feet NGVD. Deeper depressional areas occur
on site within the cypress domes.
FLUCFCS Code 621
Cypress dome in the southwest portion of the property. The trees in the
background are willow (Salix carolinians) just beginning to leaf out.
Native habitats on site consist of pine flatwoods, hydric pine flatwoods, cypress-
pine-cabbage palm, cypress, non-forested wetlands, wet prairie and Melaleuca.
Most of the property burned during the summer of 2000, causing areas of heavy
Melaleuca infestation to become even worse. Brazilian pepper is also found in the
cypress domes on site.
EAC Meeting
Page 6 of 11
FLUCFCS Code 411
Pine Flatwoods
According to the information provided in the EIS, seven types of soil occur on the
subject site, Malabar Fine Sand (Unit #3), Immokalee Fine Sand (Unit #7), Pineda
Fine Sand, Limestone Substratum (Unit #14), Oldsmar Fine Sand (Unit #16), Boca
Fine Sand (Unit #21), Chobee, Winder and Gator Soils, Depressional (Unit #22)
and Boca, Rivera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland Fine Sands, Depressional
(Unit #25). Four of the soil types are listed as hydric by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (Units #3, 14, 22 & 25). Most of the project site consists of
hydric soils. Non-hydric soils are found on the west side of the property.
Wetlands:
Jurisdictional wetlands total 533.1 acres out of a total 646.5 project acres. These
include hydric pine flatwoods, cypress-pine-cabbage palm, cypress, non-forested
wetlands and wet prairie, portions of which are heavily invaded with Melaleuca.
The project as proposed will impact approximately 280.52 acres (52.6%) of the
jurisdictional wetlands on site. Impacts to high quality habitats, such as cypress,
have been avoided, except for the creation of the proposed flow-way on site.
NOV 2 ? 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 7 of 11
FLUCFCS Code 424/411
Area of Melaleuca and pine which were burned during the summer of 2000. The
picture was taken in January 2001 after a recent frost killed much of the new
growth on the Melaleuca.
Current project design provides for water storage capacity within the preserve
acreage internal to the project as well as in the flow-way preserve along the east
side of the project, more accurately recreating historic hydroperiods on the project
site and those in the surrounding area. An excavated ribbon of interconnected lakes
will be constructed within the preserve area that will increase the conveyance
capability of the flow-way during storm events. This conveyance system will be
controlled with gate structures to mimic natural ground water elevation during
normal conditions, but will allow increased flow during flooding conditions. The
system within the Teraflna preserve will average 200 feet wide and 4 feet deep. A
marsh community will be planted within the excavated areas.
In order to offset adverse environmental impacts resulting from development
activities in 280.52 acres of wetlands, the development plan provides for
preservation and restoration of the remaining on-site wetlands. The preservation
of 247.43 acres of wetlands and 26.92 acres of uplands is proposed. All preserved
wetlands will be cleared of invasive exotic species and maintained in aa exotic free
condition. Areas that are devoid of remnant native vegetation will be planted with
appropriate native vegetation. Slash pine, cypress and other canopy species will be
utilized as will appropriate mid-story and ground cover plantings. Approximately
one million dollars of off-site mitigation credits will also be purchased to make up
tbr any on-site deficits that remain at~er the final preservation credits t,,*~ n~,Ll~l:}~l.j~
EAC Meeting
Page 8 of 11
awarded. Final mitigation requirements will be coordinated with State and Federal
agencies according to guidelines presented in the SFWMD Basis of Review.
Preservation Requirements:
The project exceeds the twenty-five percent (25%) native vegetation preservation
requirement in preserving and restoring 274.35 acres of the native vegetation on
site. Preservation areas amount to forty-two percent (42%) of the total project
site.
Listed Species:
A Threatened and Endangered Species Survey of the property was conducted
during July and August 1997. Established transects were oriemated north-south
and east-west and superimposed on an aerial of the site. These transects were
ground lecated and walked by compass bearing. Early morning, mid-day and late-
day time periods were chosen to survey these transects. This survey was
conducted dally for a minimum of five days.
The availability of good functional habitat on site has been restricted by the
presence of Melaleuca. This Threatened and Endangered Species Survey placed
emphasis on surveying the pine flatwoods and cypress areas since they offer some
of the best quality foraging and nesting areas on site. Listed species observed
during the survey included Big Cypress fox squirrel and wild pine (Tillandsia spp.).
No other listed species were observed on site.
Historic utilization of the northwestern portion of the site by red-cockaded
woodpeckers is noted in the environmental impact statement and has been
discussed with the State and Federal W'fldlife Agencies. No current RCW activity
has been noted on the project site and almost all of the trees that are known to
have had cavities have since died, either through stress induced by the high water
levels, fire, wood boring beetles, or a combination of the factors.
One individual Big Cypress fox squirrel was observed crossing a primitive road on
the west side of the property. No other fox squirrels were seen during the survey.
The majority of the Tillandsia species found on the site are located on cypress
trees. Some are also located in slash pine. Cypress is scattered throughout the site
but found in almost pure stands in several locations within the proposed preserve
Preservation and enhancement of 274.35 acres of mixed wetlands and uplands will
retain viable habitat and forage area for wildlife using the subject site. Of[~~------~i-,~l~
the layout of the large preserve area in the east part of the property, v~mcl~._~ ~ [
J ,ov 2oo,i'
Vile
EAC Meeting
Page 9 of 11
contiguous to the preserved areas of adjacent properties thus maximizing wildlife
value. This preserve area will also contain the ribbon lakes that that will help to re-
establish the historic outfall rates from this portion of the watershed. This created
marsh and lake habitat will also provide valuable foraging area for the areas
wading birds, most notably the wood stork.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development No. PUD-2000-21
"Terafina PUD", with the following stipulations:
Water Management:
The petitioner shall obtain a surface water management permit from the SFWMD.
Environmental:
No additional stipulations.
NOV 2 7 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 10 of 11
PREPARED BY:
STAIN CHRZANOWSKI, P.E.
SENIOR ENGINEER
STEPHEN LENBERGER
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST II
REVIEWED BY:
RARiNY~5ID V. BELLOWS
P AL PLANNER
_
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
I/aGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER
R~rNALD '~1~0, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
DATE
DATE
DATE
DATE
DATE
NOV 2 7 2001
EAC Meeting
Page 11 of 11
RObeRT'S-. MU~I-I~E~,'AICP
PLANNING SERVICES Dii~CTOK
DATE
APPROVED BY:
R/MM. DU'NNUCK, III
COMMUNI~ DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATOR
SL/gdh/c: Stafl~eport
DATE
ENVIRO~~AL SERVICES.
NOV 2 7 2001
March 7, 2001
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
Naples, Florida, March 7, 2001
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Environmental Advisory
Council, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 1:00 p.m. in REGULAR
SESSION in Building. 'F' of the Government Complex, East
Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
Thomas Sansbury
Ed Carlson
Michael G. Coe
Alfred F. Gal, Jr.
William Hill
Erica Lynne
Alexandra "Allie' Santoro
ALSO PRESENT:
Patrick White, Assistant County Attorney
Stan Chrzanowski, Senior Engineer
Barbara Burgeson, Senior Environmental Specialist
Stephen Lenberger, Environmental Specialist,
Development Services
Marjorie Student, Assistant County Attorney
Ron Nino, Current Planning Manager
NOV 2 ? 2001
March 7, 2001
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Barb, it will be very difficult for me,
you know that.
Okay, go ahead.
MR. BELLOWS: Do we have to be sworn in?
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Yeah, swear in, everybody that's
going to comment on this one. (Speakers were duly sworn.}
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. I'm the
principal planner with the planning services.
Petitioner is proposing to rezone 646 acres from agriculture
to planned unit development.
As was previously discussed on the last petition, this
project is located in the urban residential area. It's adjacent to
the Mirasol PUD that was just heard. To the north is the.
Parklands PUD. To the south is the Olde Cypress PUD.
The petitioner proposes 850 dwelling units. The master plan
also provides for 126 acres of golf course and open space and
approximately seven acres for a golf course clubhouse. There's
also a proposal for a village commercial area that will serve the
development. '
The subject site is located in the urban residential district
on the Future Land Use Map, which permits these types of uses.
It's consistent with the Growth Management Plan in terms of
density, which has a base density of four units per acre.
Proposed density of this project is about 1.3 units per acre.
It's consistent with the traffic circulation element and the
other elements of the Growth Management Plan.
I'd be happy to answer any planning questions that you
might have.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Questions from the council?
Hearing none, Steve?
MR. LENBERGER: For the record, Stephen Lenberger,
Development Services.
The subject property, as Ray mentioned, sits next to the
PUD you just heard,. Mirasol. Mirasol would be this proposed PUD
in the map on this area here. And Teraflna would sit immediately
to the west of it. *~
It also shares a portion of the proposed flowway, which will
go through the project and down and through Olde Cy~
you've already heard plenty about.
NOV 2 1 2001
Page73 Ij~ P[-.,~ __~
March 7, 2001
The site, as you can see from the aerial on the wall, is all
vegetated. Noticeable features are some cypress domes. They
sit in this area here. The cypress surround areas, which are
mainly herbaceous, with deeper water vegetation, mostly
willows, some pop ash, things of this nature. There's also a
cypress dome in this area.
There are also cypress areas more scattered and spread out
in a slough type setting on the lower east side of the project.
Most of the project is heavily invaded with melaleuca. You
saw a slide presentation earlier about a fire which went through
Mirasol. That fire burnt extensive areas of this PUD, mostly in
the center, on over into this way here.
I did have a chance to walk the property with the
consultant. We took a transect. We walked up to this way
through the pine flatwoods on this portion, through the edge of
the cypress dome. We walked up through this way.
This area is heavily invaded with melaleuca. I do have a
picture of the staff report. It was - most of the pines were dead.
Pretty much all of them are dead. And it looked pretty ghostly
when we walked through it because the frost had just went
through and actually killed the sprouts on the melaleuca. So
there were - there was no green pretty much for this whole
portion when I walked it. It was pretty depressing.
We took the transect back this way. There's an extensive
area of pine flatwoods in this portion. Looks pretty nice. I have
a picture of it in the staff report.
And then we went down to this portion here. This area has
the mixed cypress I was just talking about.
The petitioner is proposing to preserve all the cypress
domes, as a matter of fact, all the cypress on the project, except
for what will be needed to construct the flowway.
The cypress dome shows up here, the one we walked
through, and the other one sits on this portion of the property
here. This portion preserve, as proposed, is mostly upland.
The project site has quite a bit of wetlands. It's 646 acres
total. It's 533 acres of wetlands. And the petitioner is proposing
impact of a little more than 50 percent, 280 acres.
Mitigation proposed will be construction of the flowway, and
that will be in this area, this large pres.e, rve, on the e __.
also r ve~t o~.
portion of the project. Removal of exotics and
Page 74
March 7, 2001
with native species. Apparently there have been discussions
with the Water Management District. They're requiring about a
million dollars worth of off-site mitigation for compensation for
wetlands losses on this property.
As far as protected species on site, protected species, the
only one observed as far as animals was a Big Cypress fox
squirrel on the western portion of the project. There are some
documented cavity trees on the northwest portion of the PUD,
but those have since been abandoned and the trees are dying.
If you have any questions, I'll be glad to answer them. Tim
Hall is here also to answer any questions specific to the site.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Questions for Mr. Lenberger?
MR. CARLSON: Water levels. What are the water levels on
the site?
MR. LENBERGER: I put the elevations in the staff report.
Let me get those for you.
MR. CARLSON: Does this project suffer from the same water
regime as the previous project?
MR. LENBERGER: No, it's the same as the other project.
MR. DUANE: For the record, my name is Robert Duane from
Hole, Montes & Associates. I'll be very brief, as I think the
presentations have highlighted some of the saline points.
MS. LYNNE: Can you speak a little louder?.
MR. DUANE: Yes.
MS. LYNNE: I can't hear you.
MR. DUANE: We are an 850-acre - 850-unit project on
almost one section of land. We are proposing 274 acres of both
uplands and wetland preserve areas in our project. It's depicted
on the wall there in the dark green areas, are our preserve area
which comprise about 45 percent of the project. ! would point
out to you that's substantially in excess of the minimum
requirements, as it should be for this project. But I note that'we
have almost exceeded by twofold the base requirement of 25
percent.
We have a recommendation of approval here. I concur with
your staff that we comply with yOur comprehensive plan as it
exists today in the half a dozen policies that are set forth in your
staff report.
Unlike the project that was bef. ore yo.u today, we Rr~
in the urban area, and we're sandw, ched ,n 'between Olle~~~ I
March 7, 2001
Cypress and the Parklands. So I think there are some
distinctions we can make between this project and the project
that went before you today.
We are also working toward regional solutions of the
flowway as you now know. We are far along into the permitting
process, perhaps even a little further than the project that you
heard earlier on your agenda. Karen can ad-lib for me.
But we hope to have our permit, if we're lucky, as soon as
May. But we've also been in the permitting process for some
time.
Well, that was my optimistic prediction. We've been at this
for some time, just like the project has that was before you. And
if you look at our master plan here, we only have 140 acres of our
section in actual area for residential development or residential
pods; albeit, we do have a golf course that's approximately t20
acres in area or so.
And ! would be frank with you to tell you that were we --
unlike the project before us that had two or three sections of
land, to reach out in this project and go beyond the preserve
areas that we have here, we either lose the golf course or we
lose our 140 acres of residential development, which supports
our 850 units, which is a gross density of about 1.3 units per
acre. Not a high density project.
I think Ray pointed out to you that we're entitled to four.
But a predominant pattern of development is going to be
single-family for this particular project.
Just to close, my opinion, we meet your requirements and
we're consistent with the comprehensive plan.
And our team here consists of Mr. Barber, whom you heard
earlier, George Hermanson, senior vice president of my company,
Jerry Neal, who's also a project engineer. Tim Hall, who is our
environmental consultant. And rm the consultant on the
planning and land development issues, and rd be happy to
answer any questions that you may have.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay, can we take a break for just
a second, because we're going to - (Brief recess.)
MR. DUANE: Mr. Chairman, I would like Mr. Hermanson to
make just a brief comment.
MR, HERMANSON: Just to bring you up-to-date
Page 76
NOV 2 7 2001
March 7, 2001
As you notice, there is really only one stipulation that staff is
recommending, which is that we sustain our South Florida Water
Management permit. And I wanted to give you just an update on
where we are on that.
Notwithstanding the fact that formalization of the
agreement of the properties has to be made to maintain the
flowway like you discussed earlier, ! believe the technical issues
on the project are substantially resolved. We made a
re-submittal to the South Florida Management District last week.
And I think we have addressed all of those satisfactorily.
We may get a couple of clarification-type issues that may
come up, but I don't'believe there's anything substantial with
respect to the plan. So I think we're doing pretty good on the
Water Management permit. We can resolve the agreement issue
on the flowway. We'll be all set.
And, of course, our Corps permit is in with the other permits
that are going to come up for public notice before. So I think --
I'm pretty optimistic about our permitting situation.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Question to the petitioner?.
Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: This particular development
then is within the growth management line, is it?
MR. DUANE: Yes. It's entirely within the boundary of the
urban area and it's straddled in between projects that already
have zoning to the north and south of us. The Old Cypress PUD
has -
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: Whereas the one next-door is -
MR. DUANE: Right. The one next-door was a little further to
the east and abutted the CREW lands. So I appreciate you
recognizing that.
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: And there's no problem with
water or sewers for your particular location?
MR. DUANE: Well, we're served by the same sewage
treatment plant that you may have discussed earlier. And there
will be improvements coming on-line. And if the capacity is not
there when we're ready to pull permits, then we won't be putting
houses up, only infrastructure.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: HOw much of the
jurisdictional wetland?
Page 77
NOV 2 7 2001
March 7, 2001
MR. DUANE: I would refer to Mr. Hall, but a substantial
portion of it is jurisdictional wetlands, as I understand it. 533 of
our 646 acres.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: So what does that work out to;
does somebody have a calculator?.
But basically my question is -
COMMISSIONER COE: 95 percent, 94 percent.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: How then does the design of
your residential project minimize impacts to. the jurisdictional
wetlands?
MR. DUANE: Well, we've minimized our impacts by providing
you almost 300 acres of our section and contributing to a
flowway and preserving an upland area that Mr. Lenberger
pointed out to you that is already here. And we've concentrated
our development in the areas of lower quality wetlands. *1 think
rm just echoing Mr. Lenberger at this point. But have preserved
the heart of it, as we should do.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: But if this was an area that is
already wetland, why would protecting 300 acres for a flowway -
why - I mean, that just seems like a given to leave the wetlands
in wetlands and minimize the spatial extent of the wetlands it's
impacted.
I mean, you're not giving anything by giving away a couple of
hundred or 300 acres for a flowway. It has to be there.
MR. DUANE: But we're also giving areas outside the
flowway. We're substantially exceeding your minimal
requirements that we should. We comply - and I don't mean to
be flippant, Mr. Carlson.
We comply with Objective 6.2, 6.2(10), 6.2(13), 6.3, 6.4 and
6.4(6) as determined by your staff. I think that also needs to be
given some weight today. We comply with your requirements as
we understand them.
And we're allowed a certain allowed - a certain amount of
latitude in impacting these lower quality wetlands, provided that
we provide the mitigation that is called for in your plan as it
exists today. Would you disagree with that?
I am not trying to be argumentative, but I will just leave it at
that. That's on the record. Your staff will -
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: Well, I just think that -
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Can I do one thing real q~uic~~_
I
78 ~ ~~ NOV ~ 7 ~001
Page
March 7, 2001
important in the middle of this because Karen has got to get out
of here for a second? Can you - you don't?
Don't you guys have to head back pretty soon? I just
wanted to stop for a second and see if you all had any comments
on this particular petition, anything you wanted to say on this
petition.
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt you guys. I'm sorry.
MR, THOMPSON: Richard Thompson, for the record. We
have a lot of history on this project. I mean, we denied it two
years ago. It has been, what, two, two and a half years in
mitigation trying to come up with a plan that works.
We are getting Closer to an engineering plan for the
community. However, we did get a set of plans last Friday -
which the last time we sent out comments on this we were still
lacking plans for the flowway. We now have a set of plans for
the flowway and we have a set of plans for this development.
And the two don't match.
So we're still having the failure to communicate that we
discussed earlier about the flowway and the design plans for this
are not utilizing the same information and the same assumptions.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Would the petitioner like to address
that?
MR. DUANE: We agree with the stipulation that we've got to
get a permit and we have to resolve these issues with the
district. Just off the plans here - I'm not sure this is the best
forum to -
MR. THOMPSON: It's not.
MR. DUANE: So-
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay, okay. Thank you very much.
We really appreciate you ali's input in coming to see us today. I
know you guys had a tough time getting up here.
Okay. Mr. Carlson, I interrupted you. 'Go right ahead, sir.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: I forgot what I'was going to say.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: It happens when you get old.
COMMISSIONER HILL: Age does it.
COMMISSIONER COE: With the hair goes the brain.
COMMISSIONER LYNNE: You were stating that there is
going to be loss of wetlands here and that there is no obvious
effort at minimizing the impact on the wetlands. I be~
what you were talking about.
Page 79 ~ NOV 27 2001
March 7, 2001
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LYNNE: I guess one thing that bothers me
-- and i don't know if it's important or not. Maybe other people on
the Board know. I don't like to see cypress domes destroyed
even if -- and put into the middle of a flowway. Cypress domes
have got some really useful functions. And just to flood them out
I don't think is, in general, a good idea.
MR. HALL: Tim Hail, for the record.
I just wanted to address both yours and, I think, some of Mr.
Carlson's concerns. The jurisdictional on this property showed
that there was 133 acres of uplands. The problem is that the
uplands aren't all contiguous. They're not in one big lump sum.
They're spread out all throughout -- throughout mostly the
western portion of the project, which is where they have
attempted to put the residential and the golf course
development.
The developer has also attempted to - or has also managed
to design the system to where those wetland areas are still
hydrologically connected to the flowway in a manner such that
when the -- when the elevation within the flowway preserve that
was presented during the last presentation elevates, that water
has the potential to flow back into the internal preserves and act
as additional storage capacity for that drainage basin.
The cypress dome is not being impacted. The two cypress
domes that Steve had mentioned are not being - the one is
contained in the preserve area that you see in the lower corner.
The dark green. That's one of the domes with a buffer around it.
It is not just the dome. There is some upland and marginal
wetlands surrounding that dome. So it is not right up against the
development. It is contained within it. And, as I said before, it is
still connected hydrologically so that the water table within the
dome will elevate and lower as it does now.
The other preserve up to the north contains mostly uplands.
The applicant, the developer - we could have minimized our
wetland impacts by constructing some of the residential and
some of the golf course within those uplands. However, those
were the areas that historically had the. RCWs.
And based on conversations with the wildlife agencies, it
was determined that an attempt would be made to keep those
areas in preserve and hopefully entice the
Page 80
woodpeck~
March 7, 2001
back into the area. It's wide enough and the existing vegetation,
with a little management - basically some removal of melaleuca
that's coming into it and some mid-story management, taking out
some of the wax myrtle or that mid-story vegetation and opening
up the views between the remaining pine trees~ would help to
facilitate that.
I'm not arguing that there's a lot of- there are a lot of
impacts - wetland impacts associated with this as well, but
some of those impacts are a result of conversations that we've
had with wildlife agencies in an attempt to preserve the uplands
that are necessary to the species that would be utilizing the
area.
GOMMISSIONER CARLSON: So the trees didn't burn up in
that red-cockaded woodpecker area; those pines are still fine?
MR. HA~.L: No. The trees that had the cavities in them -- I
believe all but one are dead. The one that is remaining was
being used by a downy. The one cavity -- the one remaining
cavity was being used last year by a downy.
I apologize in that I did not do the original threatened and
endangered species survey on this site. I have done some
follow-up work since I became involved with it. And I have seen
no other activity.
GOMMISSIONER GARLSON: Okay.
MR. HALL: The fire - as I had explained earlier on the other
one, the fire caused a lot of damage through there in that the
trees that were already stressed - I believe because of the
fluctuating water levels, the fire either killed them outright or
stressed them further to where the bark - a bark beetle
infestation came in and killed off the rest of them.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Questions for the petitioner?.
COMMISSIONER HILL: What's the distribution of multifamily
and single-family?
MR. DUANE: The 850 units.can be either single or
multifamily. It's the option of the developer.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay. Anything else?
COMMISSIONER HILL: Gould you further minimize impact on
the wetlands by clustering -- and I'll use the term high-riser
multi-story as opposed to single-family; the concentration?
MR. DUANE: W.e. ll, th. at's the. oretically possible,
preference for my chent ,s for this to have more of a mU~~'-~';~'' I
! NOV 2 ? 2001
'"'" I' ';? ,-
March 7, 2001
single-family uses than multifamily uses on the project. If we did
what you suggest, which is, again, possible, we could probably
avail ourselves of a great number of more units in this project.
But we've chosen to keep it at a Iow density project at about one
dwelling unit per acre.
MR. HALL: Tim Hall again. Something else I might just want
to draw your attention to briefly is that the preserve on the
eastern boundary was designed to match up with either what's
existing or what is proposed for the developments to the north
and to the south. The line on the southern boundary matches up
with the existing Old Cypress preserve boundary. It doesn't - if
we went further to the west, you would have the preserve up
against the residential component of Old Cypress. And on the
north side, it matches up with the boundary that is proposed in
the Parklands DRI.
Another thing that the developer did was he did give up
some of his residential lots to - to keep wooded areas so that, in
essence, a corridor or at least a - there is a pathway from all of
the preserve areas to the larger preserve area without anything
having to go through somebody's yard. There's either a forested
or a golf course connection from all of those preserve areas to
the large preserve area outside.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay. Thank you.
Any discussion? Hearing none, what is the pleasure?
COMMISSIONER HILL: I guess it needs to be said - and
back to my question about multi-story. The County, and in
particular this Council, has the charge to protect the
environmental aspects of Collier County. When you come to
residential development with the requirements that are
stipulated in the land development code, particularly with
respect to wetlands, functioning wetlands - I don't want to
sound nasty, but developer's preference as opposed to
multifamily versus single-family I don't think is a major - is a
major factor in what we can consider here.
We have to weigh property rights and the environmental
problems. And that scale is not easy all the time. And you can
get the same density - you can get a higher density if you want,
more towards what is allowed, and still minimize - further
minimize the impact on wetlands.
And that's where we're coming from.
Page 82
And that's a
L.o ' Ac~t~..A .n~./~
! NOV 2 7 2001
March 7, 2001
di:
balance to -- to find. And I think we need to perhaps put more
pressure on developers to consider those sources.
MR. DUANE: I understand your point. And my point is that
this is a market-driven project. I don't know that there's a
market for high-rise development at this location.
Clustering, we all use that term. But we have t40 acres out
of our 650 acres that we're actually constructing units on. So
that represents a minority of the project area.
But I understand your point, but the market is for a plan
somewhat what you see today. I'm not aware that there is
anything that mandates us to be multifamily or single-family, but
philosophically I understand your point entirely.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: How many units are we planning to
put on here?
MR. DUANE: There would be ~ maximum of 850 units on 646
acres at 1.3 units per acre.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: But I mean on the t40.
MR. DUANE: On the 140 it would be probably closer to six or
seven units per acre.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Six or seven units per acre. You're
talking multifamily housing. You're talking villas on 50.foot lots
or you're talking two-story condos.
MR. DUANE: Or the density goes down.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Yeah. Or the density goes down.
COMMISSIONER HILL: I understand that. But all I'm saying
is to look for a balance between environmental impacts and
density. I think that's one of the problems this Council has in
resolving proposals of this nature.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay. Any other discussion on this
particular petition?
Okay. Public comment.
Yes, sir.
I forgot about that. Nobody is here.
MR. NEALE: Jerry Neale. I just need to stress one thing
that - unfortunately they have left. But the wetland Issue of this
development has been approved and it was approved by South
Florida Water Management somewhere around September,
November of last year. The only thing we're working out is the
flowway design as to what kind of channel. Sou
. I don't know if you were aware of the fact that
,s on record. They have already approved the plan, as
Page 83
March 7, 2001
impacts and our proposed mitigation.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay. The pleasure of the Council.
MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, I'd just ask that if there is any
disclosures required regarding contacts-
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: I forgot about disclosures. Sorry
about that.
MR. WHITE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Did anyone have any discussion
with the petitioner regarding this item?
Hearing none, what is the pleasure?
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: I thought that when the South
Florida Water District people were here they still had some
concerns.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: On the flowways.
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: Yeah. And he's saying that they
gave the permit, but --
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: No.
COMMISSIONER SANTORO:
That's not what he said.
I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COE: Only on what impacts for the
wetlands.
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: Oh, not the flowways?
COMMISSIONER COE: Not the flowways.
MR. HERMANSON: May I try to answer that? George
Hermanson again.
I don't really know what Richard was saying. There was --
we had a very extensive meeting with him about a month ago
before we made our last submittal. He said the fiowway cross
section you have doesn't match what we are looking at here. He
has put these dimensions on here. He put them on just like you
said.
And so I don't really know what he means by they don't
match. But on the way out he said, "Let's have a meeting next
week." So Rick and I are going to go up and resolve it.
It's just a matter of putting the dimensions on the drawings
that he wants. And. maybe we're having a misunderstanding
there, but that is not an issue. We'll put any dimension they
want. It is not a problem.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay.
MR. CHRZANOWSKh I don't think it's that simple.~
district did tell me that they have other problems with ~hi~--~.-.-
NOV 2 7 2001
Page 84 iL i,t~~.,
March 7, 2001
project as they were leaving.
MR. HERMANSON: Did they say what?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: No. ! don't know.
MR. HERMANSON: The only - I can bring our comment
letter that we got. There were no concerns within the project.
As Jerry mentioned, the wetland issues have been resolved. We
have had no additional comments about the wetlands.
There were a lot of clarifications as to the way the drawings
appeared. We've taken care of that. We may get a call on some
minor -- straggler issues is what I call them. But I don't know
what the flowway issues -- other than possibly some dimensional
changes and formulating the agreement for the maintenance of
the system.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: The district has left and I have heard
two people in a row say that they don't have any problems with
this project. But they did tell me that they do before they left
and they hung around purposely to talk about this project, so --
MR. HERMANSON: About the flowway?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Well, no. About the whole project, yes,
and the flowway. They said that the big problem with the
flowway was that the two sets of drawings that they have don't
match. But they told me they had other problems with the
project. I don't know what they are.
MR. HERMANSON: I don't know. Maybe it's a question of:
Is the glass half full or half empty? I don't know how to -- I don't
know how to address those, Stan, because that isn't the tone of
their letter at all.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: But the bottom line is that you
don't get a permit until they agree to it.
MR. HERMANSON: That's correct.
'T'.
We have to cross every
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay.
MR. NEALE: May I interject one thing?
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Excuse me.
MR. NEALE: The points that we're referring to that have
already been approved -- because we are going through this
procedure with South Florida Water Management, they are
documented by the attorney on our side, the attorney
Florida Water Management, and the mediator attorney
appointed by the courts. So the things we're saying,
Page 85
can ~v~ol
March 7, 2001
you the legal documents that say what we're saying is the facts.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: All right. Very good.
Okay. Let's decide what we're doing here, folks.
Mr. Hill, you were so articulate before when you put that one
together, do you want to try it again?
COMMISSIONER HILL: No. I have - I have a problem with
what's been quoted here as - with respect to the procedure. We
now find that supposedly, according to the representative of the
developer, that South Florida Water Management District has
already approved all of the wetland considerations. That
disappointments me if that is the case. That that has been done
prior to it coming before the Environmental Advisory Council.
Something is it out of order here if that indeed is the case.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Well, really the unfortunate fact is
that South Florida doesn't pay a lot of attention to us when it
comes to wetland designations.
COMMISSIONER HILL: Well, maybe we have to change that
or at least try to change it. I mean, if this Council is to have any
viable position in Collier County, maybe we need to strengthen
our horns a little bit or sharpen them or do something with it.
Maybe we'll be heard at some point in time.
We've been given the charge of coming up with wet --
improved wetland ordinances. Well, good heavens, why waste -
spin our wheels if nobody is going to pay any attention to --
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Well, the County Commission will
be paying attention to us. And that's the process.
COMMISSIONER HILL: Are you sure about that?
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: South Florida has their set of rules.
Maybe they will, maybe they won't, i don't know.
COMMISSIONER HILL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: But that's where that wetlands is
going to go. I mean, South Florida has their set of rules that they
follow -- they have to follow. And what - you know, those rules
are not necessarily - as I mentioned when we were talking about
our wetland ordinance, they are not necessarily the same rules
that we're putting
together. They're very close, but those rules are not going to
change for something we do.
C~MMISSIONER SANTORO: Can I say something
C.'-~AIRMAN SANSBURY: Yes.
Page 86
NOV 2 7 2001
March 7, 2001
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: One of the things that we're
looking at is wetlands ordinance. And I have heard two
developers come in and say - one specifically said 75 percent
melaleuca, well, then it is not jurisdictional wetlands. It is
interesting that both of these projects are coming in with 50
percent of wetlands being affected and they're melaleuca
infected.
We all looked at that and said we don't want that greater
than 75 percent making it a Type III. We want anything with a
fiowway being a Type I. So our mentality is saying, "Don't affect
more than five percent at the most of an area."
And you're all cOming in affecting 50 percent. And I think
this is -- and on top of that we had -
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Remember, that's an ordinance that
has not been passed by the County Commission.
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: I know. But I'm saying mentally
this is what this Board is about. And the question that the South
Florida Water group came and said they still have questions on it,
the question that the design is not minimizing - I looked and you
don't have to have a golf course or a clubhouse. That's 133 more
acres that you could give to the wetlands.
So the question is: Is the design the greatest to allow for
the least impact on wetlands? I think these are real questions
that are coming up.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: I think that somewhere in our
equation when we're looking at things - it is like a conversation I
had one day with a staff person who was very - that said, '~Nhy
do you need 18 holes; why can't you just have 177"
There are some viabilities to a project that we have to look
at. And the viability is it has to be matched with the
environmental concerns. To have an 18-hole golf course is
something that this developer is attempting to bring in within the
wetland regulations that presently exist. Whether - again,
whether it's perfect or not, I don't know.
I think we have an opportunity again here with the flowway
set up and a considerable number of - a high number of wetlands
preserved and enhanced because the quality we have out there.
nAon.d, again, Ithink we're missing an opportunity. It's n~
Does it mess up a lot of areas that are wetlands,
Page 87
March 7, 2001
to Mr. Carlson? I agree with him 100 percent. But what happens
if this doesn't happen? Where does this land go? Where does
that other piece of land go?
There gets to be more melaleucas. There gets to be more
fires. There gets to be more people dumping trash out there.
This is an opportunity to start turning things around in this
particular area and creating some flood relief and creating some
positives, although there are some negatives. And that's - that's
all I have to say.
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: I just want to add to it. I don't
want to be totally negative. I had wanted to see both of these
tabled for a little bit of looking at the design of the South Florida
Water Management Group. So I'm just -- I'm just not completely
sold right at this point. It is not that I think it is totally bad.
And I do think it's good. The flowway needs improvement.
You will help prevent flooding up in Bonita Springs.
CHAIRMAN SANSBUR¥: Okay. Where do we move on this?
Somebody has got to make a motion one way or the other.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: Well, let me ask one more thing
real quick. Maybe there's no quick answer.
But this went before the South Florida Management District
governing board and they recommended denial?
MR. HERMANSON.' Yes, it did. I wasn't involved in the
project at the time. i believe the fiowway area was smaller.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: Yeah. Well, that was going to
be my next question. What has changed since that?
MR. HERMANSON: Well, the flowway has gotten larger. The
flowway, as a concept, didn't exist at that time. It was maybe in
some people's minds, but it wasn't brought to the point where it
is now.
This would not have participated in the flowway. So the
difference is the flowway is a little bigger. They're participating
in the flowway and the off-site mitigation. Those are the three
big things that have happened.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: Was there no flowway just
because the land to the east was just not slated for development
and that was going to be the flowway?
MR. HERMANSON: I think when Mirasol jumped in that's
when Mr. Bark~
when the opportunity came and th.a.t's to help not only~th~
involved in trying to bring the solut,on ~ H0V 27
2001
March 7, 2001
projects, but help the -- the environmental issues and the flood
issues, too.
That's what really jump-started it. Until that happened,
there was no way this project could stand on its own and say,
"We can do this and help the area."
And I did want to mention one thing. I hope you all aren't
concerned with the fact that we are - maybe aren't as far along
with the Water Management District than we are. I realize that
this is more complicated than most projects that you've seen.
But in the vast majority of cases the zoning is approved first or is
issued first. Very seldom do I come to this Council and say, "1
have my Water Management District permit already or my Corps
permit."
The majority of cases that comes a little later. We're
usually in the process, like we are now, and we have a lot of
questions that have to be answered yet. Because that's much
more detailed than land use. This is just land use.
We have to - we have to put every dimension on the
drawings just the way they want it. And that's the way it's going
to be on this one, too. So I would hope that the fact that we are
not inches away from the permit doesn't concern you overly so
because that's the way it is on most projects.
COMMISSIONER HILL: Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HILL: Based on excessive impact on
wetlands and
the questions which seem to exist with respect to South Florida
Water Management District, I move we recommend denial.
COMMISSIONER COE: I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay. Seconded by Mr. Coe. Any
discussion?
All in favor of the motion to deny signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER GAL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SANTORO: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LYNNE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: How many is that?
four five are committing denial.
All in favor of - against the motion to denial
Page 89
One, two~ three,
NOV 2 7 2001
March 7, 2001
Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Motion of denial passes 5-2.
Thank you, gentlemen.
Okay. Bill Hill had something on new business that he
wanted to talk about.
COMMISSIONER HILL: Very quick. I - with Bob Mulhere's
resignation, I would like to see the Council go on record thanking
him for his support of the Council and his efforts to Collier
County and wish him the best in his future employment. I move
that we put that in the form of a resolution or whatever.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: So moved. Do I hear a second on
that?
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: Second.
COMMISSIONER LYNNE: Second.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: I believe it's passed unanimously.
How is that?
COMMISSIONER HILL: One of us should write it, I guess,
maybe.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: I would like to see Mr. Hill write it.
How about you, Mr. Carlson?
COMMISSIONER CARLSON: That's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER HILL: I thought that that would be the
Chairman's -
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: We'll get it done.
COMMISSIONER HILL: I guess I fell into that one.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Okay. We still have a quorum.
(Commissioner Carlson left the Boardroom.)
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: Stan, are you going to be running
this thing from this point on with Barbara gone?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: I wasn't intending on doing that, no.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: *** Okay. We have - do we need to
have the comments back on the wetlands ordinance? Does
anybody have any further comments from staff since our last
review of that?
I think we were pretty thorough on our last review, were we
not?
COMMISSIONER GAL: Did we finish our last review?.
CHAIRMAN SANSBURY: As.i recall, we were d~r=;';~~ |
last page of the last section, wh,ch was more the te~h~0~~~~
Page90 Il i~__.~.~ ___.~
!
APPLICATION FOR _PUBLIC___HEARIN~G FOR,:
PUDo0.21
Petition No.: Date Petition Received: ..............
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Commission District:
Planner Assigned:
General Information:
ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF
Name of Applicant(s)
Applicant's Mailing Address
Robert Vocisano & Angel# Favretto
Place Venier, Suite 103, 333 River Road
City Ottawa State
Applicant's Telephone # 613-745-9122
Name of Agent Robert L. Duane
Ontario, Canada Zip K1L8B9
Fax # 613-746-1238
Finn Hole Montes, Inc.
Agent's Mailing Address
City Naples
Agent's Telephone #
P. O. Box 111629
941-254-2000
State FL Zip 34108
Fax # 941-254-2099
COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING
2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE-NAPLES, FL 34104
PHONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEAR1~G FOR PUD REZONE - 10~)8
PAG
NOV 2 7 2001
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional
sheets ifnocessary)
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
N/A
City State __ Zip
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
N/A
City State __ Zip
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
N/A
City State __ Zip
Name of Master Association:
Mailing Address
N/A
City
State Zip
I
I
I
I
I
Name of Civic Association:
Mailing Address
N/A
City State __ Zip
Disclosure of Interest Information:
ao
If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety,
tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well
as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary).
· N~me .nd Addre~
Robert Vocisano
Angelo Favretto
Percentage of Owner~p
2/3
1/3
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE
PAl
2001
I
i,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
_l
bo
If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and
the percentage of stock owned by each.
Name and Address, and Office
N/A
Percentage of Stock
If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with
the percentage of interest.
Name and Address
N/A
Percentage of Interest
If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the
name of the general anti, or limited partners.
Name and Address
N/A
Percentage of Ownership
If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a
Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers
below, including the officers, stockholders, benefi¢imies, or partners.
Name and Address
Kevin F. Leo
2291 Oaks Blvd
Naples, FL 34119
Percentage of Ownership
100%
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD RF_~ONE - 10/98
Date of Contract: 12/01/00
NOV 2 7 2001
PAGE 3 OF 16
f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all
individuals or officers, ifa corporation,_ partnership, or trust.
Name and Address
N/A __
g.Date subject property acquired ( ) leased ( ): June 6tth 1995 Term of lease N/A
yrs./mos. ·
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: N/A and date option
terminates: , or anticipated closing date
h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur
subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public
hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit
a supplemental disclosure of interest form.
Detailed description of the property covered by the application: (If space is
3.
legal
inadequate, attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning
district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant
shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months,
maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting.
NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If
questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey
may be required.
Section: 16 Township: 48S Range: 26E
Lot: N/A Block: N/A Subdivision: N/A
Plat Book N/A Page #: N/A Property I.D.# 001.836 00000
Metes & Bounds Description: N/A
4. Size of property: 2646 ft. X 2663 ft. = Total Sq. Ft. :1: 646_Acres
5. Address/general location of subject properW:.
Adjacent to and East of"Q~_~hl Creek"
Adjacent to and North of"Olde Cyprus'
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZO~ - 10~)8
PAG
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Adjacent zoning and land use:
Zoning Land use
N PUD Vacant / Parklands
S PUD Residential / Olde Cypress
E AG Vacant
W PUD Residential/Quail Creek
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? If
so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate,
attach on separate page).
Section: ~ Township: Range:
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book~ Page #:__ Property I.D.#
Metes & Bounds Description:
I
I
I
Rezone Request: This application is requesting a rezone from the Agriculture
zoning district(s) to the PUD zoning district(s).
Present Use of the Property: Vacant
I
I
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Residential Golf Come/Preserve and
residential areas permitting 850 dwelling units.
I 8.
request.
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE
PAGE
Evaluation Criteria: Pursuant to Section 2.7.2.5 and Sec. 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County
Land Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendntion to the Planning
Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County
Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below.
Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the
criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and docmentation ii: o"t'~l~l~' ' -Ivem-----
NOV 2 7 2001
16
Standard Rezone Considerations [I.,DC Section 2. 7.2.5)
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies
and future land use map and the elements of the growth management plan.
!
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZX)NE - 10/9~
2. The existing land use pattern.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property for the proposed change.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
(rezone) necessary.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
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..~.~
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
10. Whether the proposed change will seriously affect property values in the adjacent area.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
12. Whether the proposed change will 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.
14. I~hether the change suggested is 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. ~ .i:
I 2 ? 2oo {
PAGE~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which
wouM be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses
under the proposed zoning classification.
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 growth management
plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinance {Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended.
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.
PUD Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7.3.2.5)
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.
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. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after
consultation with the county attorney.
3. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth
management plan.
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.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improwiments and facilities, both public and private.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations
in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as
meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such
regulations, n~.l~A ~
API~LICATiON FOR rUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE- l~J~ NOV 2 ? 2001
I PA
9. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions,
I O however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact.tl~.e
civic or property owners association in the area_for .w. hich .~.? us~e lS~ bel. n.g..reqsUeSted m
order to ascertain whether or not the request is affecte~ by exlsung oeeo resmcuon.
I 10. Previous land use petitions on the subject prooerW: To your knowledge, has a public
hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that
I a. A copy of the pre-application meeting notes; .
I b. If this rezone is being requested for a specific use, pro,vide fifteen (15) copies of a 24"
x 36" conceptual site plan [and one reduced 8V2" x 11 ' copy of site plan], drawn to a
maximum scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet, depicting the following [Additional copies
I of the plan may be requested upon completion of staff evaluation for distribution to the
Board and various advisory boards such as the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB),
i or CCPC];
all existin~ and proposed structures and thc dimensions thereof,
i I~ · provisions for existing and/or proposed ingress and egress (including pedestrian
ingress and egress to the site and the structure(s) on site),
· all existing and/or proposed parking and loading areas [include matrix indicating
required and provided parking and loading, including required parking for the
I disabled],
i · required yards, open space and preserve areas,
· proposed locations for utilities (as well as location of existing utility services to the
I site),
· proposed and/or existing landscaping and buffering as may be required by the
I County,
I a. An architectural rendering of any proposed structure~.
b. An Environmental Impact Statement (ELS), as required by Section 3.8. of the Land
Development Code (LDC), or a request for waiver if appropriate. ..
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE- 10~9~ NOV 2 ? 200~
I
I
I
I
I
I
Whether or not an ElS is required, two copies of a recent aerial photograph, (taken
within the previous twelve months), minimum scale of one inch equals 400 feet, shall
be submitted. Said aerial shall identify plant and/or wildlife habitats and their
boundaries. Such identification shall be consistent with Florida Department of
Transportation Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System. Additionally, a
calculation of the acreage (or square feet) of native vegetation on site, by area, and a
calculation and location(s) of the required portion of native vegetation to be preserved
(per LDC Section 3.9.5.5.4.).
d. Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments and sketches);
e. A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS), unless waived at the pre-application meeting;
A historical and archeological survey or waiver application if property is located
within an area of historical or archaeological probability (as identified at pre-
application meeting);
Any additional requirements as may be applicable to specific conditional uses and
identified during the pre-application meeting, including but not limited to any
required state or federal permits.
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE o 10/98
PA(
NOV 2 7 2001
STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST
NAME OF APPLICANT: Robert Vocisano & Angel# Favretto
I 2. MAILING ADDRESS: Place Vcnier, Suite 103, 333 River Road
I CITY Ottawa.~.__~~ ~m STATE. Ontario, Canada ZIP K1L8B.~_~9
I 3. ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY (1F AVAILABLE):
I
4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
I Section: 16 Township: 48 South Range: 26East
I Lot: N/A Block: N/A Subdivision: N/A
i Plat Book N/A Page #: N/A Property 1.D.0:001.836 00000
Metes & Bounds Description: N/A
I
I 5. TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED (Check applicable system): &. COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM []
I b. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM ~']
¢. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM ["-]
PROVIDE NAME
I d. PACKAGE TREA~
(GPD capacity)
i e. SEPTIC SYSTEM I--!
i 6. TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED:
a. COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM
b. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM [--]
PROVIDE NAME __
d. PRIVATE SYSTEM (WE -~-~~
^,.mc^'noN ~OR,t~L,C.,-^~.~C FOR ~'~ ~.r. zoNE-,~ ~.~ NOV 2 7~ 2001
I
Io 8.
I
I 9.
I 10.
I
I 11.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TOTAL POPULATION TO BE SERVED:850 Units
12.
PEAK AND AVERAGE DAILY DEMANDS:
AVERAGE DAILY 327,250 GPD
A. WATER-PEAK 654,500GPD _
AVERAGE DAILY 225~000 GPD
B. SEWER-PEAK 510,000 GPD
IF PROPOSING TO BE CONNECTED TO COLLIER COUNTY REGIONAL
WATER SYSTEM, PLEASE PROVIDE THE DATE SERVICE IS EXPECTED TO
BE REQUIRED:_ 2002 .
NARRATIVE STATEMENT: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic
drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding
the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then
percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a
professional engineer.
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY DEDICATION STATEMENT: If the project is located
within the services boundaries of Collier County's utility service system, written notarized
statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate to Collier County Utilities the water
distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project Area upon completion of the
construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect
at the at time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system
development charges and connection fees will be paid to thc County Utilities Division prior
to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain
shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the
water and sewer systems.
STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY CAPACITY FROM OTHER PROVIDERS:
Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to
receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a
statement from that provider indicating that there is adequate capacity to serve the project
shall be provided.
Utility Provision Ststement RJM
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD laga~ONE - 10/98
NOV 2 7 2001
AFFIDA
Well, ~~ ~/oEf ~,~0, ~ ~Vre~obeing first duly sworn, depose and s~ that
a~are the o~ers of the prope~ d~c~b~ herein and which ~ the subject matt~ of the proposed
h~ng; that aH the a~s to the qu~tio~ in th~ applicatiom including the d~closure of
interest info~ation, aH s~tch~, data, and other supplementa~ ~atter attached to and made a
pan of this application, are honest and t~e to the best of our ~owledge and belief We/I
understand that the info~ation requested on th~ appli~tion m~t be complete and ac~rate and
that the content of th~ fo~, whether computer generated or Coun~ p~nted shall not be altered.
Public hearings will not be adve~ised until this application is deemed complete, and all required
info~ation has been submitted.
As proper~ owner ~I fu~her autho~ze Robert L. ~ane to act
as our/my represegattve tn any matters regardtng thts Petition. ~
~S,~ature of Proper~ ~ner
' ' Robert Vocisano
.. Typed or Printed Name of Owner
Signature ~f Property Owner
Angelo Favretto
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
The_foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this / q~' day of ~,
~ by ~<ot~-~.~,~ z~..~,,.~,~n.° who is person___._ally know-'-~ t'~ me or has produced
~ /.? as identification.
State of Florida
County of Collier
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD RE/XINE - 10/98
(Signature of Notary Public - State of
NOV 2 7 200I
Property Information Report
CDPR1002 - Property Information Report
0 NBR
1000183600000
IBLOCK BLDG LOT UNIT
001 .000
USE CODE CLASS CODE
60 0
SHORT LEGAL
PARENT PARCEL PHYSICAL STREET LOCATION
0000000000000000 482616 482616 TRS= , NAPLES AREA NORTH
RANGE TWP SECT STRAP
26 48 16 482616 001.0003B1
~ MILL AREA TOTAl. ACSC ~DR REF FLAG
122 625.00
XTRA LGL CNT
16 48 26 ALL, LESS W 60FT + W
2670FT OF S 60FT + N 30FT
. OWNER NAME PREVIOUS OWNER
~~-~, ~OBERT
VOClSANO TR, ROBERT
OWNER ADDRESS
i A~IGELO FAVRETTO TR
1% QUALITY INN
·4100 GOLDEN GATE PKWY
NAPLES, FL00C0 341166522
FULL LEGAL DESCRIPTION
i6 48 26 ALL, LESS W 60FT + W
2670FT OF S 60FT + N 30FT
NOV 2 7 2001
i
Printed on 12/£ ~$ ~:~:Z~M
llier County
· -- _. _~_~ ..... a~/a~/~ Page 1 of 1
I
I The project is within Collier County's Water - Sewer District and will be served by the County
with both potable water and sanitary sewer services. It is proposed that Terafma connect to a 16-
of Where
inch water transmission main in Quail Creek near the southwest comer Terafina.
I feasible, the distribution system in Terafina will be interconnected to mains installed in Olde
Cypress to the south and/or Quail Creek to the west. This will provide loops to complete a
network that interconnects a number of developments north of Immokalee Road and east of 1-75.
I The project will obtain sewer service via an existing 16-inch force main along Immokalee Road.
When Olde Cypress was constructed, an 8-inch force main was extended up to the entrance of
Olde Cypress which will be extended to serve Terafina. The County's transmission facilities in
Ithis area have adequate capacities to serve the Terafina development.
I
I
I
I
!
!
!
!
NOV 2 7 2001
I W:H 995X1995087~RLD~PUI~UTILITY NARRATIVE. doc ~
HOLE MONTES
El, Ileal:iS - PLA~ERS · ~:AJRVL:YO~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
950 Encore Way. Naples, Florida 34110 · Phone: 941.254.2000. Fax: 941.254.2099
December 27, 2000
Mr. Ron Nino
Collier County Planning Services
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Re: Terafma Rezoning Application
HM File No. 1995087
Dear Mr. Nino:
Attached please find 15 copies of a rezoning application for the Terafina PUD located in Section
16, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, including a check in the amount of $15,805 to process
the petition. The request is to rezone 646.5 acres of the property from Agriculture Use to a
Planned Unit Development to accommodate 850 dwelling at a gross density of 1.3 dwelling units
per acre. Proposed uses also include a golf course, clubhouse, opportunities for a Neighborhood
Village Center on up to 4.5 acres, including 274 acres of both uplands and wetland preserve
areas. The wetlands along the eastern portion of the property are preserved to create a flow way
on lands to the south in the Olde Cypress PUD. Total proposed open space includes 457 acres or
70% of the subject property.
1. Existing Conditions
The subject property is presently vacant. Utilities will be extended from the south along the
western edge of Olde Cypress to meet the needs of the proposed development, which have been
sized to take into consideration the proposed development. Lands to the South of the subject
property are zoned for the Olde Cypress PUD which permits 1400 dwelling units on 538 acres or
' a gross density of about 2.2 dwelling units per acre. Residential and golf course development is
occurring within Olde Cypress. The Quail Creek PUD is located west of the subject property on
640 acres and is approved for 296 dwelling units or a gross density of approximately .5 units per
acre. The Quail Creek PUD is also undergoing golf course and residential development. Lands
to the north of the subject property are zoned for the Parklands PUD on 642 acres and is
approved for 1,603 units or a gross density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre. The Parklands is
presently vacant. Lands to the east of the subject property are vacant and are zoned for
Agriculture Use. In summary surrounding land use patterns and prior zoning approvals are
similar in nature to the proposed development, which is a low-density residential golf course
community, which is an appropriate use for the subject property.
Access to the subject property is proposed along a 60 foot easement along the west side of the
property which will provide access to Immokalee Road and also lands to the nort~ ~
W:\1995\1995087~J_D~PUD~N Ltr.doc
NOV 2 7 2001
_.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Ron Nino
December 27, 2000
Page 2 of 3
proposed Parklands PUD. Because of ease of access for lands located north and south of the
subject property to access onto this roadway easement, interconnection between these planned
developments is not anticipated as necessary at this location.
2. Environmental Considerations
The E.I.S. for the proposed PUD is attached setting forth the impacts of the proposed
development which include the lost of function and wildlife value of 288 acres of currently
degraded wetlands and 82 acres of naturally functioning uplands. As previously noted 274 acres
of wetland and upland preserve area is proposed with the largest concentration of proposed
wetlands to be set aside along the eastern portion of the property, for a flow way. Construction
of the flow way will result in a large, exotic flee preserve contiguous to the Crew Lands to the
east that will assist in providing enhanced wildlife habitat and will also provide flood relief to
historically flood-prone areas of Bonita Springs and northern Collier County. Wood storks and
fox squirrels were identified on the subject property in endangered species surveys. The
management plan for these species will consist of the extensive preserve areas proposed as part
of the planned development
The proposed Terafina PUD has submitted an application for an Environmental Resource Permit
with the South Florida Water Management District that contemplates off site mitigation in
addition to on site preserve areas. It is anticipated that this permit will be in effect at the time of
the hearing scheduled before the B.C.C. to review the rezoning application. No archeological
resources have been identified on the subject property.
3. Growth Management Plan
The subject property is located in the Mixed Use Residential Area as set forth on the Future Land
Use Map. The maximum density permitted is 2,586 dwelling units. Eight hundred and fifty
dwelling units are proposed in this rezoning request or a gross density of 1.3 dwelling units per
acre.
Opportunities are also provided for a Neighborhood Village Center on up to 4.5 acres or 40,000
S.F. on areas designated for either residential or club house use, internal to the project to meet
the needs of future project residents. These intensifies may also be found consistent with the
Future Land Use Element and applicable provisions of the Collier County Land Development
Code.
In summary the proposed development intensities may be found consistent with the Future Land
Use Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan.
W:\1995\1995087~RLD~PUD~RN LU.doc
NOV 2 7 2001
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
Mr. Ron Nino
December 27, 2000
Page 3 of 3
4. Transportation
The T.I.S. included as part of this rezoning application indicates that traffic impacts are not
significant. However, the proposed Terafina PUD will exceed 5% of service level "C" on
Immokalee Road east of 1-75 and Immokalee Road west of 1-75. Because of planned
improvements, which include the four laning and six laning of Immokalee Road, the proposed
development will not adversely affect the level of service of this roadway. Therefore, the
proposed PUD may be found consistent with policy 5.1 of the Traffic and Circulation Element of
the Collier County Growth Management Plan. This policy requires rezoning with significant
roadway impacts to require mitigation for roadway segments operating and/or projected to
operate within one year at an unacceptable level of service, which is not the case for the
proposed development based on the attached T.I.S. The proposed development is anticipated to
generate 5,795 average daily trip ends and 560 p.m. peak hour trip ends at the time of project
build-out.
In summary, we trust you will find the proposed Terafina PUD consistent with the Collier
County Growth Management Plan, the Collier County Land Development Code, and acceptable
planning practices, and that you can support the proposed request. Should you require any
additional information please don't hesitate Io contact me.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Very truly yours,
HOLE MONTES, INC.
Robert L. Duane, ^.I.C.P.
Planning Director
RLD/laa
W:\1995\1995087~LD~UD~ L~x.doc
I{NOV 2 7 2001
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER ~!-102 THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH
INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR
THE UNInCORPORATED AREA OF COLI.FFR COUNTY,
FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAPS
NUIkO3~ 8616N AND 8616S; BY CHANOHqO THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCR~I~ REAL
PROPERTY' FROM "A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL TO "PUD"
PLANNED ~ DEVEIX)PMENT KNOWN AS THE TERAFINA
PUD LOCATED APPROXIMATELY !.5 ~ EAST OF 1-75, ONE
MILE NORTH OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R. 846), IN SECTION 16,
TOWNSI. HP 48 .~)UT~ RANGE 26 EAST, COLL{]:;R COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 646.5:i: ACRES; AN]3 BY PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Robert L. Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes, Inc., representing Robert Vocisano and
Angelo Favretto, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of
the herein described real property.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Em'ida, that:
The zoning classification of the hereto described real property located m Section 16, Township
48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "A" Rural AlP/cultural to "PUD"
Planned Unit Development m accordance w/th the Terafinn PUD Document, attached hereto as Exh/bit
"A' and incorporated by reference here/n. The Official Zoning Arias Maps numbered 8616N and 8616S,
as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code, are hereby
amended accordingly.
This Ord/nance shall become effective upon filing w/th the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, this ~ day of ,2001.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
Approved as to Form
and Legal Sufficiency
M~rjorie M. Student
Assistant Cmmty Attorney
g/admie~UD-2000-21/IU~im
-1-
AGENOA ~
NOV 2 7 2001
TERAFINA
A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PREPARED BY:
HOLE MONTES, INC.
950 ENCORE WAY
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34110
HM PROJECT 1995087
REVISED BY COLLIER COUNTY ON OCTOBER 23, 2001
REVISED AUGUST 9, 2001
REVISED JULY, 2001
REVISED JUNE, 2001
REVISED FEBRUARY, 2001
- DECEMBER, 2000
Date Reviewed by CCPC:
Date Approved by BCC:
Ordinance No.
Amendments & Repeals
EXHIBIT "A"
NOV 2 7 2001
i ,,.qZ _
SECTION I
SECTION II
SECTION m
SECTION IV
SECTION V
SECTION VI
SECTION VII
SECTION vm
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Statement of Compliance .................................................................................... 3
Property Ownership, Legal Description, Short Title and
Statement of Unified Control .............................................................................. 4
Statement of Intent and Project Description .......................................... 5
General Development Regulations ..................................................... 6
Preserve Area Requirements .......................................................... 10.
Permitted Uses and Dimensional Standards for Residential Development ..... 11
Permitted Uses and Dimensional Standards for Golf Course ..................... 14
Development Commitments ........................................................... 16
EXHIBITS
Exhibit A - PUD Master Plan
Exhibit B - Legal Description
NO¥ 2 7 2001
SECTION I
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
The development of 646.5 acres of property in Section 16, Township 48 South, Range 26 East
Collier County, Florida, as a Planned Unit Development to be known as the Terafma PUD, will be in
compliance with the goals, objectives, and policies of Collier County as set forth in the Growth
Management Plan. The residential component of the project will be consistent with the growth
policies, land development regulations and applicable comprehensive planning objectives of each of
the elements of the Growth Management Plan for the following reasons:
The property is located in the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district as
depicted on the Future Land Use Map. The proposed gross density of 1.3 dwelling units per
acre is consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Management Plan,
which allows up to four (4) dwelling units per acre at this location or a maximum of 2,586
dwelling units. The total number of dwelling units proposed is eight hundred and fifty (850) on
± 141 acres proposed for residential use.
The subject property's location in relation to the existing or proposed community facilities and
services supports the development's residential density as required in Objective 2 of the Future
Land Use Element.
3. The proposed development is compatible with and complementary to existing and future
surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element.
4. Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable land development regulations as
set forth in Objective 3 of the Future Land Use Element.
5. The proposed development will result in an efficient and economical extension of community
facilities and services as required in Policy 3.1. G of the Future Land Use Element.
The project is planned to incorporate natural systems for water management purposes in
accordance with their natural functions and capabilities as required by Objective 1.5 of the
Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element.
All final development orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Concurrency
Management System, as implemented by the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance in Division
3.15 of the Land Development Code and further required by policy 2.3 of the Furore Land Use
Element.
NOV 2 7 2001
SECTION II
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, LEGAL DESCRIPTION, SHORT TITLE AND STATEMENT OF
UNIFIED CONTROL
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
Property Ownership
Robert Vocisano and Angelo Fawetto are co-trustees for the owners of the subject property.
Legal Description
Section 16, Township 48 South, Range
particularly, described in Exhibit "B".
26 East, Collier County, Florida, and, more
General Description of Prope~.
The property is located approximately 1.5 miles east of 1-75, and one (1) mile north of
Immokalee Road.
Physical Description
The subject property is vacant at the time of the application for rezoning. This site currently
drains from the northeast to the southwest. Soil types on the site are (3) Malafar Fine Sand;
(7) Immokalee Fine Sand; (14) Pineda Fine Sand & Limestone Substratum; (21) Boca Fine
Sand; and (25) Boca, Rivieria, Limestone Substratum, and Copeland Fine Sands,
depressional (16) Oldmar Fine Sand (10) Oldsmar Fine Sand Limestone Substratum. The
property is located in Flood Zone X.
The zoning classification prior to the date of approval of this PUD was Agricultural (A).
Short Title
This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "Terafina Planned Unit Development
Ordinance".
Statement of Unified Control
This statement represents that the current property owner has lands under unified control for
the purpose of obtaining PUD zoning on the subject property.
4
NOV 2 ? 2001
SECTION Ill
STATEMENT OF INTENT AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1
3.2
3.3
Introduction
It is the intent of this Ordinance is to establish a Planned Unit Development meeting the
requirements as set forth in Section 2.2.20 of the Collier County Land Development Code
(LDC). The purpose of this document is to set forth guidelines for the future development of
the project that meet accepted planning principles and practices, and to implement the Collier
County Growth Management Plan.
Proiect Description
The project contains 646.5 acres and includes land area for residential and golf course
development including preservation areas comprising two hundred and seventy four acres.
Total open space proposed is approximately seventy percent. The maximum number of
dwelling units permitted is eight hundred fifty (850).
Access will be provided from an existing sixty-foot (60') wide easement that is located along
the western property line that provides access to the south to Immokalee Road and future
access for lands located to the north.
1 _and Use Plan and Project Phasing
The PUD Master Plan provides for areas of commercial and residential use, water
management areas, and retained vegetation areas and road rights-of-way as depicted
on Exhibit "A". The PUD Master Plan is designed to be flexible with regard to the
placement of buildings, tracts and related utilities and water management facilities.
More specific commitments will be made at the time of Site Development Plan and
permitting approval, based on compliance with all applicable requirements of this
Ordinance, the LDC and local, state and federal permitting requirements. All tracts
may be combined or developed separately subject to compliance with the applicable
dimensional requirements contained within this document.
The anticipated time of build-out of the project is approximately eight (8) years from
the time of issuance of the first building permit, or 2008. However, actual build-out
will depend on market conditions.
k6~Ok '
NOV 2 7 2001
SECTION IV
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development regulations that may be applied generally
to the development of the Terafma Planned Unit Development and Master Plan.
4.1 General
The following are general provisions applicable to the PUD Master Plan:
ho
Regulations for development of the Terafina PUD shall be in accordance with the
contents of this document, the PUD Planned Unit D~velopment District and other
applicable sections and pans of the LDC and the Collier County Growth
Management Plan in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which
said regulations relate which authorizes the construction of improvements. The
developer, his successor or assignee, agree to follow the PUD Master Plan and the
regulations of this PUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications as may
be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor in title or
assignee is subject to the commitments within this agreement.
Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the
definitions set forth in the LDC in effect at the time of building permit application.
All conditions imposed and all graphic material presented depicting restrictions for
the development of the Terafina PUD shall become pan of the regulations that
govern the manner in which this site may be developed.
Do
Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a
concurrency review under the provisions of Division 3.15, Adequate Public
Facilities, of the LDC at the earliest or next to occur of either final SDP approval,
final plat approval, or building permit issuance applicable to this development.
Unless specifically waived through any variance or waiver provisions of any other
applicable regulations, the provisions of those regulations not otherwise provided for
within this PUD remain in full force and effect.
4.2 Site Clearing and Drainage
Cleating, grading, earthwork, and site drainage work shall be performed in accordance with
the Collier County LDC and the standards and commitments of this document in effect at the
time of construction plan approval.
4.3 Easements for Utilities
Easements, where required, shall be provided for water management areas, utilities and other
purposes as may be required by Collier County. All necessary easementst dedications or
other instruments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and 1
services and utilities. This will be in compliance with the applicable regu
the time construction plans and plat approvals are requested. Easements d
atio~l~~
dicated to Collier
NOV 2 7 2001
4.4
4.5
4.6
County shall be counted toward the County's open space and the retention of native
vegetation requirements.
Amendments to the Ordinance
The proposed PUD Master Plan is conceptual in nature and subject to change within the
context of the development standards contained in this Ordinance.
Amendments to this Ordinance and PUD Master Plan shall be made pursuant to Section
2.7.3.5 of the Collier County LDC, in effect at the time the amendment is requested.
Project Plan Approval Requirements
Exhibit "A", the PUD Master Plan, constitutes the required PUD development plan.
Subsequent to, or concurrent with PUD approval, a preliminary subdivision plat (if required)
shall be submitted for the entire area covered by the PUD Master Plan. All division of
property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with the subdivision
regulations set forth in Section 3.2 of the LDC.
Prior to the recording of the final subdivision plat, when required by the subdivision
regulations set forth in Section 3.2 of the LDC, final plans of the required improvements
shall receive the approval of all appropriate Collier County governmental agencies to ensure
compliance with the PUD Master Plan, the County subdivision regulations and the platting
laws of the State of Florida.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit or other development order, the provisions of
Section 3.3, Site Development Plans, shall be applied to all platted parcels, where applicable.
Should no subdivision of land occur, Section 3.3 shall be applicable to the development of all
tracts as shown on the PUD Master Plan.
Provision for Offsite Removal of Earthen Material
The excavation of earthen material and its stockpiling in preparation of water management
facilities or to otherwise develop water bodies is hereby permitted. If, after consideration of
fill activities on buildable portions of the project site, there is a surplus of earthen material,
offsite disposal is also hereby permitted subject to the following conditions:
A. Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a "development excavation"
pursuant to Section 3.5.5.1.3 of the LDC, whereby offsite removal shall not exceed
ten (10) percent of the total volume excavated up to a maximum of 20,000 cubic
Co
A timetable to facilitate said removal shall be submitted to the Development Services
Director for approval. Said timetable shall include the length of time it will take to
complete said removal, hours of operation and haul routes.
All other provisions of Section 3.5 of the LDC are applicable.
7
NOV 2 7' 2001
4.7 Sun,et and Monitoring Provisions
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
The Terafina PUD shall be subject to Section 2.7.3.4 of the LDC, Time Limits for Approved
PUD Master Plans and Section 2.7.3.6, Monitoring Requirements.
Polling Places
Polling places shall be provided in accordance with Section 3.2.8.3.14 of the Collier County
l_and Development Code.
Native Vegetation
The project shall meet the requirements of Division 3.9, Vegetation Removal, Protection and
Preservation of the LDC for the subject property. The preserve areas depicted on the PUD
Master Plan comprise a total of 274.5 acres or forty-two (42) percent of the total site area and.
far exceed the minimum preservation area requirement of twenty-five (25) percent.
Open Space
In addition to the areas designated on the PUD Master Plan as buffers and lakes, open space
will be allocated within each subsequent development area. Open space maybe in the form
of landscaping, additional buffers, passive or active recreation areas and water management
facilities. The total aggregate of such open space areas shall meet or exceed the open space
requirements of Section 2.6.32 of the LDC.
Archaeological Resources
The developer shall be subject to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the LDC pertaining to archaeological
resources in the event such resources are contained on the property.
Common Area Maintenance
Common area maintenance, including the maintenance of common facilities, open spaces,
and water management facilities, shall be the responsibility of a homeowners' association to
be established by the developer.
Architectural and Site Design Standards
Development of commemial uses shall meet the requirements of Division 2.8 of the LDC.
Signa~te
All signage shall be in accordance with Section 2.5 of the Collier County Land Development
Code, as applicable.
: A~A ITEI~,
NOV 2 7 2001
4.15
4.16
Off Street Parking and Loading
All off street parking and loading facilities shall be in accordance with Division 2.3 of the
Collier County Land Development Code.
Ail landscaping shall be in accordance with the requirements of Division 2.4 of the Collier
County Land Development Code.
9
AC/.NDA
NO. ~ .
NOV 2 7 2001
5.1
5.2
SECTION V
PRESERVE AREA REQUIREMENTS
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify development standards for the Preserve Areas as
shown on Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan.
PERMITTED USES
The PUD Master Plan provides for 274.35 acres for upland and wetland preserve areas or
forty two (42) per cent of the total site area. Minor adjustments may be made to the
boundaries of preserve areas based on wetland permitting considerations.
No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in
whole or part, for other than the following structures:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1. Passive recreation areas.
2. Biking, hiking, and nature trails, and boardwalks.
3. Water management structures.
4. Native preserves and wildlife sanctuaries.
5. Supplemental landscape planting, screening and buffering within the
Preserve Areas, after the appropriate environmental review.
B. Any other use deemed comparable in nature by the Development Services
Director.
10
AC.~J~A rr~
NOV 2 ? 20§!
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
SECTION VI
PERMITTED USES AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
Pul'~OSC
The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas
within the Terafina PUD designated for residential development on the PUD Master Plan,
Exhibit "A".
Maximum Dwelling Units
A maximum of eight hundred and fifty (850) dwelling units is permitted on areas designated
"R" on the PUD Master Plan. Dwelling units may be single or multifamily. Guesthouses
which are a permitted accessory use will be deducted from the total number of dwelling units
permitted.
General Description
The PUD Master Plan designates the following uses for the general use designations on said
Master Plan.
AREA
ACRES · PERCENTAGE
1. Residential 141.00 21.8
2. Lakes 56.08 8.7
3. Golf Course 126.76 19.6
4. Preserve Area 274.35 42.4
5. Club House Area 7.00 1.1
6. Maintenance Facility 1.80 .3
7. Right-of-way 39.50 6.1
646.49 100
The total open space area is seventy-one (71%) percent and comprises golf course, preserve,
lake and buffer areas.
The approximate acreage of the residential areas is depicted on the PUD Master Plan. Actual
acreage of all development tracts will be provided at the time of site development plan or
final subdivision plat approval in accordance with Article 3, Division 3.3, and Division 3.2,
respectively, of the Collier County Land Development Code. Residential areas are designed
to accommodate internal roadways, open spaces, recreational amenity areas, water
management facilities, and other similar uses typically found in residential areas.
Permitted Uses and Structures
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used~ in
whole or part, for other than the following:
A. Principal Uses:
11
NOV 2 7 2001
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Single family detached dwellings
Zero-lot line dwellings
Two-family and duplex dwellings
Single family attached and townhouse dwellings
Multi-family dwellings, including garden apartments
Any other housing type which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
uses and which the Development Services Director determines to be
compatible with residential uses.
B. Accessory Uses and Structures
Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal
residential uses permitted in this District, including recreational facilities,
maintenance facilities, a clubhouse, and guesthouses on lots greater than one
(1) acre, not to exceed forty (40) percent of the size of the principle structure.
6.5 Development Standards
TABLE 1
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS
PERMITTED USES SINGLE ZERO TWO SINGLE MULTI-
AND STANDARDS FAMILY LOT FAMILY FAMILY FAMILY
DETACHED LINE & ATTACHED DWELLING
DUPLEX AND
TOWNHOUSE
Minimum Lot Areas 6,000 S.F. 3,500 S.F. 3,500 3,000 S.F. per 1 AC
S.F.0) d.u.
Minimum Lot Width (2) 50 35 45 30 100
Front Yard 20® 15 15 20 20
Side Yard (3) 6.0 0 or 12(3) 0 or 6 0 or 12(3) 0 or .5 BH
Rear Yard Principal 20 20 20 20 25
Rear Yard Accessory 10 10 10 10 10
Maximum Building 35 35 35 35 35
Height
Distance Between N/A N/A N/A 10 .5 BH
Structures
Floor Area Min. (SF) 1600 1400 1200 1200 1200
BH = Building Height
All distances are m feet unless otherwise noted.
Notes
2
Each halfofa duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of thirty-five hundred (3,500)
square feet for a total minimum lot area of seven thousand (7.000) sq,,are I~A... -- rr~/9-~'
ac
Minimum lot width may be reduced by twenty (20) percent for cul-de-,,
located on curvilinear streets provided the minimum lot area is still rr
12
7 2001
Where the zero (0) foot yard option is utilized, the opposite side of the structure shall
have a twelve (12) foot sideyard.
Single-family dwellings, which provide for two (2) parking spaces within an enclosed
garage and provide for guest parking other than private driveways may reduce front
yard requirements to five (5) feet for the garage and fifteen (15) feet for the
remaining structures. Side entry garage setbacks may be reduced to twelve (12) feet.
Bo
Guest suites in the clubhouse area shall be a minimum of six hundred (600) square feet in
area. See also Section VII.
Building height shall be the vertical distance from the first finished floor to the highest point
of the roof surface of a flat or Bermuda roof, to the deck line or a mansard roof and to the
mean height level between eaves and ridge of gable, hip and gambrel roofs. Accessory
buildings shall be limited to twenty-five (25) feet above grade.
Development of individual tracts has not been finalized at the time ofrezoning with respect
to the particular type of residential dwellings. The location and mixture thereof, will be
based upon the following factors as are deemed appropriate by the Development Services
Director for the harmonious development of each tract with a minimum of interference
between different housing types based on the following criteria.
1. Physical separation of housing types into discrete areas.
2. Landscape or constructed barriers between different housing types meeting at a
minimum the standards of Division 2.4, Landscaping of the Collier County Land
Development Code.
3. Separation of housing types by common amenities.
13
NOV 2 7 200 I
7.1
7.2
SECTION VII
PERMITTED USES AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR GOLF COURSE
Purpose
The purpose of this Section is to set forth regulations for the area designated as Golf Course
on the PUD Master Plan.
Permitted Uses and Structures
No building or structure, or part thereof, may be erected, altered or used, or land or water
used, in whole or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures
2.
3.
4.
Golf Course
Golf clubhouse and country club
Water management facilities
Guest suites
B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures
o
Pro-shop, practice driving range, and other customary accessory uses for golf
courses or other recreational facilities.
Small commercial establishments, including gift shops, golf equipment sales,
restaurants, cocktail lounges, and similar uses intended to exclusively serve
patrons of the golf and country club or other permitted recreational facilities.
Shuffleboard courts, swimming pools, and other types of facilities intended
for recreation.
Tennis and other racquet sports courts.
Maintenance shops and equipment storage.
Non-commercial plant nursery.
C. General Requirements
4.
5.
6.
Overall site design shall be harmonious in terms of landscaping, enclosure of
structures, location of access streets and parking areas and location and
treatment of buffer areas.
Buildings shall be set back a minimum of fifty (50) feet from abutting
residential districts and twenty-five (25) feet from tract boundaries and the
setback areas shall be landscaped and maintained to act as a buffer zone.
Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner, which will protect roadways
and neighboring property from direct glare or other interference.
Maximum height shall be fifty-feet (50') above the finished grade of the lot.
The off-street parking will be as required by the Collier County Land
Development Code.
Landscaping shall be provided as required by the Collier
Development Code.
14
The total nUmber of guest suites will be governed by the maximum number
of dwelling units permitted in the Terafina PUD as set forth in Paragraph 6.2
of this ordinance.
The minimum floor area of guest suites shall be six hundred (600) square feet
and they may be attached or detached from the clubhouse and are available
for only residents or their guests.
15
SECTION VIII
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
8.1
8.2
Environmental Standards
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the environmental commitments of the project
developer.
Vegetative Preserve Areas depicted on the PUD Master Plan are permitted for open
space and passive recreational uses only. Vegetated preserve areas may be
reconfigured provided all other applicable requirements of this Ordinance are met.
All preservation areas shall be designated as Preservation Tracts or easements on all
construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per or
similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes.
Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida
Environmental Resource Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by
Current Planning Section Staff.
Co
Native vegetation preservation shall conform to the requirements of Subsection
3.9.5.5.3 of the Collier County LDC. For this site, a minimum of 274.35 acres of
native vegetation shall be retained on site.
An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring and maintenance (exotic free) plan for the
site, with emphasis on the Preservation Area, shall be submitted to the Current
Planning Section Staff for review and approval prior to final site plan/construction
approval. A schedule for exotic removal within all Preservation Areas shall be
submitted with the above-mentioned plan.
Eo
The petitioner shall comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission (FFWCC) regarding potential impacts to protected wildlife species.
Where protected species are observed on site, a habitat management plan for these
protected species shall be submitted to Current Planning Section Staff for review and
approval prior to final site plan/construction approval.
The applicant shall be subject to all environmental ordinances in effect at the time of
development order approvals to which said regulations relate.
Portions of the PUD designated as a preserve area along the eastern portion of the
property will be connected as a flow-way with lands to the south in the Olde Cypress
PUD District and lands to the east in the Marisol PUD District to improve water
management function in the general area and to lessen flooding.
Transportation Requirements
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the transportation
development.
16
Ao
The developer shall provide arterial level street lighting at the project entrance. Such
lighting shall be in place prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy.
The road impact fee shall be as set forth in the Collier County Consolidated Impact
Fee Ordinance No. 2001-13 and shall be paid at the time building permits are issued
or as provided for by the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance.
Internal access improvements shall not be subject to impact fee credits and shall be in
place before any certificates of occupancy are issued.
All traffic control devices used shall conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices as required by Chapter 316.0745, Florida Statutes.
Roads internal to the project serving the residential uses shall be private and
dedicated to the Homeowners Association for perpetual maintenance.
The developer shall provide turn lanes at the project entrance prior to the issuance of
the first certificate of occupancy for the first structure in accordance with the Collier
County Public Right-of-Way Manual and Ordinance 82-91.
The developer shall make a fair share contribution towards the capital cost of traffic
signals at the project entrance when deemed warranted bythe Transportation Services
Administrator, or designee, which is anticipated to be necessary for the efficient
distribution of traffic in the general area. These signals will be owned, operated and
maintained by Collier County.
An additional twenty (20') feet of right-of-way will be provided along the western edge of
the Terafina Development to provide for a total of eighty (80') feet of right-of-way along
the extension of Logan Blvd. A sixty (60') foot right-of-way presently exists. The
developer of Terafina will construct the extension of Logan Blvd. to the proposed project
entrance for Terafina. The additional road right-of-way will be dedicated to Collier
County at the time of platting or within ninety (90) days upon request fi.om Collier
County.
I. The golf maintenance facility shall have interior access only.
8.3 Utility Requirements
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the utilities and engineering commitments of the
project developer.
Bo
Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and interim water and/or
sewage treatment facilities to serve the project are to be designed, constructed,
conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No.
88-76, as amended, and other applicable County roles and regulations.
All customers connecting to the water distribution and sewage collecti
be constructed will be customers of the County.and will be billed by
accordance with the County's established rotes. Should the Coun~
position to provide sewer service to the project, the sewer custo, .~ersN[~al~ ~e
2001
8.4
8.5
customers of the interim utility established to serve the project until the County's off-
site sewer facilities are available to serve the project.
Prior to approval of construction documents by the County, the developer must
present verification, pursuant to Chapter 367, Florida Statutes, that the Florida Public
Service Commission has granted territorial rights to the developer to provide sewer
service to the project until the County can provide these services through its sewer
facilities.
The utility construction documents for the project's sewerage system shall contain the
design and construction of an on-site force main, which will ultimately connect the
project to the future central sewerage facilities of Collier County. The force main
must be interconnected to the pump station with alJpropriately located valves to
permit for simple redirection of the project's sewage, when connection to the
County's central sewer facilities becomes available.
Engineering Requirements
go
Detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans shall be submitted to the
Development Services Department for review. No construction permits shall be
issued unless detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans are submitted
and until approval of the proposed construction, in accordance with the submitted
plans, is granted by the Development Services Department.
A copy of the SFWMD Surface Water Management Permit must be received by the
Development Services staff prior to any construction drawing approvals.
Subdivision of the site shall require platting in accordance with Section 3.2 of the
LDC to define the fight-of-way and tracts shown on the PUD Master Plan.
The developer and all subsequent owners of this project shall be required to satisfy
the requirements of all County Ordinances or Codes in effect prior to or concurrent
with any subsequent development order relating to this site, including but not limited
to preliminary subdivision plat, site development plan and any other applications that
will result in the issuance of a final development order.
Water Management Requirements
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the water management commitments of the project
developer.
go
Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with the
appropriate provisions of the Collier County LDC, except that excavation for water
management features shall be allowed within twenty (20) feet from side, rear or
abutting property lines, with side, rear or abutting property lines fenced.
Landscaping may be placed within the water management area in acco
criteria established within Section 2.4.7.3 of the LDC.
18
· ~nn~e. ~Jth the~
NOV 2 7 2001
Co
The wet season water table elevation shall be established at the time of South Florida
Water Management District (SFWMD) permitting, which is required for the subject
property.
A surface water management permit must be obtained from the SFWMD prior to
any subdivision or site plan approval.
19
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD TAKE WHATEVER STEPS ARE
NECESSARY TO REVIEW AND MAKE DECISIONS REGARDING THE THREE
ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED VARIANCES REFERENCED IN THE
CLF_RK OF COURTS AUDIT
OBJECTIVE: To have the decisions on these variances made by the Board of
County Commissioners in accordance with local ordinance.
CONSIDERATIONS: The Clerk of Courts in a recent audit, indicated that there
were three variances that had been administratively granted that should have
been submitted to the County Commission for decision. It is recommended that
the Board take the steps necessary to have these brought back to the Board of
Commissioners for a decision.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management 'impact
associated with this item.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the County for this decision.
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
direct the County Attorney's office and staff to take actions necessary to bring the
three variances that were administratively approved and included in the audit
conducted by the Clerk of Courts to the Board of County Commissioners for
public hearings and decisions.
Submitted by: ,'-~_-~
Tom Henning, Commissi~r District 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER(S) TO BAYSHOKE/AVALON BEAUTIFICATION MSTU
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
OBJECTIVE: To appoint 2 members to serve on the Bayshore/Avalon Beautification MSTU
Advisory Committee; 1 members term will expire on March 3, 2005 and one will be appointed to
fulfill the remainder of the current term expiring on March 3, 2002 plus an additional 4 year term
expiring on March 3, 2006.
CONSIDERATIONS: This 5 member advisory committee was created on December 16, 1997,
by Ordinance No. 97-82, as amended, to provide curbing, watering facilities, plantings and
maintenance of the median strips of roadways within the MSTU; provide traffic calming
improvements; and, beautification and maintenance of other areas within the MSTU. Members
will also prepare and recommend an itemized budget to the Board of County Commissioners.
Members must be permanent residents or owners of commercial property within the MSTU
boundaries. A list of the current membership is included in the backup.
Mr. Michael Bruet retired fi.om the company he was representing on the committee, which made
him ineligible to continue serving as a member and Mr. Thomas R. Briscoe resigned on
September 6, 2001. A press release was issued and resumes were received from the following 2
interested citizens:
APPLICANT
CATEGORY
DIST ELECTOR ADV. COMM.
Thomas L. Welstead Resident
David L. Benson Resident
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
4 I Yes I None
4 I Yes I None
Thomas L. Welstead
David L. Benson
The terms will be determined at the next committee meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NONE
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners consider the
recommendation for appointment, appoint 2 members, and direct the County Attorney to prepare
a resolution confirming the appointments.
Prepared By: Sue Filson, Executive Manager
Board of County Commissioners
Agenda Date: NOVEMBER 27, 2001
ITEM
Memorandum
filson._s
From: levy_m
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 12:36
To: lilson_s
Subject: Memo - Bayshore
Memorandum
From:
Date:
Subject:
Sue Filaon, Administrative Assistant, Board of County Commissioners
Michael S. Levy, Senior Secretary, Landscape Operations
1119/01
Bayshore MSTU Advisory Committee Vacancy
The Bayshore MSTU Beautification Advisory Committee met on November 7, 2001. Please accept
the applications of Thomas L. Westead and David L. Benson.
11/9/2001
Bayshore/Avalon Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee
Worh Phone Appt'd Ex~. Dale Term
Name Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term
Ms.. Jean Carpenter
3412 Lakeview Drive
Naples, FL 34112
District: 4
Category: Resident
Mr. Michael Bruet
7768 Jewel Lane, #201
Naples, FL 34109
District: 2
Category: Commercial Interest
Mr. Thomas R. Briscoe fe3~
2841 Shoreview Drive q, b'
Naples, FL 34112
District: 1
Category: Resident
Mr. Maurice Gutierrez
2736 Shoreview Drive
Naples, FL 34112
D/str~4: 4
Category: Resident
Mr. Bill L. Neal
3839 Clipper Lane
Naples, FL 34112
District: 4
Category: Resident
775-5(503
04/24/01 03/03/05 4 Years
261-4455 03/03/98
592-O027
03/03/98
774-7564 04/24/01
03/03/02 4 Years
03/03/01 3 Years
03/03/05 4 Years
263-0572 08/03/99
774-7022 02/22/00
03103/00 8 Months
03~03/04 4 Years
03/03/98
774-6325 0222/00
03/03/00 2 Years
03/03/04 4 Years
Thursday, Aprd 26, 2001
Page ] of 2
AGENDA ITEM
Bayshore/Avalon Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee
Work Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term
Name Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term
· ' TM' iQl~ llllm~ ~lllll,~ :,,,1~ .......... , - , .
the MSTU. Memnem m. ~,n,-.,,, _ __
~ ~.,uu, ~ ...... orler8. Men1 r.-,, ~''
FL STAT 125.01
Staff.' Mike Levy, ,~nior Secretary, Transportation ~ervices ~ 774-8494
Thursday, Aprd 26, 2001
Page 2 of 2
AGEI~D_A ITEM
NO. ~.8
;,L',' 2 ?
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 5, 2001
TO:
FROM:
Vinell Hills, Elections Office .~
Sue Fi[son, Executive Manage~J, '
Board of County Commissioners
Voter Registration - Advisory Board Appointments
The Board of County Commissioners will soon consider the following individuals for appointment
to one of the county's advisory committees. Please let me know if those listed below are
registered voters in Collier County.
Also, please list the commission district in which each applicant resides.
BAYSHORE/AVALON BEAUT ADV COMM
COMMISSION DISTRICT
Thomas L. We[stead
3762 Haldeman Creek Drive
Naples, FL 34112
David L. Benson
4503 Lighthouse Lane
Naples, FL 34112
Thank you for your help.
I(3'; 2 7 200i
pg. ',~
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DIVISION
TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT
September 21, 2001
2705 S. HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FL 34104
(941) 774-8494
FAX (941) 659-5787
transportation@colliergov, net
Dear Mr. Bruet,
Afar hearing of your retirement from Collier Enterprises in July of this year, I became concemed about
your eligibility to remain on the Bayshore MSTU committee. As the ordinance didn't seem to answer this
question clearly, I asked the County Attorney's office to render an opinion. It was the opinion of the
County Attorney's office that you should resign from this committee, unless you are a permanent resident
or owner/officer/partner of another business entity within this taxing district..
I have requested and received a follow-up opinion on whether business conducted during the 3 meetings
(July, August, and September) held since your departure from Collier Enterprises can stand as conducted.
The County Attorney's office has stated that business that has been conducted can stand.
Your commitment and dedication to this MSTU is much appreciated by staff and by the MSTU committee
and the taxpayers of this district. I wish you luck in your retirement and hope that you will remain active in
civic activities.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Bob Petersen, Engineer II, Landscape Operations
C:
Edward J. Kant, PE, Transportation Operations Director
P_amela J. Lulich, ASLA, Landscape Operationz Manager
Bill Neal, Chairman, Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee
Sue Filson, Adminislrative Assistant, Board of County Commissioners
AGEND,~ I~EM
NO, "'/~'
Pg. (~
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
November 5, 2001
Mike Levy, Senior Secretary, Transportation Detmmnent
Sue Filson, Executive Manager t-~
Board of County Commissioner~
Bayshore/Avalon Beautifieation MSTU Advisory Committee
As you know, we currently have vacancies on the above-referenced advisory eo~nmittee. A press
release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit a resume for
consideration- I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows:
Thomas L. Welstead
3762 Haldeman Creek Drive
Naples, FL 34112
David L. Benson
4503 Lighthouse Lane
Naples, FL 34112
Please let me know, in writing, the recommendation for appointment of the advisory committee
within the 41 day time-fxame, and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration.
Please categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please caLl me at
774-8097.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
SF
Attachments
AGEND~ I, oTE~~,
THOMAS L WELSTEAD
3762 Haldeman CreekDrive
Naples, FL 34112
October 23, 2001
Ms. Sue Filson
Administrative AssiStant
Bo a Of County Commission.s
Building "F"'" ~ra3 Floor
3301 Tamiami Trail
Naples, FL. 34112
Dear Ms. Fils0n:
It has been brought to my attention that there is a possibility of an opening on the
Bayshore Beautification Advisory Committee. My wife and I have lived in the Bayshore
area for the past four years. We are both registered to vote in Collier County and are year
around residents.
I have been a full or part-time resident and proPerty owner in the State of Florida since
1960. I attended Archbishop Curley High School and the University of Miami while
living with my familY in Dade County, Florida. I have served as Chairman of Jimmy
Bums Scholarship Foundation and participated in numerous other charitable activities in
the State of Florida.
The majority of my business career has been in the insurance and reinsurance industry..
At present, I am a principle in a national wholesale insurance company that specializes in
medical malpractice coverage for health care institutions. My role in the company is one
that does not require full time participation and is confined to working on Board and
future planning matters.
Living in the Bayshore area since the beginning of the beautification project, I have
watched, it progress to its present state. Both my wife and I feel this project has been a
very positive force in improving our local community.
I would appreCiate being considered for. a position on the Advisory Committee. Please
feel fi'ce to contact me at home with any questions you might have concerning my
request.
Home phone 941-732-1917
Sincerely,
AGENDAJTEM
NO. qdY
..... , . -
Pg. ~
Mrs. Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant
Board of County Commissioners
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Naples, Florida 34112
October 12, 2001
Dear Mrs. Filson,
I would like to submit my name to fill a vacancy on the Bayshore Committee.
I have worked closely with Bill Neal over the past five years at Windstar Country
Club. We were both on the Board of Directors We worked together to negotiate
with Huntington Bank to have the members own the Club at no cost to them. !
retired from the Windstar Board as President in 2000.
In addition to my experience as President of two different Clubs, and various USGA
leadership positions, I have also been active in my Community. I have been President
of Grace Lutheran Church, on various Church committees, President of the
Northern Ohio Grocery Manufacturers Representatives, Advancement Chairman of
the Boy Scouts of America as a former Eagle Scout. I served as Tournament Chair
of last years Botanical Garden Golf Tournament.
My wife and have been property owners in Naples for 16 years. Her parents were
members of Windstar Country Club in 1984 when Bayshore Drive was Kelly Road.
We joined the Club in 1993 when I retired to Naples.
We have seen many improvements in the area and would be pleased to assist in any
way possible to continue this forward progress.
Sincerely yours,
David L. Benson
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER(S) TO THE CONTRACTORS LICENSING BOARD
OBJECTIVE: To appoint 2 members to serve 3 year terms, expiring on June 30, 2004 on the
Contractors Licensing Board.
CONSIDERATIONS: This 9 member board determines the qualifications of applicants for
the various categories of the Contractors' Certificates of Competency. They also hold hearings to
determine if the holder of a certificate of competency of any contractor, master or journeyman
should be disciplined. A minimum 3 members shall be in the category of"Consumer". The
consumer representatives may be any resident of the local jurisdiction that is not, and has never
been, a member or practitioner ora profession regulated by the board or a member of any closely
related profession. Members are required to file a Form 1 Statement of Financial Interests each
year with the Supervisor of Elections. Terms are 3 years. A list of the currem membership is
included in the backup.
The terms for Mr. Arthur F. Schoenfuss (representing Engineer category) and Mr. Daniel
Gonzalez (representing. Residential Contractor) expired on June 30, 2001.
A press release was issued and resumes were received from the following 4 interested citizens:
APPLICANT CATEGORY DIST ELECTOR ADV. COMM.
Charles Morsan Abbott General Contractor 4 Yes Development Services Adv Comm
Michael D. Bm'il General Contractor 1 Yes None
Kenneth H. D,mne Engineer t 2 Yes None
Scan Mahoney Electrical Contra~or 2 Yes None
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Quasi Judicial - no recommendation accepted.
FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NONE
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners consider the requests for
appointment, appoint 2 members, and direct the County Attorney to prepare a resolution
confirming fl~e appointments.
Prepared By: Sue Filson, Executive Manager
Board of Coumy Commissioners
Agenda Date: NOVEMBER 27, 2001
2 ? 2001
Pg. -_~_~_..__..,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
BUILDING REVIEW AND PERMITTING
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 341o4
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 7, 2001
Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant
Board of County Commissioners
Ed Perico, Director c...-f
Building Review & Permitting Department
Contractors' Licensing Board
I have reviewed the resumes for the Contractors' Licensing Board and listed the specific
categories they are qualified for. They are as follows:
Michael D. Baril
Baril Construction, Inc.
118 South Barfield Drive
Marco Island, FL 34145
General Contractor
Charles Morgan Abbott
1306 28th Ave. North
Naples, FL 34103
General Contractor
Sean Mahoney
3215 La Costa Circle
Naples, FL 34105
Electrical Contractor
Kenneth H. Dunne Engineer
133 Sharwood Drive
Naples, FL 34110
If I can be of further as si stance please do not he si rate to co ntact me at 403-~i~,~ z,~ ~6F./~,~ ?M !
I
I
Contractors Licensing Board
Saffl~
Worh Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term
Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term
Mr. Kenneth Lloyd
5408 Freeport Lane
Naples, FL 34119
District: 3
Category: Consumer
43O-690O 09/11/01
594-8685
Mr. Gary F. Hayes 643-2431
341 Airport Road North
Naples, FL 34104
District: 4
Category: Specialty Contractor/Plumbing
Mr. Arthur F. Schoenfuss
6506 Ilex Circle
Naples, FL 34109
District: 4
Category: Engineer
597-7544
596-3388
Mr. Daniel Gonzalez
809 Walkerbilt Rd., Ste 3
Naples, FL 34110
District: 2
Category: Residential Contractor
4~4-8696
Mr. Walter Mitchell Crawford, I
1280 Venetian Way
Naples, FL 34110
District: 2
Category: General Contractor
596-0291
597-9604
Mr. Richard E. Joslin, Jr. 455-5000
'595 13th Street, N.W.
Naples, FL 34120
District: 5
Category: Licensed Commercial Pool/Spa Contr
09/26/95
05/25/99
06/13/95
06/16/98
11/07/95
06/16/98
06/13/00
06/11/96
06/13/00
06/30/04
06/30196
06130/02
06/30/98
06/30/01
06/30/98
06/30/01
06/30/03
06/30/97
06/30/03
Thursday, September 13, 2001
Page 1 of 2
3 Years
-1Year
3 Years
3 Years
3 Years
3 Years
3 Years
3 Years
1 Year
3 Years
AC.~JqD~ rrEM
NO.
,,~, 2 7
Pg. ,
Contractors Licensing Board
Name
Work Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term
Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term
571-3345 05/25/99 06/30/02 3 Years
649-8828
Ms. Sara Beth White
346 Pirate's Bight
Naples, FL 34103
District: 4
Category: Consumer
Ms. Carol Pahl
2501 Sailors Way
Naples, FL 34109
District: 3
Category: Consumer Representative
02/09/99 06/30/00 1 Year
597-3759 06/13/00 06/30/03 3 Years
Mr. Les Dickson
202 Monterey Drive
Naples, FL 34119
District: 3
Category: Roofing Contractor
643-1516 06/11/96 06/30/99 3 Years
05/25/99 06/30/02 3 Years
This 9 member board wes created by Ord. No. 78-2, 85-42, 90-105, 92-61 to determine the
qualifications of applicants for the various categories of the Contractors' Certificates of
Competency. They also hold hearings to determine if a certificate of competency of any
contractor, master or journeyman should be revoked. A minimum of 2 members shall reside
within the corporate city limits of Naples or shall be recommended to the BCC by the Naples
City Council. FI Stat, Sec 489.131, sub 10 states that 3 members must be consumer
representatives. Membership should be licensed architect, general contractor, engineer,
electrical contractor, plumbing contractor, mechanical contractor, roofing contractor, residential
or building contractor. Terms are 3 years. This is a Quasi Judicial Board. Amended by
Ordinance No. 94-34, 95-11, 97-68, 99-45
FL STAT 489
Staff.' Ed Perico, Building Review & Permitting Director.: 403-2400
Thursday, September 13, 2001
Page 2 of 2
AGENDA ITEM
'!
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 5, 2001
TO:
FROM:
Vinell Hills, Elections Office
Sue Filson, Executive Manage.r~
Board of County Commission~'
Voter Registration - Advisory Board Appointmems
The Board of County Commissioners will soon consider the following individual~ for appointment
to one of the county's advisory conunittees. Please let me know il'those listed below are
registered voters in Collier County.
Also, please list the commission district in which each applicant resides.
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSING BOARD
COMMISSION DISTRICT
Charles Morgan Abbott
1306 28t~ Avenue North
Naples, FL 34103
Sean Mahoney i~rI[-i
3215 La Costa Circle
Napes, FL 34105
Kenneth H. Dunne
133 Sharwood Drive
Naples, FL 34110
Thank you for your help. -
2 7 2001
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 6, 2001
TO:
FROM:
Vinell Hills, Elections Office
---gff
Sue Filson, Executive Manager<0
Board of County Commissioners
RE: Voter Registration - Advisory Board Appointments
The Board of County Commissioners will soon consider the following individuals for appointment
to one of the county's advisory committees. Please let me know if those listed below are
registered voters in Collier County.
Also, please list the commission district in which each applicant resides.
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSING BO~ COMMISSION DISTRICT
Michael D. Baril
832 Rose Court
Marco Island, FL 34145
Thank you for your help.
AG~A I~M~
NO~ ,, c~
.... .....
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
November 5, 2001
Ed Perieo, Building Review & Permitting Director
Sue Filson, Executive Manage~ '
Board of County Commissioners
Contractor's Licensing Board
As you know, we currently have 2 vacancies on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press
release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit a resume for
consideration. I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows:
Charles Morgan Abbott
1306 28t~ Avenue North
Naples, FL 34103
Sean Mahoney
3215 La Costa Circle
Naples, FL 34105
Kenneth H. Dunne
133 Sharwood Drive
.Naples, FL 34110
Please let me know, in writing within the 41 day time-~, if the applicants are qualified to serve as
members on the board, and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration.
· Ple~e e~tegorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at
774-8097.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
SF
Attachments
AC~.NDA ITEM
pg. '7
Abbott Construction Enterprises, Inc.
CGC 016719
CUSTOM BLULDERS
Napics, FL 341O3
(941) 649-6~65, F~x:(941) 649-/$7J
Em~il:C-',~(~oom
Cellular: (941) 'TK7-1404
1 November 2001
Board of County Commissioners
Collier County Florida
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Naples, FL 34112
Attn: Ms. Sue Fison
(941) 774-8097, Fax:774-$865
RE: Contractor's Licensing Board
Dear Ms. Filsorg
I wish to apply for one of the vacant positions on the Contractors' Licensing
Board. I have been a builder/remodeler in Collier County for twenty four
years, an instructor in Edison Community College's construction classes for
the past year. I make much of my living from being a salvage contractor
where I have to complete projects started by others who for various reasons
have failed to complete the work. I believe that I am in a unique position to
assist in judging the sufficiency of contractor's efforts to perform their work.
Thank you for your attention to this application.
Yours truly,
Charles Morgan Abbott
C:~/fhmnmtmmMtid S'-~G''Man 1001 a'wpd
Page 1 of 1
Resume of:.
CHARLES MORGAN ABBOTT
1306 28th Ave. North
Naples, Fiodda 33940
(941) 649-6565, FAX:(941) 649-7825
Cellular. (941) 777-1404
EDUCATION
BA Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 1971, lVi~er ofBusimss ~n program in Real
Estate, University of Florida. Major in Real Estate Appraisal prineip~ & practices. Continuing
education in professional ~ such as FP&L's Energy Audit Seminam-1986, 1988, 1989, 1990,
1992, 1994, 1999. FlorktaSoIarCentegs"LowEnergyBufkting~inWarm, Humid Climates",
Co~n Management and govermnem l~,~:ion seminars. Real Estate and construction
seminars and licensing programs every year. CCIM(Commercial Investment Real Estate Institute)
candidate. AH four core Bm'ld~E Code 2000 classes completed in 2001.
LICENSES
State of Florida: Licensed Real Estate Broker, State Certified C_mneml Contractors License(CG
C016719). U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Marine Master's License(500 ton)
PERSONAL
Bom: 16 November 1950, Atlanta GA
Height: 6'1", weight: 198 lbs.
Civic Organizations: Boy Scout leader of Post 1838, Vice President of the Friends of the Collier
County Museum> member of North Naples Rotary Club
EMPLOYMENT
June 1987 - Present
Consmmtion related activities in corranercial and resklential remodeling with some large custom
home~ Consmmtion and Compmer consulting for legal and constructionfnms. Appointed amember
of the Comiv, lttee." Real estate activities inthe consm~tion and sale of speculation homes in St. Johm,
Flagler & Volusia Counties in N.E. Florida. Cost Approach appraisals performed for U.S. Fish &
WiJdlife Service for the establishment of the Florida Panther Preserve in northeast Collier County,
1989. Consmmfion value co~ for Real Estate Appraisers in various right of way acquisitions.
Consulting on values and standards of comtnw~don for mortgage lenders, engineering f~ms and
attorneys. Appointed by the Collier County Co~-i~.:-~4on as a 4 year member of the Development
Shopping Plaza from 1988 to 1997. Co-?leted all course work in the CCIM program. Salvage
contractor for abandoned or disabled projects. Special.consultant for the LaPlaya Resort remodel in
2001. Mere _her of the FEMA and City of Naples Ad Hoc Committee for constructio~n issues in the City
of Naples. [ AO~..I~&ffEM
Pg. q
p.2
July 1980.-19~
Owu~ and op~riRed a small gemini con~act~g firm. Opgratiom were directed m F~al projects
Conlinl~lg work IR Edison Coom,tmity College as an instructor in 1~__~_ ~ Eslate clnsses. Served as an
expert witness on construction values(! 987- ! 990) with the estddishraent of I-75 in Collier Comay for
~ Appraisal of Tampa, Florida. Contract woxk for the Federal Govenm~nt.
Dec. ! 9g l-Jan. 19g3
Construction Manager for Avatar Properties, Inc. In charge of all odmin~triRive nnd construction
facets of the major developer in Golden Gate Subdivision, Collier County, Floridm Prh~ry
reslxmsibility wns for the construct~n and snk~ ofth~ 32 unit COURTYARDS OF GOLDEN GATE
Condom~-,ium and a numb~ ofs~l~ and nmBifamily unita in tlm ~a-rotmd~g ama.
I~ties involved estimating construction, financ~ planning for Golden Gate operations for the parent
company, completion of all construction projects and obligations for Avatar Properties, sales of
inventory homes/units, and adminis'aation and enforc~m~t of deed r~ictiom for Gold~ Gate and
Csold~n Gate Estat~ Subdivisions.
Oct. 1979-Dec, 1981
Construction superintendent and Real Estate Bwkex. Obtained State of Florida Certified General
Contra~or's ~ in Jm~e 1980. lnstn~or in Read Estate eour~e~ at Edison Communivj College, a
dbAsion of the Florida Universi~ System
Jan. 1979-Oct. 1979
Comnxt~ion superintendent with Rtrtenberg Homes, Inc.(U.S. Home).
analysis, cost comroi, subcontractor procurenmnt, nnd scheduling for
mult~ constructio~
Duties involved Ix~iget
high quality single and
1975-1979
National Park S~'vic~, Big Cypm~ & Ew-rgla~ National Park, South Florida
Real Estate Appraiser with apl~raisals of parcels for Federal purchase in Collier, Monroe, and Dade
Counties. Qm, I;C~! m an expen witneas in mai estate valuegapprai~ ia Federal Court for the
Southern District of Florida. Functioned in the Federal anti-smuggling effort in South Florida and the
Cari~ 1976 to 19g3.
1974-1975
Off~ce ofthe Auditor General, Stale of Florida.
cat~o~
Real Estate Appraiser with npprais~ of all property
22 O1 12: 17p
10/22/9I]81 10:50
Oc~. lS Ol 0~:47a
Seam HahomeM
9416437875
Sue Filson
941
P~ FGANCE IN PLBG
Board of County Commissioners
3311 EaSt Tamiami Trail Naples, FL34112
040 774-a097
Fa~u (941) 774-3~2
B49-BTlO p. 1
P~E 81/81
774-888~ p. I
Application for Advisory Committees/Boards
g~ll
(3.1L'~Ty (ffsp~licnblc):~C'
l~o~so list ~ c~mmunJty iL~_vllJff (~vJC ~b~, ndfhborbood sssoebflom, e~.. amd IMoitl°~
ImM: .qr-',~,~i , ~..J .5~,,c:~ ;)/_4. t/_ O_~J4rn_¢_~%0~5
/
pg. //
Kenneth H. Dunne, P.E.
Civil Engineer & General Contractor
Florida Professional Engineer #35766 Florida Certi?ed General Contractor #CGC059871
October 16, 2001
Mrs. Sue Filson
Executive Manager to BCC
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Naples, FL 34112
SUBJECT:
Construction Licensing Board
Application for Engineer Vacancy on the Board
Dear Mrs. Filson,
I respectfully submit my letter of interest, application and resume for consideration of my experience and
qualifications to serve on the Construction Licensing Board and fill the Engineer vacancy on the Board.
I have a B.S. Degree in Civil Engineering from Villanova University, Villanova, PA in 1975 and have been
a Registered Professional Engineer in Florida sir :e 1985. I am also a Florida Certified General Contractor
#CG-C059871 since 1998, and have lived in Naples with my wife and two daughters for the past 11 years
on a full-time basis. I have over 26 years of engineering and construction experience in heavy civil projects
including buildings, bridges, highways, nuclear power plants, and railroads, and have successfully managed
over $150,000,000 of construction work for FDOT, Port Authority of NY & NJ and the Miami-Dade Transit
Agency, plus others. Please refer to my resume for additional details.
I most recently served on the Naples/Collier County Beach Renourishment and Maintenance Committee for
2 V2 years as a Collier County Appointee. I am active in the community at Naples Park Elementary School
where I teach Math Superstars on a volunteer basis, and I have created a new curriculum called Science
Superstars which we are introducing in Mr. DeWitt's 4~ Grade Class where my youngest daughter, Sarah
is a student. My oldest daughter, Taylor, is a 6~ Grader at Oak Ridge Middle School.
I have also served on the Collier M.P.O. Citizens Advisory Committee, and I am a member of the Knights
of Columbus, and the Forum Club of SW Florida.
I look forward to continuing to serve our community, and respectfully request the Board's consideration of
my engineering and construction experience and ~' difications to serve on the Construction Licensing Board.
Thank you. If you have any questions, or need more information, please call me at (941)571-5280.
Best Regards,
Kenneth H. Dunne, P.E.
133 Sharwood Drive, Naples, FL 34110
(941)594-0269; (941)594-1453fax; (941)571-5280 cell
Board of County Commissioners
3301 East Tamiami Trail
Naples, FL 34112
(941) 774-8097
Fax: (941) 774-3602
Application for Advisory Committees/Boards
Home Address:
Zip Code: ~c~/([0
FaxNo. '~f-/'f~ BusinessPho%'~/~'''&'~'
A~ yon a r~red voter ~ Co~r Co~: Yes ~ No
Do you c~ent~ ho~ public o~e? Yes No
~ ~ ~w ~ ~ h~ ~ ~er ~ ~ a C~ C~ ~ or ~~? Y~ ~ No
If ~ ~ ~ ~e ~~s: ~ , ~ _ '
I ~ . ,I
Pteate attach any ~ informat~on yM feelpergm'~ TI~ appftca_#on skmdd be forwarded to 5se Flison, Executive Mauler to the
Bmod of Cotmty C~ners, $$01 Eas~ T~niami Tra~ Naples, FL 34113. If yo~ wisk, please fw~ your appFtcatlon to f941)774-$602 or
e-msil to suefdson(&colli~rgov, ne:. Tdumkyo~for yohmaewing t~ serve the ~ ~fC.o~i~ Cmmty.
Education:
Registrations:
Professional
Affiliations:
KENNETIt fi. DLrNNE, P.E.
B.S. Civil Engineering, Villanova University, 1975
Professional Engineer in FL #35766 and NY//062789-1
State of Florida Certified General Contractor CG-C059871
ASCE, NSPE, Florida Eng'...-.-r~ring Society (FES)
ASCE Committee on Quality in the Civil Engineering Profession, 1994-1997
Naples/Collier County Beach Renourishment]Maintenance Committee, 1998-2001
Collier County M.P.O. Citizens Advisory Committee, 1999 - 2001
Mr. Dunne contributes with 26 years of progressively responsible engineering and construction experience
in heavy civil engineering and construction on structural projects for buildings, bridges, highways,
railroads, and ports and harbors for Port Authority of NY & NJ piers in Manhattan and Brooklyn, NY as
the Resident Engineer and Project Manager managing multiple contractors, consultants and personnel.
Aggregate construction project value is in excess of $150,000,000.
His responsibilities include supervising engineering personnel, plans reviews, construction time and cost
estimates, value engineering, writing specifications, preparing budgets and performance reports, CPM
Schedule Analysis, writing performance reports, negotiating change orders, resolving disputes, interpreting
contract drawings and specifications, evaluating daily construction progress, construction inspection,
participating in Disputes Review Boards and Public Hearings, meetings with contractors, and coordination
with the Florida Department of Transportation ~nd local government agencies.
Representative Experience
F~orida Department of Transportation $38 Million MacArthur Causeway Bridge 1-395, Miami, FL: Mr.
Dunne was Resident Engineer and Project Manager from 1993-1997 responsible for the project
construction engineering and inspection (CED of two Major Category I Bridges, including underwater
bridge foundations consisting of (84) 7' diameter shafts drilled in Biscayne Bay to depths of between 85-
100' in accordance with USEPA, USCG, FDER, and Dare County environmental regulations. The twin,
high-level, ih-mile long bridges utilized AASHTO pre-stressed girders, post-tensioned in three- and four-
span units 65' wide by 435'- 580' long, constructed in two phases using a 9-strand configuration of the
tendon. The bridge's pier columns are on 145' centers, using the FDOT Mass Concrete Specification. The
1-395 and U.S. 41 roadway approaches utilized a limerock base and Mechanically Stabilized Earth walls,
with extensive 60" diameter french drains and deep wells. Successfully completed in January, 1997.
Florida Department of Transportation, $7 Million SR-951 Widening and Reconstruction, District One,
from Naples to Marco Island Bridge, 1998-2000. Mr. Dunne served as the Senior Project Engineer for
the CE&I of 3.1 miles of roadway widening en~. new bridge construction through extremely sensitive
environmental wetlands and mangroves, and is immediately adjacent to the Federally sponsored Rookery
Bay Marine Institute in Collier County, Florida. It is a protected habitat and research facility for many
species of avian and marine wildlife, including the American Bald Eagle, American Crocodile, and West
Indian Manatee. The project is permitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida
Depaxm~ent of Environmental Protection. The project also has an Incentive/Disincentive Clause for
construction time-to-complete, Alternative Contracting Provisions, and a Disputes Review Board. The
Project was completed in March, 2000, 4 months ahead of schedule.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) $210 Million Phase I.I Cen,tr, al Arte, r~ T_unnel/l-
Project. Mr. Dunne performed the Constructability Review of the design Ior ~0.,~~ 1-93
· I ,, 2uu,
J .. ,
Southbound and Albany Street Bridge over Amtrak, MBTA and Conrail electrified tracks, and the
Massachusetts Turnpike in Boston in 1997. The review included demolition of existing temporary
structures over the tracks, new construction of long span Albany Street bridge sections over the tracks, and
segmental construction of roadway and ramp structures.
Florida Department of Transportation Value Engineering Study of the $11 Million Ft. George River Inlet
Bridge, Jacksonville, Florida. Mr. Dunne provided bridge and roadway construction value engineering
services to the FDOT VE Team with respect to marine construction efforts in the tidal inlet river basin for
bridge construction, experience with drilled shafts and deep driven piling to protect against bridge scour,
and coastal erosion of the existing bridge abutments. The study included alternate bridge foundations and
sub-structure, raising bridge and roadway elevations, and revetment design and construction.
Metro-Dade Transit Agency (MDTA) $45 M','Kion Metrornover APM Omni Extension Construction
Project, Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Oversight: As the Resident Engineer, Mr. Dunne was
responsible for the construction inspection and engineering of 1.5 miles of elevated Transitway and six
Stations/Power Distribution Buildings in Miami for the Metro-Dade Transit Agency. Mr. Dunne started
the Project in February 1991 and successfully completed the civil construction portions Project in June
1993 when systems installation and testing began. The elevated transitway is constructed of 6,000 Tons
of AASHTO Fracture Critical Steel on augercast piles and concrete columns and caps. Six multi-level
Stations and Power Distribution Buildings were constructed along the Omni alignment, while maintaining
1/16" tolerances on platform/vehicle distance requirements. Mr Dunne regularly provided reports to the
MDTA and Federal Transit Administration on budget and schedule controls.
$60 Million Harrison Main Repair Facility for the PATH R/R, Interstate Transportation Division of Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey: Mr. Dunne was the Railroad's Field Project Manager for four
prime contracts during the construction of the new Harrison Main Repair Facility from 1988-1991,
including Buildings, Foundations, Stmcturai Steel, and Track. These contracts were inspected,
administered and negotiated for the PATH Railroad. The Facility included 12 miles of lay-up Yard Track
and 1 Mile of Mainline Track, 190,000 s.f. MaL".tenance and Office Facility including 250Ton capacity
'overhead cranes, hydraulic lift equipment and m'a~hine tool equipment to repair railroad wheel equipment
to FRA and AAR Standards. Foundations included over 4,000 driven timber piles in 5-pile clusters, with
concrete pile caps designed to receive industrial building floor loads from heavy equipment and revenue
transit cars.
NYCTA $7 Million Renovation and Rehabilitation of the Bus Garage/Depot in Queens Village, New
York: Mr. Dunne was the Resident Engineer responsible for a one-year construction schedule in 1986
which included civil, electrical and mechanical upgrades of existing repair facilities, new hazardous
materials storage building and the roof'mg of the 190,000 s.f. garage during 24-hour transit operations.
Florida Department of Transportation, Engineering Consultant, Beeline Main and Holland East/West
Toll Expressways, Orlando. Mr. Dunne serves as the Project Manager for this thxee-year, Prime
Consultant contract for the physical inspection of roadway and toll facilities, evaluations and
recommendations for inclusion in the Depa~m~ent's five-year work program, and preparing reports for the
Department's use as required in the Lease-Purchase Agreement with OOCEA with regards to operations
and maintenance budgets, toll revenue projections to determine sufficiency of debt coverage.
Florida Department of Transportation, District Six, Miami, Districtwide Public Transportation
Consultant. Mr. Dunne served as the Project Manager for the District Six Public Transportation Office
under a two-year consultant contract to provide expert professional planning,dT~,~,~ll~l~[~u-- ............
I NO.
1
inspection for Ports and Harbors, Aviation, Transit, and Bridges/Highways, and expert peer review
services of Consultant Plans submitted on Pr.aiects within the District. Aviation, RJR Crossing Re-
construction CEI, and M.O.T. Plans, Transit Safety Evaluations, and Environmental Assessments.
United Engineers & Constructors, Inc.: As Field Engineer Mr. Dunne was responsible for nuclear
power plant field engineering and inspection and remedial design of steel and concrete structures.
City of Perlh Amboy, New Jersey, Assistant City Engineer. As the Assistant Engineer, Mr. Dunne was
responsible for the engineering design and construction of modifications and improvements to City Water
and Wastewater Treatment Plants.
Publications
Quality Control: Bridge Steel Fabrication and Erection, ASCE: 4th International APM Conference, 1993, Las Colinas, Texas
Metromover Extends Miami's Infrastructure, FES Journal, September 1993.
Contemporaneous Development of FieM Data, ASCE I st Congress on Computing in Civil Engineering, 1994, Washington, D.C.
Developing Construction Database Models, ASCE 2nd Congress on Computing in Civil Engineering, June 1995, Atlanta, Georgia.
Improving Transportation Infrastructure for International Trade, ASCE 1995 National Convention, San Diego, California.
F~xed Guideway Construction Improvements, ASCE 5th International APM Conference, 1996, Paris, France.
Differences in Steel vs. Concrete Bridge and Transitway CM., January, 2001, Honolulu, Hawaii.
AGENDA ITEM
NO. ~--~
Pg' /~
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
November 6, 2001
Ed Perieo, Building Review & Perm~ing Director
Sue Filson, Executive Manager~.,-t
Board of County Commissioners
Contractor's Licensing Board
As you know, we currently have vacancies on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press
release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this eo~ni;:ittee to submit a resume for
consideration. I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows:
Michael D. Baril
832 Rose Court
Marco Island, FL 34145
Please let me know, in writing within the 41 day time-frame, if the applicants are qualified to serve
as members on the board, and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration.
Please categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call
me at 774-8097.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
SF
Attachments
11/86/2001 29:29 941642855B t{~RIL C23NST INC PAGE Bi
'l'hmlk YOu
~11/e6/2081 19:29 94~6428558 ~.~IL CONS]' INC PAC~ 02
1/93 - 1/97
Caq~m~ S~~r
8/91 - 10~ ~C~Co.
U~ of ~!
T~
Uni~y of~ ~~ ~s
147~
CO C051762
AGENDA ITEM
NO. ¢IC~.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AUTHORIZE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2002
BUDGET REDUCTION AND EXPENDITURE CONTROL PLAN
OBJECTIVE: To initiate proactive measures to address anticipated revenue shortfalls in the
FY 2002 budget resulting from a weakening national economy, State budget reductions and a
downturn in local tourism.
CONSIDERATIONS: It is anticipated that the County budget will be directly affected in a
number of ways by State budget reductions, a softer economy and national events affecting
tourism here in Collier County. As a result, staff is recommending a series of budget revenue
adjustments and expenditure controls to mitigate the effects of these economic conditions for
the balance of this fiscal year. Each specific issue is discussed below along with recommended
actions.
Tourist Tax Revenues
The table below identifies the budgeted and actual tourist tax revenues, and the percentage of
October receipts relative to total annual revenue.
Category FY 00 FY 01 FY 02
October Tourist Tax Receipts $308,092 $340,273 $217,371
Annual Tourist Tax Receipts $8,672,272 $9,190,686 n/a
October (% of total revenue) 3.6% 3.7% n/a
Budgeted Tourist Tax Revenue $7,894,800 $8,944,700 $9,660,000
Historically, October receipts represent approximately 3.7% of the total annual tourist tax
revenue collected in Collier County. FY 02 budgeted tourist tax revenue amounts to
$9,660,000. Based on the historical revenue collection pattern, October 2001 tourist tax
receipts should have amounted to approximately $357,420. Actual tourist tax revenues were
$217,371, or 39.2% less than anticipated.
Based on the historical October percentage of total annual collections, projected tourist tax
revenues would be approximately $3.8 million less than budgeted. However, Florida Statutes
require that only 95% of estimated revenues be appropriated. In this case, the required 5%
revenue reserve provides a built-in safeguard from revenue shortfalls of approximately
$500,000 (5% of $9,660,000 annual tourist tax revenue budgeted).
The net revised shortfall is approximately $3.32 million. The distribution of this projected
shortfall among the four tourist tax supported funds is as follows: Museums (193) - $600,000,
Promotion (194) $500,000, Beach Renourishment (195) - $2,200,000, Disaster Recovery (196)
- $20,000.
However, it must be recognized that October tourist tax receipts are only one month removed
from the events of September, represent only one month's collections and are ~ -very/rdllg~A ITEM
timeframe from which to make meaningful projections. In essence, it is anticip~ ed tl~.this
NOV 2 7 2001
revised estimate would be a worst-case scenario, barring any other airline related events.
Tourist tax revenues will be monitored on a monthly basis to determine the extent of the budget
reductions required.
Recommendations - Tourist Taxes - $4,420,000 (worst case scenario)
Museums (193), Proiected Net Shortfall of $600,000
As noted above, the projected shortfall in this fund amounts to approximately $600,000. As
there is only $177,100 in uncommitted reserves in the tourist tax Fund (193) allocated for
Museums, a shortfall of $422,900 must still be addressed.
The principal expense allocations are for the Collier County Museum - $1,223,600 (71%) and
for the Botanical Gardens $500,000 (29%), It is recommended that the $422,900 remaining
shortfall being distributed between the Museum and the Botanical Garden based on their
relative percentage of appropriations. The Museum's share amounts to $300,300. This would
require deleting the $255,000 budgeted in FY 02 for the construction of a visitor and
administrative center at the Roberts Ranch facility and the remaining $45,300 would be
absorbed by reducing reserves. The Botanical Gardens share is $122,600. The County
contribution to this organization would be reduced by that amount.
Promotion (194), Projected Net Shortfall of $500,000
Budgeted reserves in the Tourism Promotion Fund (194) amount to $1,543,000.
adequate to address the projected worst-case shortfall of $500,000.
This is
Beach Renourishment Fund (195), Projected Net Shortfall of $2,200,000
Based on the projected shortfall of $2.2 million, it is recommended that the budgeted
Vanderbilt Beach Parking garage be reduced to provide for only design and permitting costs,
and that estimated construction funds of $3,300,000 be eliminated from the FY 02 budget and
placed back into contingency reserves. This project would be re-budgeted in the FY 03 county
budget. This is a reasonable approach as on-going discussions with surrounding property
owners are making this time line a more likely scenario in any case.
Disaster Recovery (196), Projected Net Shortfall of $20,000
There are no reserves budgeted within the Disaster Recovery Fund (196). However, there is a
budgeted appropriation of $1,047,300 for advertising following natural disasters of any type.
The Board recently approved supplemental advertising of $250,000. In all likelihood, the
remaining balance for emergency advertising would remain unspent. The $20,000 shortfall
would be absorbed within this amount.
State Shared Revenues
A. Sales Tax Revenue
Collier County receives a monthly distribution of sales tax revenue from the State of Florida.
The State Department of Revenue provides revenue estimates for each County during the
summer to assist local governments during development of the annual budget. Sales tax
revenue is used for debt service on existing bonds and the bulk of revenue i: us6'd'/~E~~ ITEM
general government activities provided on a countywide basis in the General Fun 1. No. ! 19 /Oc
NOV 2 7 200I
pg._ .2_..
The Office of Management and Budget, anticipating difficulties at the State budget level and
following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, recommended that the Board reduce
General Fund sales tax revenue by $1,281,600. The Board approved this recommendation
during the FY 02 budget public hearings. The net sales tax revenue included in the adopted
budget were $26,210,100, which figure represents 95% of the County's budgeted revenues of
$27,589,600.
Subsequent to the adoption of the budget, the State Department of Revenue recently issued
revised projections for sales tax revenues for fiscal year 2002 for each county in the State of
Florida. In particular, the revised projections for the County estimated a decrease of 5.4% in
sales tax revenues for FY 02. Due to the previous pro-active measures taken by the Board, the
County's net sales tax revenues of $26,210,100 are within one half of one percent ($145,400) of
the revised sales tax projections from the State Department of Revenue for the County for fiscal
year 2002 of $26,064,700. Any shortfall in sales tax revenue must be borne entirely in the
General Fund, as there is no latitude to reduce previously established debt service payments.
B. County Revenue Sharing
Collier County also receives a monthly distribution of revenue from the State of Florida
through the County Revenue Sharing program. The Florida Department of Revenue also
provides estimates from this revenue source for each County during the summer to assist local
governments during development of the annual budget. County revenue sharing proceeds are
used for debt service on existing bonds and the bulk of revenue is used to fund general
government activities provided on a countywide basis in the General Fund. Previously, the
County Revenue Sharing program was funded with proceeds of intangible taxes and cigarette
taxes. Due to legislative changes, this program is now funded with sales taxes and a small
portion of cigarette taxes. As a result, any weakness in sales tax revenues now impacts both the
sales tax and county revenue sharing distributions. Due to the uncertainty regarding tourism,
compounded by the September 11 terrorist attacks, staff took a very conservative position in
budgeting county revenue sharing proceeds in FY 02.
The initial state estimate for Collier County's share of the County Revenue Sharing funds was
slightly above $6.9 million (100% distribution). The net County Revenue Sharing proceeds
included in the adopted budget were $5,934,300, which figure represents 95% of the County's
budgeted revenues of $6,246,600.
Subsequent to the adoption of the budget, the State Department of Revenue recently issued
revised projections for county revenue sharing revenues for fiscal year 2002 for each county in
the State of Florida. The revised revenue estimate for Collier County of $6.55 million was
5.4% less than the initial state estimate. Due to the County's conservative revenue estimate,
this reduction in estimated proceeds can be absorbed without any changes to the adopted
budget. This is especially important, as any shortfall in county revenue sharing revenue must
be borne entirely in the General, Fund, as there is no latitude to reduce previously established
debt service payments.
AGENDA ITEM
No.
NOV 27 2001
p~. ..~
C. Transportation Fundinl!
The third major area is transportation construction grants and gas taxes. It appears that a
previously awarded $3,650,000 FY 03 grant awarded by the State for construction of
Livingston Road is in jeopardy.
Total FY 02 budgeted gas tax revenue amounts to $16,140,100. Again, the state mandated 5%
revenue reserve provides a built-in safeguard against revenue shortfalls equivalent to $807,000.
Net revenue after factoring in the mandated 5% revenue reserve is $15,333,100.
Currently, the State Department of Revenue is recommending that officials consider local
economic conditions in addressing any potential reductions in gas tax revenues. These
· revenues will be monitored monthly. At this point in time, there are no shortfalls anticipated.
An update to the five year transportation plan will be addressed at the November 28 Board
workshop and at the November 30 AUIR workshop.
D. Other Potential Impacts
There are a number of other issues being discussed in Tallahassee, which may have major
financial implications on Counties throughout the State and would have an impact in this fiscal
year. Some of these include:
significant increases in the County portion of Medicaid nursing home patients,
possible further reductions in state revenue sharing,
· increasing costs for currently state paid mental health services.
A Florida Association of Counties (FAC) briefing in Orlando last week resulted in the
following information relative to the potential impacts of shifting Medicaid Nursing Home
costs to Florida counties. Counties currently contribute approximately $33 million annually for
Medicaid Nursing Home Care costs that are capped at $55 per month per eligible patient.
The House proposal increases the cap from $55 to $140 per month per eligible patient and the
cost shit~ would be effective January 1, 2002 thereby impacting the Collier County budget for 9
months. FAC estimates that the statewide impact of this cost shift to Florida Counties at $37
million in FY 02 and $49 million in annual recurring costs. The estimated impact to Collier
County amounts to $326,874 in FY 02 and $435,832 on an annualized basis.
The Senate proposal increases the cap from $55 to $90 per month per eligible patient and the
cost shift would be effective April 1, 2002 thereby impacting the Collier County budget for 6
months. FAC estimates that the statewide impact of this cost shift to Florida Counties at $10
million in FY 02 and $20 million in annual recurring costs. The estimated impact to Collier
County amounts to $89,824 in FY 02 and $179,648 on an annualized basis.
FAC opposes any increases to counties share of the Medicaid program and
House and Senate positions.
pposes both the
AGENDA I~d~M
No.
NOV 2 7
pg._,.
Expenditure Control Recommendations:
As a result of the aforementioned issues, it is recommended that the County take a proactive
approach to these issues and make anticipatory reductions now to position it better for other
reductions that seem probable at this point. These are in addition to the TDC recommendations
noted previously. Further, the County's adopted budget includes only 5% contingency reserves
in each fund. Maintaining a healthy reserve to fund natural disaster clean up efforts should
they occur, safety or security enhancements that may result from the Governor's security task
forces, and other unforeseen emergencies is important component of sound financial planning.
1. Operating Budget Reductions- $3,650,000: The County reduce its operating budgets
by 3% in the following non-public safety funds:
Fund
General Fund (001)
Unincorporated Area General Fund (111)
Community Development Fund (113)
County Water/Sewer District Fund (408)
Road and Bridge Fund (101)
Total
Amount
$1,118,000
$683,000
$569,000
$940,000
$340,000
$3,650,000
2. Capital Project Reductions - $1,250,700: The following reductions in capital projects
supported by the General Fund are also recommended:
Project
Horticulture Learning Center
Electronic Registration/Payments (Parks)
GIS
Vanderbilt Beach Parking Lot Rental
Copeland Playground Land Purchase
Wiggins Pass Outfall Land Purchase Savings
*Urban Immokalee Basin Master Plan
Total
Amount
$100,000
$355,700
$250,000
$200,000
$ 25,000
$100,000
$220,000
$1,250,700
*Clarence Tears requesting funding through Big Cypress Basin Board.
Deferred Hiring Program - $500,000: The County establishes a deferred hiring
program, keeping any vacant position, other than public safety positions, open for a
minimum of three months before filling. Selected exemptions for vacancies in which
an offer letter has already been extended and/or for vacancies that are critical to
particular functions of the organization may be granted on a case-by-case basis. This
will generate salary savings estimated at $500,000. All positions will be reviewed
when they become vacant and we will take advantage of any opportunities to eliminate
positions, combine positions, leave positions vacant for longer periods due to
seasonality of positions, or fill with volunteers, if possible.
Debt Restructuring -$6,000,000: The proposal is being developed by,~2s ....
Finance Committee, which includes the Office of Management and Budg~ t, the ~E~A iTEM
HO¥ 2 ?
pg. ~"
o
Finance Department, the County Attorney's Office and the County's Financial
Advisor- William R. Hough & Co. This group monitors the municipal bond market to
identify potential financing opportunities for the County. For approximately one year
we have been experiencing a decreasing interest rate environment to a point where we
are currently at thirty year lows. At these interest rate levels the County has significant
opportunity in regards to its long term financing needs. It is recommended that the
County take advantage of the current interest rates and restructure several of the
County's short-term variable rate debt associated with long term capital projects.
This recommendation will result in fixed interest rates to be paid over a longer term
consistent with the estimated useful life of the assets. Based on debt service levels
included in the adopted FY 02 budget, FY 02 debt service payments would be reduced
by an estimated $6 million, as only an interest payment is due on the new bond issue in
FY 02.
Professional Development/Business Travel and Training - $117,000: A reduction
of $117,000 or 25% of the professional development/business travel and training
budget for County employees is also recommended. A greater reduction in this area is
not recommended only because it is anticipated that the requirements for travel in some
areas such as those opportunities to argue for State funding and grants may actually be
more important in this year than in years past.
Primary Health Care Program - up to $700,000: Lastly, the Board decided during
its November 13th County Commission meeting to discuss again the funding for the
Primary Health Care program for the needy. This program is currently budgeted in the
County's FY 02 budget to be a six month start up program through a yet to be
determined health care provider at an estimated $700,000 cost. The program was
expected to be able to service 2,000 needy residents in the first year. The anticipated
cost to the County for the first full year of operations in fiscal year 2003 would be
$1,400,000, and would be expected to provide service to 5,000 residents. Because a
contracted health care provider would likely have to some assurances beyond the initial
six-month commitment in order to bring on one or more doctors, nurses, and
equipment, a decision regarding this program is in essence a decision for a minimum of
18 months. The options are:
bo
Fund the program as it is currently budgeted; continue the provider selection
process already underway and provide service to 2,000 patients this fiscal year.
Anticipate an expenditure of $1,400,000 in the FY 03 budget.
Delay a funding decision until the FY 03 budget .deliberations in the
spring/summer of 2002 at which time other options may be identified.
Discontinue the program, with the $700,000
County's General Fund contingency reserves.
appropriation shifted to the
AGENDA ITEM
No. /g ~
NOV 2'? 2001
Pg. ~
Assuming the worst-case tourist tax revenue scenario, these recommendations (without
inclusion of a decision on the primary health care program) will result in excess of $15,900,000
in reductions to this year's County budget. In addition, it is anticipated that all reductions
including operating fund reductions, debt service payments and travel and training reductions
would be physically moved to reserve funds where they cannot be spent without specific Board
approval and will be available to offset any other revenue reductions that may come or to put
the County in a better position for preparing budgets for fiscal year 2003.
In addition to these recommendations, it is suggested that in this particular fiscal year that more
regular reporting of budget information to the Board will be important. As a result, we will be
providing quarterly updates to each of you from the Office of Management and Budget to
ensure that you continue to have a good understanding of where our actual revenues are in
relationship to the actual budget.
FISCAL IMPACT: The reduction to the County's FY 02 budget would be estimated to be in
excess of $15,900,000. Additional budget adjustments may be necessary depending on actions
taken by the State legislature.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management plan impact
associated with this recommended action.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners:
1. Accept the initial proposed budget reduction/expenditure control plan for fiscal year
2002, and,
2. Authorize the associated budget amendments required to implement the plan.
Prepared by:-
Thomas' .W. (~l~ff, (~ouh~ager
Reviewed by:
Michael Smykowski, Director, Office of Management and Budget
AGENDA ITEM
No.
NO¥ 2 7 2001
Pg. "'"7 _
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT
EXCEEDING $55,200,000 IN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001 IN ORDER TO EFFECT SUCH
FINANCING AND REFINANCING; PROVIDING CERTAIN
TERMS AND DETAILS OF SAID BONDS, INCLUDING
AUTHORIZING A NEGOTIATED SALE OF SAID BONDS;
DELEGATING CERTAIN AUTHORITY TO THE CHAIRMAN FOR
THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A PURCHASE
CONTRACT; APPOINTING THE PAYING AGENT AND
REGISTRAR FOR SAID BONDS; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE; AND SELECTING UNDERWRITERS (RFP 02-3312) IN
ANTICIPATION OF ISSUING SAID BONDS.
OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners adopt the attached Resolution
authorizing the issuance of Collier County, Florida Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds,
Series 2001in an amount not to exceed $55,200,000 and to select the underwriting team to
effectuate such issuance.
CONSIDERATIONS: William R. Hough & Co., the County's Financial Advisor, along
with the County's Finance Committee are constantly monitoring the municipal bond
market to identify potential financing opportunities for the County. For approximately one
year we have been experiencing a decreasing interest rate environment to a point where we
are currently at thirty year lows. At these interest rate levels the County has significant
opportunity in regards to its long term financing needs.
The County has traditionally utilized the Florida Association of Counties Pooled
Commercial Paper Program for the short term financing of projects. This program is a
variable rate program of which the County's current outstanding is approximately
$25,000,000. In addition, the County enjoys a line of credit with Bank of America, which
has been used to acquire the property for a future Regional Park to be located in the
northern portion of the County. There is currently $3.3 million at 5.85% outstanding
against this line of credit.
In addition to the aforementioned refunding opportunities, the County currently has the
financing needs for eight new projects in fiscal year 2002. These new projects, along with
the projects financed by the Commercial Paper Program and the line of credit, are outlined
on the following page:
AGENDA}~EM
No. ,,~ ~
NOV 27 001
Pg. /
New Projects for Fiscal Year 2002:
Acquisition of voting machines
Community Development Services Expansion
Design phase of the Courthouse Annex
Construction of the Immokalee Jail
North Naples Satellite Facility
Reimbursement of Tax Collector Building
Acquire Goodland Boat Launch*
Acquire Lely Barefoot Beach Parcel*
Sub-Total
$5,000,000
$3,500,000
$2,877,000
$8,114,200
$3,072,000
$2,400,000
$4,700,000
$4,750,000
$34,413,200
*Note: Mid-December closing dates for these properties, based on previous Board action.
Refunded Projects:
Purchase of EMS Helicopter
Construction of Domestic Animal Services Bldg
Construction of North Naples Library
Construction of Sheriff's Horseshoe Facility
Construction of Sheriff's Admini.~tration Bldg
Line of Credit
Sub-Total
$2,430,000
$1,757,000
$6,546,0OO
$5,000,000
$2,443,000
$3,228,030
$21,404,030
In anticipation of this transaction, the Purchasing Department issued a Request for
Proposal (RFP 01-3312) to select an underwriting team. In an effort to benefit from the
current interest rate market and understanding the dynamic nature of this market, staff
determined it was necessary to shorten the 21-day posting period for this RFP. The
County received proposals from nine firms. The Finance Committee, along with Financial
Advisor, met to review the responses and ranked the top three firms as follows:
Salomon Smith Barney
Raymond James & Associates
A. G. Edwards
Based on the size of this bond and the need to expedite the transaction due to the
uncertainty in the market, the Finance Committee is recommending that the County utilize
a Senior Manager and two Co-Managers in underwr/ting the issue.
Moody's Investors Service has assigned an underlying rating A1 rating on this bond issue.
It was noted that:
"The outlook on Moody's A1 underlying rating on Collier
County's Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds is stable reflecting
strong maximum annual debt service coverage, a history of
conservative budgeting practices resulting in healthy financial
operations, and an expanding tax base and population."
AGENDA/.~TEM
No._/m D ~
NOV 27 2001
In addition, Standard and Poor's assigned a rating of AA to this issue. These bonds will be
insured through FGIC to obtain Aaa rating status. A debt service reserve fund surety will
be purchased to secure the 1992, 1994, and 2001 bonds. This surety bond will release the
existing $3.6 million cash debt service reserve fund that will then be used to decrease the
size of this bond issue.
It is anticipated that this bond issue will close in mid-December, barring any major
changes in current market conditions. In the event that the bond closing does not occur in
mid-December, staff will be prepared to borrow internally on a short-term basis to close on
the Barefoot Beach and Goodland Boat Launch properties.
FISCAL IMPACT: Based on the current market conditions, the annual debt service
payments will range between approximately $3,600,000 and $4,800,000 over the twenty-
year life of the bond. Based on the maturity of each of the specific bonds, interest rates
will range from 2% to 4.92%. The pledge for this bond is the Local Government Half-
Cents Sales Tax Program, which generates in excess of $23,000,000 on an annual basis.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management Impact
associated with this Executive Summary.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners:
Adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the issuance of Collier County,
Florida Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series, 2001 in an amount not to
exceed $55,200,000
Approve a waiver of Purchasing Policy, Section VIII B 1, regarding the 21-day
posting period, and
Approve the selection of Salomon Smith, Barney as the Senior Managing
Underwriter, and the firms of Raymond James & Associates, and A. G.
Edwards as Co-Managing Underwriters.
Authorize staff to approve necessary budget amendments and borrow internally
to close on the Goodland boat launch and Lely Barefoot Beach properties in the
event that this bond issue does not close prior to the end of the calendar year.
Submitted by: ~ ~ J~-"~
Michael Smykowski, OMB Director
Reviewed by: ~ctor
Reviewed by: ~flliam//Re~an, C/~I~ County Financial
Reviewed by:
'-'Tl:i~as W. Olliff, County Manager
DATE: Il.. !
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
AGENDA~TEM
No._ I~ ~
NOV 2 7 2001
mg_ ,.¢ ....
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
SUPPLEMENTING RESOLUTION NO. 85-107 ENTITLED
"A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT
EXCEEDING $29,625,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1985 OF THE
COUNTY TO FINANCE THE COST OF REFUNDING
CERTAIN OUTSTANDING OBLIGATIONS OF THE
COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS OF THE
HOLDERS OF SUCH BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE
PAYMENT THEREOF; MAKING CERTAIN OTHER
COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS IN CONNECTION
WITH THE ISSUANCE OF SUCH BONDS; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE"; AUTHORIZING THE
FINANCING OF VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE COUNTY AND REFINANCING OF CERTAIN
OUTSTANDING INDEBTEDNESS OF THE COUNTY;
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT EXCEEDING
$55,200,000 IN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001 IN ORDER TO EFFECT
SUCH FINANCING AND REFINANCING; PROVIDING
CERTAIN TERMS AND DETAILS OF SAID BONDS,
INCLUDING AUTHORIZING A NEGOTIATED SALE OF
SAID BONDS; DELEGATING CERTAIN AUTHORITY TO
THE CHAIRMAN FOR THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY
OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PURCHASE CONTRACT
WITH RES-PECT THERETO; APPOINTING THE PAYING
AGENT AND REGISTRAR FOR SAID BONDS;
AUTHORIZING THE DISTRIBUTION OF A PRELIMINARY
OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND THE EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY OF AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT WITH
RESPECT THERETO; ESTABLISHING A BOOK-ENTRY
SYSTEM OF REGISTRATION FOR THE BONDS;
AUTHORIZING MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE FOR
THE BONDS; AUTHORIZING A RESERVE ACCOUNT
INSURANCE POLICY WITH RESPECT TO THE BONDS;
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1.
FINDINGS. It is hereby found and determined that:
(A) On April 30, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") of
Collier County, Florida (the "Issuer") duly adopted Resolution No. 85-107, as amended and
supplemented (collectively the "Resolution"), the title of which resolution is quoted in the
title of this Supplemental Resolution, for the purposes described therein, authorizing, among
other things, the issuance of $29,625,000 Capital Improvement Revenue Refunding Bonds,
Series 1985 (the "Series 1985 Bonds"), which Series 1985 Bonds were issued for the
principal purpose of refunding the Issuer's outstanding Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds,
1982. The Series 1985 Bonds are no longer outstanding under the Resolution.
(B) Pursuant to the Resolution the Issuer has heretofore issued its $8,225,000
Capital Improvement Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1992 (the "Series 1992 Bonds") for
the principal purpose of refunding the County's outstanding Capital Improvement Revenue
Bonds, Series 1988.
(C) Pursuant to the Resolution the Issuer has heretofore issued its $30,415,000
Capital Improvement Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1994 (the "Series 1994 Bonds") for
the principal purpose of refunding the County's outstanding Capital Improvement Revenue
Bonds, Series 1986.
(D) The Issuer has heretofore issued its Collier County, Florida Revenue Notes,
Draw Numbers A-11-1, A-11-2, A-11-3, A-11-4, A-12-1,A-13-1, A-18-1 and A-19-1 (the
"Prior Notes") to the Florida Local Government Finance Commission (the "Finance
Commission") and two promissory notes (the "Bank Notes") to Bank of America (the
"Bank") for the principal purpose of financing and refinancing various governmental projects
(the "Prior Projects").
(E) The Issuer has determined that certain capital improvements should be
acquired, constructed and equipped throughout the Issuer in order to improve the health,
safety and welfare of the inhabitants within the Issuer's geographic boundaries. Such capital
AGENDA ITEM
N 0V 2 7 200'
Pg. ~ _
improvements are generally described in Exhibit A hereto and are more particularly
described in the records, plans and specifications on file with the Issuer (the "Project"). Such
Exhibit A may be amended or supplemented from time to time by the Board without the
consent of any Bondholder (as defined in the Resolution) or Insurer (as def'med in the
Resolution).
(F) The Resolution provides for the issuance of Additional Parity Bo nds on a parity
with the outstanding Series 1992 Bonds and Series 1994 Bonds (collectively, the "Parity
Bonds") for the purpose of current refunding the Prior Notes and the Bank Notes and
financing the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project, upon meeting the
requirements set forth therein.
(G) There is hereby authorized the current refunding of the Prior Notes and the
Bank Notes and financing and/or reimbursing the costs of the acquisition, construction and
equipping of the Project, all in the manner as provided by this Supplemental Resolution.
(H) The Issuer deems it to be in its best interest to issue its Collier County, Florida
Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 2001 (the "Series 2001 Bonds") for the
principal purpose of current refunding the Prior Notes and the Bank Notes and financing
and/or reimbursing the costs of the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project.
The Series 2001 Bonds shall be issued on parity in all respects with the Parity Bonds
pursuant to the terms of the Resolution.
(I) Due to the potential volatility of the market for tax-exempt obligations such as
the Series 2001 Bonds and the complexity of the transactions relating to such Series 2001
Bonds, it is in the best interest of the Issuer to sell the Series 2001 Bonds by a negotiated
sale, allowing the Issuer to enter the market at the most advantageous time, rather than at a
specified advertised date, thereby permitting the Issuer to obtain the best possible price and
interest rate for the Series 2001 Bonds.
(J) The Issuer anticipates receiving a favorable offer to purchase the Series 2001
Bonds from Salomon Smith Barney Inc., Raymond James & Associates, Inc. and A.G.
Edwards & Sons, Inc. (collectively, the "Underwriters"), all within the parameters set forth
herein.
(K) Inasmuch as the Board desires to sell the Series 2001 Bonds at the most
advantageous time and not wait for a scheduled Board meeting, so long as the herein
described parameters are met, the Issuer hereby determines to delegate the award and sale
of the Series 2001 Bonds to the Chairman within such parameters.
AGENDA IT~.~.)
No. /~ _
I'-"
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. ~'
(L) The Issuer hereby certifies that it is not in default in performing any of the
covenants and obligations assumed under the Resolution and all of the covenants contained
in the Resolution shall apply to the Series 2001 Bonds.
(M) The report required by Section 19(I) of the Resolution is set forth as Exhibit
B hereto and the Board hereby accepts such report.
(N) All of the Prior Projects and the Project are of the nature and type that are
beneficial to, or available to, all of the citizens of the Issuer.
(O) The Resolution provides that the Series 2001 Bonds shall mature on such dates
and in such amounts, shall bear such rates of interest, shall be payable in such places and
shall be subject to such redemption provisions as shall be determined by Supplemental
Resolution adopted by the Issuer; and it is now appropriate that the Issuer set forth the
parameters and mechanism to determine such terms and details, which terms and details shall
be set forth in the hereinafter defined Purchase Contract.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. When used in this Supplemental Resolution,
the terms defined in the Resolution shall have the meanings therein stated, except as such
definitions may be hereinafter amended or del-med.
SECTION 3. AUTHORITY FOR THIS SUPPLEMENTAL
RESOLUTION. This Supplemental Resolution is adopted pursuant to the provisions of the
Act and the Resolution.
SECTION 4. AUTHORIZATION OF THE CURRENT REFUNDING OF
THE PRIOR NOTES AND THE BANK NOTES AND THE FINANCING OF THE
PROJECT. The Issuer hereby authorizes the current refunding of the Prior Notes and the
Bank Notes and the financing and/or reimbursing of the Cost of the Project upon the
satisfaction in all respects of the conditions set forth in Section 6 hereof.
SECTION 5. DESCRIPTION OF THE SERIES 2001 BONDS. The Issuer
hereby authorizes the issuance ora Series of Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of not
exceeding $55,200,000 to be known as the "Collier County, Florida Capital Improvement
Revenue Bonds, Series 2001 ," for the princiPal purposes of current refunding the Prior Notes
and the Bank Notes and. financing and/or reimbursing the Cost of the acquisition,
constructqon and equipping of the Project. The aggregate principal amount of the Series
2001 Bonds to be issued pursuant to the Resolution shall be determined by the Chairman
provided such aggregate principal amount does not exceed $55,200,000. The Series 2001
Bonds shall be dated as of December 1, 2001 or such other date as the Chairman may
4
AGENDA ~E
No.
lq 2 7
Pg. 7 -
determine, shall be issued in the form of fully registered Bonds in the denomination of
$5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, shall be numbered consecutively from one upward
in order of maturity preceded by the letter "R", shall bear interest from the dated date
determined therefor, payable semi-annually, on April 1 and October 1 of each year (the
"Interest Dates"), commencing on April l, 2002 or such other date as may be determined by
the Chairman.
Interest on the Series 2001 Bonds shall be payable by check or draft of Fifth Third
Bank, Cincinnati, Ohio, as Paying Agent, made payable and mailed to the Holder in whose
name such Bond shall be registered at the close of business on the date which shall be the
fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month next preceding the
applicable Interest Date, or, at the request of such Holder, by bank wire transfer to the
account of such Holder. Principal of the Series 2001 Bonds is payable to the Holder upon
presentation, when due, at the designated corporate u'ust office of The Fifth Third Bank,
Cincinnati, Ohio, as Paying Agent. The principal of, redemption premium, if any, and
interest on the Series 2001 Bonds are payable in lawful money of the United States of
America.
The Series 2001 Bonds shall bear interest at such rates and yields, shall mature on
October 1 of each of the years and in the principal amounts corresponding to such years, and
shall have such redemption provisions as determined by the Chairman subject to the
conditions set forth in Section 6 hereof. All of the terms of the Series 2001 Bonds will be
included in a Purchase Contract which shall be in substantially the form attached hereto and
made a part hereof as Exhibit C (the "Purchase Contract"). The Chairman is hereby
authorized to execute the Purchase Contract in substantially the form attached hereto as
Exhibit C with such modifications as he deems appropriate upon satisfaction of the
conditions described in Section 6 hereof.
SECTION 6. CONDITIONS TO EXECUTION OF PURCHASE
CONTRACT. The Purchase Contract shall not be executed by the Chairman until such time
as all of the following conditions have been satisfied:
(A) Receipt by the Chairman of a written offer to purchase the Series 2001
Bonds by the Underwriters substantially in the form of the Purchase Contract attached
hereto as Exhibit A, said offer to provide for or demonstrate, among other things, (i)
not exceeding $55,200,000 aggregate principal amount of Series 2001 Bonds, (ii) an
underwriting discount (including management fee and all expenses) not in excess of
.55% of the par amount of the Series 2001 Bonds, (iii) a true interest cost of not more
than 5.25% per annum, and (iv) the maturities of the Series 2001 Bonds, with the final
maturity being not later than October 1,2021.
AGENDA IT~
No.
NO¥ 2 7 2001
pg.
L
(B) With respect to any optional redemption terms for the Series 2001
Bonds, the first call date may be no later than October 1, 2012 and no call premium
may exceed 2.0 % of the par amount of that portion of the Series 2001 Bonds to be
redeemed. Term Bonds may be established with such Amortization Installments as
the Chairman deems appropriate.
(C) Receipt by the Chairman of a disclosure statement and a truth-in-
bonding statement of the Underwriters dated the date of the Purchase Contract and
complying with Section 218.385, Florida Statutes.
(D) Receipt by the Chairman of a good faith deposit from the Underwriters
in an amount not less than 1.0% of the par amount of the Series 2001 Bonds.
Upon satisfaction of all the requirements set forth in this Section 6, the Chairman is
authorized to execute and deliver the Purchase Contract containing terms complying with the
provisions of this Section 6.
SECTION 7. REDEMPTION PROVISIONS FOR SERIES 2001 BONDS.
The Series 2001 Bonds may be redeemed prior to their respective maturities from any
moneys legally available therefor, upon notice as provided in the Resolution, upon the terms
and provisions as determined by the Chairman and set forth in the Purchase Contract subject
to the conditions contained in Section 6 hereof.
SECTION 8. FULL BOOK-ENTRY. Notwithstanding the provisions set
forth in Section 13 of the Resolution, the Series 2001 Bonds shall be initially issued in the
form of a separate single certificated fully registered Series 2001 Bond for each of the
maturities of the Series 2001 Bonds. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of each such Bond
shall be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co.,
as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"). As long as the Series 2001 Bonds
are registered in the name of Cede & Co., all of the Outstanding Series 2001 Bonds shall be
registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., all
payments of principal on the Series 2001 Bonds shall be made by the Paying Agent by check
or draft or by bank wire transfer to Cede & Co., as Holder of the Series 2001 Bonds, upon
presentation of the Series 2001 Bonds to be paid, to the Paying Agent.
With respect to Series 2001 Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the
Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the Issuer, the Registrar and the
Paying Agent shall have no responsibility or obligation to any direct or indirect participant
in the DTC book-entry program (the "Participants"). Without limiting the immediately
preceding sentence, the Issuer, the Registrar and the Paying Agent shall have no
AGENDA ITE/~
No.~
2 7 2001
responsibility or obligation with respect to (A) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede &
Co. or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest on the Series 2001 Bonds, (B)
the delivery to any Participant or any other Person other than a Bondholder, as shown in the
registration books kept by the Registrar, of any notice with respect to the Series 2001 Bonds,
including any notice of redemption, or (C) the payment to any Participant or any other
Person, other than a Bondholder, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar,
of any amount with respect to principal of, Redemption Price, if any, or interest on the Series
2001 Bonds. The Issuer, the Registrar and the Paying Agent may treat and consider the
Person in whose name each Series 2001 Bond is registered in the registration books kept by
the Registrar as the Holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of
principal, Redemption Price, if any, and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose
of giving notices of redemption and other matters with respect to such Bond, for the purpose
of registering transfers with respect to such Bond, and for all other purposes whatsoever.
The Paying Agent shall pay all principal of, Redemption Price, if any, and interest on the
Series 2001 Bonds only to or upon the order of the respective Holders, as shown in the
registration books kept by the Registrar, or their respective attorneys duly authorized in
writing, as provided herein and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy
and discharge the Issuer's obligations with respect to payment of principal of, Redemption
Price, if any, and interest on the Series 2001 Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid.
No Person other than a Holder, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, shall
receive a certificated Bond evidencing the obligation of the Issuer to make payments of
principal, Redemption Price, if any, and interest pursuant to the provisions of the Resolution.
Upon delivery by DTC to the Issuer of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined
to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co,, and subject to the provisions in the
Resolution with respect to transfers during the 15 days next preceding an Interest Date or first
mailing of notice of redemption, the words "Cede & Co." in this Supplemental Resolution
shall refer to such new nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such notice, the Issuer shall
promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Registrar and the Paying Agent.
Upon (A) receipt by the Issuer of written notice from DTC (i) to the effect that a
continuation of the requirement that all of the outstanding Series 2001 Bonds be registered
in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of
DTC, is not in the best interest of the beneficial owners of the Series 2001 Bonds or (ii) to
the effect that DTC is unable or unwilling to discharge its responsibilities and no substitute
depository willing to undertake the functions of DTC hereunder can be found which is
willing and able to undertake such functions upon reasonable and customary terms, or (B)
determination by the Issuer that such book-entry only system is burdensome or undesirable
to the Issuer, the Series 2001 Bonds shall no longer be restricted to being registered in the
registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, but
may be registered in whatever name or names Holders shall designate, in accordance with
7
AGENDA IT~__.~
No. /o
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. /~
the provisions of the Resolution. In such event, the Issuer shall issue and the Registrar shall
authenticate, transfer and exchange the Series 2001 Bonds of like principal amount and
maturity, in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof to the Holders thereof.
The foregoing notwithstanding, until such time as participation in the book-entry only system
is discontinued, the provisions set forth in the Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations
previously executed by the Issuer and delivered to DTC shall apply to the payment of
principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Series 2001 Bonds.
SECTION 9. APPLICATION OF SERIES 2001 BOND PROCEEDS; USE
OF OTHER MONEYS. The proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 2001 Bonds shall
be applied by the Issuer as follows:
(A) An amount equal to the accrued interest, if any, on the Series 2001 Bonds shall
be deposited to the Interest Account of the Sinking Fund and shall be used to pay a portion
of the interest on the Series 2001 Bonds.
(B) An amount necessary to repay the Prior Notes shall be distributed pursuant to
the instructions of the Finance Commission to be applied to the full payment of such Prior
Notes on January 18, 2002 or such other date as determined between the Finance
Commission and the Chairman so long as such date is no later than the 90th day from the date
of issuance of the Series 2001 Bonds.
(C) An amount necessary to repay the Bank Notes shall be distributed pursuant to
the instructions of the Bank to be applied to the full payment of such Bank Notes within 90
days from the date of issuance of the Series 2001 Bonds; provided, however, that the
Chairman is hereby delegated the authority to determine, upon the advice of the Issuer's
Financial Advisor, prior to the sale of the Series 2001 Bonds to the Underwriters whether to
repay the Bank Notes in connection with the issuance of the Series 2001 Bonds and what
portion of the Bank Notes to repay, if any.
(D) A sufficient amount of the Series 2001 Bond proceeds shall be applied to the
payment of the premium for the hereinafter described Bond Insurance Policy applicable to
the Series 2001 Bonds, to the payment of the premium for the hereinafter described reserve
account insurance polic~t, and to the payment of costs and expenses relating to the issuance
of the Series 2001 Bonds.
(E) The remainder of the proceeds of the Series 2001 Bonds shall be deposited to
the Construction Fund and applied to pay the Cost of the Project.
AGENDA ITE/~
No. /a~
V 2 ?
Pg. //
(F) Moneys released from the Reserve Account, if any, as a result of the purchase
of the res erve account insurance policy described in Section 13(B) hereof shall be ap plied
to the refinancing of the Prior Notes and/or the Bank Notes.
SECTION 10. PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT. The Issuer
hereby authorizes the distribution and use of thc Preliminary Official Statement in
substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit D in connection with the offering of the
Series 2001 Bonds for sale. If between the date hereof and the mailing of the Preliminary
Official Statement, it is necessary to make insertions, modifications or changes in the
Preliminary Official Statement, the Chairman is hereby authorized to approve such insertions,
changes and modifications. The Chairman is hereby authorized to deem thc Preliminary
Official Statement "final" within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12(b)(1) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 in the form as mailed. Execution of a certificate by the Chairman
deeming the Preliminary Official Statement "final" as described above shall be conclusive
evidence of the aPproval of any insertions, changes or modifications.
SECTION 11. OFFICIAL STATEMENT. The form, terms and provisions of
the Official Statement relating to the Series 2001 Bonds shall be substantially as set forth in
the Preliminary Official Statement and shall include all of the specific financial terms of the
Series 2001 Bonds. The Chairman is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver
said Official Statement in the name and on behalf of the Issuer, and thereupon to cause such
Official Statement to be delivered to the Underwriters with such changes, amendments,
modifications, omissions and additions as may be approved by the Chairman. Said Official
Statement, including any such changes, amendments, modifications, omissions and additions
as approved by the Chairman and the information contained therein are hereby authorized
to be used in connection with the sale of the Series 2001 Bonds to the public. Execution by
the Chairman of the Official Statement shall be deemed to be conclusive evidence of
approval of such changes.
SECTION 12. APPOINTMENT OF PAYING AGENT AND REGISTRAR.
Subject in all respects to the satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 6 hereof, Fifth
Third Bank, Cincinnati, Ohio, is hereby designated Registrar and Paying Agent for the Series
2001 Bonds. The Chairman and/or the Clerk or any designated Deputy Clerk are hereby
authorized to enter into any agreement which may be necessary to effect the transactions
contemplated by this Section 12 and by the Resolution.
SECTION 13. MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE; RESERVE ACCOUNT
INSURANCE POLICY. (A) Subject in all respects to the satisfaction of the conditions set
forth in Section 6 hereof, the Issuer hereby authorizes the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Series 2001 Bo. nds to be insured pursuant to a municipal bond insurance
9
AGENDA ITF~
No._ ~
NOV 2 7 20 I
Pg._ /,~. --
policy (the "Bond Insurance Policy") that guarantees payment of principal of and interest on
the Series 2001 Bonds issued by Financial Guaranty Insurance Company ("Financial
Guaranty"), a monoline f'mancial guaranty insurer domiciled in the State of New York and
subject to regulation by the State of New York Insurance Department. The Chairman and
the Clerk are hereby authorized to execute such documents and instruments necessary to
cause Financial Guaranty to insure the Series 2001 Bonds. With respect to the Series 2001
Bonds, Financial Guaranty shall be deemed to be the "Insurer" as such term is used and
defined in the Resolution.
(B) Subject inall respects to the satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section
6 hereof, the Issuer shall deposit to the Reserve Account a reserve account insurance policy
purchased from Financial Guaranty the face amount of which, together with any other cash
mounts and the face amounts of any other reserve policies or surety bonds on deposit in the
Reserve Account, is equal to the Maximum Bond Service Requirement for all Outstanding
Bonds. At the discretion of the Chairman, such reserve account insurance policy may be in
such amount as to allow for the release of the moneys presently on deposit in the Reserve
Account for the benefit of the Parity Bonds. The Chairman is hereby authorized to enter into
a Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement substantially in the form attached hereto as
Exhibit F in order to cause Financial Guaranty to issue such reserve account insurance policy.
The provisions of such Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement, when executed and
delivered, shall be incorporated herein by reference and to the extent there are any conflicts
between the D cbt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement and the Resolution, the provisions
of the Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement shall control.
SECTION 14. PROVISIONS RELATING TO BOND INSURANCE
POLICY. So long as the Bond Insurance Policy issued by the Insurer is in full force and
effect and the Insurer has not defaulted in its payment obligations under the Bond Insurance
Policy, the Issuer agrees to comply with the following provisions, notwithstanding any
provision in the Resolution to the contrary:
(A) Information Provided to Financial Guaranty. Financial Guaranty shall be
provided with the following information: (i) within 210 days after the end of each of the
Issuer's fiscal years, the annual audited financial statements for such fiscal years, and, if not
presented in the audited financial statements, a statement of the revenues pledged to the
payment of Series 2001 Bonds; (ii) as soon as it becomes available, the annual budget for the
upcoming fiscal year; (iii) any Official Statement or other disclosure document, if any,
prepared in connection with the issuance of additional debt, whether or not on parity with the
Series 2001 Bonds, within 30 days of the sale thereof; (iv) notice of the redemption, other
than mandatory sinking fund redemption, of any of the Series 2001 Bonds, or any advance
refunding of the Series 2001 Bonds, including the principal amount, maturities and CU SIP
10
AGENDA IT~)
No.
NOV 2 7 '001
Pg.
numbers thereof; and (v) such additional information as Financial Guaranty may reasonably
request from time to time. The Issuer shall be solely responsible for providing the
information described in clauses (i)-(iii) above.
(B) Payment Procedure Pursuant to Bond Insurance Policy. (i) If, on the third day
preceding any Interest Date for the Series 2001 Bonds the Issuer does not have on deposit
sufficient moneys available to pay all principal of and interest on the Series 2001 Bonds due
on such date, the Issuer shall immediately notify Financial Guaranty and State Street Bank
and Trust Company, N.A., New York, New York or its successor as its Fiscal Agent (the
"Fiscal Agent") of the amount of such deficiency. If, by said Interest Date, the Issuer has not
provided the amount of such deficiency, the Paying Agent shall simultaneously make
available to Financial Guaranty and to the Fiscal Agent the registration books for the Series
2001 Bonds maintained by the Paying Agent. In addition:
(i) The Paying Agent shall provide Financial Guaranty with a list of the
Series 2001 Bondholders entitled to receive principal or interest payments from
Financial Guaranty under the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy and shall make
arrangements for Financial Guaranty and its Fiscal Agent (a) to mail checks or drafts
to Series 2001 Bondholders entitled to receive full or partial interest payments from
Financial Guaranty and (b) to pay principal of the Series 2001 Bonds surrendered to
the Fiscal Agent by the Series 2001 Bondholders entitled to receive full or partial
principal payments from Financial Guaranty; and
(ii) The Paying Agent shall, at the time it makes the registration books
available to Financial Guaranty pursuant to (i) above, notify Series 2001 Bondholders
entitled to receive the payment of principal of or interest on the Series 2001 Bonds
from Financial Guaranty (a) as to the fact of such entitlement, (b) that Financial
Guaranty will remit to them all or part of the interest payments coming due subject to
the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy, (c) that, except as provided in paragraph (C)
below, in the event that any Series 2001 Bondholder is entitled to receive full payment
of principal from Financial Guaranty, such Series 2001 Bondholder must tender his
Series 2001 Bond with the instrument of transfer in the form provided on the Series
2001 Bond executed in the name of Financial Guaranty, and (d) that, except as
provided in paragraph (C) below, in the event that such Series 2001 Bondholder is
entitled to receive partial payment of principal from Financial Guaranty, such Series
2001 Bondholder must tender his Series 2001 Bond for payment first to the Paying
Agent, which shall note on such Series 2001 Bond the portion of principal paid by the
Paying Agent, and then, with an acceptable form of assignment executed in the name
of Financial Guaranty, to the Fiscal Agent, which will then pay the unpaid portion of
11
AGENDA ITFr~
No. /~ I~.~
NOV 27 20B
principal to the Series 2001 Bondholder subject to the terms of the Bond Insurance
Policy.
(C) In the event that the Paying Agent has notice that any payment of principal of
or interest on a Series 2001 Bond has been recovered from a Series 2001 Bondholder
pursuant to the United States Bankruptcy Code by a trustee in bankruptcy in accordance with
the final, nonappealable order of a court having competent jurisdiction, the Paying Agent
shall, at the time it provides notice to Financial Guaranty, notify all Series 2001 Bondholders
that in the event that any Series 2001 Bondholder's payment is so recovered, such Series 2001
Bondholder will be entitled to payment from Financial Guaranty to the extent of such
recovery, and the Paying Agent shall furnish to Financial Guaranty its records evidencing the
payments of principal of and interest on the Series 2001 Bonds which have been made by the
Paying Agent and subsequently recovered from Series 2001 Bondholders, and the dates on
which such payments were made.
(D) Financial Guaranty shall, to the extent it makes payment of principal of or
interest on the Series 2001 BOnds, become subrogated to the rights of the recipients of such
payments in accordance with the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy and, to evidence such
subrogation, (i) in the case of subrogation as to claims for past due interest, the Paying Agent
shall note Financial Guaranty's rights as subrogee on the registration books maintained by
the Paying Agent upon receipt from Financial Guaranty of proof of the payment of interest
thereon to the holders of such Series 2001 Bonds and (ii) in the case of subrogation as to
claims for past due principal, the Paying Agent shall note Financial Guaranty's rights as
subrogee on the registration books for the Series 2001 Bonds maintained by the Paying Agent
upon receipt of proof of the payment of principal thereof to the holders of such Series 2001
Bonds. Notwithstanding anything in this Indenture or the Series 2001 Bonds to the contrary,
the Paying Agent shall make payment of such past due interest and past due principal directly
to Financial Guaranty to the extent that Financial Guaranty is a subrogee with respect thereto.
(E) Amendments. Any amendments to the Resolution requiring Bondholder
consent entered into in accordance with the provisions of the Resolution shall require the
written consent of Financial Guaranty. Financial Guaranty shall be provided with a full
transcript of all proceedings relating to the execution of any Supplemental Resolution
containing such an amendment. Any rating agency rating the Series 2001 Bonds shall
receive notice of any amendment or supplement to the Resolution and a copy thereof at least
15 days prior to the amendment's execution.
(F) Additional Provisions. (i) Any successor Paying Agent for the Series 2001
Bonds must have combined capital, surplus and undivided profits of at least $50 million,
unless Financial Guaranty shall otherwise approve; (ii) no resignation or removal of the
12
AGENDA ITEM
No..
NOV 2 7 2001
pg.
Paying Agent shall become effective until a successor has been appointed 'and has accepted
the duties of Paying Agent; (iii) Financial Guaranty shall be furnished with written notice of
the resignation or removal o£the Paying Agent and the appointment of any successor thereto;
(iv) the Paying Agent shall provide Financial Guaranty with immediate notice of any
payment default and notice of any other default known to the Paying Agent within 30 days
of their knowledge thereof; (v) Financial Guaranty shall be a party in interest hereunder and
as a party entitled to (a) notify the Issuer, the Paying Agent and any applicable receiver of
the occurrence of an event of default under the Resolution and Co) request the Paying Agent
and any applicable receiver to intervene in judicial proceedings that affect the Series 2001
Bonds or the security therefor; the Paying Agent and any applicable receiver shall be required
to accept notice of default from Financial Guaranty; and (vi) if a forward supply contract is
employed in connection with a refunding of.the Series 2001 Bonds, (a) the verification report
shall expressly state that the adequacy of the escrow to accomplish the refunding relies solely
on the initial escrowed investments and the maturing principal thereof and interest income
thereon and does not assume performance under or compliance with the forward supply
contract, and (b) the applicable escrow agreement shall provide that in the event of any
discrepancy or difference between the terms of the forward supply contract and the escrow
agreement (or the authorizing document, if no separate escrow agreement is utilized), the
terms of the escrow agreement or authorizing document, if applicable, shall be controlling.
SECTION 15. SECONDARY MARKET DISCLOSURE. Subject in all
respects to the satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 6 hereof, the Issuer hereby
covenants and agrees that, in order to provide for compliance by the Issuer with the
secondary market disclosure requirements of Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Rule"), it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the
Continuing Disclosure Certificate to be executed by the Issuer and dated the date of delivery
of the Series 2001 Bonds, as it may be amended from time to time in accordance with the
terms thereof. The Continuing Disclosure Certificate shall be substantially in the form
attached hereto as Exhibit E with such changes, amendments, modifications, omissions and
additions as shall be approved by the Chairman who is hereby authorized to execute and
deliver such Certificate. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Resolution, failure of
the Issuer to comply with such Continuing Disclosure Certificate shall not be considered an
event of default under the Resolution; provided, however, any Series 2001 Bondholder may
take such actions as may b'e necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific
performance by court order, to cause the Issuer to comply with its obligations under this
Section 15 and the Continuing Disclosure Certificate. For purposes of this Section 15,
"Series 2001 Bondholder" shall mean any person who (A) has the power, directly or
indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, any Series 2001
Bonds (including persons holding Series 2001 Bonds through nominees, depositories or other
13
AGENDA ITEr~
No. /'~ D
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. //.-
intermediaries), or (B) is treated as the owner of any Series 2001 Bonds for federal income
tax purposes.
SECTION 16. GENERAL AUTHORITY. The members of the Board, the
Clerk and the officers, attorneys and other agents or employees of the Issuer are hereby
authorized to do all acts and things required of them by this Supplemental Resolution, the
Resolution, the Official Statement, thc Continuing Disclosure Certificate, the Debt Service
Reserve Fund Policy Agreement or the Purchase Contract or desirable or consistent with the
requirements hereof or the Resolution, the Official Statement, the Continuing Disclosure
Certificate, the Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement or thc Purchase Contract for
the full punctual and complete performance of all the terms, covenants and agreements
contained herein or in the Series 2001 Bonds, the Resolution, the Official Statement, the
Continuing Disclosure Certificate, the Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement and the
Purchase Contract and each member, employee, attorney and officer of the Issuer or the
Board and the Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver any and all
papers and inslrumcnts and to do and cause to bc done any and all acts and things necessary
or proper for carrying out the transactions contemplated hereunder. If the Chairman is
unavailable or unable at any time to perform any duties or functions hereunder including but
not limited to those described in Section 6 hereof, the Vice-Chairman is hereby authorized
to act on his or her behalf.
SECTION 17. SEVERABILITY AND INVALID PROVISIONS. If any one
or more of the covenants, agreements or provisions herein contained shall be held contrary
to any express provision of law or contrary to the policy of express law, though not expressly
prohibi.ted or against public policy, or shall for any reason whatsoever be held invalid, then
such covenants, agreements or provisions shall be null and void and shall be deemed
separable from the remaining covenants, agreements or provisions and shall in no way affect
the validity of any of the other provisions hereof or of thc Series 2001 Bonds.
SECTION 18. RESOLUTION TO CONTINUE IN FORCE. Except as
herein expressly provided, the Resolution and all the terms and provisions thereof are and
shall remain in full force and effect.
14
AGENDA IT~Vl
No.
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. /7
SECTION 19. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Supplemental Resolution shall
become effective immediately upon its adoption.
DULY ADOPTED, in Regular Session this 27~ day of November, 2001.
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
(SEAL)
ATTEST'
By:
Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
By:
Clerk, Board of County
Commissioners
Approved as to Form and
Legal Sufficiency:
~"~- ~'~ounty Attorney
15
AGENDA ITEM
No. /,~ /'1
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg.
EXHIBIT A
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
The Project generally includes the following, as more particularly described in the
plans and specifications on file with the Issuer, and as the same may be amended or
supplements! from time to time:
· Acquisition of voting machines
· CDS building expansion
· Design of courthouse
· Acquisition and construction of Immokalee jail facility
· Acquisition and construction of North Naples satellite facility
· Acquisition and construction of Tax Collector building (reimbursement)
· Acquisition and conslxuction of Goodland Boat Launch
AGENDA-ITEN~
No. /t~ ~.~
N0V 7 2001
Pg. /f _
EXHIBIT B
ADDITIONAL PARITY BONDS REPORT
AGENDA ITeM
No.
NOV 27 2001
pg. ,,~
EXHIBIT C
FORM OF PURCHASE CONTRACT
AGENDA ITEM
No.~/~ ~
NOV 77 2001
pg. 2,t _
EXHIBIT D
FORM OF PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT
AGENDA
No. ?',~
NOV 27 2001
pg. ,~,A
EXHIBIT E
FORM OF CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE
AGENDA ITE,~
No. /~ /~
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. 2,,3
EXHIBIT F
FORM OF DEBT SERVICE RESERVE FUND POLICY AGREEMENT
AGENDA ITE~
No.
N0V 2 7 200I
pg. ,~L
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 21,2001
Board of County Commissioners
Michael Smykowski,
OMB Director
Collier County, Florida Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds,
Series 2001 -- minor revisions to authorizing resolution
Attached please find a revised version of the authorizing bond resolution to be considered by the
Board of County Commissioners at its November 27, 2001 meeting (agenda item 1 OB). The revised
resolution is marked to show changes from the version that was included in the printed agenda
package. All of the changes are contained in Section 14 of the resolution and were required by the
municipal bond insurance company that will be insuring the transaction. The County's bond counsel
has provided a brief explanation of the changes as noted below.
1. Section 14(A)(i) -- The insurer's original commitment requires that the County's audited
financial statements be provided to them within 120 days of the end of the County's fiscal year.
Knowing this was impracticable; we drafted the original resolution with a required delivery period of
210 days. The insurer then requested a shorter period and after consulting with County staff it was
determined that 180 days would be acceptable for both the County and the insurer.
2. Section 14(A)(ii) -- The original resolution was drafted with a requirement that the annual
budget of the County be delivered to the insurer each year. The insurer's subsequent commitment
does not include any such requirement so it was deleted.
3. Section 14(A)(iii) -- The insurer's commitment requires that the insurer be notified if the
County draws upon the Reserve Account or if the market value of the Reserve Account declines.
This was not included in the original resolution. This requirement has no practical effect inasmuch
as the County will be depositing a reserve account insurance policy into the Reserve Account
resulting in no cash or investments being on deposit therein.
4. Section 14(B)(i) -- The term "Registrar" was inserted simply because, in theory, the County's
Paying Agent and Registrar could be separate entities and the insurer wanted to make sure one or the
other would provide it with the information required by said Section. It is extremely unlikely that the
County's Registrar and Paying Agent will ever be separate entities. Pursuant to Section 12 of the
Resolution, the County is appointing Fifth Third Bank as the original Paying Agent and Registrar.
5. Section 14(G) -- We inadvertently left the notice address of the insurer and its fiscal agent out
of the original resolution.
6. Section 14(H) -- Resolution 92-399 authorized the issuance of the County's Capital
Improvement Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1992, which are still outstanding and will be on
parity with the Series 2001 Bonds being authorized pursuant to this resolution. The insurer for these
Series 2001 Bonds was also the insurer for the Series 1992 Bonds. The insurer's commitment
requires that the provisions set forth in Section 13(E) of Resolution 92-399 continue to apply so long
as the Series 2001 Bonds are outstanding. This Section 14(H) makes sure of that. Section 13(E) of
Resolution 92-399 includes certain ratings and other standard requirements for any future reserve
account insurance policies or reserve account letters of credit that the County may obtain with
respect to any subsequently issued bonds. We objected to the application of the fifth paragraph of
such Section 13(E), which required the delivery of certain opinions to the insurer and the insurer
agreed to exclude them.
Hopefully, the above summary adequately explains the differences between the resolution provided
in agenda packages and the actual resolution that will be considered by the Board during the meeting
on Tuesday, November 27, 2001. Bond counsel will be present to further explain these changes or
any other provisions of the resolution at the meeting. Please feel free to contact me if you have any
questions.
CCi
Thomas W. Olliff
David Weigel
James V. Mudd
Leo E. Ochs, Jr.
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
SUPPLEMENTING RESOLUTION NO. 85-107 ENTITLED
"A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT
EXCEEDING $29,625,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1985 OF THE
COUNTY TO FINANCE THE COST OF REFUNDING
CERTAIN OUTSTANDING OBLIGATIONS OF THE
COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS OF THE
HOLDERS OF SUCH BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE
PAYMENT THEREOF; MAKING CERTAIN OTHER
COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS IN CONNECTION
WITH THE ISSUANCE OF SUCH BONDS; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE"; AUTHORIZING THE
FINANCING OF VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE COUNTY AND REFINANCING OF CERTAIN
OUTSTANDING INDEBTEDNESS OF THE COUNTY;
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT EXCEEDING
$55,200,000 IN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001 1N ORDER TO EFFECT
SUCH FINANCING AND REFINANCING; PROVIDING
CERTAIN TERMS AND DETAILS OF SAID BONDS,
INCLUDING AUTHORIZING A NEGOTIATED SALE OF
SAID BONDS; DELEGATING CERTAIN AUTHORITY TO
THE CHAIRMAN FOR THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY
OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PURCHASE CONTRACT
WITH RESPECT THERETO; APPOINTING THE PAYING
AGENT AND REGISTRAR FOR SAID BONDS;
AUTHORIZING THE DISTRIBUTION OF A PRELIMINARY
OFFICIAL STATEMENT' AND THE EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY OF AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT WITH
RESPECT THERETO; ESTABLISHING A BOOK-ENTRY
SYSTEM OF REGISTRATION FOR THE BONDS;
AUTHORIZING MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE FOR
THE BONDS; AUTHORIZING A RESERVE ACCOUNT
INSURANCE POLICY WITH RESPECT TO THE BONDS;
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1.
FINDINGS. It is hereby found and determined that:
(A) On April 30, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") of
Collier County, Florida (the "Issuer") duly adopted Resolution No. 85-107, as amended and
supplemented (collectively the "Resolution"), the title of which resolution is quoted in the
title of this Supplemental Resolution, for the purposes described therein, authorizing, among
other things, the issuance of $29,625,000 Capital Improvement Revenue Refunding Bonds,
Series 1985 (the "Series 1985 Bonds"), which Series 1985 Bonds were issued for the
principal purpose of refunding the Issuer's outstanding Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds,
1982. The Series 1985 Bonds are no longer outstanding under the Resolution.
(B) Pursuant to the Resolution the Issuer has heretofore issued its $8,225,000
Capital Improvement Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1992 (the "Series 1992 Bonds") for
the principal purpose of refunding the County's outstanding Capital Improvement Revenue
Bonds, Series 1988.
(C) Pursuant to the Resolution the Issuer has heretofore issued its $30,415,000
Capital Improvement Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1994 (the "Series 1994 Bonds") for
the principal purpose of refunding the County's outstanding Capital Improvement Revenue
Bonds, Series 1986.
(D) The Issuer has heretofore issued its Collier County, Florida Revenue Notes,
Draw Numbers A-11-1, A-11-2,A-11-3, A-11-4, A-12-1,A-13-1, A-18-1 and A-19-1 (the
"Prior Notes") to the Florida Local Government Finance Commission (the "Finance
Commission") and two promissory notes (the "Bank Notes") to Bank of America (the
"Bank") for the principal purpose of financing and refinancing various governmental projects
(the "Prior Projects").
(E) The Issuer has determined that certain capital improvements should be
acquired, constructed and equipped throughout the Issuer in order to improve the health,
safety and welfare of the inhabitants within the Issuer's geographic boundaries. Such capital
2
improvements are generally described in Exhibit A hereto and are more particularly
described in the records, plans and specifications on file with the Issuer (the "Project"). Such
Exhibit A may be amended or supplemented from time to time by the Board without the
consent of any Bondholder (as defined in the Resolution) or Insurer (as defined in the
Resolution).
(F) The Resolution provides for the issuance of Additional Parity Bonds on a parity
with the outstanding Series 1992 Bonds and Series 1994 Bonds (collectively, the "Parity
Bonds") for the purpose of current refunding the Prior Notes and the Bank Notes and
financing the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project, upon meeting the
requirements set forth therein.
(G) There is hereby authorized the current refunding of the Prior Notes and the
Bank Notes and financing and/or reimbursing the costs of the acquisition, construction and
equipping of the Project, all in the manner as provided by this Supplemental Resolution.
(H) The Issuer deems it to be in its best interest to issue its Collier County, Florida
Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 2001 (the "Series 2001 Bonds") for the
principal purpose of current refunding the Prior Notes and the Bank Notes and financing
and/or reimbursing the costs of the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project.
The Series 2001 Bonds shall be issued on parity in all respects with the Parity Bonds
pursuant to the terms of the Resolution.
(I) Due to the potential volatility of the market for tax-exempt obligations such as
the Series 2001 Bonds and the complexity of the transactions relating to such Series 2001
Bonds, it is in the best interest of the Issuer to sell the Series 2001 Bonds by a negotiated
sale, allowing the Issuer to enter the market at the most advantageous time, rather than at a
specified advertised date, thereby permitting the Issuer to obtain the best possible price and
interest rate for the Series 2001 Bonds.
(J) The Issuer anticipates receiving a favorable offer to purchase the Series 2001
Bonds from Salomon Smith Barney Inc., Raymond James & Associates, Inc. and A.G.
Edwards & Sons, Inc. (collectively, the "Underwriters"), all within the parameters set forth
herein.
(K) Inasmuch as the Board desires to sell the Series 2001 Bonds at the most
advantageous time and not wait for a scheduled Board meeting, so long as the herein
described parameters are met, the Issuer hereby determines to delegate the award and sale
of the Series 2001 Bonds to the Chairman within such parameters.
(L) The Issuer hereby certifies that it is not in default in performing any of the
covenants and obligations assumed under the Resolution and all of the covenants contained
in the Resolution shall apply to the Series 2001 Bonds.
(M) The report required by Section 19(I) of the Resolution is set forth as Exhibit
B hereto and the Board hereby accepts such report.
(N) All of the Prior Projects and the Project are of the nature and type that are
beneficial to, or available to, all of the citizens of the Issuer.
(O) The Resolution provides that the Series 2001 Bonds shall mature on such dates
and in such amounts, shall bear such rates of interest, shall be payable in such places and
shall be subject to such redemption provisions as shall be determined by Supplemental
Resolution adopted by the Issuer; and it is now appropriate that the Issuer set forth the
parameters and mechanism to determine such terms and details, which terms and details shall
be set forth in the hereinafter defined Purchase Contract.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. When used in this Supplemental Resolution,
the terms defined in the Resolution shall have the meanings therein stated, except as such
definitions may be hereinafter amended or defined.
SECTION 3. AUTHORITY FOR THIS SUPPLEMENTAL
RESOLUTION. This Supplemental Resolution is adopted pursuant to the provisions of the
Act and the Resolution.
SECTION 4. AUTHORIZATION OF THE CURRENT REFUNDING OF
THE PRIOR NOTES AND THE BANK NOTES AND THE FINANCING OF THE
PROJECT. The Issuer hereby authorizes the current refunding of the Prior Notes and the
Bank Notes and the financing and/or reimbursing of the Cost of the Project upon the
satisfaction in all respects of the conditions set forth in Section 6 hereof.
SECTION 5. DESCRIPTION OF THE SERIES 2001 BONDS. The Issuer
hereby authorizes the issuance ora Series of Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of not
exceeding $55,200,000 to be known as the "Collier County, Florida Capital Improvement
Revenue Bonds, Series 2001 ," for the principal purposes of current refunding the Prior Notes
and the Bank Notes and financing and/or reimbursing the Cost of the acquisition,
construction and equipping of the Project. The aggregate principal amount of the Series
2001 Bonds to be issued pursuant to the Resolution shall be determined by the Chairman
provided such aggregate principal amount does not exceed $55,200,000. The Series 2001
Bonds shall be dated as of December 1, 2001 or such other date as the Chairman may
4
determine, shall be issued in the form of fully registered Bonds in the denomination of
$5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, shall be numbered consecutively from one upward
in order of maturity preceded by the letter "R", shall bear interest from the dated date
determined therefor, payable semi-annually, on April 1 and October 1 of each year (the
"Interest Dates"), commencing on April 1,2002 or such other date as may be determined by
the Chairman.
Interest on the Series 2001 Bonds shall be payable by check or draft of Fifth Third
Bank, Cincinnati, Ohio, as Paying Agent, made payable and mailed to the Holder in whose
name such Bond shall be registered at the close of business on the date which shall be the
fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month next preceding the
applicable Interest Date, or, at the request of such Holder, by bank wire transfer to the
account of such Holder. Principal of the Series 2001 Bonds is payable to the Holder upon
presentation, when due, at the designated corporate trust office of The Fifth Third Bank,
Cincinnati, Ohio, as Paying Agent. The principal of, redemption premium, if any, and
interest on the Series 2001 Bonds are payable in lawful money of the United States of
America.
The Series 2001 Bonds shall bear interest at such rates and yields, shall mature on
October 1 of each of the years and in the principal amounts corresponding to such years, and
shall have such redemption provisions as determined by the Chairman subject to the
conditions set forth in Section 6 hereof. All of the terms of the Series 2001 Bonds will be
included in a Purchase Contract which shall be in substantially the form attached hereto and
made a part hereof as Exhibit C (the "Purchase Contract"). The Chairman is hereby
authorized to execute the Purchase Contract in substantially the form attached hereto as
Exhibit C with such modifications as he deems appropriate upon satisfaction of the
conditions described in Section 6 hereof.
SECTION 6. CONDITIONS TO EXECUTION OF PURCHASE
CONTRACT. The Purchase Contract shall not be executed by the Chairman until such time
as all of the following conditions have been satisfied:
(A) Receipt by the Chairman of a written offer to purchase the Series 2001
Bonds by the Underwriters substantially in the form of the Purchase Contract attached
hereto as Exhibit A, said offer to provide for or demonstrate, among other things, (i)
not exceeding $55,200,000 aggregate principal amount of Series 2001 Bonds, (ii) an
underwriting discount (including management fee and all expenses) not in excess of
0.55% of the par amount of the Series 2001 Bonds, (iii) a true interest cost of not
more than 5.25% per annum, and (iv) the maturities of the Series 2001 Bonds,. with
the final maturity being not later than October 1, 2021.
(B) With respect to any optional redemption terms for the Series 2001
Bonds, the first call date may be no later than October 1, 2012 and no call premium
may exceed 2.0 % of the par amount of that portion of the Series 2001 Bonds to be
redeemed. Term Bonds may be established with such Amortization Installments as
the Chairman deems appropriate.
(C) Receipt by the Chairman of a disclosure statement and a
truth-in-bonding statement of the Underwriters dated the date of the Purchase
Contract and complying with Section 218.385, Florida Statutes.
(D) Receipt by the Chairman of a good faith deposit from the Underwriters
in an amount not less than 1.0% of the par amount of the Series 2001 Bonds.
Upon satisfaction of all the requirements set forth in this Section 6, the Chairman is
authorized to execute and deliver the Purchase Contract containing terms complying with the
provisions of this Section 6.
SECTION 7. REDEMPTION PROVISIONS FOR SERIES 2001 BONDS.
The Series 2001 Bonds may be redeemed prior to their respective maturities from any
moneys legally available therefor, upon notice as provided in the Resolution, upon the terms
and provisions as determined by the Chairman and set forth in the Purchase Contract subject
to the conditions contained in Section 6 hereof.
SECTION 8. FULL BOOK-ENTRY. Notwithstanding the provisions set
forth in Section 13 of the Resolution, the Series 2001 Bonds shall be initially issued in the
form of a separate single certificated fully registered Series 2001 Bond for each of the
maturities of the Series 2001 Bonds. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of each such Bond
shall be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co.,
as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"). As long as the Series 2001 Bonds
are registered in the name of Cede & Co., all of the Outstanding Series 2001 Bonds shall be
registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., all
payments of principal on the Series 2001 Bonds shall be made by the Paying Agent by check
or draft or by bank wire transfer to Cede & Co., as Holder of the Series 2001 Bonds, upon
presentation of the Series 2001 Bonds to be paid, to the Paying Agent.
With respect to Series 2001 Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the
Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the Issuer, the Registrar and the
Paying Agent shall have no responsibility or obligation to any direct or indirect participant
in the DTC book-entry program (the "Participants"). Without limiting the immediately
preceding sentence, the Issuer, the Registrar and the Paying Agent shall have no
responsibility or obligation with respect to (A) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede &
Co. or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest on the Series 2001 Bonds, (B)
the delivery to any Participant or any other Person other than a Bondholder, as shown in the
registration books kept by the Registrar, of any notice with respect to the Series 2001 Bonds,
including any notice of redemption, or (C) the payment to any Participant or any other
Person, other than a Bondholder, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar,
of any amount with respect to principal of, Redemption Price, if any, or interest on the Series
2001 Bonds. The Issuer, the Registrar and the Paying Agent may treat and consider the
Person in whose name each Series 2001 Bond is registered in the registration books kept by
the Registrar as the Holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of
principal, Redemption Price, if any, and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose
of giving notices of redemption and other matters with respect to such Bond, for the purpose
of registering transfers with respect to such Bond, and for all other purposes whatsoever.
The Paying Agent shall pay all principal of, Redemption Price, if any, and interest on the
Series 2001 Bonds only to or upon the order of the respective Holders, as shown in the
registration books kept by the Registrar, or their respective attorneys duly authorized in
writing, as provided herein and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy
and discharge the Issuer's obligations with respect to payment of principal of, Redemption
Price, if any, and interest on the Series 2001 Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid.
No Person other than a Holder, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, shall
receive a certificated Bond evidencing the obligation of the Issuer to make payments of
principal, Redemption Price, if any, and interest pursuant to the provisions of the Resolution.
Upon delivery by DTC to the Issuer of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined
to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., and subject to the provisions in the
Resolution with respect to transfers during the 15 days next preceding an Interest Date or first
mailing of notice of redemption, the words "Cede & Co." in this Supplemental Resolution
shall refer to such new nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such notice, the Issuer shall
promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Registrar and the Paying Agent.
Upon (A) receipt by the Issuer of written notice from DTC (i) to the effect that a
continuation of the requirement that all of the outstanding Series 2001 Bonds be registered
in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of
DTC, is not in the best interest of the beneficial owners of the Series 2001 Bonds or (ii) to
the effect that DTC is unable or unwilling to discharge its responsibilities and no substitute
depository willing to undertake the functions of DTC hereunder can be found which is
willing and able to undertake such functions upon reasonable and customary terms, or (B)
determination by the Issuer that such book-entry only system is burdensome or undesirable
to the Issuer, the Series 2001 Bonds shall no longer be restricted to being registered in the
registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, but
may be registered in whatever name or names Holders shall designate, in accordance with
7
the provisions of the Resolution. In such event, the Issuer shall issue and the Registrar shall
authenticate, transfer and exchange the Series 2001 Bonds of like principal amount and
maturity, in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof to the Holders thereof.
The foregoing notwithstanding, until such time as participation in the book-entry only system
is discontinued, the provisions set forth in the Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations
previously executed by the Issuer and delivered to DTC shall apply to the payment of
principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Series 2001 Bonds.
SECTION 9. APPLICATION OF SERIES 2001 BOND PROCEEDS; USE
OF OTHER MONEYS. The proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 2001 Bonds shall
be applied by the Issuer as follows:
(A) An amount equal to the accrued interest, if any, on the Series 2001 Bonds shall
be deposited to the Interest Account of the Sinking Fund and shall be used to pay a portion
of the interest on the Series 2001 Bonds.
(B) An amount necessary to repay the Prior Notes shall be distributed pursuant to
the instructions of the Finance Commission to be applied to the full payment of such Prior
Notes on January 18, 2002 or such other date as determined between the Finance
Commission and the Chairman so long as such date is no later than the 90th day from the date
of issuance of the Series 2001 Bonds.
(C) An amount necessary to repay the Bank Notes shall be distributed pursuant to
the instructions of the Bank to be applied to the full payment of such Bank Notes within 90
days from the date of issuance of the Series 2001 Bonds; provided, however, that the
Chairman is hereby delegated the authority to determine, upon the advice of the Issuer's
Financial Advisor, prior to the sale of the Series 2001 Bonds to the Underwriters whether to
repay the Bank Notes in connection with the issuance of the Series 2001 Bonds and what
portion of the Bank Notes to repay, if any.
(D) A sufficient amount of the Series 2001 Bond proceeds shall be applied to the
payment of the premium for the hereinafter described Bond Insurance Policy applicable to
the Series 2001 Bonds, to the payment of the premium for the hereinafter described reserve
account insurance policy, and to the payment of costs and expenses relating to the issuance
of the Series 2001 Bonds.
(E) The remainder of the proceeds of the Series 2001 Bonds shall be deposited to
the Construction Fund and applied to pay the Cost of the Project.
(F) Moneys released from the Reserve Account, if any, as a result of the purchase
of the reserve account insurance policy described in Section 13(B) hereof shall be applied
to the refinancing of the Prior Notes and/or the Bank Notes.
SECTION 10. PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT. The Issuer
hereby authorizes the distribution and use of the Preliminary Official Statement in
substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit D in connection with the offering of the
Series 2001 Bonds for sale. If between the date hereof and the mailing of the Preliminary
Official Statement, it is necessary to make insertions, modifications or changes in the
Preliminary Official Statement, the Chairman is hereby authorized to approve such insertions,
changes and modifications. The Chairman is hereby authorized to deem the Preliminary
Official Statement "final" within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12(b)(1) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 in the form as mailed. Execution of a certificate by the Chairman
deeming the Preliminary Official Statement "final" as described above shall be conclusive
evidence of the approval of any insertions, changes or modifications.
SECTION 11. OFFICIAL STATEMENT. The form, terms and provisions of
the Official Statement relating to the Series 2001 Bonds shall be substantially as set forth in
the Preliminary Official Statement and shall include all of the specific financial terms of the
Series 2001 Bonds. The Chairman is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver
said Official Statement in the name and on behalf of the Issuer, and thereupon to cause such
Official Statement to be delivered to the Underwriters with such changes, amendments,
modifications, omissions and additions as may be approved by the Chairman. Said Official
Statement, including any such changes, amendments, modifications, omissions and additions
as approved by the Chairman and the information contained therein are hereby authorized
to be used in connection with the sale of the Series 2001 Bonds to the public. Execution by
the Chairman of the Official Statement shall be deemed to be conclusive evidence of
approval of such changes.
SECTION 12. APPOINTMENT OF PAYING AGENT AND REGISTRAR.
Subject in all respects to the satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 6 hereof, Fifth
Third Bank, Cincinnati, Ohio, is hereby designated Registrar and Paying Agent for the Series
2001 Bonds. The Chairman and/or the Clerk or any designated Deputy Clerk are hereby
authorized to enter into any agreement which may be necessary to effect the transactions
contemplated by this Section 12 and by the Resolution.
SECTION 13. MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE; RESERVE ACCOUNT
INSURANCE POLICY. (A) Subject in all respects to the satisfaction of the conditions set
forth in Section 6 hereof, the Issuer hereby authorizes the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Series 2001 Bonds to be insured pursuant to a municipal bond insurance
9
policy (the "Bond Insurance Policy") that guarantees payment of principal of and interest on
the Series 2001 Bonds issued by Financial Guaranty Insurance Company ("Financial
Guaranty"), a monoline financial guaranty insurer domiciled in the State of New York and
subject to regulation by the State of New York Insurance Department. The Chairman and
the Clerk are hereby authorized to execute such documents and instruments necessary to
cause Financial Guaranty to insure the Series 2001 Bonds. With respect to the Series 2001
Bonds, Financial Guaranty shall be deemed to be the "Insurer" as such term is used and
defined in the Resolution.
(B) Subject in all respects to the satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section
6 hereof, the Issuer shall deposit to the Reserve Account a reserve account insurance policy
purchased from Financial Guaranty the face amount of which, together with any other cash
amounts and the face amounts of any other reserve policies or surety bonds on deposit in the
Reserve Account, is equal to the Maximum Bond Service Requirement for all Outstanding
Bonds. At the discretion of the Chairman, such reserve account insurance policy may be in
such amount as to allow for the release of the moneys presently on deposit in the Reserve
Account for the benefit of the Parity Bonds. The Chairman is hereby authorized to enter into
a Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement substantially in the form attached hereto as
Exhibit F in order to cause F inanc ial Guaranty to issue such reserve account insurance policy.
The provisions of such Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement, when executed and
delivered, shall be incorporated herein by reference and to the extent there are any conflicts
between the Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement and the Resolution, the provisions
of the Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement shall control.
SECTION 14. PROVISIONS RELATING TO BOND INSURANCE
POLICY. So long as the Bond Insurance Policy issued by the Insurer is in full force and
effect and the Insurer has not defaulted in its payment obligations under the Bond Insurance
Policy, the Issuer agrees to comply with the following provisions, notwithstanding any
provision in the Resolution to the contrary:
(A) Information Provided to Financial Guaranty. Financial Guaranty shall be
provided with the following information: (i) within [^] 180 days after the end of each of the
Issuer's fiscal years, the annual audited financial statements for such fiscal years, and, if not
presented in the audited financial statements, a statement of the revenues pledged to the
payment of Series 2001 Bonds; (ii) [^] any Official Statement or other disclosure document,
if any, prepared in connection with the issuance of additional debt, whether or not on parity
with the Series 2001 Bonds, within 30 days of the sale thereof; (iii) immediate notice of any
draw upon or deficiency due to market fluctuation in the amount, if any, on deposit in the
Reserve Account; (iv) notice of the redemption, other than mandatory sinking fund
redemption, of any of the Series 2001 Bonds, or any advance refunding of the Series 2001
10
Bonds, including the principal amount, maturities and CUSIP numbers thereof; and (v) such
additional information as Financial Guaranty may reasonably request from time to time. The
Issuer shall be solely responsible for providing the information described in clauses (i)-(iii)
above.
(B) Payment Procedure Pursuant to Bond Insurance Policy. (i) If, on the third day
preceding any Interest Date for the Series 2001 Bonds the Issuer does not have on deposit
sufficient moneys available to pay all principal of and interest on the Series 2001 Bonds due
on such date, the Issuer shall immediately notify Financial Guaranty and State Street Bank
and Trust Company, N.A., New York, New York or its successor as its Fiscal Agent (the
"Fiscal Agent") of the amount of such deficiency. If, by said Interest Date, the Issuer has not
provided the amount of such deficiency, the Paying Agent shall simultaneously make
available to Financial Guaranty and to the Fiscal Agent the registration books for the Series
2001 Bonds maintained by the Paying Agent. In addition:
(i) The Paying Agent or Registrar shall provide Financial Guaranty with
a list of the Series 2001 Bondholders entitled to receive principal or interest payments
from Financial Guaranty under the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy and shall make
arrangements for Financial Guaranty and its Fiscal Agent (a) to mail checks or drafts
to Series 2001 Bondholders entitled to receive full or partial interest payments from
Financial Guaranty and (b) to pay principal of the S eries 2001 Bonds surrendered to
the Fiscal Agent by the Series 2001 Bondholders entitled to receive full or partial
principal payments from Financial Guaranty; and
(ii) The Paying Agent shall, at the time it makes the registration books
available to Financial Guaranty pursuant to (i) above, notify Series 2001 Bondholders
entitled to receive the payment of principal of or interest on the Series 2001 Bonds
from Financial Guaranty (a) as to the fact of such entitlement, (b) that Financial
Guaranty will remit to them all or part of the interest payments coming due subject to
the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy, (c) that, except as provided in paragraph (C)
below, in the event that any S eries 2001 Bondholder is entitled to receive full payment
of principal from Financial Guaranty, such Series 2001 Bondholder must tender his
Series 2001 Bond with the instrument of transfer in the form provided on the Series
2001 Bond executed in the name of Financial Guaranty, and (d) that, except as
provided in paragraph (C) below, in the event that such Series 2001 Bondholder is
entitled to receive partial payment of principal from Financial Guaranty, such Series
2001 Bondholder must tender his Series 2001 Bond for payment first to the Paying
Agent, which shall note on such Series 2001 Bond the portion of principal paid by the
Paying Agent, and then, with an acceptable form of assignment executed in the name
of Financial Guaranty, to the Fiscal Agent, which will then pay the unpaid portion of
11
principal to the Series 2001 Bondholder subject to the terms of the Bond Insurance
Policy.
(C) In the event that the Paying Agent has notice that any payment of principal of
or interest on a Series 2001 Bond has been recovered from a Series 2001 Bondholder
pursuant to the United States Bankruptcy Code by a trustee in bankruptcy in accordance with
the final, nonappealable order of a court having competent jurisdiction, the Paying Agent
shall, at the time it provides notice to Financial Guaranty, notify all Series 2001 Bondholders
that in the event that any Series 2001 Bondholder's payment is so recovered, such Series 2001
Bondholder will be entitled to payment from Financial Guaranty to the extent of such
recovery, and the Paying Agent shall furnish to Financial Guaranty its records evidencing the
payments of principal of and interest on the Series 2001 Bonds which have been made by the
Paying Agent and subsequently recovered from Series 2001 Bondholders, and the dates on
which such payments were made.
(D) Financial Guaranty shall, to the extent it makes payment of principal of or
interest on the Series 2001 Bonds, become subrogated to the rights of the recipients of such
payments in accordance with the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy and, to evidence such
subrogation, (i) in the case of subrogation as to claims for past due interest, the Paying Agent
shall note Financial Guaranty's rights as subrogee on the registration books maintained by
the Paying Agent upon receipt from Financial Guaranty of proof of the payment of interest
thereon to the holders of such Series 2001 Bonds and (ii) in the case of subrogation as to
claims for past due principal, the Paying Agent shall note Financial Guaranty's fights as
subrogee on the registration books for the Series 2001 Bonds maintained bythe Paying Agent
upon receipt of proof of the payment of principal thereof to the holders of such Series 2001
Bonds. Notwithstanding anything in this Indenture or the Series 2001 Bonds to the contrary,
the Paying Agent shall make payment of such past due interest and past due principal directly
to Financial Guaranty to the extent that Financial Guaranty is a subrogee with respect thereto.
(E) Amendments. Any amendments to the Resolution requiring Bondholder
consent entered into in accordance with the provisions of the Resolution shall require the
written consent of Financial Guaranty. Financial Guaranty shall be provided with a full
transcript of all proceedings relating to the execution of any Supplemental Resolution
containing such an amendment. Any rating agency rating the Series 2001 Bonds shall
receive notice of any amendment or supplement to the Resolution and a copy thereof at least
15 days prior to the amendment's execution.
(F) Additional Provisions. (i) Any successor Paying Agent for the Series 2001
Bonds must have combined capital, surplus and undivided profits of at least $50 million,
unless Financial Guaranty shall otherwise approve; (ii) no resignation or removal of the
12
Paying Agent shall become effective until a successor has been appointed and has accepted
the duties of Paying Agent; (iii) Financial Guaranty shall be furnished with written notice of
the resignation or removal of the Paying Agent and the appointment of any successor thereto;
(iv) the Paying Agent shall provide Financial Guaranty with immediate notice of any
payment default and notice of any other default known to the Paying Agent within 30 days
of their knowledge thereof; (v) Financial Guaranty shall be a party in interest hereunder and
as a party entitled to (a) notify the Issuer, the Paying Agent and any applicable receiver of
the occurrence of an event of default under the Resolution and (b) request the Paying Agent
and any applicable receiver to intervene in judicial proceedings that affect the Series 2001
Bonds or the security therefor; the Paying Agent and any applicable receiver shall be required
to accept notice of default from Financial Guaranty; and (vi) if a forward supply contract is
employed in connection with a refunding of the S eries 2001 Bonds, (a) the verification report
shall expressly state that the adequacy of the escrow to accomplish the refunding relies solely
on the initial escrowed investments and the maturing principal thereof and interest income
thereon and does not assume performance under or compliance with the forward supply
contract, and (b) the applicable escrow agreement shall provide that in the event of any
discrepancy or difference between the terms of the forward supply contract and the escrow
agreement (or the authorizing document, if no separate escrow agreement is utilized), the
terms of the escrow agreement or authorizing document, if applicable, shall be controlling.
be.'
(G)
Notices. The notice address for Financial Guaranty and the Fiscal Agent shall
Financial Guaranty Insurance Company
125 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10017
Attention: Risk Management
State Street Bank and Trust Company, N.A.
61 Broadway
New York, New York 10006
Attention: Corporate Trust Department
(H) Reserve Products. Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Resolution, the
provisions of Section 13 (E) of Resolution No. 92-399 adopted by the Issuer on July 28, 1992
shall apply with respect to any reserve account insurance policy or reserve account letter of
credit that is deposited to the Reserve Account subsequent to the issuance of the Series 2001
Bonds; provided, however, the fifth paragraph of said Section 13(E) shall not apply.
SECTION 15. SECONDARY MARKET DISCLOSURE. Subject in all
respects to the satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 6 hereof, the Issuer hereby
13
covenants and agrees that, in order to provide for compliance by the Issuer with the
secondary market disclosure requirements of Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Rule"), it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the
Continuing Disclosure Certificate to be executed by the Issuer and dated the date of delivery
of the Series 2001 Bonds, as it may be amended from time to time in accordance with the
terms thereof. The Continuing Disclosure Certificate shall be substantially in the form
attached hereto as Exhibit E with such changes, amendments, modifications, omissions and
additions as shall be approved by the Chairman who is hereby authorized to execute and
deliver such Certificate. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Resolution, failure of
the Issuer to comply with such Continuing Disclosure Certificate shall not be considered an
event of default under the Resolution; provided, however, any Series 2001 Bondholder may
take such actions as may be necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific
performance by court order, to cause the Issuer to comply with its obligations under this
Section 15 and the Continuing Disclosure Certificate. For purposes of this Section 15,
"Series 2001 Bondholder" shall mean any person who (A) has the power, directly or
indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, any Series 2001
Bonds (including persons holding Series 2001 Bonds through nominees, depositories or other
intermediaries), or (B) is treated as the owner of any Series 2001 Bonds for federal income
tax purposes.
SECTION 16. GENERAL AUTHORITY. The members of the Board, the
Clerk and the officers, attorneys and other agents or employees of the Issuer are hereby
authorized to do all acts and things required of them by this Supplemental Resolution, the
Resolution, the Official Statement, the Continuing Disclosure Certificate, the Debt Service
Reserve Fund Policy Agreement or the Purchase Contract or desirable or consistent with the
requirements hereof or the Resolution, the Official Statement, the Continuing Disclosure
Certificate, the Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement or the Purchase Contract for
the full punctual and complete performance of all the terms, covenants and agreements
contained herein or in the Series 2001 Bonds, the Resolution, the Official Statement, the
Continuing Disclosure Certificate, the Debt Service Reserve Fund Policy Agreement and the
Purchase Contract and each member, employee, attorney and officer of the Issuer or the
Board and the Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver any and all
papers and instruments and to do and cause to be done any and all acts and things necessary
or proper for carrying out the transactions contemplated hereunder. If the Chairman is
unavailable or unable at any time to perform any duties or functions hereunder including but
not limited to those described in Section 6 hereof, the Vice-Chairman is hereby authorized
to act on his or her behalf.
SECTION 17. SEVERABILITY AND INVALID PROVISIONS. If any one
or more of the covenants, agreements or provisions herein contained shall be held contrary
14
to any express provision of law or contrary to the policy of express law, though not expressly
prohibited or against public policy, or shall for any reason whatsoever be held invalid, then
such covenants, agreements or provisions shall be null and void and shall be deemed
separable from the remaining covenants, agreements or provisions and shall in no way affect
the validity of any of the other provisions hereof or of the Series 2001 Bonds.
SECTION 18. RESOLUTION TO CONTINUE IN FORCE. Except as
herein expressly provided, the Resolution and all the terms and provisions thereof are and
shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 19. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Supplemental Resolution shall
become effective immediately upon its adoption.
DULY ADOPTED, in Regular Session this 27th day of November, 2001.
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
(SEAL)
By:
Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
ATTEST:
By:
Clerk, Board of County
Commissioners
Approved as to Form and
Legal Sufficiency:
County Attorney
15
EXHIBIT A
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
The Project generally includes the following, as more particularly described in the
plans and specifications on file with the Issuer, and as the same may be amended or
supplemented from time to time:
· Acquisition of voting machines
· CDS building expansion
· Design of courthouse
· Acquisition and construction of Immokalee jail facility
· Acquisition and construction of North Naples satellite facility
· Acquisition and construction of Tax Collector building (reimbursement)
· Acquisition and construction of Goodland Boat Launch
EXHIBIT B
ADDITIONAL PARITY BONDS REPORT
EXHIBIT C
FORM OF PURCHASE CONTRACT
EXHIBIT D
FORM OF PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT
EXHIBIT E
FORM OF CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE
EXHIBIT F
FORM OF DEBT SERVICE RESERVE FUND POLICY AGREEMENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
REQUEST BOARD APPROVAL TO PURCHASE EQUIPMENT AND
ENGINEERING SERVICES TO EXPAND THE SIMULCAST COMPONENT
(ADDITIONAL TOWER SITES) OF THE COUNTY'S 800 MHz RADIO SYSTEM
OBJECTIVE: Request Board approval to purchase equipment and engineering services
to expand the simulcast component (additional tower sites) of the County's 800 MHz
radio system.
CONSIDERATIONS: On October 26, 1994 the Board approved contract 94-2201 with
Ericsson Inc., now M/A COM Private Radio Systems Inc., for construction of the 800
MHz trunked radio system. Radio system coverage criteria, included in the design of the
radio system, were based upon population density and anticipated growth. Since
implementation of the radio system many areas of the County have experienced
substantial growth.
The County requested that the 800 MHz Advisory Committee identify areas where
improvements in the original signal coverage specification are necessary. Two key areas
were identified; the Northeast Golden Gate Estates/Orangetree area and the area east of
951 on US 41, including the South Blocks area of Golden Gate Estates. Population
estimates, compiled by the County's Comprehensive Planning Section, project 60%
growth in population from 27,445 residents in 2000 to 44,420 residents in 2007 in north
south corridor between these two areas. Increased population generates increased calls for
public safety service, requiring a higher level of reliability and signal coverage from the
radio system.
The County's radio system vendor was tasked to develop a plan to expand the radio
system to meet the increased signal coverage requirements. It was anticipated that this
plan would be part of future budget requests. There are however several factors that have
resulted in this request being submitted at this time.
The technology platform that operates M/A COM's simulcast radio system has
been changed. Adding sites to an existing system, like Collier County's, would
normally require an upgrade to the new technology prior to adding sites. M/A
Com has estimated this cost at $2.5 to $3 million dollars for Collier County.
The new simulcast technology is a change in the operating platform, not a change
in functionality. The improvements are more technical than operational. Adding
sites offers a more tangible improvement for radio system users.
Executive Summary
Page 2
The County's vendor, M/A Com, has a customer that is completing a major radio
system redesign that requires the upgrade to the new simulcast technology. This
customer's existing equipment is being traded in and is compatible with Collier
County's technology platform.
M/A Com has submitted a proposal to Collier County to add two (2) additional
simulcast sites utilizing refurbished equipment that was traded in and new
equipment; antenna systems, generators, battery back up systems and equipment
shelters.
With the addition of two simulcast sites, signal coverage from exiting sites will be
reconfigured to afford improvements in overall radio system coverage and
reliability.
· The equipment being provided under this proposal has a life expectancy of 7 to 10
years.
The cost of this upgrade is $1.35 million dollars compared to a minimum
estimated cost of $4 million if it was necessary to upgrade the simulcast
technology platform prior to adding tower sites.
Collier County has evaluated the benefit and savings of adding only one site. Based upon
equipment and engineering requirements, this option would result in minimal savings,
less than $300,000.
FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is required to establish this project in the
County-Wide Capital Projects fund (301) under project number 01851 for $1,400,000.
The Finance Committee has recommended that this system expansion be funded through
a loan from the Commercial Paper Loan program.
The General Fund will be obligated for the repayment of the loan from non-advalorem
revenues. The estimated annual debt service payment, assuming a 5-year amortization, is
approximately $353,500. A budget amendment will be required to reduce General Fund
reserves and transfer funds to the Commercial Paper fund (299) for current year debt
service payments.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None
Executive Summary
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners:
Authorize the purchase of equipment and services to add two sites to the County's
radio system.
Authorize the Chairman to execute a contact with the vendor following review by
the County Attorney's Office.
Authorize a loan in an amount not to exceed $1.4 million from the Commercial
Paper Loan Program as the funding source for the site expansion.
· Authorize necessary Budget Amendments
PREPARED BY'
~, Radio Communications Manager
/--
Ski~¢Camp, Ifiterim Information Technology ~irector
Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrative Servicers Administrator
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AMEND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES .AGREEMENT WITH HAZEN & SAWYER,
P.C., FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES TO EXPAND THE NORTH COUNTY WATER
RECLAMATION FACILITY, PROJECT 73950
OBJECTIVE: To continue emergency engineering services to expand the North County Water
Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) to 30.6-mgd (Million Gallons Per Day) Maximum Month
Average Daily Flow (MMADF), as mandated by the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (FDEP) April 10, 2001 Consent Order.
CONSIDERATION: During the County's last peak demand season (2000-2001), the NCWRF
experienced several overflow events. These events resulted in an FDEP Consent Order (fully
executed by the Board and the FDEP on April 10, 2001), mandating an operational NCWRF
expansion to 30.6rmgd MMADF by January 1, 2005.
On May 8, 2001, item 16(C)(5), the Board declared a valid public emergency, waived the
competitive selection and negotiations process under section 287.055 F.S., and awarded
engineering services to consultant, Hazen & Sawyer, P.C. (H&S). The basis for a direct award to
H&S was that they designed and administered the last two expansions (3-mgd completed in
1994, and the current 5-mgd to complete in Spring 2002) at this facility. They proved to be
reliable, have performed satisfactorily on past projects, and bring continuity to this project. They
have extensive experience with this facility. Due to the expeditious nature of the Consent Order
and cash flow constraints in the FY 01 budget, staff originally negotiated, and the Board
approved, an initial scope (preliminary design, design report, surveying and permitting services)
to commence design. As reported to the Board on May 8, 2001, item 16 (C)(5), the remaining
services (final design, bidding services, value engineering/constructability review, construction
services, start up and close out services) were intentionally deferred to FY 02, due to budget
considerations. Pursuant to an October 24, 2001 meeting between the County and the FDEP, the
FDEP is considering allowing only the first half of this project (expansion to 24.1-mgd
MMADF) to be constructed and placed on line by the aforementioned Consent Order date, with
the second half (expansion to 30.6-mgd MMADF) being deferred to a future date based on
demand. In anticipation of approval by the FDEP, two distinct bidding packages will be
developed. The first package (expansion to 24.1-mgd MMADF), will bid in Summer 2002, and
will corrjg4ete by the FDEP-mandated Consent Order date of January 1, 2005. The second.
~ (expansion to 30.6-mgd MMADF), will bid in 2008 or 2009, dependent on direction
from the FDEP, funding availability and demand requirements. This amendment in the amount
of $2,856,803 includes design services for the full expansion to 30.6-mgd MMADF, so that all
necessary permitting can be obtained in one process, and only construction and follow-up
services for the expansion to 24.1-mgd MMADF. The scope is more fully detailed in the
attached amendment to Professional Services Agreement scope of services.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are specifically budgeted in FY 02 and are available for this work.
The source of funds is Impact Fees.
.o.. io b
NOV 2 7 21301
PG.
Executive Summary
Amend PSA For The NCWRF Expansion To 30.6-mgd MMADF
Page 2
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This work is consistent with the Growth
Management and Wastewater Master Plans.
RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the
Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, amend the Professional Services
Agreement with Hazen & Sawyer, P.C., for the NCWRF Expansion to 30.6-mgd MMADF,
Project 73950.
SUBMITTED BY:
Peter Schalt, PMP, Project Manager
Public Utilities Engineering Department
-Roy/t}. A~._derson, P.E., Director
PulSlic Utilities Engineering Department
REVIEWED BY:
jp?b~ich e awtohrak~,D iWv~Ss i~ nW at er Direc o
Date:
.I? > c '
/ ·
Date: tile
APPROVED BY:
Thomas G. Wides, Interim Administrator
Public Utilities Division
Attachment: Copy of Proposed Amendment to PSA
NOV 2 ? 200(
NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY 30.6-MGD MMADF
EXPANSION AMENDMENT NO. 10 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Amendment No. 10 to the Agreement dated May 14, 1996 (hereinafter
"AGREEMENT") is made and entered into this day of ,
20 , by and between the Board of County Commissioners for Collier County,
Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida and Governing Board of the Collier
County Water-Sewer District (hereinafter referred to as the "OWNER") and Hazen &
Sawyer, P.C., a New York corporation, authorized to do business in the State of
Florida, whose business address is 2101 Corporate Blvd., Boca Raton, Florida
33431 (hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT").
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, OWNER and CONSULTANT currently have a valid professional
services agreement for the provision of professional services for the NORTH COUNTY
WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY 30.6-MGD MMADF EXPANSION (hereinafter
referred to as "PROJECT"), said services more fully described in said AGREEMENT;
and
WHEREAS, OWNER and CONSULTANT agree some modifications to the
services being contemplated under said AGREEMENT are necessary; and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT represents that he has the expertise and the type of
professional services that will be required for completion of the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and provisions
contained herein, parties agree as follows:
AG£NDA
NOV 2 7 2001
PG.
ARTICLE ONE
1.1 CONSULTANT shall provide to OWNER professional engineering services in all
phases of the project to which this Amendment applies.
1.2 CONSULTANT shall provide professional services in addition to those as
outlined in said AGREEMENT as noted in Schedule A of this Amendment, as attached
hereto.
ARTICLE TWO
2.1 OWNER agrees to compensate CONSULTANT for services rendered hereunder
as prescribed in Schedule B, entitled "Schedule of Fees For Basic Services (Schedule B
attachment A), "Sche,dule of Fees" (Schedule B attachment B) and "Schedule of Fees
For Detailed Observation and Additional Services" (Schedule B attachment C)", as
outlined in said AGREEMENT with the modifications to Attachments A, B and C to said
AGREEMENT which are attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3.1
ARTICLE THREE
The schedule for said Project, shall be as shown in the revised Schedule C as
attached hereto.
NOV 2 7 001
P(;. //
4.1
ARTICLE FOUR
The AGREEMENT, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment to
Professional Services Agreement for the NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION
FACILITY 30.6-MGD MMADF EXPANSION the day and year first written above.
ATTEST: (As to Chairman)
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, A
POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE
OF FLORIDA AND AS EX - OFFICIO THE
GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
By:
Dwight E. Brock, Clerk
By:
James D. Carter, Ph.D., Chairman
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
Assistant Couhty Attorney
Witness
-By:
Hazen & Sawyer, P.C.
Mur~iz,'P.E., Vl'ce President
(C(
AG£ I~1~,
NOV 2 7 2001
PG.
CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 10
SCHEDULE A - SCOPE OF SERVICES
NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
EXPANSION TO 30.6-MGD MMADF
This document is Contract Amendment No. 10 to our original Professional Services Agreement for
the North County Regional Water Reclamation Facility 5-MGD Expansion project dated May 14,
1996.
A.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
A previous Contract Amendment (No. 8) to our PSA included engineering services for the North
County Water Reclamation Facility Expansion to 30.6 MGD (MMADF). Schedule A (Scope of
Services) for that previous Contract Amendment (No. 8) included the following tasks:
A.1
A.2
A.3
A.4
A.5
A.6
A.7
Design Report
Preliminary Design
Final Design
Construction Bid Services
Construction Contract Administration
Detailed Observation
Additional Services
Under that previous Contract Amendment (No. 8), scopes of services were defined for Tasks A.1
through A.7; however, engineering fees were established only for Tasks A. 1 (Design Report), A.2
(Preliminary Design), A.3 (Final Design), and portions of A.7 (Additional Services). Contract
Amendment No. 9 included additional services for Task A.5 (Contract Administration);Task A.6
· (Detailed Observation, construction period extended 6 months); Task 7.2 (Operator Training); Task
7.4 (Permitting); Task A.7.12 (SRF Funding Management for Expansion to 30.6 MGD, MMADF);
and Task 7.20 (Septage Receiving Station).
Contract Amendment No. 10, Schedule B (attached) establishes engineering fees corresponding to
the Scope of Services included in the previous Contract Amendment (No. 8) for Tasks A.4 (Bidding
Services), A.5 (Contract Administration), A.6 (Detailed Observation) and the remaining subtasks in
A.7 (Additional Services).
A.3 Final Design
Preliminary and Final Design of the Expansion to 30.6 MGD (MMADF) was originally provided for in
Contract Amendment No. 8. The Expansion to 30.6 MGD (MMADF) is equivalent to a nominal 10-
MGD expansion, based on annual average daily flow (AADF). Per Tasks A.2 and A.3 of Contract
Amendment No. 8, the design was to be executed in two separate bid packages, the first for a 10-
MGD (AADF) Liquid Stream Expansion and the second for a 10-MGD (AADF) Solids Stream
Expansion. In accordance with the OWNER'S request, the CONSULTANT shall prepare design
documents to be separated into two bid packages, as follows:
Page I of 3
10130/01
CA10SCHA
AG£aOA
"°.-/0
NOV 2 7 2001
PG.
Bid Package No. I - Complete design, including liquid and solids stream facilities, for an initial 5-
MGD (AADF) expansion, to be constructed and operational before the FDEP Consent Order date of
January 1, 2005. This expansion will expand the NCWRF capacity to 24.1-MGD MMADF.
Bid Package No. 2 - Complete design, including liquid and solids stream facilities, for a second 5-
MGD (AADF) expansion, whose construction will stad approximately three years after the initial
expansion is operational, and will expand the plant to 30.6-MGD MMADF.
A.6 Detailed Observation
The OWNER stipulates that Contract Amendment No. 10 includes the CONSULTANT's Detailed
Observation services for Bid Package No. 1 only (i.e.- initial 5-MGD (AADF) expansion as defined
above in Task A.3 scope). Detailed Observation services for Bid Package No. 2 (i.e.- second 5-
MGD expansion as defined in Task A.3 above) are not included in this amendment.
A.7.4 Permitting
Under Contract Amendment No. 7 (Engineering Services for Flow Equalization Facilities), scope
and fees were established for modification of the NCWRF Stormwater Management Permit from the
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to incorporate the 0.65 acre area associated
with the Flow Equalization Facilities (the remainder of the existing NCWRF is already permitted
through SFWMD). Following a pre-application meeting, the permit application and supporting
documentation was sub~nitted to SFWMD on September 5, 2001. In early October 2001, through
an inter-agency agreement, the stormwater permit application was forwarded to FDEP for
processing and approval. Based on their initial Request for Additional Information, FDEP intends to
re-permit the entire NCWRF stormwater management system (20+ acres), in lieu of only permitting
the modified 0.65-acre area associated with the Flow Equalization Facilities. To address this
change to the stormwater permitting process, the CONSULTANT shall (1) resubmit the permit
application to address the entire NCWRF site; (2) attend additional pre-application and permit
review meetings; (3) coordinate responses to additional RFI's with FDEP.
A.7.11 System Integration
In addition to providing Intellution programming services previously defined in the original PSA and
subsequent amendments, and as requested by the OWNER, the CONSULTANT shall pay for the
OWNER's 2-Year Service Contract for the NCWRF Intellution software package. The service
contract includes free software upgrades and unlimited technical support service. The
CONSULTANT shall pay the direct cost for the service contract, $30,380.00, and shall invoice that
cost back to the OWNER under this subtask.
A.7.2'1 Landscaping/Front-Entry Gate
This item shall include services for design, bidding, contract administration and detailed observation
for (a) landscaping of the west perimeter strip of the NCWRF from an area near Effluent Ponds Nos.
lA and 2 north to the plant entrance road (per the County's direction, the landscaping shall include
trees and plantings native to Southwest Florida); and (b) replacement of the existing "chain-link"
front-entry gate with an architectural front-entry gate designed to be consistent with the County's
Land Development Code.
Page 2 of 3
11/01/01 AG[ N0A
CA10SCHA .0._ /~
NOV 2 7 2001
P(;. '7
A.7.22 Reclaimed Water Distribution Model
One facility to be expanded under the NCWRF Expansion to 30.6 MGD (MMADF) is the Reuse
Pump Station. The operating criteria of the Reuse Pump Station has changed over the years,
based on changes to user demands, whether County provides operating pressure directly to users,
and other impacts. The last hydraulic model of the reclaimed water distribution system (run in
KYPipe) must be updated in order to define the required operating criteria for the expanded Reuse
Pump Station. This item was not included in the design scope of the NCWRF Expansion to 30.6
MGD (reference Contract Amendment No. 8). Under this task, the CONSULTANT shall review the
existing model, and either (1) update the model based on additional users and other phySical
changes to the piping system (e.g.- use of backpressure sustaining valves, etc.); or (2) construct a
new model, if required. The results of this modeling effort shall form the basis of hydraulic design for
the expanded Reuse Pumping System.
A.7.23 Dedication Ceremonies
The CONSULTANT shall assist the OWNER to prepare and conduct the following dedication
ceremonies:
· NCWRF 5-MGD Liquid Stream Expansion "Turn the Valve" Ceremony
· NCWRF 5-MGD Expansion Final Dedication Ceremony
· NCWRF Flow Ec~ualization Facilities "Turn the Valve" Ceremony
· NCWRF Expansion to 30.6 MGD Groundbreaking Ceremony
· NCWRF Expansion to 30.6 MGD Final Dedication Ceremony
The CONSULTANT shall assist the OWNER with preparations, including invitations, seating,
podiums, catering food and beverages, handouts, presentation graphics, programs, tours (as
applicable) and mementos. All costs incurred by the CONSULTANT shall be invoiced to the
OWNER through this Additional Services subtask.
END OF SCHEDULE A
Page 3 of 3
10/30/01
CA10SCHA
AGENDA
NOV 2 7 2001
PG. ~
Task
A. 1
A.2
A.3
A.4
A.5
Description
Design Report
Predesign
Final Design
Bid Services
Contract Administration
Subtotal
COLLIER COUNTY NCWRF
CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 10
EXPANSION TO 30.6 MGD (MMADF)
SCHEDULE B - ATTACHMENT A
FEES FOR BASIC SERVICES
Original Amend. 1-9 Amend. 10
$110,000 $127,220
$585,000 $857,110
$0 $1,898,075
$0 $76,8O0
$0 $493,44O
$0
$0
$0
$80,080
$734,315
Total
$237,220
$1,442,110
$1,898,075
$156,880
$1,227,755
$695,000 $3,452,645 $814,395 $4,962,040
10/30/2001
1 of 1
NOV 2 7 2001
.G. q .
COLLIER COUNTY
NCWRF EXPANSION TO 30.6 MGD (MMADF)
SCHEDULE B- ATTACHMENT B
FEE SCHEDULE
Professional Credentials Fee Schedule
Principal/Senior Project Manager P.E. $ 130-150/hr.
Project Manager P.E. $ 95-130/hr.
Senior Utility Engineer/*
Chief Engineer P.E. $ 130-145/hr
Senior Engineer P.E. $ 95-110/hr
Engineer EI.T. $ 79-94/hr
Engineer $ 60-75/hr
Senior Designer** P,E. $ 79-94/hr
Designer $ 63-78/hr
Senior Planner A.I.C.P. or P.E. $ 79-94/hr
Planner $ 60-75/hr
Senior Technician $ 54-60/hr
Senior Inspector $ 75-85/hr
Inspector $ 55-65/hr
Technician $ 54-60/hr
Other Professional
Surveyor P.L.S. $ 60-75/hr
2 person field crew $ 75-85/hr
3 person field crew S 85-95/hr
Professional
Hydrologist Geologist $ 70-80/hr
Ecologist Certified Ecologist $ 65-75/hr
Professional
Environmental Specialist Wetlands Scientist $ 65-75/hr
Structures P.E. (Structures) $ 80-110/hr
Geotechnical P.E. $ 80-110/hr
Support
Administrative Assistant, Secretary
Clerical, other support
$ 53-59/hr
$ 43-49/hr
This list is not intended to be all-inclusive, Hourly rate fees for other categories.
Boca: SCH-BA-I'T-B- 10MGD
Task
A.6
COLLIER COUNTY NCWRF
CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 10
EXPANSION TO 30.6 MGD (MMADF)
SCHEDULE B - ATTACHMENT C
FEES FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES (INCLUDING DETAILED OBSERVATION)
Description.
Original Amend. 1-9 Amend. 10
Detailed Observation
Total
$0 $1,239,520 $1,174,408 $2,413,928
A.7
A.7.1
A.7.2
A.7.3
A.7.4
A.7.5
A.7.6
A.7.7
A.7.8
A.7.9
A.7.10
A.7.11
A.7.12
A.7.13
A.7.14
A.7.15
A.7.16
A.7.17
A.7.18
A.7.19
A.7.20
A.7.21
A.7.22
A.7.23
Additional Services
O&M
Training
Startup
Permitting
Surveying
Geotech
Reproduction
Photos
Postage
l-year followup ,
System Integration
SRF
Warranty Period Services
Hypochlorite Design Mods
Odor Control Design Mods
Blower Control Design Mods
Partnedng
VE Review
Independent Cost Estimates
Septage Receiving Station
Landscaping/Front-Entry Gate
Reclaimed Water Distribution Modeling
Dedication Ceremonies
Subtotal (Tasks A.6 and A.7)
$0 $83,900 $75,000 $158,900
$0 $54,400 $75,000 $129,400
$0 $30,500 $50,000 $80,500
$10,000 $63,000 $53,000 $126,000
$25,000 $5,000 $40,000 $70,000
$10,000 $35,000 $50,000 $95,000
$5,000 $15,000 $20,000 $40,000
$0 $4,000 $0 $4,000
$0 $5,000 $0 $5,000
$0 $50,000 $75,000 $125,000
$0 $287,120 $280,000 $567,120
$0 $433,000 $0 $433,000
$0 $20,000 $0 $20,000
$0 $76,110 S0 $76,110
$0 $72,500 $0 $72,500
$0 $6,320 $0 $6,320
$0 $800 $0 $800
$0 $55,OOO $0 $55,000
$0 $35,000 $0 $35,000
$0 $50,000 $0 $50,000
$0 $0 $50,000 $50,000
$0 $0 $50,00O $50,0OO
$0 $0 $50,000 $50,00O
$50,000 $2,621,170 $2,042,408 $4,713,578
10/30/2001
1 of 1
AG[NOA ]TJ~N - .
NOV 2 7 2001
.G. // ,,
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
HiSPANiC AFFAlrRS ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATI~ON FOR
ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION RE(~UESTI~NG DIALOGUE
BETWEEN IMMOKALEE GROWERS AND FARMWORKERS.
~ For the Board of County Commissioners to call for dialogue between the
growers and farmworkers for the good of the Immokalee economy and community.
CONSIDERATIONS: For a number of years, the Collier County Hispanic Affairs
Advisory Board (HAAB) has received information regarding very Iow wages and
deplorable living conditions for farmworkers in the Immokalee area. The HAAB has also
received information that the problems faced by the farmworkers negatively impact the
rest of the Immokalee community and area with particular emphasis on the Hispanic
population. The HAAB has previously brought this matter to the attention of the Board
of County commissioners and the prior Board declined to involve itself in this
controversy primarily because it viewed the matter as a labor-management private
sector dispute. Since that time, the dispute has continued and the problem appears to
be getting worse.
During the course of the last year, the HAAB has had public meetings in Immokalee and
heard from farmworker representatives as well as other interested citizens and
community leaders who have appeared at public meetings in Immokalee. The HAAB
has again voted to request that the County Commission formally, by resolution, call
upon the growers and the farmworkers to engage in dialogue to try to solve the
problems faced by farmworkers. The HAAB is not requesting that the County
Commission involve itself in terms and conditions of employment. Rather, the HAAB
believes that the Commission should merely make the call to the parties to have
dialogue. It is believed that such an action would benefit the citizens and economy of
Immokalee and especially the Hispanic community. The HAAB is convinced, based on
information received, that the lack of dialogue and solutions to the farmworker issues
are impacting the Immokalee community and Collier County as a whole. The HAAB also
believes that the County Commission should formally, by resolution, request that Florida
Governor, Jeb Bush, also make a plea for dialogue to the growers and the workers for
the benefit of the Immokalee community and Collier County.
FISCAL iMPACT: None.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners pass a resolution
(attached) calling for dialogue between growers and farmworkers in the ]~mmokalee
area. Also, that the resolution include a request to Florida Governor Je'.
the call for dialogue between Tmmokalee growers and farmworkers.
Board authorize the Chairman to execub
~aid resolutign.
AGENDA ITEM
No.
NOV 2 7
NOV J~l
Ramiro Mafialich, as Liaison to the
Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board
REVIEWED BY:
David Correa, Chairman
Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board
Date:
Date:
//-
/
~Oo ]
h: RN\HAAB\Ex Sum-Dialogue
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
il
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-~
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE
GROWERS AND THE FARM WORKERS OF IMMOKALEE,
FLORIDA FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY.
WHEREAS, for a number of years, the Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory
Board ("HAAB") has received information at public meetings regarding very Iow wages
and deplorable living conditions of the farm workers in the Immokalee area; and
WHEREAS, the HMB has also received information that these problems faced by
the farm workers negatively impact Hispanics as well as the entire Immokalee
community; and
WHEREAS, this matter was previously brought to the attention of the prior Board of
County Commissioners ("Board"). The Board chose not to act because it viewed the
matter as a private sector labor dispute. However, the HAAB has found that the farm
worker problems in Immokalee continue to exist creating further dissention in the
community as well as the deterioration of opportunities for the parties to negotiate; and
WHEREAS, the HAAB has found, as a result of its public meetings, that the farm
worker problems in Immokalee impact very significantly the Hispanic community; and
WHEREAS, the HAAB recommends that the Board make a plea for dialogue
between the growers and farm workers in the Imm°kalee community for the good of
all. Said recommendation of the HAAB is only for the Board to request dialogue and
not for the Board to involve itself in the dialogue or in any terms or conditions of
employment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. The Collier County Board of County Commissioners hereby respectfully requests
that growers and farm workers of the Immokalee, Florida community promptly enter
into dialogue to address problems affecting growers, farm workers and the community.
The Board makes this request with the public purpose of seeking to improve living and
economic conditions for all in Immokalee and Collier County, Florida.
2. The Board respectfully requests that Florida Governor .leb Bush join the Board's
plea for dialogue between growers and farm workers in Immokalee and that the
Governor also communicate a plea for dialogue to the parties.
This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote.
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
5O
DATED:
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
Approved as to form and legal sufficiency:
Chief Assistant County Attorney
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA ITE~
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION CARNY-2001-AR-1714, SANDRA RAMOS, PROGRAM LEADER II, IMMOKALEE
COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, REQUSESTING PERMIT TO
CONDUCT THE 8'm ANNUAL CARNIVAL AROUND THE WORLD ON DECEMBER 8, 2001, ON
COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY AT THE IMMOKALEE SPORTS COMPLEX 505 ESCAMBIA
STREET.
OBJECTIVE: Sandra Ramos, Program Leader II, of the Immokalee Collier County Parks and Recreation,
is requesting that the Board of County Commissioners approve a permit to conduct the 8'~ annual Carnival
Mound the World on December 8, 2001, on County owned property located at the Immokalee Sports
Complex. The applicant is also requesting waivers of the Carnival Fee, Occupational License and Surety
Bond.
CONSIDERATIONS: The Immokalee Collier County Parks and Recreation Department has made
application to the Board of County Commissioners for a permit to conduct the 8th annual Carnival Around
the World. Immokalee Collier County Parks and Recreation Department has presented evidence that all
the criteria has been for the issuance of this permit. Staff supports the waiver of the Surety Bond as there
have been no previous problems related to clean up of the site after the carnival.
FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant is requesting a waiver of the $275.00 permit application fee waiver has
been granted in past years. It is a Board policy that requests for waiver of such fees be granted only by the
Board.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management Impact.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the permit to conduct the 8th
annual Carmval Around the World and waive the carnival fee, occupational license and surety bond.
PREPARED BY
/'(s~-SAN MURRAY, AICP "
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
DATE
THOMAS KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
JOHN ~I. DUNNUCK, III
INTI~RIM ADMINISTRATOR
COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS.
DATE
~.I~A ITEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
Permit No. ~
PERMIT FOR
CARNIVAL EXHIBITION
STATE OF FLORIDA:
COUNTY OF COLLIER:
WHEREAS, Sandra Ramos, Progam Leader, Immokalee Parks and Recreation
Department, has made application to the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, for a permit to conduct a carival; and
WHEREAS, Sandra Ramos, Pro.am Leader. Immokalee Parks and Recreational
Department, has presented to the Board sufficient evidence that all criteria for the issuance ota
permit to conduct a carnival as set forth in Chapter 10, Article II, Amusements and Entertainments.
of the Collier County Code have been satisfied and that such carnival exhibition will be conducted
according to lawful requirements and conditions; and
\VHEREAS, said Sandra Ramos, Program Leader, Immokalee Parks and Recreation
Department. has requested a waivers of the Carnival Fee, Occupational License and , Surety
Bond;
NOW, THEREFORE, this Permit is hereby granted to the Immokalee Parks and
Recreation Department, to conduct a carnival December 8, 2001, in accordance with the terms
and conditions set forth in the petitioner's application and all related documents, attached hereto
and incorporated herein for the following described property:
(See attached Exhibit "A")
The request for waivers of the Carnival Fee, Occupational License and Surety Bond is
hereby approved.
WITNESS my hand as Chairman of said Board and Seal of said County, attested by the
Clerk of Courts in and for said County this ~ day of 2001.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS:
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Approved as to Form and
Legal Sufficiency:
Mmjo~ M. Student
Assistant County Attorney
JAMES D. CARTER, PhD., CHAIRMAN
NOV 2 7 2001
A Tract of land lying is Section 33, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier
County, Florida, more particularly described as follows:
Newmarket Subdivision, Block 24, commence southwest comer
of Block 24, north 762.44 feet along east right-of-way comer to
point on easterly right-of-way of Glades Street, continue along east
right-of-way northwest 434.28 feet to point of beginning.
EXHIBIT "A"
AGE~A ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
~ov O? O1 05.:~' CCPRD 9~1 65751~5 p. 11
COLI,IER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
November 7, 2001
COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION
ADMINISTRATION EAST
310 ALACHUA STREET
IMMOKALEE, FLORIDA 34142
(941) 657-5126
(941) 657-1447
FAX (941) 657-5125
Cecilia Martin, Planning Tech II
Community Development
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34103
A CERTIFIED BLUE CHIP COMMUNITY
Dear Cecilia:
The Collier County Parks and Recreation Department is requesting a
carnival permit for the 8th Annual Christmas Around the World. The event
will be held December 8, 2001 from 6:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. at the Immokalee
Sports Complex, 505 Escambia Street, Immokalee, FL 34142.
The department is requesting to waive the carnival permit fee ($250.00),
surety bond ($2,500.00) and occupational license.
Thank you,
Sandra R.qmos, Program Leader II
Collier County Parks & Recreation
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 200I
Mov O? O1 05:23p' CCPRD 941 6575125
Christmas Around
- the ~/orld
~Festival
Saturday, December O, 2001 beginning at 6:00 P.M.
Parade begins on 1st and Main Street, through 9th and
ends at. the lmmokalee High School
begins at 7:00 P.M. ~ lmmokalee Spor~s Cow
Admission $1.00
Attractions:
The North Pole - 50 tons of snow transformed into Sled Mountain
& 2 Snow Mountains
iplex~
Winter Wonderland - icc skating rink. Skates wil be provided.
Mrs. Claus' Kitchen - local civic groups, churches & public schools
wkll provide an exciting menu of
food & drinks to delight the entire family.
Santa's Reindeer Games - rides and games for children of all agcs.
Kris Kringle' s Workshop - arts & crafts for you & your family to create.
Frosty's Entertainment - performing wil be the "Untouchables"
stilt dancers from Miami, Lane Price, DJ Corey Jones, & enjoy
lots of Christmas music, karyoke & much, much, more.
For more information please contact the
Collier County hi'ks & Recreation I~mokalee
hdministrati0n Office
Visit our website at w~~'~v.~t.
Nov
07 O!
X~: 0'71=
CCPRD
p.1
TO:
FAX NO.
FR. OM:
DATE:
FAX
COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECFdSATION
AD~,{QqISTRATION EAST
310 ALACHUA STREET
IMb{OKALEE, FL 3414!
(941) 657-5126
FAX (941) 657-5125
NOV ? 7 2001
Mov O? O1 05':201o CCPRD 941 6575125
NOU-05-2001 12:84 1 9141 353 1~]02 P.03/ll
p.2
ADDRESSING CttECiC[~$T
Plea. so complete thc following an_~d submit to the Addressing Section £or Review. Not all items will apply to
every project. Items in bold type ~ reauired.
1. Legal description of subjegt property or prop~'rfics (copy of lengthy description may be attached)
2. Folio O~roperty l'D) number(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one)
3. Strect addre~ or addresses (a~ applicable, if already a~signed)
4. Location map, showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right-of-way (attach)
5. Copy of survey 0'qEEDED ONLY FOR UNPLATTBD PROPERTIES)
6. Propos~ project name (if'applicable)
7. Proposed Street names (if applicable)
8. Site Development Plan Number (FOR BXISTIYtG PRO/IgC'IS/SITES ONLY)
SDP
9. Petition Type - (Complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition Type)
[] Other- Describe:
[] SDP (Site Development Plan)
[] SDPA (SDP Amendment)
[] SDPI (SDP Insubstantial Change)
[] SIP (Site Improvement Plan)
[] SIPA (SIP Amendracnt)
[] SNR (Street Name Change)
[] Vegctation/Exotic (Vcg. Removal Permits)
[] Land Use Petition (Variance, Conditional Use,
Boa! Dock Ext., Rezone, PUD rezone,
'VOR iia. w usg O L¥
Primary Number
Addre$~ Number
Address Number
Address Number
[] PPL ('Plans & Plat Review)
[] PSP (Preliminary' Subdivision Plat)
[] FP (Final Plat)
LLA (Lot Line Adjugtment)
BL (Blasting Permit)
[] ROW (Right-or-Way Permit)
[] EXP (Excavation Permit)
[] V'RSFP (Veg. Removal & Site Fill Permit)
10. Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing ~, condominium documents (i f
applicable; indicate whether proposed or existing)
I 1. Please Check One: ~]'Checldist is to be Foxed Back [] Per~onally Picked Up
13. Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subjecl to
£unher review by the Addressing Section.
Approved by Datc
Revised 3-21 -O I
"'. S
A~A ITF~
NOV 2 7 2001
~2:~5
CCPRD
941 G575125
I 91-11 353 1002
NOTE:
Copy:
Please ~zcl T~VeTSC sid~ Copy:
Scl;orr coTrJplct;"g This Cop~
c~AL OpEn'ON ~ON
Zoujn8 Dizectot
l, tt~oocr
pE'ITIIOH 1',10._
p£TrI'IONEK'S ADDRESS:
Ifa corpor~tioo, whe0~er or no! a aol. fm-profh corP
p~OprmTy OWT~R.'S
i~ROPER-i~ OV~qI~R'S ADDP~SS:~'¥ -
LEGAL DEsk'ON
~ ZO~O: ~ USE__
SEE ~E SINE.) / 3.c.7)~
AGENDA I'I~-
NOV 2 7 2001
,
Hov O? 01 05':23p CCPRD 941 6575125 p.13
1M OKALEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT
$02 E. NEW MARKET ROAD, llVIDIOI~L~.~'., FLORIDA 34142
November 7, 2001
Sandra Ramos
lmmokalee Parks and Recreation
321 N. 1st St.
Immokalee, FI. 34142
Dear Sandra Ramos,
The Immokalee Fire Control Dist. will provide fire protection and inspections for the carnival you are
planning in December. Please provide the date and time that the state ride inspector is scheduled for.
When planning thc layout, keep in mind that the fire trucks need access. Provide at least 24' fire lane
around the midway. Fire extinguishers will be needed per NFPA i 0. Fire extinguishers shall be inspected
and tagged as required.
If you should have any questions, feel free to call me at 657-2700.
Fire Inspector
GENERAL OFFICE
(941) 657-2111
FIF,.E FI~VENTION
(941) 657-2700 FAX
No.
NOV 2 7 2001
,I
~ov O? O1 0S:23p' CCPR~ 94! 6575125 p.12
..I
Building
Field 3
Field 2
~-'~OCC,~
Field 1
............ Fence .....
Parking Lot
AC, END~ ITF_M
NOV 2 7 2001
~ov 08 01 08:4Sa CCPRD
~ ~'ov 07 01 04:38p Immo~alee Housin~
Projec~
941 657512S
Property Information Report
CDPR1002 - Property Information Report
FOLIO NBR PARENT EARCEL PHYSICAL STREET LOCATION
0000063857680102 0000000000000000 508 9TH ST N, IMROKA/~EE
BLOCK BLD~ LOT UNIT .RAKGE T%~P SECT STRAP
24 2 29 46 33 520300
USE CODE C~SS'CODE MILL AREA
83 C 5
SHORT LEGAL
N~.~4ARKET SUBD BLK 24 CON SW
CNR BLK 24,N 762.44FT ALC E
R/W CR TO PT ON ELY K/W OF
GLADES ST. CO~T ALG E R/W N
OWNER R'.~ME
COLD!ER CNTY
OWNER ADDRESS
3301 TAF. iA~Ii TRL E
NAPLES, FL99COX 341123969
FULL LEGAL DESCRIPTIO~
NEWMA~KET SUBD BLK 24 COH SW
C~ B~K 24,N 762.44FT ALG E
R/W CR TO PT ON ELY R/W OF
GLADES ST, CONT ALG E R/W N
W 434.28FT TO FOB
24 21~3
TOTAL ACSC
13.67
XT.%A L~L C~T
10
PREVIOUS O:x~E R
HDR REF FLAG
p.;~
Coll-'er County
CD-Plus for Wi~ldows 95/98/N.'2
Printed on l
Page '- o-= I
.,?j:~:: --
AGENDA ITEM
/7/2001 2 :$9:27PM
NOV 2 7 200
~ov 07 O! 05:22p' CCPRD ~4! 6575125
.. .~- NOU-05-200! ~2:05 ! 914~ 353
p.lO
Ezcerpl ~tom Ordinanc~ No. ?~-ll, FLied $~rttary of Strata 3/6/'15
3- A_uollcntio~t and Fee for ~erm~t. A minimum of twenty (:10) days before occupytnl; the carnival
or exhibition site, an application for a permit shall be submitted to the County Administrator
in Four (4) copies accompanied
n) A surety boi~d in the penni sum of $2,s00, issued by n company authorized to istue such
honda in Florida, conditioned upon the operator comp. lying with each pr~viuion nF this
Ordinnnce and subject to ForFeiture under the terms provided in PnraR~rapb 8
bereinbcJow.
b) Evidence of current public liablUty insurance coverage, issued by n company authorized to
do buslnese in the State oF Florida, in the minimum amount oF SRO0,000 for any one person
sod S300,000 for any one incident.
c)
d)
e)
A non-refundable fee of S275.00.
A current occupational license issued by the ColUtr County Taz Collector, and
Including the following information:
1) The name and headquarters eddrus(cs) o[ the carnival or exhibition company(its)
with n direct or indirect financial i.,terest; name(O and addrpss(e~) of any sponqoring
organization(s), ..nd the name and local address of the applicant representing the
carnival or exhibition company(ice);
A description of every activity to be conducted such as but not limited to, menageries;
circus and side-show perTormnnces; amusement, merry-go-round and other ride
activities; food and drink dispensing facilities; booths for conduct of games of skill or
chance not prohibited by State law to be open to the public for an admission or
participation fee and number of persons to operate the activities;
fqame, tdentlflcatlon and social security number of each person accountable for the
operation of each activity;
d)
A description stud sketch of tbs site showing the location of each activity proposed.
the iocatiol~ ..nd number of f unitary facilities; parking facilities, and provision for
lighting and public water;
5) Application for Food EstabU~hmon! Operating Permit from the County llcalth
Department as required by Ordinance No. 7445.
6) The plan for refuse, garbage, debris, and sewage disposal during and after operation
of the circus or exhibition;
7)
8)
Provisions for traffic control, fire safety and security pre~autions;
The date and time rich activity is to be conducted and concluded;
Written approval from thc owner of the property authorizing tbs use of bls premises
for such carnival activity;
I0) Legal description of property to be utilized,
C;tP. NIV,kl- pK'TITIO~ APPLICATION
NOV 2 .7 2001
,,, /7_.
Ploy O? 01 05~.22p· CCPRll 941 6575125
NOU-05-2001 12:~6 1 9141 353 1002
(a) Thc storage facili~ is cquipp~ with nd~qu~tc drmins which preclude ~e ecc~stion
of wet~ d~ng ~c;
(b) ~e melt water is dispo~ of~o ~ not to c~tc z nui~cc; ~d
(c) ~c storage facili~ is kept clc~.
(g) ~en ~l nec~s~ w~Mng ~d s~fi~n~ of utensils ~d equipment ~ condum~ at
~ approved ~is~ or food so.ice es~lis~ent, a ute~il w~ng si~ ~1 not be
requital, except t~t ~ nd~te supply 0f sp~ prcp~don ~d sc~ing utensi~ ~
m~n~ed in ~c es~blis~ent ~d us~ to replace ~ose ~nt ~com~ soiled. However, e
s~ solution in a bucket or sp~y ~e to ndcq~tcly s~d~ ~e fo~ p~p~don
(9) ~ food sc~ice opc~ons w~ch p~p~c ~d on p~mi~s sh~ p~vide ~ ~eq~tc
supply ofpo~ble water for clc~ng ~d ~ploycc ~d~g. ~ ndeq~ s~pply
tony be provided m c[~ po~blc con~c~ cquip~d ~ o~o~v~ves. Soap ~d
s~glc-ec~cc towcls sh~l be ev~lnblc ~or h~~g ~d ~d ~g.
(10) ~uipmcnt s~l be i~lcd in eu~ a m~cr ~t ~c csmbli~ent c~ be kept
ci~ nad ~e f~d ~1 not b~omc connoted,
(i I) Liquid waste which is no~ discharl~cd into a sewerage system shall bc disposed of'in
a manner that wilt no~ create a public health ~ or a sanitazy nuisance.
(12) Floor construction in establishments which prepare food on premises shall be of
durable material. D/rt or g~-avel subfloori~g ca~ be us~l when Eroded to drain, and
covered with platforms, duckboardz, plastic film. wood chips, shav/ngs, or similar
suitable material such as n sufficient cover of grass or turf to control dust.
(I ]) Walls and ceilings, when rcquircd, sh~ll be constructed to minim/z~ thc cnu'an~c of
fli~ and dust. C~ilings may be of wood, ctnvas or othcr materials which protect thc
interior of thc cstabliskmcnt from thc elcmcnts and walls ms¥ bc of such materials or of
16 mesh screening or ~quivalcnt Doors to food preparation areas, when r~ttized, shall bc
solid or screer~d and shall be self-closing. Coumer aery/ce openings, for fncitities with
wall ~mclosur~, shall not bc larll~r than necessary for the par~cular operndon conducted
and shall be kept closed at all times except when food is actually being served.
(14) All foc~t se~wice operations at temporn.,-y food ~,ir,~ events without effective
facilities for cleaning and s~nitizing ~blewar~ shill provide only sin~,le-scrvicc articles
for use by the consumer.
381.0~2
31 !.0072
6,.!-~3, Fm'm~'ly 10D-13.02~...~.ne~ded 3-15-91.
P. 07/11
p.S
AGENDA iTEM
N~__/~=.~_
NOV 2 7 2001
0'7 O1 05'.~'2p' CCPRD
NOU-OS-2L~)l I Z: 05
941 6575125 p.8
'Exerp t from Florida Administrative Code 64E-11, Food-Hygien ·
64E-11.009- Temporary Food Service Events.
Food service opo'ations at temporary food service ·vents shall comply with all applicable
sanita.-y requirements of this rule, unless otherwise exempted in this s~ction.
( I ) Notification
(a) Temporary food service event sponsors or vendors shall noti~ the local county he.~tlth
department not less than three days prior to the scheduled event of the lypc of food
service proposed and the time and localion of the event. Notification ma~, be completed
orally, by telephone, in person, or in writing.
(b) The loc. al county health department shall keep a record ofnotifir, ado~s rcccivc~l for
propo.~d Ic. mporary food service er·ms and s.~a]l provide appropriate e.~duca~ior~l
m~cri~l to the event spon~or~ or vendors.
(2) Facilities -- Specific requirements for the physical facility wl~m the food servi¢~
operation is to be conducted sh~U be bn-~cd on t~¢ typo food tl~t is to be pr~ar~ or
served, thc length of the cver~t, a~ud the at, oust of food ptep~mtiou that i~ to bc conducted
at the t~mporary facility.
(~,) If the food service o]:mration in int~ded for the sal~ of onJy package~i, non-pole~ti~lly
hazardous food or dziak, thc food p~.~ge~ du~li b~ proceed f~m du~t, di~ ~d otl~r
sourcc.s of contamination during storage and scrvinB.
(b) Overhead pret~tion shall be provided at ail food service operations when food is
prepare! or portioned on p~mises.
(c) When potentially hazardous food is ptcpsred at temporary food s~rvice ew'.nts of
more tha~ 3 days, the physical structure wh~re th~ food prepm'ation occurs shall be
protecied from the entrance of flying insects and oth~ v~rmi~-
(3) Alt food and b~erag¢$ served at temporary food s~-vic~ ev~n~ shnll be from
approved sources in a¢cordanc~ with pmvlsio~ of section 64E-11.003 of this chnpt~r or
prepared on prr. mises.
(4) All food served at ~emp~orar~ food s~-vice events shall b~ protected in accordance
with provision~ of~'tlon 6~E-I 1.004 of thls chapu:r.
{5) Food a~l food-cont~:t suffar~ shall bo pmteci~xi from ¢ontami~tion by customers
ami duse Wher~ nece~sm, y, effe~tiw shields or oov~s~ sh~ll be p~vided.
(6) Ice which will b,,- comumed or which will come into c. ontac~ with food shall b~
obt~ne~ from an approved sours. The ico ~hall b~ held in ,, way that prote~,s it fr~m
contamination until dispensed.
(7) Storage of packag~xl food in contact with water or undmin~ i~ is prohibitS.
B~v~ra~o containers may be stored in dir~t con,act with ice when:
NOV 2 ? 2001
Hou O? 01 0S,:21p' CCPRD 941 8575125
- .: · ~- i 9i4i
p.?
Failure to comply wilh applicable food service requirements in accordance with
Chapter 64E-11, Florida Administrative Code, result in enfercement action.
Do you undersland this completely? Yes ~ No
I certify tt~at to the best of my knowledge and belief al/of the statemenl~
contained herein and on any, attachments are true. correct, complete, and made
in good faith. I understand that these regulations include food intended for
service lo the public regardless of whether there is a charge for the food. i agree
to assume responsibility for this establishment and I certify that said busin~ will
be cor~ucted in compliance with the Florida Administrative Code,
Chapter 64E-11.
Signature of applicant
AC.~A ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
AC.~.~A ITEM
~0¥ 2 7 200~
07 O1 05':21p
N0~-05- 2001 ! 2: 06
CCPRD ~41
6575125
1 9141 .353
! 002
I~ BOOTH NOTIFICATION FORM FOR TEMPORARY EVENTS
Name of event: ~_~nri~c~ A~d -~e ~ ~ool
Name of booth: ~o~c~~ ~Co~
P~son in cha~e of booth: ~tv~e~ ~ec~ '
Types of fo~ or beverage to be se~ed:
p.6
Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 64E-11 requim.e ell food to come from
an approved source. All food storage, preparation and utensil c~eenlng
for this event shall not be done in p~vate homes.
Location of advanced food.preparation: .. Co~,c~ss; o~ ~r-~.', \ es-
How will food be transported to event location?
Method of keeping food hot and/or cold at event site:
,j
Method of cooldng food at the location:
- f[n;+
Food muat I~ protected from dust, Insects, files, cougl'~, .~rmezo~. How will
you provide this protection9 Deacribe type of atructum:
Adequate facilities and eupplie~ shatl be provided for e,-nployee handwaahl~.
How re'il you provide this? ~e_~O -r_o~--~&~-.~ -~-r-c~i\e~-~ ~/6"p~,
A~AITEJ~
NOV 2 7 2001
O'7
O1 05':21p' CCPRn 941 B575125
NOV-05-S~)O 1 12:07 1 9141
P.11,11
p.5
AS the sponsor of this event you are responsible to notify ell t'ood vendors of the
temporary food service requirements. Failure to comp' ~ may subjec~ the booths
to t~e closed for public health reason. Do you understand this completely?
Yes _V// No .,
I certify that to the bast of my knowledge and belief ali of the statements
contained herein end on any attachmant~ ere true, c~rmct, complete, and made
in good faith. I understand that these regulalJons include food Intended for
service to the public; regardless of whether there ia · e..harge for the food.
I agree to assume responsibility for this event and certify that said business will
be conducted in compliance with the Florida Administrative Code,
Chapter 64E-11.
Signature of sponso?s agent
NOV 2
0'7
O! 05". 201° ·
N0~-85-280! 12:
CCPRO
B575125
1 9141~--~_._, 1002
P. 10,'11
~ NOTIFICATION FORM FOR TEMPORARY EVENTS
Date(s) of event b~~ ~: ~t . Houm of operation ~ p -~, - lo?.~-
Sponsor of event ~o t ~ ~ e ? ~. ~ ~?~ ~A ~¢~c~;o ~ ....
Pemon in charge of~ sewice _~~ ~~ _
Phone
Number of food and beverage boolhe
Estimated number of affender~ expected at the event at one time?
Number of toilets to be provided:
Portable: Ma~e ( ~. )
Permanent' Male ( $ )
Method of toilet waste disposal:
Female ( ~ )
Female ( ~ ) ~',t~ 'Ae~.f~ ~Co.c~i-b,.i ·
Desr..zibe me/hod of liquid kitchen waste disposal:
Describe containers and method of solid w-aste disposal (garbage):
Number of solid waste disposal contminer~ provided:
Describe facilities and rfiathod of handwashing:
Descdbe facilities and method of utensil washing, rinsing and sanitizing:
Source of potable water. ~AIo.~e~ ¼ooY~ ,~p · pro~,;4¢~ b~, ~c~'~\~%t
AGENDA:ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
~ou 08 O! O~:OOp CCP~D 9~! 6575125 po2
Collier County Sheriff's Office
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Building "J"
Naples, FL 34112
Telephone (AC 941) 774-4434
November 7, 2001
Ms. Sandra Ramos
hztmokalee Community.
lmmokalee, FL 34]42
Dear Ms. Ramos,
This letter is to confirm that I have had the oppommityto review the proposed plan for the
upcoming Christ, urns Around the World on December 8, 2001.
tn reviewing the plan, I anticipate no major law enforcement problems. I am providing extla
patrols to assist w/th traffic and the flow of participants, ffany problems should arise will will
resolve fl~em at ~at time.
If any additional information is needed please advise.
Since~.y,~
Acting Lt. Brad Simmons
Collier County Sheriff's Office
lmmokalee Substation Commander
BS/vg
AGENOA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
Mov 08 01 09:07a CCPRD 941 6S75125 p.2
Person in charge of carnival operations for SARASOTA AMUSEMENTS
LESTER COLEGROVE
5131 WAUCHULA ROAD
MYAKKA, FLORIDA 34251
ACtA field
NOV 2 7 200I
E~C~IVESUMM~Y
PETITION CARNY-2001-AR-1699, PEG RUBY, SPECIAL EVENTS COORDINATOR, COLLIER COUNTY PARKS
AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, REQUSESTING PERMIT TO CONDUCT THE ANNUAL SNOWFEST
CARNIVAL ON DECEMBER 1, 2001, ON COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY AT THE GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY
PARK 3300 SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD.
OBJECTIVE: Peg Ruby, Special Events Coordinator, of the Collier County Parks and Recreation, is requesting that the
Board of County Commissioners approve a permit to conduct the annual Snowfest carnival on December 1, 2001, on
County owned property located at the Golden Gate Community Park. The applicant is also requesting waivers of the
Carnival Fee, Occupational License and Surety Bond.
CONSIDERATIONS: The Collier County Parks and Recreation Department has made application to the Board of
County Commissioners for a permit to conduct the annual Snowfest carnival. Collier County Parks and Recreation
Department has presented evidence that all the criteria has been for the issuance of this permit. Staff supports the waiver
of the Surety Bond as there have been no previous problems related to clean up of the site after the Snowfest.
FISCAL IMPACT,: The applicant is requesting a waiver of the $275.00 permit application fee waiver has been granted in
past years. It is a Board policy that requests for waiver of such fees be granted only by the Board.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management Impact.
RECOMMENDATION.: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the permit to conduct the Snowfest carnival
and waive the carnival fee, occupational license and surety bond.
pREPARED BY
SU~ MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
DATE
THOMAS KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
DATE
A~A ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
NOV-OG-2001 10:26 1 9141 353 1002 P.01×01
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
3800 SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD
NAPLES, FL 34116
(941) $53-0404
FAX: [941) 353-1002
Website: colliergov, net
November 6, 2001
Cccclia Martin, Planning Tech II
Community Development
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34103
Dear Cecelia:
The Collier County Parks and Recreation Deparunent is requesting a carnNal permit for
the 16th Annual SnoWfest and the 4th Annual Country Jam.
Snowiest will be held December l, 2001 at the Golden Gate Community Park, 3300
Santa Barbara Blvd. Naples, FL
The department is requesting to waive the Carnival Fcc, Surety Bond and Occupational
License.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 353-040a.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Peg Ruby, Special Events Coordinator
Collier County Parks and Recreation
A~IOA JTEM
NOV 2 7 2001
pg. Z...
I U I F,1L I-
,01
FAX COVER LETTER
COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND
RECREATION
3300 Santa Barbara Boulevard
Naples, Florida 34116
Phon~ 941-353-0404
FAX 941-353-1002
Date:
To:
Number of pages including cover:
2(0
@ colliergov.net
Message:
NOV 2 7 2001
$
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DIVISION OF PUBLIC .SERVICES
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
November 5, 2001
3300 SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD
NAPLES, FL 34116
(941) 353-0404
FAX: (941) 353-1002
Website: colliergov, net
Cecelia Martin, Planning Tcch II
Community Development
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34103
Dear Cecelia:
The Collier County Parks and Recreation Department is requesting a carnival permit for
the 16th Annual Snowfest and the 4th Annual Country Jam.
Snowfest will be held December 1, 2001 at the Golden Gate Community Park, 3300
Santa Barbara Blvd. Naples, FL
Country Jam will be held May 3 - 4, 2001 at the Vineyards Cmranunity Park, 6231 Arbor
Blvd. Naples, FL
If you have any questions, please contact me at 353-0404.
Thank you for your assistance.
Peg Ruby, Special Events Coordinator
Collier County Parks and'Recreation
ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
ADDRF~$11VG CHECKLIST
Please complete the ~'ollowing and submit to the Addressing Section £or Review.
_eyre_fy ~roiee~- Items in ~bold ~gpe aro requirea,
Not all items will apply t,o
1. Legal des~i..ptionpf, subject property or propertiez (copy of lengthy description may be attached)
2. Folio (~roperty
of above (attach to, or associate .with, legal description if more than one)
3- S~e~i add~e~_ or ad~_.?sse~ (a.v.~p.l~licable, if'already q4signed~
4. Location map, showing exact location'ofprojectJsite in relation to nearest public road fight-of-way (attach:
5. Copy of~u'vey (NEEDED ONLY FOR UNPLATTED PROPERTIES)
7. Proposed Street names (if'~pplic~tble) "'
Site Development Plan Number (FOR ~XISTING PROTECTS/S1TF_,S ONLY)
SDP -
9. Petition Type - (Complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition Type)
SDP (Site Development Plan)
SDPA (SDP Amendmeut)
SDPI (SDP Insubstantial Ckange)
SIP (Site Improvement Plan)
SIPA (SIP Amendment)
SNR (Street Name Change)
further review by the Addressing Section.
'FOR STAFF ~SE ONLY
Primary Number.
Address Number
Address Number
Addr~s Number
['-'] PPL (Plans & Plat Review)
[~ PSP (Preliminary Subdivision PlaI)
[--] LLA CLot Line Adjustment)
[] BL (Blasting Permit)
[-] ROW (Right-of-Way Permit)
[~ Vegetation/Exotic (Veg. Removal Permits) FI EXP (Ex~vation Permit)
[] Land Use Petition (Variance, Conditional Use, [--] VRSFP (Veg. Removal & Site Fill Permit)
Boat Dock Ext., Rezone,_PUD rezone, ete.),.x .,
10. Project or development names l~oPOsed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if
applicable; indicate whether proposed or existing) ..
/
11. Please Check One: ~ Checklistjs to be Faxed Back [~ Personally Picked UP
12. Applic.~ltName ~ [~ Phone 3~'0(/0~/ Fax_,~..l~
13, Siguatur~ on Addre~i'ng~hecklist fda's not constit~t~ Project and/or street Name approval and ~s ~ubj~t to
Revised 3-21-01
Approved by
)ate AG~A ITEM
NOV 2 7 200
L~: ~ '~00U-SO-~ON
lO:O0 a.m. - &.OOp.ra.
'N;O$IC WO&rOga,~5>
ICg
NOV 2 7 2001
,f~ o"*,.~
Pg. · ,~ t
SE:PI I00Z-S0-AON
NOTE:
Plcas~ r~ad reverse side ..' Copy: Zoning Director
Befor~ completing this C~y: P~r
P~fifiom ~p~ (2) CO~ A~inis~
TELEPHONE:
~ FO~O~G ~O~ON iS~ED
SEE ~SE S~)
3.d.
3,~, 1). 3.c.4) 3,e,7).
3.¢,2) 3,¢3)_ 3,e,~)
3.e.3) '/ 3.0.6) / 3.~-9)
_ ~1 ~ e.10)t='''''~
rrrto -
DAT~ REVI~WF.D by Boar~ of Couaty C~mmlaaitm~:
Apl~roved: Disapproved:
Cotlclitiam of Appmvai:
SIGNATI/RE OF COUNTY ADMINII~.ATOR:
· NOV 2 7 2001
0£: ~' I 100a-SO-AON
Excerpt f~'om OrdJnanc~ No. '/S-Il, Filed Secretlry of State 3/6/75
3. A~uDlica.fion-and Fee for p~_rmlt. A minimum of twenty (20) days before occupying the carnival
or exhibition site, an application for a permit shall be submitted to the County Administrator
in four (4) copies accompanied by:
s) A surety bond in the penal sum of $2,500, issued by a company authorized to issue such
bonds in l~orida, conditioned upon the operator complying ~tb each provhlon of this
Ordinancz and subject to forfeiture under the terms provided in Paragraph 8
bereinbclow.
b) Evidence of current public liabpity jxtsurance coverage, issued by a company authorized to
do business in the State of Florida, in the minimum amount of $100~000 for toy one person
and $300,000 for an)' one incident,
A non-refundable fee of $275.00.
A current occupational license issued by the Collier County Tax Collector, and
pETITION API*IACATION
Including the following information:
1) The name and headquarters address(es) of the carnival or exhibition company(les)
with a direct or indirect financial interest; name(s) and address(es) of any sponsoring
organization(s), and the name and local addres~ of the applicant representing the
carnival or exhibition company(les);
2) A description of every activity to be conducted such as but not limited to, meuagefles;
circus and side-show performances; amusement, merr3;*g°'r°und and other ride
activities; food and drink dispensing facilities; booths for conduct of games of skill or
chance not prohibited by State law to be open to the public for an admission or
participation fee and number of persons to operate the activities;
3) INan~e, identification and social security number of each person accountable for the
operation of each activity;
4) A description and sketch of the site showinl~ the location of each activity proposed,
the location and number of sanitary facilities; parking facilities, and provision for
liihting and public water;
S) Application for Food Establishment Operating Permit from the County Health
Department as required by Ordinance No. 74-4S.
6) The plan for refuse, garbage, debris, and sewal~e disposal define and after operation
of the circus or exhibition;
7) Provisions for traffic cont~oJ, fire safety and security precautions;
8) The date and time each activity is to be conducted and concluded;
9) Written approval from the owner of the property authorizing the use of his premises
AGENDA ITF~
for such carnival activity; I~ /~/~ ~--
~0) Lelial description ofpropert~ to be utilized.
NOV 2 7 200
Kxerpt from Florida Administrative Code 64E-11, Food.Hygiene
64K-11.009 ~ Tempo~ Food ~e~ice ~ven~.
Food ~ o~ra~ons at ~po~ food s~i~ ev~ ~l comply ~ ~1 apphcable
s~t~ r~ukcm~ts of ~is ~c, ~s o~e~se cx~d ~ ~s s~on.
(1) No~fi~on '
(a) Tcm~ f~d se~i~ ~t s~ or veMo= s~l no~ ~c l~al co~ h~
decrement not l~s ~ ~e ~ys
~ce pro~s~ ~d ~e ~e ~d lo,lion cftc event. Nofifi~on may ~ ~mplc~
o~ly, by telephone, ~ ~o~ or in
~) ~e 1~ co~W ~ depmh,,ent s~l k~p a ~o~ ofno~o~ ~iv~ for
pmpo~ tem~ fo~ s~ ev~ ~d
macfi~ to ~e event spo~ or vendo=.
(2) F~fli~es ~ Sp~ifie r~en~ for ~e physi~ facili~ wh~ ~c food semcc
op~on is mbc ~nductcd sh~ bc b~ on ~c ~c food ~ ~ to be p~ or
s~, ~e le~ of~e even~ ~d ~e ~o~t of food p~p~on ~t is ~ be ~nducted
(a) If~e f~ ~ce o~on is ~te~ for ~ ~e ofo~y ~c~ non-poten~ly
~o~ food ~ ~ ~c food ~
so~ ofcon~i~nfion d~g ~o~8~
~) ~h~ ~fion ~ ~ pro~d~ at ~ f~ ~cg op~fio~ ~cn food is
p~d or ~on~ on p~.
mo~ ~ 3 ~ys, ~c physi~ ~~
pmt~ ~m ~e cn~ of fl~g
ap~ved so--cs ~ a~or~ ~ pm~sio~ of ~on ~E-11.003 offs c~t~ or
prc~ on p~i~s.
(4) ~ f~d ~ a tem~ f~ ~cc ev~M ~ ~ ~1~ ~ accor~
~ p~sio~ of s~on ~- 11.0~ of ~s ~.
(5) F~ ~d f~on~ct ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~m ~n~on by ~om~
ob~ ~m ~ ~v~ so~ ~c i~ ~ ~ held ~ a ~y ~ pm~ it ~m
con--on ~ ~~
(7) S~e of ~~ rom ~ ~n~ct ~ ~ or ~~ i~ is pm~bit~.
Berne ~ntsi~ may bc ao~ ~ ~ ~n~ct ~ i~ ~:
NOV 2 7 2001
(a) The storaile facility is equipped with adequate drains which prelude thc accumulation
of water durint use;
(b) Thc melt water is disposal of so as not to create a nuisance; and
(c) The storage facility is kepl clean.
(8) When all necessary xvashinil and sanitizing of utensils and equipment are conducted at
an approved commissary or food service cs:ablishment, a utensil washinil sink will not be
required, except fi,at an adequate supply of spare preparation and s~rvinl/utensils ar=
maintained in the establishment and use. xi to replace those ~at b~ome soiled. Howe-vet, a
sanitizer solulion in a bucket or spray bottle to adextuately sanitize the food preparation
surfaces w/Il be available at all :imm.
(9) All food service operations which prepare food on premises shall provide an adequate
supply of potable water for cie. an/nil and employee handwasb-i-fl. An adeqtta~ supply
ma), be providccl in clean portable container~ equipped with on/off valves. Soap and
shal~le-service Iowels shall be available t'or handwashiIl[~ and hand dryinl.
(10) Equipme. n~ shall be in:tallccl in such a mann~ that the csrablishrnent can be kept
clean and the. food w/Il not become contaminated.
(11) Liquid waste which is not dischari~ed/nto a sewerase system shall be dispos~'d of in
a manner that will not create a public health hazard or a sanitary nuisan~.
(12) Floor ~nstruction in establishments which prepar~ food on premises shall be of
durable material. Dh't or/ravel subflooring can be used when I/faded to dry_ in~ and
covered with pla~orms, duckboards, plaslic film, wood chips, shavinEs, or similar
suitable material such as a suffici~-nt cover of i/
(13) Walls and ceilin/~s, whe~ required, shall be conslruc~ed to minimize the entrance of
fli~ and dusl. Ceilings may be ofwoocl, canva: or other mats-'rials which protect the
in~erior of the es~ablishmen~ from the elements and walls may be of such materials or of
16 mesh s~ree~__ing or equivalent Door: ~o foocl preparalioll areas, when required, shall b~
solid or s~een~xi and shall be self-closing. Counter sera'ice Old'nine, for facilities with
wall ~n~losur~, shall nol be larEcr than rl~.~.sary for the particular opewafion conduct~l
and shall be kept closed a all times e..xc.~pt when food is a~t~ally being scrv~l.
04) All food service operalions al ~emporary food s~rvic, e e~=nts without eff'~:tive
facilities for cleanin~ and ~niti~inlt tablewar~ shall pwvide only sin~le-servi~e articles
for ~ by tl~e container.
NOV 2 ? 2001
I£:~I ~00~-SO-AON
BOOTH NOTIFICATION FORM FOR TEMPORARY EVENTS
Name of event:
Name of booth:
Person in charge of booth: ' '
Types of food or beverage to be sewed:
dr,'n
dOD' COr'(~ -
Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 64E-11 requires all food to come from
an approved source. All food storage, preparation and utens~ cleaning
for this event shall not be done In private homes.
Location of advanced food .preparation:
How will food be transpo.rt.,ed to event location?
Method of keepin~
Method of cooking food qt the. iqciation:
Food must be protected from dust, Insects, files, coughs, mneezes. How will
you provtd this prot 'on? D type of structure:
Adequate facilities and aupplie~ s, hall, be provided fo.~_r e,-np!oy~e handwashl~.
How will you provide this? ' '
NOV 2 7 2001
~¢. //.
~00~-S0-00N
Failure to comply with applicable food service requirements in accordance with
Chapter 64E-11, Florida Administrative Code, ma, y ~esuit in enforcement action.
Do you understand this completely? Yes~ No _
I certify that to the best of my knowledge .and be'lief all of the Statements
contained herein and on any attachments are true, correct, complete, and made
in good faith. I understand that these regulations include food intended for
service to the public regardless of whether there is a charge for the food. I agree
to assume responsibility for this establishment and I certify that said business will
be conducted in compliance with the Florida Administrative Code,
Chapter 64E-11.
Sig ~/'~/of applicant (.J
~00~ £S£ T~T6 T
AC-i~A ITEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
~£:~T TOO~-S0-AON
.~ NOTIFICATION FORM FOR TEMPORARY EVENTS
Name of event ' ..~~
Pemon in cha~e of ~ se~ice
Number of fo~ and ~ve~ge b~s
Estimated number of attenders exl3ected at the event at one time?
_
J
Number of toilets to be provided:
Portable: Male ( ~ )
Permanent: Male (~)
Method of toilet waste disposal:
Female (~-~)
..,~Femlale
'"'-- U
Describe
corm ~,U~ ~te disppsal ,(ga rt3,sge): ,,. __ /f
Number of solid waste disposal containers provided:
Descdbe facilities and ri~tl~d of har)dwashing:.
Describe facilities and method of uten~it.w~.sh~_r~, rinsing and sanitizing:
NOV 2 7 2001
As the spansor of this event you are responsible to notify all food vendors of the
temporary food service requirements. Failure to comp' t may subject the booths
to be closed for public health reason. Do you utLderstand this .completely?
Yes ~ No
I certify that to the best af my knowledge and belief all of the statements
contained heroin and on any attachments are true, correct, complete, and made
in good faith. I understand that these regulations include food intended for
service to the public regardless of whether there is a charge for the food.
I agree to assume responsibility for this event and certify that said business will
be conducted in compliance with the Florida Administrative Code,
Chapter 64E-11.
onsDate:
~00I £S£ I~6 ~
NOV 2 7 2001
££:~I I00~-SO-AON
NOV-E~-~:::'~01 1,4:33 1 91,41 353 1002 P.15×17
'.' .'.: i .,i.~*. **;i .~.. '.' !:'':'i .':,": :.,':.i:.:~:..; ... :....~ : !.~ .: **;..'/.'~......;.;~.,!.~,".......'.:.:...,**:.:'..:.,.~.~, .;,i.....,'**....~. ~*,....*~...... ..~,......... -.,
Permit No.
PERMIT FOR
CARNIVAL EXHIBITION
STATE OF FLORIDA:
COUNTY OF COLLIER:
WHEREAS, Peg Ruby, Special Events Coordinator of the Collier County Parks and
Recreation Department, has made application to the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, for a permit to conduct a carnival; and
WHEREAS, Peg Ruby, Special Events Coordinator of the Collier County Parks and
Recreation Department, has presented to the Board sufficient evidence that all criteria for the
issuance of a permit to conduct a carnival as set forth in Chapter 10, Article II, Amusements and
Entertainments, of the Collier County Code have been satisfied and that such carnival exhibition
will be conducted according to lawful requirements and conditions; and
WHEREAS, said Peg Ruby, Special Events Coordinator of Collier County Parks and
Recreation Departments, has requested waivers of the Carnival Fee, Surety Bond and
Occupational License;
NOW. THEREFORE, this Permit is hereby granted to Collier County Parks and
Recreational Department to conduct a carnival on December 1, 2001, in accordance with the
terms and conditions set forth in the petitioner's application and all related documents, attached
hereto and incorporated herein for the following described property:
(See attached Exhibits A and B)
The request for waivers of the Carnival, Surety Bond and Occupational License is hereby
approved.
WITNESS my hand as Chairman of said Board and Seal of said County, attested by the
Clerk of Courts in and for said County this ~ day ol 2001.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk - COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Approved as to Form and
Legal Sufficiency:
Ma~jor~-M. Student
Assistant County Attorney
JAMES D. CARTER, PhD., CHAIRMAN
AGENDA ITEM
OR
OOOZZO
PAGE
described&
t~elee /lee/lot~e totem Stem of Ibtve legatee
bllll ~m~ O'-06°'0~' Els&) ?OS.~3 felt tO ~l '
'::~*,:~';I.:;~ ~::~'~i,~~:::'~:'~' ""
C Ilgm wu m
Ior~ 0'egg'oa~ '~'*~
141 ~11111! ~& .......
... lei. ~ljllllru i.m k .
.~. ~ · gAT[:
W.O, t lOll:Imf '""
K,. ,'fa ~':~' ~." '"" ' - ' ' '
. 2.;' .. .<. ' "' p'~) .
~2~'/~ -
. · j~;:.: ~...;
~::..~.-:.-~~~'"
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 27 2001
A~I that.part of section 33, ~ownshtP 49 $outl%, P~a~ge 26
~nd beth9 more partlCul&rl~ described as yo~lOM~; 3oMnshtp
h ~es~ corner o~ SectAOfl 33,
commenc~flg ~C ~he n~rt Florida~
Sou~h, Range 26 EaSt, Col~e~ Count~,
~hence ~long ~he north ~tne of above section, ~or~h
San~a Bar~ar~ Boulevard;
~hence ~long ~he eas~ rt~h~-of-ua~ of sntd S&n~8
Boulevard, Sou~b 0'-00'-~9" ~s~, ~0,~3 fee~ ~o an angle
po~ tn sat~ righ~-of*wa~;
~hence cofl~tnutflg a~on9 s~t6 rtgh~-Of-Ma~ Sou~h
Eas~, ~38.~0 fee~ ~o ~he sou~h ~tfle of ~he Access
~he~ce ~loflg ~be sou~h ~fle of ~e Access Ro&d
89..SS~.S~, East, 619.75 feet to ~he POINT OF B~G~HIHG of
Parcel here~ d~'scr~ the south line of the ~ccess
the .
of 1302. .~ ~- ~0.48" gest 93.49 . '
be~rs sou~n u~
~ K~ong'&he arc of a
~esterl~ ~84.7~ f~e ~ 'havtng a
&~ence .... . concave:~u &he n~h.. ~ chora
~ ~62.~ fee& and b:~.~.._.. ~6~'.52 fee~,
~:-::-~-~h 89*-58*'b~ ~).~-~ *~-~he arc
ce nor~hwesterl~ ~, · uLh'-*--..- - _a
~e~.~.. ~urv8 concave ~o t .... o chord
of. ~302.33 feet And being subtended' by a
bears north 6S"-04'-58" ~ast, 9S.B4'fea~ to the point
of begton~n ; .... ~= ~nMn~hio 4' 'Sou~h, R~nga
AGENDA ITEM
No.~
NOV 27 2001
A~l that p~rt of Section 33; To~nshtp 49 South, R~nge 26
East, Collier County,.Flortda and being mor~' par ticularl~
described as follows;
Commencing at the north ~est co~ner ~f Section 33, To~nshtp
49 South, R~nge ~6 E~st, Co111Br County.~ 'Floridl;
thence along the north 1tn~ of above sec'tton ).North
87'-53,-Z6" E~st, t~0.O7 feel to the e~st rlght=of-H~y
s~nt~ Bnrbir~ Boulevard;
thence along the e~st right-of-way of said.Snare Birb~ra
Boulevlrd, South 0'-00'-59' E~st, 5~0,73 feet to an ingle
point in s~ld right-of-Nay;
thence conttnuln9 ~long s~1d rt~ht-of-ffay. South
[~sto 238.30 feet to the south 11ne of the Access Road;
thence ~long the south l~ne of the Access Ro~d Horth
89'-58'-5~" East, 298.53 feet to the POINT OF BEG~flHING of
the p~rcel herein described;
thence continuing ~long the south 11ne of the Access
'Road. Horth 89'-58'=55" East, 4R2.ZR feet;
· thence Southeasterly 93.86 feet ~long the ~rc of
ctrcular curve concave to the south h~vtng
~0Z.33 feet ~nd being subtended by ~. chord Nhtch
6~'~rs South 69'-04'-58" Enst, 93.84 feet;
'the'nee e~sterl~ 684.7~ fee~ ~long the.~rc of
ctrcular curve concave to the north having 4 rddtus
of Bsz.g~ feet and betng subtended b~ a chord ~hlch
be~rs Horth 89'-SB~-55' E~st, 666.5~ feet,
thence northeasterl~ 93.86 feet llong the ~rc of
ctrculnr curve concave to the south h~vtng ~ radius of
~30~.33 feet and betng subtended b~ a chord Nhlch
bears North 69'-O2'-48' E~st, 93.84 feet to ~ point on
the South 11ne n(.the Access Road; ·
thence ~lon~.the sout~ 11ne of the A~cess
8g',Se'-SS"'~'~st, 4Z~.2~ feet;
southHester]'Y 494.69 feet ~long the arc of
thence~r curve con~ve to the south hnYtngs ~ r~dtus
clrcul
of 223~.33 feet led betng subtended by a chord Nhtch
beers South 78'=R8'=55" gest 49~.37 feet;
thence ~esterl~ 740.96.feet llong the ~rc
. ctrcul~r curve.concave to the north, h~v~ng n ridtus
of 92~.92 feet and betPg subtended by ~ chord'~hlch
be~rs Sou~h 89'-58'-5~' ~es~, 7Z2.~2
thence ffesterly 494.69 feet ~long the nrc of.
ctrcullr curve concave to the south, h~vtng i radtus
of 223Z.33 feet ~nd being subtended by · chord Nh~ch
bears North 78'=3~'-05' gest 49~.37. feet to the potn~
of beginning;
betn9 ~ p~rt of'Section 33, ToNnshtp 4) South, R~nge 26
~Isk, Col~ter Count~, Flortd~
subject co eiselents ind rts~rtcttons of r~cor~
con~llntng ~.87 acres of l~nd more or ~ess.
E~4IBIT B .... ~.~
NO /2 7
Pg_ /F
Snowfest
Saturday, D~ml~r
lo:oo am - S:OO pm
Golden Gate Community Park
""oo Santa Barbara Blvd.
pies, FL 34~6
Medium
Pile
~led
Mountain
AGENDA. ITEM
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RAYMOND BERUBE REPRESENTING THE BERUBE BROTHERS INC.,
REQUESTING A FEE WAIVER FOR AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE
APPLICATION FOR A SWIMMING POOL ENCROACHING INTO THE
'REQUIRED SETBACKS.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of Zoning Appeals consider an application for a fee waiver for
an after-the-fact variance while maintaining the community's best interest.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The applicant obtained a building permit to construct a swimming pool for a
single-family residence located at 188 Topanga Drive in Lely Barefoot Beach.
The permit indicated a 7.5-foot side setback. After the construction of the pool, a
spot survey submitted by the builder, as required by Code, showed 10.7 and 14-
foot side setbacks. However, the setback indicated on the permit was incorrect.
The required setback should have been 16.5 feet. in order to obtain a Certificate
of Completion the applicants need to apply for an after-the-fact variance. Since
the Permit was issued with the wrong side yard setbacks and the applicant
constructed the pool in accordance with the permit, they are requesting that the
$2025.00 application fee for the variance be waived.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Revenues for Fund 113 (Community Development Enterprise Fund) are
generated from fees established in the Schedule of Development Review and
Building Permit Fees. It is a Board policy that requests for waiver of such fees be
granted only by the Board.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
A policy decision made by the Board with respect to fee waivers will have no
impact on the Collier County Growth Management Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
NOV 2 7 2001
Fee waiver applications may only be approved by the Collier County Board of
County Commissioners. Since fee waivers are requested by a wide variety of
individuals and organizations, for various reasons, it is necessary for the Board to
evaluate the conditions and reasons which undedie the fee waiver application on
a case by case basis. In this case, it is clear that the applicant did nothing to
cause this encroachment; therefore, staff recommends that the BCC approve this
fee waiver request.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
REVIEWED BY:
-'~USAN MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
II/7/¢ (
DATE
DATE
APPROVED BY:
JOHN M. DUNNUCK, III DATE
INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
AGENDA rrE.I~
NOV 2 7 2001
BI RIIBI BRO ;. lllC.
404 PINE RIDGE RD.
NAPLES, GL. 34108
T~)= COLLIER COUNTY GOVERMENT
ATTN: CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN
FROM: RAYMOND BERUBE
DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2001
RE: VARIANCE APPLICATION FEE
ON MAY 16, 2001 THE COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING
DEPARTMENT ISSUED BERUBE BROS. INC. A SWIMMING POOL
PERMIT (~2001-051373) BASED UPON THE PLANS SUBMITTED
TO THEM FOR LOT 78, UNIT 1, SOUTHPORT ON THE BAY
WHICH PHYSICAL ADDRESS IS 188 TOPANGA DR. UPON
COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT WE WERE NOTIFIED WHEN
TURNING IN THE SPOT SURVEY THAT THE PROJECT DID NOT
MEET THE REQUIRED SET BACKS ALTHOUGH IT WAS BUILT
PER THE PLANS SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY BUILDING DEPARTMENT ON THE DATE MENTIONED
ABOVE. WE HAVE SINCE BEEN TOLD THAT WE MUST PETITION
FOR A VARIANCE FOR THE PROJECT WHICH HAS AN APPLICATION
FEE OF $2025.00- I AM WRITING TO REQUEST A WAVIER OF THE
APPLICATION FEE BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES MENTIONED
ABOVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION OF
THIS REQUEST. IF YOU NEED TO CONTACT ME PLEASE CALL
253-9626 (MOBILe).
I~YM~)ND BZRUBE
BERUBE BROSo TNCo/PRES-
AGENDA tTEld
NOV 2 7 2001
BOAF~
COLLIER COUNTY
OF COUNTY COMMISSI~.,.. JERS
~__ T #,:,. 2001051373
ISSUED: 05-16-01 BY: GARRETT S
MASTER #: 2001051373 COA
JOB ADDRESS: 188 TOPANGA DR
JOB DESCRIPTION: POOL W/ ELEC 2000081248
PERMIT
PERMIT POOL
APPLIED 05-16-01
JOB PHONE:
VALID
APPROVAL DATE:
(941)262-3967
373
05-16-01
SUBDIVISION #: 1668 - Southoort On The Bay Unit One
FLOOD M3%P: 0179 ZONE: VE-14 ELEVATION:
FOLIO #: 0000074435006605 SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RAN 6
48 25
BLOCK:
LOT:78
OWNER INFORMATION:
VLAHOVIC, KATHY V
164 BAREFOOT CIR
CONTRACTOR INFORMATION:
BERUBE BROS. INC.
1404 PINE RIDGE RD.
BONITA SPRINGS, FLS1COP 341350000
NAPLES,FL 34108-
CERTIFICATE #: 13544 PHONE: (941)262-3967
FCC CODE: 329 - STRUCT OTH THAN BLDG-POOL/SEAWALL/DOCK/F
CONSTRUCTION CODE: 10 / OTHER
JOB VALUE: 23.000.00 TOTAL SQFT:
SETBACKS FRONT: REAR: 10.00 LEFT: 7.50 RIGHT: 7.50
S~'~{: ~'1'1~ WATER: WELL
Cc .~CT NAME: RAY
CONTACT PHONE: (941}262-3967
Per Collier County Ordinance No. 96-83. as amended, all work under the approved building perm/t shall
comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances and additional stipulations and/or Conditions of Per~t.
The approved permit expires if work authorized i~ not commenced within six (6) months from date of issue as
evidenced by the successful completion of the foundation inspections as stated in Ordinance No. 96-83
104.6.1.b as amended. Fee Resolution No. 96-594 provides for additional fees for failing to obtain perm/ts
prior to commencing construction. The permittee further understands that only licensed contractors may be
employed and that the structure shall not be used or occupied until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
NOTICE: In addition to the requirements of this permit, there may be additional restrictions applicable to this property that
may be found in the public records of this county, and there may be additional permits required from other governmental
entities such as water management districts, state agencies, or federal agencies.
WARNING TO OWNER: YOUR FAILURE TO RECORD &
NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT MAY RESULT IN YOUR
PAYING TWICE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO YOUR PROPERTY
IF YOU INTEND TO OBTAIN FINANCING
fOUR LENDER OR AN ATTORNEY BEFORE.RBC
YOUR NOTICE OF COMMENCEME
SCALE
Public records of C.~ ~c.~
"WILLIAM McALEAR
REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR '
P.O. Box 9732 Naples, FL 34101-9732
Telephone: (941) 59%7428
Fax: (94 !) 597-2803
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
, of Block ~ , of that certain subdivision known as ~OO'T~PO~.T o~t 'r n ~- E,& V
, as recorded in Plat book .. ~' page .5'1 - ?3 , of the
County, Florida
/
LEGEND
~..~=~.=. ,..
C~R/IFICAT E
"LOOO PLANE C:t:~,rtt:,t',,a r~, ............. I HEREBY CERTIFY to /'/'~'~',,V/? j''''~J I~.' V~/~'o ~/~,
'rn;rm.n-r-r~;r~nl"eP..ARSTOBE ,, _ I I - : ' -" '' f
FLO00 ZONE ~' ~ -- NOTE '
rYPEOFSURVEY, DATE ! FIELDWORK [~, I BEARIN~SAJ~EBASF. DONTNE P~,'r-I .--, -.- // '.,~
"~ '"~ - '~° ' .~.o,< ,?f' sEc'no, ~ ....... ,'rwP ~-',e, s.,eE .2'_<'
AGEt~A ITEM
NOV 2 7 200!
I>iL 6
REQUEST TO GRANT FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADHAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND
SEWER IMPPXFFEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "VENEZIA AT GREY OAKS"
OB,T~CTIVE:
To grant final acceptance of the infrastructure improvements
associated with that subdivision known as "Venezia at Grey Oaks"
CONSIDERATIONS:
On February 28, 2000, the Board of County Commissioners granted
preliminary acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements in "Venezia at Grey Oaks"
The roadway and drainage improvements will be maintained by the
project's homeowner's association. The water and sewer
improvements will be maintained by the County.
The required improvements have been constructed in accordance
with the Land Development Code. The County Development
Services has inspected the improvements and is recommending
final acceptance of the improvements.
A resolution for final acceptance has been prepared and
approved by the .County Attorney's Office. A copy of the
document is attached.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The roadway and drainage improvements will be maintained by the
project's homeowners association. Water and sewer improvements
will be maintained by the County's Utility Department through their
operation and maintenance budget.
IMPACT: None
-- AC~.I'~I:)A ~
NOV 2 7 2001
Executive Summary
Venezia at Grey Oaks
Page 2
REC(H~4ENDATION:
That the Board of County Commissioners grant final acceptance of
the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in "Venezia at
Grey Oaks" and release the maintenance security.
1. Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached resolution
authorizing final acceptance.
2. Authorize the release of the maintenance security.
PREPARED BY:
John R. Houldsworth, Senior Engineer
Engineering Review
Date
BY: '
Thomas E. Kuck, P.E.
Engineering Review Director / County Engineer
APPROVED BY:
John M. ~unnu~ck Iit, Interim Administrator
Communit~ Dev. and Environmental Svcs.
Date
j rh
AGE~Q:)A 19'EZQ.
No. /~./~ ~
NOV 2 7 2001
---' PROJECT
ITEM
7 2001
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
45
46
47
48
49
51
52
55
57
59
60
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THOSE ROADWAY,
DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS IN VENEZIA AT GREY OAKS,
RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY,
AND ACCEPTING THE MAINTENANCE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ROADWAY,
DRAINAGE WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED TO
BE MAINTAINED BY THE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, on
March 9, 1999 approved the plat of Venezia at Grey Oaks for recording; and
WHEREAS, the developer has constructed and maintained the roadway, drainage,
water and sewer improvements in accordance with the approved plans and specifications
and as required by the Land Development Code (Collier County Ordinance No. 91-102,
as amended); and the Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance (Collier County
Ordinance No. 97-17), and
WHEREAS, the developer has now requested final acceptance of the roadway,
drainage, water and sewer improvements and release of his maintenance security; and
WHEREAS, the Engineering Review Department of Community Development
Services has inspected the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements and is
recommending acceptance of said facilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that final acceptance be
granted for those roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in Venezia at Grey
Oaks, and authorize the Clerk to release the maintenance security.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County accept the
furore maintenance and other attendant costs for the roadway, drainage, water and sewer
improvements that are not required to be maintained by the homeowners association.
This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote favoring same.
DATE:
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
A.p_[roved as to form and legal
Patricl~ G. White
Assistant Collier County Attorney
AG~A ITEM/
NOV 2 7 2001
REQUEST TO APPROVE FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "CEDAR HAMMOCK -
UNIT 6", AND APPROVAL OF T~ STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTEN~CE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF T~ AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY
OBJECTIVE:
TO approve for recording the final plat of "Cedar Hammock - Unit 6",
a subdivision of lands located in Section 3 Township 50 South, Range
26 East, Collier County, Florida, following the alternative procedure
for approval of subdivision plats.
CONSIDERATIONS:
Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the
construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of "Cedar
Hammock - Unit 6". These documents are in compliance with the County
Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. Ail fees
have been paid. Security in the amount of 10% of the total cost of
'-'the required improvements, and 100% of the cost of any remaining
improvements, together with a Construction and Maintenance Agreement
for Subdivision Improvements, shall be provided and accepted by the
Planning Services Director and the County Attorneys office prior to
the recording of the final plat. This would be in conformance with
the County Land Development Code - Division 3.2.9.
Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Cedar
Hammock - Unit 6" be approved for recording.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project cost is $267,002.50 (estimated) to be
borne by the developer.
The cost breakdown is as follows:
a)
b)
Water & Sewer
Drainage,
Paving, Grading
- $ 73,960.00
- $193,042.50
The Security amount, equal to 110% of the
project cost, is $293,702.75
· Executive Summary
Cedar Hammock - Unit 6
Page 3
Approve the standard
Agreement, and
form Construction and
Maintenance
a. That no Certificates of Occupancy be granted until the
required improvements have received preliminary acceptance.
b. That the plat not be recorded until suitable security and
an appropriate Construction and Maintenance Agreement is
approved and accepted by the Planning Services Director and
the County Attorney's office.
PREPARED BY:
Senior Engineer
Engineering Review
REVIEWED BY:
Thomas E. Kuck, P.E.
Engineering Review Director / Cou_nty Engineer
Date
bate
APPROVED BY:
john~I, Interim Ack~inistrator
Commu~tyDevelopment & Environmental Services
Date
jrh
AGENDA ITEM
No._
NOV 2 7 2001
SITE LOCATION MAP.
~ _ OIL
WELL
k- DRANGETREI
) GOLDEN GATE ]~I..VD N.T.S.
,.RIDGE RD WHITE BLVD ;
~ GREEN!'" > -,' .'.
m BLVD.
__.~E ~--'Y~ / ,-,'"+' "~ ,.'"'"
)I0 RD. ~: ~ INTERSTATE 75 ALLIGATOR ALLEY
I---
~;NAKI://HAMMOCK ~,,
\ /.z" ~'
~ SABAL PALM RD. ~i '
.
>
F~ ~'!.';: STEWART BLVD, m
· i~N0V 2 2001
TOWNSHIP 50~oLrrH, RANGE 26 EAST
~COLLIER coukr~ FLORIn~
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPROVE AN AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT A DERELICT VESSEL REMOVAL
GRANT FROM THE FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
COMMISSION.
OBJECTIVE: To preserve and enhance the waterways and estuaries of Collier County
through the removal of derelict vessels.
CONSIDERATION: The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has
offered Collier County a $11,000 grant for FY 01/02. The FWCC Law Enforcement has
documented 23 derelict vessels in the waters of Collier County. The grant funds will be
used to remove as many of these vessels as fiscally possible.
FISCAL IMPACT: No funds were budgeted for this grant. Staff will process a budget
amendment for $11,000 into the derelict vessel cost center.
GROVgTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:' The grant money will support Objective 6.6,
6.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the County Growth
Management Plan.
RECOMMENDATION: That the BCC authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement
for the $11,000 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission grant and approve
the appropriate budget amendments.
SUBMITTED BY: Date:
Douglas'~. Sm'¥r, SemSx.l~nvironmental Specialist
REVIEWED BY:-)q~/~"-.~)'~"'LIJxJI'"xI Date:
BY:Wilh~?~enz'-Jff"/P 'Ii' I~irector, Natural Date: Resources ~[/I'~l°l Department
APPROVED
John unnuck, Interim Administrator
Commt~dty Development & Environmental Services
FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
DERELICT VESSEL REMOVAL GRANT AGREEMENT
FWC GRANT NO 01014
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
COMMISSION, hereinafter referred to as the "COMMISSION", and Collier Coun~ Board of County
Commissioners, whose address is 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida 34112,and hereinafter referred
to as the "GRANTEE".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the COMMISSION has established a program to provide grants to coastal local governments for
the removal of derelict vessels from the public waters of the state pursuant to Section 376.15(2)(b), Florida
Statutes, hereinafter referred to as the "Program";
WHEREAS a GRANTEE is a coastal local government as defined by Florida Statutes;
NOW THEREFORE, the COMMISSION and the GRANTEE do hereby mutually agree as follows:
1. Definition, Scope and Qualit~ of Grant Services
The GRANTEE shall administer the removal and disposal of designated derelict vessels as an
independent governmental authority and not as an employee, agent, or representative of the
COMMISSION.
No vessel shall be eligible for removal or disposal by the GRANTEE unless and until said
vessel has been designated as a derelict vessel by the Commission's Bureau of Marine
Enforcement as prescribed by General Order of the COMMISSION's Division of Law
Enforcement.
Co
Only derelict vessels that appear on the Derelict Vessel List, Attachment A, which is made a
part of this Agreement by reference, are eligible for grant monies.
do
Authorized disposal sites for derelict vessels shall be limited to permitted artificial reef sites,
permitted landfill locations and permitted recycled materials centers. Exceptions to this
requirement must be approved in writing by the Executive Director of the COMMISSION.
No grant monies for the removal or disposal of a given derelict vessel shall be paid to the
GRANTEE until said vessel has been legally removed and disposed of, and such removal and
disposal properly documented by the GRANTEE. For derelict vessels disposed in a landfill,
the documentation must be a landfill receipt clearly marked with the derelict vessel number
and, date of disposal for each derelict vessel.
The GRANTEE shall be responsible for obtaining all state, local and federal permits and
licenses required for the removal and disposal of the designated derelict vessels. The
· · ' d
GRANTEE shall fully comply with all apphcable laws, ordinances, and co ~_~_e~
· ,';,.t to
and local governments which are applicable to the work accomplished pursu~tnt
Agreement. Full responsibility for such compliance shall rest with the GRAFTEL~. '
NOV 2 ? 2001
DV#01-05 FWCC 01014
Page 1 of 9 ~. P~.
jo
ko
Any pollutant found to be contained within a designated derelict vessel shall be removed and
properly disposed of in accordance with applicable laws by the GRANTEE prior to the
removal of the derelict vessel.
The GRANTEE shall be entitled to the salvage value of any grant-designated derelict vessel
or any part(s) or accessories thereof, excluding the hull, not used in the construction of a
permitted artificial reef site. All such salvage activities not essential to the physical removal
of a derelict vessel shall be accomplished after the vessel has been removed from public
waters. The salvage value of each vessel shall be deducted by the GRANTEE when
determining the removal and disposal costs for each derelict vessel.
The GRANTEE agrees that all work shall be performed satisfactorily as determined by the
COMMISSION by competent employees experienced and qualified to do the work specified
in this Agreement, and that ali work will be performed in accordance with the best
commercial practices and without unnecessary delays. The GRANTEE and its
subcontractors shall use suitable, modem equipment necessary for the satisfactory execution
of this Agreement.
The GRANTEE shall not be entitled to payment from grant funds for any designated derelict
vessel for which the removal and disposal of same was accomplished prior to the award of the
grant or subsequent to the close of the grant period established by the COMMISSION.
The GRANTEE shall maintain insurance coverage, either through a self-insurance program or
purchase of coverage from an authorized insurer, to protect the GRANTEE from any and all
claims, including pollutant spillage and death, which may arise from operations under this
Agreement. The GRANTEE'S insurance shall, at a minimum be sufficient to pay a claim or a
judgement, or portions thereof, of $200,000 per incidence or occurrence. The GRANIEE
shall require any subcontractor to carry insurance coverage as necessary to protect the
subcontractor and GRANTEE from any and all claims arising out of the subcontractor's
participation in activities related to this program. Certificates of such insurance shall be
subject to the approval of the COMMISSION for adequacy of protection and name the
COMMISSION, the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund and the State
of Florida as additional insureds. All certificates of insurance shall contain a provision that
the insurance will not be cancelled for any reason except after thirty(30) days written notice
to the COMMISSION'S project manager.
To the extent required by law, the GRANTEE will be self-insured against, or will secure and
maintain during the life of this Agreement, Workers' Compensation Insurance for all of
GRANTEE'S employees connected with the work of this project and, in case any work is
subcontracted, the GRANTEE shall require the subcontractor similarly to provide Workers'
Compensation Insurance for all of the latter's employees unless such employees are covered
by the protection afforded by the GRANTEE. Such self-insurance program or insurance
coverage shall comply fully with the Florida Workers' Compensation law. In case any class
of employees engaged in hazardous work under this Agreement is not protected under the
Workers' Compensation statute, the GRANTEE shall provide, and cause each subcontractor
to provide, adequate insurance satisfactory to the COMMISSION, for the protection of
GRANTEE's employees not otherwise protected. The GRANTEE agrees to supply the
COMMISSION with proof of insurance, the types and coverage outlined by the
COMMISSION. The GRANTEE shall provide to the COMMISSION a
DV#01-05 FWCC 01014
Page 2 of 9
no
co
insurance herein required prior to the execution of the related agreement through the issuance
of a purchase order or the execution of a formal contract.
Should the rightful owner be discovered, the GRANTEE shall make a reasonable effort to
recover from the derelict vessel owner(s) all grant funded removal and disposal costs incurred
pursuant to this Agreement. Any such recovered monies shall be reimbursed to the
COMMISSION, with a check marked restitution of derelict vessel removal, and Agreement
number 01014.
An awarded Derelict Vessel Removal Grant shall be suhiect to pre-audit and post-audit
review by the COMMISSION or its representative. All records and documents of the
GRANTEE pertaining to this Grant shall be maintained by the GRANTEE for a minimum of
three (3) fiscal years following the end of the fiscal year in which final grant payment is made
by the COMMISSION to the GRANTEE. Said records and documents shall be made
available to the COMMISSION or its representative upon request. This period shall be
extended for an additional two (2) years upon request for examination of all records and
accounts for payment verification purposes by the COMMISSION or its duly authorized
agent. In the event any work is subcontracted, the GRANTEE shall similarly require each
subcontractor to maintain and allow access to such records for audit purposes.
Disposition, Status Reports, and Chan~e Orders of Derelict Vessels
The derelict vessels listed in the GRANTEE's "Derelict Vessel Listing", Attachment A,
which is made part of this Agreement, shall be removed and disposed of by the GRANTEE to
the extent grant reimbursement funds allow, unless during the time of removal a listed vessel
is no longer on site, in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.
The COMMISSION may at any time, by written order designated to be a change order, make
any change in the list of vessels to be removed under this Agreement. All change orders are
subject to the mutual agreement of both parties as evidenced in writing. Any change order
which causes an increase or decrease in-the total amount of the grant or grant period shall
require an appropriate adjustment and modification (formal amendment) to this Agreement. It
is the intention of the COMMISSION and the GRANTEE that no evidence of any waiver or
modification or amendment shall be offered or received in evidence in any proceeding or
litigation between the parties arising out of or affecting this Agreement unless such waiver, or
modification or amendment is in writing and executed as aforesaid. The provisions of this
section shall not be waived without compliance with said writing and execution requirements.
The GRANTEE is required under the terms of this Agreement to forward monthly pro_cress
reports to the COMMISSION detailing the exact status of each derelict vessel with regard to
the removal process. Failure to make these progress reports to the COMMISSION shall be
deemed a material breach of the Agreement and may subject the GRANTEE to cancellation of
the Agreement.
Reimbursements
The COMMISSION shall pay, on a cost reimbursement basis, to the GRANTEE, actual
expenses incurred up to a total grant amount not to exceed $11,000.00 under this Agreement.
Payment requests and expenditure documentation shall be submitted in accordance with, and
DV#01-05 FWCC 01014 ~ NO.~
Page 3 of 9 i
NOV 2 7 2001
o
on the forms included in, the Grant and Contract Accountability Policy and in sufficient detail
for a proper pre-audit and post-audit thereof. However, reimbursement to the GRANTEE
shall be net of salvage as referenced in Paragraph 1 (h). Salvage recovery must be documented
as required by the COMMISSION. Reimbursement under this Agreement does not include
travel or any administrative costs. The COMMISSION's performance and obligation to pay
under this Agreement is contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Florida Legislature.
bo
The request for compensation shall consist of; A) An invoice on the GRANTEE's letterhead,
clearly marked "Invoice", that makes reference to FWC Grant Agreement number, 01014;
B) A visual verification of removal report entitled "Incident/Summary Report Narrative",
(FWC/DLE-045A), from your district FWC office that indicates the derelict vessel(s) have
been removed; C) Photograph's of the actual removal for each derelict vessel removed under
this Agreement and; D) The form entitled "Disposition Certification" for Derelict Vessels
completed, and notarized.
Up to two invoices may be allowed under this Agreement. Under existing budget authority,
the first invoice must be received no later than June 1, 2002, to assure the availability of
funds for payment. A second and final invoice date may be offered by the COMMISSION, at
its discretion, if budget authority is certified forward as outlined in the Term of Agreement
section, and contingent upon satisfactory performance to date by the GRANTEE.
do
Only eligible costs identified in the Grant and Contract Accountability Policy shall be
allowable. All minor details necessary for proper completion of the work herein specified
shall be accomplished by the GRANTEE without additional expense to the COMMISSION
Verification of compliance with the grant terms and conditions must be completed by the
COMMISSION, and payment will be authorized within 30 days after receipt by the
COMMISSION of the required "Disposition Certification for Derelict Vessels", and a proper
invoice with supporting schedules and documentation of allowable expenses incurred.
Term of Agreement
The grant period shall begin on the date of execution, and end no later than November 1, 2002.
It is understood and agreed that budget authority for this Agreement ends June 30, 2002. and the
COMMISSION's authority to authorize spending under the Agreement beyond that date is contingent
upon certification forward of grant funds by the Governor's Budget Office, of which there is no
guarantee. Therefore, the GRANTEE shall not be reimbursed for activities beyond May 21, 2002,
unless and until notified otherwise by the COMMISSION. If grant funds are certified forward, thc
COMMISSION may, at its discretion, notify the GRANTEE by certified letter of the additional
budget authority, and thereby authorize the GRANTEE to continue grant activities through the
remaining term of the Agreement.
Monitorin~
The GRANTEE shall permit the COMMISSION, or its duly authorized representative, to monitor the
removal and disposal of derelict vessels covered by this Agreement as deemed necessary by the
COMMISSION.
Liability
Each party hereto agrees that it shall be solely responsible for the wrongful acts of its employees,
contractors, and agents. However, nothing contained herein shall constitute a.waiver by ~!tk_-'r ~,~" -~--I1TOa--
of its sovereign immunity and the limitations set forth in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes[
DV#01-05pageFWCC4 of 010149 [~[ NOV ~2 7 2001
10.
11.
12.
Termination of Agreement
a. This Agreement may be terminated by either party, fbr failure to perform by the non-
terminating party, by giving thirty (30) calendar days written notice to the other party. Said
notice shall be sufficient if delivered personally or by certified mail to the address contained
herein. In case of termination, the GRANTEE will not be reimbursed for any work performed
after receipt of the written notice.
b. The COMMISSION shall have the right to terminate this Agreement and demand refund of
Program funds in the event of fraud, willful misconduct, or any breach of terms and
conditions of this Agreement. Failure to comply with the provisions shall result in the
COMMISSION declaring the GRANTEE ineligible for further participation in the Program.
Public Records
Pursuant to Section 216.2815, Florida Statutes, all records in con. iunction with this
Agreement shall be public record and shall be treated in the same manner as other
public records are under general law. This Agreement may be unilaterally canceled by
the COMMISSION for refusal by the GRANTEE to allow public access to all
documents, papers, letters or other material subject to the provisions of Chapter 119,
Florida Statutes, and made or received by the GRANTEE in conjunction with this
Agreement.
Non-Exclusive Basis
As a condition of this agreement, the GRANTEE and/its subcontractors, if any, hereby covenant and
agree not to discriminate against any individuals's race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age,
handicap, or marital status with respect to any activity occurring pursuant to this Agreement.
Prohibit Lobbying Expenditure -
In accordance with Section 216.347, Florida Statues, this Agreement strictly prohibits the expenditure
of Derelict Vessel Removal Grant funds for the purpose of lobbying the Legislature, the judicial
branch, or a state agency.
Federal/Florida Single Audit Acts Requirements
Effective July 1, 2000, the Florida Single Audit Act requires all non-State organizations who are
recipients of State financial assistance to comply with the audit requirements of the Act, pursuant to
Section 216.3491, Florida Statutes. In addition, recipients and subrecipients of federal financial
assistance must comply with the Federal Single Audit Act requirements of OMB Circular A-133.
Therefore, the GRANTEE shall be required to comply with the audit requirements outlined in
Attachment B, titled "Requirements of the Federal and Florida Single Audit Acts," attached hereto
and made a part of the Agreement, as applicable.
COMMISSION Management of Aereement
The COMMISSION'S Project Manager is Boating Safe _ty and Water-way Management Coordinator,
Division of Law Enforcement, Boating Safety and Waterway Management Section, Phone 850-488.:
5600. The GRANTEE'S Project Manager is Senior Environmental Specialist Phone 941-732-2505:
All matters shall be directed to the Project Managers for appropriate action or disposition.
NOV 2 7 2001
DV#01-05 FWCC 01014 [ ~)
Page 5 of 9 Pg'---------
13.
Correspondence Mailing Addresses
Any and all notices shall be delivered to the parties at the following addresses:
GRANTEE
Collier County
Senior Environmental Specialist
3301 E. Tamiami Trail
Naples, Florida 34112
COMMISSION
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Division of Law Enforcement
620 South Meridian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600
14.
Public Entity Crime Vendors
A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction
for a public entity crime may not perform work as a grantee, contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or
consultant under an agreement with any public entity, and may not transact business with any public
entity in excess of the threshold amount under Category Two provided in Section 287.017, Florida
Statutes, for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list.
15.
Prohibition of Discriminatory Vendors
In accordance with Section 287.134, FloridaStatutes, an entity or affiliate who has been placed on
the discriminatory vendor list may not submit a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to
a public entity, may not submit a bid on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair
of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real property to a public entity,
may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a
contract with any public entity, and may not transact business with any public entity.
16.
Conflict of Interest
The GRANTEE covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest which
would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of services required.
17.
Jury Trial Waiver
As consideration of this Agreement, the parties hereby waive trial by jury in any action or proceeding
brought by any party against any other party pertaining to any matter whatsoever arising out of or in
any way connected with this Agreement.
18.
Laws of Florida, Severability, and Venue
This Agreement has been delivered in the State of Florida and shall be construed in accordance with
the laws of Florida. Wherever possible each provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted in such
a manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but if any provision of this Agreement
shall be prohibited or invalid under applicable law, such provision shall be ineffective to the extent
of such prohibition or invalidity, without invalidating the remainder of such provision or the
remaining provisions of this Agreement. The parties agree that Leon County, Florida, shall be the
venue for all actions, at law or in equity, arising herefrom, to the exclusion of ali other lawful venues.
19.
Waiver
No delay or failure to exercise any right, power or remedy accruing to either party upon breach or
default by either party under this Agreement, shall impairany such right, power, or remedy of either
party; nor shall such delay or failure be construed as a waiver of any such breach or default, or any
similar breach or default thereafter.
DV#01-05 FWCC 01014 I NOV 2 7 2001
Page 6 of 9
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
Taxes
The GRANTEE recognizes that the State of Florida, by virtue of its sovereignty, is not required to
pay any taxes on the services or goods purchased under the terms of this Agreement.
Rights of Third Parties
This Agreement is neither intended nor shall it be construed to grant any rights, privileges or interest
in any third party without the mutual written agreement of the parties hereto.
~s~ment
This Agreement is an exclusive agreement for services and may not be assigned in whole or in part
without the written approval of the COMMISSION.
Subcontracting
The GRANTEE agrees to be responsible for the fulfillment of ali work elements included in any
subcontract consented to by the COMMISSION and agrees to be responsible for the payment of all
monies due under any subcontract. It is understood and agreed by the GRANTEE that the
COMMISSION shall not be liable to any subcontractor for any expenses or liabilities incurred
under the subcontract and that the GRANTEE shall be solely liable to the subcontractor for all
expenses and liabilities incurred under the subcontract.
P.R.I.D.E.
It is expressly understood and agreed that any articles which are the subject of, or required to carry
out, this Agreement shall be purchased from the corporation identified under chapter 946, Florida
Statutes, if available, in the same manner and under the same procedures set forth in Section
946.515(2), (4), Florida Statutes; and for the purposes of this Agreement the person, firm or other
business entity carrying out the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be substituted for
this agency insofar as dealings with such corporation are concerned.
This "corporation identified' is PRISON REHABILITATIVE INDUSTRIES AND DIVERSIFIED
ENTERPRISES, INC. (P.R.I.D.E) which may Be contacted at:
P.R.I.D.E.
12425 28th Street North
St. Petersburg, Florida 33716
Telephone: (727) 572-1987
Prohibition against Contingent Fees
The GRANTEE warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other
than a bona fide employee working solely for the GRANTEE to solicit or secure this
Agreement and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any person, company, corporation,
individual, or firm, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the GRANTEE any
fee, commission, percentage, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the
award or making of this Agreement.
Complete Aereement
This Agreement contains the complete Agreement between the COMMISSION and the
GRANTEE and, as of the effective date hereof, shall supersede all other agreements
communications or representations, either verbal or written, between the COMMISSION a~l~lOA
the GRANTEE. I ~ ,' :'
t NOVt7 2001
Page 7 of 9 L~i: -
The COMMISSION and the GRANTEE stipulate that neither of them has made any
representations except such representations as are specifically contained within this
Agreement. The COMMISSION and the GRANTEE further acknowledge that any payments
or representations that may have been made outside of those specifically contained herein are
of no binding effect and have not been relied upon by either party in its dealings with the other
in entering into this Agreement
THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
DV#01-05 FWCC 01014
Page 8 of 9
¢:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed, the day and year
last below written.
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Chairman or designee* Date Director, Division of Law Enforcement Date
James D. Carter
Manager
Name(Print)
Chairman
Title
Collier County
County Name
Approved as to form and legality:
3301 East Tamiami Trail ~~
Address FWfiT~ Assist~Lnt Ge~l Counsel
Naples, FL 34112'
City, State and Zip Code
Federal Employment Identification
Number 59-6000-558
Remittance Address:
Address
Am~bm~amt ~ty A~.~~
City, State and Zip Code
*If someone other than the Chairman signs the Agreement, a resolution, statement or other document
authorizing the person to sign the Agreement on behalf of the county must accompany the Agreement.
List of attachments/exhibits included as part of this Agreement:
Type
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Exhibit 1:
Description
Derelict Vessel Listing
Requirements'of the State and Federal Single Audit Acts
Funds awarded to the recipient !
,~ NOv 27 2001
DV#01-05 FWCC 01014
Page 9 of 9
ATTACHMENT B
REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE AND FEDERAL SINGLE AUDIT ACTS
The administration of funds awarded by the Commission to the ContractodGrantee may be subject to audits and/or
monitoring by the Commission as described in this section.
MONITORING
In addition to reviews of audits conducted in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, as revised (see "AUDITS" below),
monitoring procedures may include, but not be limited to, on-site visits by Commission staff, limited scope audits as
defined by OMB Circular A-133, as revised, and/or other procedures. By entering into this agreement, the recipient
agrees to comply and cooperate with any monitoring procedures/processed deemed appropriate by the Commission.
In the event the additional instructions provided by the Commission to the recipient regarding such audit. The recipient
further agrees to comply and cooperate with any inspections, reviews, investigations, or audits deemed necessary by
the Comptroller or Auditor General.
AUDITS
PART I: FEDERALLY FUNDED
This part is applicable if the recipient is a State or local government or a non-profit organization as defined in OMB
Circular A-133, as revised.
I in the event that the recipient expends $300,000 or more in Federal awards in its fiscal year, the recipient must
have a single or program-specific audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-133,
as revised. EXHIBIT 1 to this agreement indicates Federal funds awarded through the Commission by this
agreement. In including Federal funds received from the Commission. The determination of amounts of
Federal awards expended should be in accordance with the guidelines established by OMB Circular A-133, as
revised. An audit of the recipient conducted by the Auditor General in accordance with the provisions OMB
Circular A-133, as revised, will meet the requirements of this part.
2 in connection with the audit requirements addressed in Part I, paragraph 1., the recipient shall fulfill the
requirements relative to auditee responsibilities as provide in Subpart C o OMB Circular A-133, as revised.
3 If the recipient expends less than $300,000 in F6deral awards in its fiscal year, an audit conducted in
accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-133, as revised, is not required. In the event that the
recipient expends less than $300,000 in Federal awards in its fiscal year and elects to have an audit conducted
in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-133, as revised, the cost of the audit must be paid from
non-Federal funds (i.e.,the cost of such an audit must be paid from recipient funds obtained from other than
Federal entities).
PART I1: STATE FUNDED
This part is applicable if the recipient is a nonstate entity as defined by Section 215.97(2)(1), Florida Statutes.
1 In the event that the recipient expends a total amount of State awards (i.e., State financial assistance provided
to the recipient to carry out a State project) equal to or in excess of $300,000 in any fiscal year of such recipient,
the recipient must have a State single or project-specific audit for such fiscal year in accordance with Section
215.97, Flodda Statutes; applicable rules of the Executive Office of the Governor and the Comptroller, and
Chapter 10.600, Rules of the Auditor General. EXHIBIT I to this agreement indicates State funds awarded
through the Commission by this agreement. In determining the State awards expended in its fiscal year, the
recipient shall consider all sources of State awards, including State funds received from the Commission except
that State awards received by a non-state entity for Federal program matching requirements shall be excluded
from consideration.
2 In connection with the audit requirements addressed in Part II, paragraph 1, the recipient shall ensure that the
audit complies with the requirements of Section 215.97(23)(d). Fiodda Statutes, and Chapter lr~01~k~'~~,,
the Auditor General. i N°'--/~'/~/f'~~ -
I
NOV 2 7 200!
3
If the recipient expends less than $300,000 in State awards in its fiscal year, an audit conducted in accordance
with the provisions of Section 215.97, Flodda Statutes, is not required. In the event that the recipient expends
less than $300,000 in State awards in its fiscal year and elects to have an audit conducted in accordance with
the provisions of Section 215.97, Flodda Statutes, the cost of the audit must be paid from non-State funds (i.e.,
the cost of such an audit must be paid from recipient funds obtained from other than State entities).
PART II1: OTHER AUDIT REQUIREMENTS
None
PART IV: REPORT SUBMISSION
Copies of audit reports for audits conducted in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, as revised, and required
by PART I of this agreement shall be submitted, when required by Section .320 (d), OMB Circular A-133, ss
revised, by or on behalf of the recipient directly to each of the following:
A. The Commission at each of the following addresses:
FWCC Program Grants Manager
Division of Law Enforcement
620 S. Meridian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600
Audit Director
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Bryant Building, Room 138
620 S. Meridian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600
The Federal Audit Clearinghouse designated in OMB Circular A-133, as revised (the number of copies
required by Sections .320 (d)(1) and (2), OMB Circular A-133, as revised, should be submitted to the
Federal Audit Clearinghouse), at the following address:
Federal Audit Clearinghouse
Bureau of the Census
1201 East 10~ Street
Jeffersonville, IN 47132
Other Federal agencies and pass-through entities in accordance with Sections .320 (e) and (f~, OMB
Circular A-133, as revised.
Pursuant to Section .320(f), OMB Circular A-133, as revised, the recipient shall submit a copy of the reporting
package described in Section .320 (c), OMB Circular A-133, as revised, and any management letters issued
by the auditor, to the Commission at each of the following addresses:
.A. The Commission at each of the following addresses:
Program Grants Manager
Flodda Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Division of Law Enforcement
620 S. Meridian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600
Audit Director
Flodda Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Bryant Building, Room 138
620 S. Meddian Street
Tallahassee, Flodda 32399-1600
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
Copies of reporting packages required by PART II of this agreement shall be submitted by or on behalf of the
recipient directly to each of the following addresses:
A. The Commission's Project Manager, and Audit Director
Program Grants Manager
Flodda Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Division of Law Enforcement
620 S. Meddian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600
Audit Director
Flodda Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Bryant Building, Room 138
620 S. Meridian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600
B. The Auditor General's Office at the following address:
State of Florida Auditor General
Room 574, Claude Pepper Building
111 West Madison Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1450
Copies of reports or management letters required by PART II of this agreement shall be submitted by or on
behalf of the recipient directly to:
A. The Commission's Project Manager, and Audit Director
Program Grants Manager
Flodda Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Division of Law Enforcement
620 S. Meridian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600
Audit Director
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Bryant Building, Room 138
620 S. Meridian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600
Any reports, management letters, or other information required to be submitted to the Commission pursuant
to this agreement shall be submitted timely in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, Florida Statutes, and
Chapter 10.600, Rules of the Auditor General, as applicable.
Recipients, when submitting audit reports to the Commission for audits done in accordance with OMB Circular
A-133, Flodda Statutes, and Chapter 10.600, Rules of the Auditor General, should indicate the date that the
audit report was delivered to the recipient in correspondence accompanying the audit report.
PART V: RECORD RETENTION
The recipient shall retain sufficient records demonstrating its compliance with the terms of this agreement for
a pedod of three years from the date the audit report is issued, and shall allow the Commission or its designee,
access to such records upon request. The recipient shall ensure that audit working papers are made available
to the Commission or its designee, upon request for a period of three years from the date the audit report is
issued, unless extended in writing by the Commission.
AGENDA ITEM
No. /~/~2
NOV 2 7 2001
J'
EXHIBIT- 1
FEDERAL FUNDS AWARDED TO THE RECIPIENT PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT CONSIST OF
THE FOLLOWING:
None
COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO THE FEDERAL FUNDS AWARDED PURSUANT TO
THIS AGREEMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS:
None
STATE FUNDS AWARDED TO THE RECIPIENT PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT CONSIST OF THE
FOLLOWING:
MATCHING FUNDS FOR FEDERAL PROGRAMS:
None
SUBJECT TO SECTION 215.97, FLORIDA STATUTES:
Agency: FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
State Program Title: Derelict Vessel Removal Grant Program
CSFA Number: 77.005
GRANTEE: Collier County
Amount: $11,000.00
COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO STATE FUNDS AWARDED PURSUANT TO THIS
AGREEMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS:
None
NOV 2 7 2001
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR
DOUBLETREE HOTEL
OBJECTIVE: The Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio the
Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, to
accept the conveyance of the water and sewer facilities.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1) The Developer of Doubletree Hotel, has constructed the water
and sewer facilities within dedicated easements to serve this
development. See attached location map.
2) Preliminary acceptance was approved by the Community
Development and Environmental Services staff on June 9, 2000, in
accordance with Ordinance 97-17.
3) Staff has recorded all appropriate legal documentation which
had been reviewed by the County Attorney's office for legal
sufficiency.
4) The water and sewer facilities have been operated and
maintained by the Collier County Water-Sewer District during the
one (1) year warranty period.
5) A final inspection to examine for any defects in materials
and workmanship was conducted by-the Commdnity Development and
Environmental Services Division staff and found to be
satisfactory.
6) The Utilities Performance Security (UPS), in the form of an
Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit No. SM410331C, in the amount
of $4,410.00, will be released to the Project Engineer or the
Developer's designated agent upon the Boards approval.
FISCAL IMPACT: The water facilities were constructed without cost
to the Collier County Water-Sewer District. The cost of operating
and maintaining the water and sewer facilities will be paid by
monthly user revenues.
GROWTH MANAG~ IMPACT: This project has been connected to the
County Regional Water Treatment Plant and North/South Regional
Wastewater Treatment Plant. Capacity presently exists to serve
this project. A~A ~TEM
NOV 2 7 2001
Executive Summary
Doubletree Hotel
Page Two
RECO~m~.NDATION: The Community Development and Environmental
Services Division Administrator recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners, Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the
Collier County Water-Sewer District, accept the water and sewer
facilities for Doubletree Hotel, and release the UPS to the
Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
PREPARED B~Y:
Sh[ri'e-y ~ix} ~n~ineering Tec nician
Engineerl'~ Review Services
II
Da(e
REVIEWED BY:
Thomas E. Kuck, P.E.
Engineering Review Services Manager and
Interim Planning Services Department Director
D~te'
APPROVED BY:
John Mo ~unnuck, III, Interim Administrator
COMMUNIT~ DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
attachments
Date
NOV 2 7 2001
--
~LES
',EEl' INDEX
I THE VILLAGES
(FUTURE STE'
1!
/ANDERBILT
VILLAS
BAY
NOV 2 7 2001
1
LETTER ~F CP~EDiT ANOUf'4-;' ~ ]:SSU[ DATE
~ L:$D 4, 4i0..D0
BEh~EF .l' C 'r AN v .r-.
THE BOAHD ~qF COUNTY
COLLiFP- ¢.nui,~TY COURTHOUSE criMP' E FAIRFAX,
GENTLFHEN
:¢~E HERE'-,-:.'-.,' [3PEN OU~ iRREVOCA~L'--": STAND~.Y LETTER OF CREDIT IN YDUF. FAVOA: FOP D :"--
C
i'T i.-_% A CONDiTiD'~q .... ~.'F 'r~'T~-':,,-~. . ........ FT'TFF n? CREDIT THP-:: IT SHALL E.R
tlr ANY . ...... E i.P-'~' DATE , i~,J; =~¢ .............
ADD l T l Dt'4A.L F E..=, i OD®
THiS IRRE'-YC. CA:LE L.£'TT'ER L')F CREDIT SE'T.-'E FOr'i,!H li-~ FUL.mL 'iH,E ]'ERM~3 JiF
TO HEREIN.
WE HEREBY AGREE WiTH YDU THAT DRAFT(S) DRAi4N UNDER AND !N COMPL. iANCE. ~4 -:'~-:
¢; ElF 7HIo CREDIT. gT
WiTH DOCU.:'-IENT(S) AS SPECIFIED AI~DVE AND THE FiRT NAt .....
~'.'~';PT Ar_:} OTHERWISE ~¥pR¢.~ ;- ~ .... =n HEREIN THiS LETTER OF ~.,.---u~T ~JrJ
TO THE L:Nlr',¢nM C'~o u~= ..... iL.= r~r'.
0r THIS C'REn'r-" AGENDAITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE
REQUEST TO APPROVE FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "QUAIL WEST PHASE
III, UNIT' FOUR", AND APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEmeNT AND APPROVAL OF THE AI~OUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY
OBJECTIVE:
To approve for recording the final plat of "Quail West Phase III,
Unit Four", a subdivision of lands located in Section 8 Township 48
South, Range 26 East, Collies County, Florida, following the
alternative procedure for approval of subdivision plats.
CONSIDERATIONS:
Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the
construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of "Quail West
Phase III, Unit Four". These documents are in compliance with the
County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. All
fees have been paid. Security in the amount of 10% of the total cost
of the required improvements, and 100% of the cost of any remaining
improvements, together with a Construction and Maintenance Agreement
for Subdivision Improvements, shall be provided and accepted by the
Planning Services Director and the County Attorneys office prior to
the recording of the final plat. This would be in conformance with
the County Land Development Code - Division 3.2.9.
Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Quail
West Phase III, Unit Four" be approved for recording.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project cost is $529,970.09 (estimated) to be
borne by the developer.
The cost breakdown is as follows:
a)
b)
Water & Sewer
Drainage,
Paving, Grading
- $251,482.00
- $278,488.09
The Security amount, equal to 110% of the
project cost, is $582,967.10
NOV 2 7 2001
ERecutive Summary
Quail West Phase III, Unit Four
Page 2
The County will realize revenues as follows:
Fund: Community Development Fund 113
Agency: County Manager
Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services
Revenue generated by this project:
Total: $10,409.64
Fees are based on a construction estimate of
$529,970.09 and were paid in August, 2001.
The breakdown is as follows:
a) Plat Review Fee ($425.00 + $4./ac)- $ 590.00
b)
c)
Paving, Grading (1.3% const, est.)
GROWTH~GEMENT IMPACT:
Construction Drawing Review Fee
Water &
Sewer (.50% const, est.) - $1257.41
Drainage,
Paving, Grading (.42% const, est.)- $1169.65
Construction Inspection Fee
Water &
Sewer (1.5% const, est.) - $3772.23
Drainage,
- $3620.35
The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional
approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's
Office for the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
issues
HISTORICAL/ARCHEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
There are no outstanding environmental
There are no historical or
archeological impacts
EAC RECOMMENDATION: Approval
CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF REC~ATION:
That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of
"Quail West Phase III, Unit Four" for recording with the
following stipulations:
1. Approve the amount of $582,967.10 as performance security
for the required improvements; or such lesser amount based
on work completed, and as is approved by the En( ~_c
AGENDA iTEM
Review Department. N= /'~,? ~ .
NOV 2 7 2001
Exe. cQtive Summary
Quail West Phase III, Unit Four
Page 3
Approve the standard
Agreement, and
form Construction and
Maintenance
a. That no Certificates of Occupancy be granted until the
required improvements have received preliminary acceptance.
b. That the plat not be recorded until suitable security and
an appropriate Construction and Maintenance Agreement is
approved and accepted by the Planning Services Director and
the County Attorney's office.
PREPARED BY:
~o~n R. Houldsworth, Senior Engineer
Engineering Review
REVIEWED BY:
Thomas E. Kuck, P.E.
Engineering Review Director / County Engineer
Date
APPROVED BY:
John M. /punnuck III, Interim Administrator
Communi~ Development & Environmental Services
Date
jrh
NOV 2 7 2001
:b
L
Gulf of
Mexico
I%T.S.
City of
Naples
LOCATION MAP
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
REQUEST TO APPROVE FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF ,'IBIS COVE, PHASE
TWO-A ", AND APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY
OBJECTIVE:
To approve for recording the final plat of "Ibis Cove, Phase Two-A",
a subdivision of lands located in Section 27 Township 48 South, Range
26 East, Collier County, Florida, following the alternative procedure
for approval of subdivision plats.
CONSIDERATIONS:'
Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the
construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of "Ibis Cove,
Phase Two-A". These documents are in compliance with the County Land
Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. Ail fees have
been paid. Security in the amount of 10% of the total cost of the
required improvements, and 100% of the cost of any remaining
improvements, together with a Construction and Maintenance Agreement
for Subdivision Improvements, shall be provided and accepted by the
Planning Services Director and the County Attorneys office prior to
the recording of the final plat. This would be in conformance with
the County Land Development Code - Division 3.2.9.
Engineering Review Section recommehds that the final plat of "Ibis
Cove, Phase Two-A" be approved for recording.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project cost is $851,662.19 (estimated) to be
borne by the developer.
The cost breakdown is as follows:
a)
b)
Water & Sewer
Drainage,
Paving, Grading
- $417,286.00
- $434,376.19
The Security amount, equal to 110% of the
project cost, is $936,828.41
NOV 2 7 2001
Executive Summary
Ibis Cove, Phase Two-A
Page 2
The County will realize revenues as follows:
Fund: Community Development Fund 113
Agency: County Manager
Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services
Revenue generated by this project:
Total: $16,454.02
Fees are based on a construction estimate of
$851,662.19 and were paid in August, 2001.
The breakdown is as follows:
a)
b)
Plat Review Fee ($425.00 + $4./ac)- $ 637.01
c)
Construction Drawing Review Fee
Water &
Sewer (.50% const, est.) - $2086.43
Drainage,
Paving, Grading (.42% const, est.)- $1824.38
Construction Inspection Fee
Water &
Sewer (1.5% const, est.) - $6259.30
Drainage,
Paving, Grading (1.3% const, est.)
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
- $5646.90
The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional
approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's
Office for the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no outstanding environmental
issues
HiSTORICAL/ARCHEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
archeological impacts
EAC RECOM/~ENDATION: Approval
CCPC RECOM~4ENDATION: Approval
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
There
are no historical or
That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of
"Ibis Cove, Phase Two-A" for recording with the following
stipulations:
1. Approve the amount of $936,828.41 as performance security
for the required improvements; or such lesser amount based
on work completed, and as is approved by the Engineering
Review Department.
AC.~=.N~)A ITEDQ
NOV 2 7 2001
Executive Summary
~bis Cove, Phase Two-A
Page 3
o
Approve the standard
Agreement, and
form Construction
and Maintenance
a. That no Certificates of Occupancy be granted until the
required improvements have received preliminary acceptance.
b. That the plat not be recorded until suitable security and
an appropriate Construction and Maintenance Agreement is
approved and accepted by the Planning Services Director and
the County Attorney's office.
PREPARED BY:
~ohn R. Houidsworth, Senior Engineer
Engineering Review
REVIEWED BY:
Thomas E. Kuck, P.E.
Engineering Review Director
Date
D~te '
APPROVED BY: /
John Md' Dunnudk III, Interim Administrator
Commu~ty Development & Environmental Services
Date
j rh
ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
L.A~£
2O
R~E
TAM- 0.- ~,~ AHTER
23
24
29
UNIT
raGAS
,28
GI~E£NS
27
25
32
~i~NE YAiqD$
33
VAND~RBIL?
0OLIN P'ONO
~UCXS RUN
VICINITY MAP
VAN~t~ L 1'
CO~I~ 1~' CLL~
NOT TO SCALE
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPROVAL OF THE MORTGAGE AND PROMISSORY NOTE FOR
THOUSAND ($180,000) DOLLAR
A ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY
LOAN TO THE SHELTER FOR ABUSED WOMEN OF COLLIER
COUNTY
~ To increase the supply of affordable housing in Collier County by
granting a loan to the Shelter for Abused Women of Collier County assisting in the
construction of a 60-unit affordable transitional housing shelter.
CONSIDERATION;. The Collier County Department of Housing & Urban
Improvement has set aside $180,000 from the State Housing Initiative Partnership (SHIP)
funds for a zero interest loan to The Shelter for Abused Women of Collier County. This
zero interest loan is provided for by the Land Acquisition/ Transfer With New
Construction strategy approved by the Board of County Commissioners in thc three-year
SHIP Housing Assistance Plan on April 24, 2001.
FISCAL IMPACT,: Approval of this Mortgage and Note will grant a $180,000 loan to
The Shelter for Abused Women of Collier County from the Affordable Housing Trust
Fund. The loan shall be repaid over ten years in $18,000 increments with the first
payment due on July 1, 2004. Total payments shall bc $180,000 due by July 1, 2013.
Recording costs will be paid to the Clerk of Courts from the Affordable Housing Trust
Fund.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This loan to The Shelter for Abused
Women of Collier County will allow Collier County to enhance the development
of affordable housing in accordance with the Housing Element of the Growth
Management Plan of Collier County.
RECOMMENDATION..: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the
Mortgage and Promissory Note.
Cormac J. Giblin, Manager
Department of Hou;in~ Urban Improvement '
Depann~nt of Housing~and Urban Improvement A~A ITEM
APPROVED BY: Z,4~ Date: []~'/t~[ ~OV 27 2001
ohn M. Dunnuck III, Interim Administrator
ommunity Development and Environmental Services Division
Prepared by:
Collier County
Housing and Urban Improvement Dept.
Mr. Cormac Giblin, HUI Manager
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
941-403-2330
MORTGAGE
Security Instrument
THIS SPACE FOR RECORDINt i
THiS SECURITY INSTRUMENT is given on November 1,2001. The Borrower is:
The Shel~er for Abusec[ Women of Collier CoLLnty
('Borrower-). This Security instrument is given to Collier Coum. ty , ('Lender'), which is organized
and existing under the laws of the United States of Amedca, and whose address is 2800 Nort:l-~ Horseshoe
Drive, N&~les, Florida 3401& · Borrower owes Lender the sum ol One Hun~re~ Eighty
Thouea.ncl. Dollars (U.S. $ 180,000.00 ). This debt is evidenced by Borrowers Note dated the same date as
this Security Instrument which provides for monthly payments, with the full debt, if not paid sadist, due and payable on
July 1, 2013. This Security Instrument secures to Lender: (a) the repayment of the debt evidenced by the Note,
with interest, and all renewals, extensions and modifications; (b) the payment of all other sums, with interest advanced under
paragraph 7 to protect the secunty of the Security Instrument; and (c) the performance ot Borrower's covenants and
agreements under this Security Instrument and the Note. For this purpose, Borrower does hereby second mortgage, grant
and convey to Lender the following described property located in Collier County, Flodda.
As more particularty described in Attachment A. (Legal Description) and which has the address of:
('Prope~yAddress"): 2635 Weeks Ave Naples, FL 34112
TOGETHER WITH all the improvements now or hereafter erected on the property, and all easements, rights,
appurtenances, rents, royalties, mineral, oil and gas dghts and profits, water rights and stock and all fixtures now or
hereafter a part of the property. All replacements and additions shall also be covered by the Secudty Instrument, All of the
foregoing is referred to in this Security Instrument as the 'Property'.
BORROWER COVENANTS that Borrower is lawfully seized of the estate hereby conveyed and has the dght to
mortgage, grant and convey the Property and that the Property is unencumbered, except for encumbrances of record.
Borrower warrants and will defend generally the title to the Property against all claims and demands, subject to any
encumbrances of record.
THIS SECURITY INSTRUMENT combines unifo~n covenants for national use and non-uniform covenants with
limited variation by jurisdiction to constitute a uniform security instrument covering real property. UNIFORM COVENANTS. Borrower and Lender covenant and agree as follows:
1. Payment of Principal and Interest; Prepayment and Late Charges. Borrower shall promptly pay when due
the principal of and interest on the debt evidenced by the Note.
2. Taxes. The Mortgagor will pay all taxes, assessments, sewer rents or water rates prior to the accrual of any
penalties or interest thereon.
The Mortgagor shall pay or cause to be paid, as the same respectively become due. (A)(1) all taxes and
governmental charges of any kind whatsoever which may at any time be lawfully assessed or levied against or with respect
to the Property, (2) all utility and other charges, including 'service charges', incurred or imposed for the operation,
maintenance, use, occupancy, upkeep and improvement of the Property, and (3) all assessments or other governmental
charges that may lawfully be paid in installments over a period of years, the Mortgagor shall be obligated under the
Mortgage to pay or cause to be paid only such installments as are required to be paid during the term of the Mortgage, and
shalt, promp[ly after the payment of any of the foregoing, forward to Moflgagee evidence of such payment.
3. Application of Payments. Unless applicable law provides otherwise, all payments received by Lender shall be
applied; first, to interest due;.and, to principal due; and last, to any late charges due under the Note.
4. Charges; Liens. Borrower shall pay all taxes, assessments, charges, fines and impositions attributable to the
Property which may attain pfiodty over this Secu~ty Instrument, and leasehold payments or ground rants, if any. Borrower
shall promptly furnish to Lender all notices ot amounts to be paid under this paragraph, and all receipts evidencing the
payments.
F=o~lowur si~ail pru~[~piiy di~ci~arge any iiu~ whic~l ha~ pr;urity over this Se~cu;i[y ;us~rumeni uniess ~orrower: ia)
agrees in writing to the payment of the obligation secured by the lien in a manner acceptable to Lender;, (b) contests in good
faith the lien by, or defends against enforcement of the lien in, legal proceedings which in the Lenders opinion operate to
prevent the enforcement of the lien; or (c) secures from the holder of the lien an agreement satisfactory to Lender
subordinating the lien to this Security Instrument. If Lender determines that any part ot the Property is subject to a lien
which may attain priority over the Security Instrument, Lender may give Borrower a notice identifying the lien. Borrower
shall satisfy the lien or take one or more of the actions set forth above within 10 days of the giving of notice.
5. Protection of Lender's Rights in the Property. If Borrower fails to perform the covenants and agreements
contained in this Security instrument or there is a legal proceeding that may significantly affect Lender's fights i~ :ne AGE~A ITEA~
Property (such as a proceeding in bankruptcy, probate, for condemnation or forfeiture or to enfome laws or regul tions),
then Lender may do and pay for whatever is necessary to protect the value of the Property and Lende¢s dghts ir
Property. Lender's actions may include paying any sums secured by a lien which has priodty over this Security I
appearing in court, paying reasonable attorneys' fees and entering on the Property to make repairs. Although L~
take action under this paragraph 7, Lender does not have to do so. Any amounts disbursed by Lender under thi
7 shall become additional debt of Borrower secured by this Security !n.?t!ument. L~nle~,s B?.rr~wer. and ~Le~da~lrba;
terms of payment, these amounts shall bear interest from the date ol o~sDursement at tne Note rate and s a
with interest, upon notice from Lender to Borrower requesting payment.
the
~strument, --
~der may
para 2 7 2001
tee
ayable,
-
6. Inspection. Lender or its agent may make reasonable entries upon and inspections of the Property. Lender
shall give Borrower notice at the time of or pdor to an inspection specifying reasonable cause for the inspection.
7. Condemnation. The proceeds of any award or claim for damages, direct or consequential, in connection with
any condemnation or other taking of any part of the Property, or for conveyance in lieu of condemnation, are hereby
assigned and shall be paid to Lender. In the event of a total taking of the Property, the proceeds shall be applied to the
sums secured by this Secudty Instrument, whether or not then due, with any excess paid to Borrower. In the event of a
partial taking of the Property, in which the fair market value of the Property immediately before the taking is equal to or
greater than the amount of the sums secured by this Secudty Instrument immediately before the taking, unless Borrower
and Lender otherwise agree in wdting, the sums secured by this Secudfy Instrument shall be reduced by the amount of the
proceeds multiplied by the following fraction: (a) the total amount of the sums secured immediately before the taking, divided
by (b) the fair market value of the Property immediately before the taking. ,a~y balance shall be paid to Borrower. In the
event of a partial taking of the Property in which the fair market value of the Property immediately before the taking is less
than the amount o! the sums secured immediately for the taking, unless Borrower and Lender otherwise agree in wntmg or
unless applicable law otherwise provides, the proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Security Instrument
whether or not the sums are then due. Unless Lender and Borrower otherwise agree in writing, any application of proceeds
to principal shall no{ extend or postpone the due date of the monthly payments referred to in paragraphs 1 or change the
amount of such payments.
8. Borrower Not Released, Forbearance By Lender Not a Waiver. Extension o~ the time for payment or
modification of amortization of the sums secured by this Secudty Instrument granted by Lender to any successor in interest
of Borrower shall not operate to release the liability of the odginal Borrower or Borrower's successors in interest. Lender
shall not be required to commence proceedings against any successor in interest or refuse to extend time for payment or
otherwise modify amortization of the sums secured by this Secudty Instrument by reason of any demand made by the
original Borrower or Borrower's successors ~n interest. Any forbearance by Lender in exercising any right or remedy shah
not be a waiver of or preclude the exercise of any right or remedy.
9. Successors and Assigns Bound; Joint and Several Liability; Co-Signers. The covenants and agreements
of this Secudty Instrument shall bind and benefit the successors and assigns of Lender and Borrower, subject to the
Provisions of paragraph 17. Borrower's covenants and agreements shall be joint and several. Any Borrower who co-signs
this Security Instrument but does not execute the Note; (a) is co-signing this Secunty Instrument only to mortgage, grant and
convey that Borrower's interest in the Property under the terms of this Security Instrument; (b) is not personally obligated to
pay the sums secured by this Security Instrument; and (c) agrees that Lender and any other Borrower may agree to extend,
modify, forbear or make any accommodations with regard to the terms of this Secudty Instrument or the Note without that
Borrower's consent.
10. Loan Charges. If the loan secured by this Security Instrument is subject to a law which sets maximum loan
charges, and that law is finally interpreted so that the interest or other loan charges collected or to be collected in connection
with the loan exceed the permitted limits, then: (a) any such loan charge shall be reduced by the amount necessary to
reduce the charge to the permitted limit; and (b) any sums already collected from Borrower which exceeded permitted limits
will be refunded to Borrower. Lender may choose to make this refund by reducing the principal owed under the Note or by
making a direct payment to Borrower. If a refund reduces principal, the reduction will be treated as a partial prepayment
without any prepayment charge under the Note.
11. Notices. Any notice to Borrower provided for in this Secudty Instrument shall be given by delivering it or by
mailing it by first class mail unless applicable law required use of another method. The notice shall be directed to the
Properb/Address or any other address Borrower designates by notice to Lender. Any notice to Lender shall be given to
Borrower or Lender when given as provided in this paragraph.
12. Governing Law; Severability. This Security instrument shall be governed by federal law and the law of the
jurisdiction in which the Property is located. In the event that any provision or clause of this Secudty Instrument or the Note
conflicts with applicable law, such conflict shall not affect other provisions of this Security Instrument or the Note which cad
be given effect without the conflicting provision. To this end the provisions of this Security Instrument and the Note are
declared to be severable.
13. Borrower's Copy. Borrower shall be given one conformed copy ot the Note and of this Security Instrument.
14. Transfer of the Property or a Beneficial Interest in Borrower. If all orany part of the Property or any
interest in it is sold or transferred (or if a beneficial interest in Borrower is sold or transferred and Borrower is not a natural
person) without Lender's pnor written consent, Lender may, at its option, require immediate payment in full of all sums
secured by this Security Instrument. However, this option shall not be exemised by Lender if exercise is prohibited by
federal law as of the date of this Security Instrument.
If Lender exercised this option, Lender shall give Borrower notice of acceleration. The notice shall provide a period of not
less than 30 days from the date the notice is delivered or mailed within which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this
Security Instrument. If Borrower fails to pay these sums pdor to the expiration of this period, Lender may invoke any
remedies perrnitted by this Security Instrument without further notice or demand on Borrower.
15. Borrower's Right to Reinstate. If Borrower meets certain conditions, Borrower shall have the dght to have
enforcement of this Security Instrument discontinued at any time prior to the earlier of: (a) 5 days (or such other period as
applicable law may specify for reinstatement) before sale of the Property pursuant to any power of sale contained in this
Security Instrument; or (b) entry of a judgment enforcing this Secudty Instrument. Those conditions are that Borrower: (a)
pays Lender all sums which then would be due under this Secudty Instrument and the Note as if no acceleration had
occurred; (b) cures and default of any other covenants or agreemenls; (c) pays all expenses incurred in enforcing this
Security Instrument, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees; and (d) takes such action as Lender may
reasonably require to assure that the lien of this Security Instrument, Lender's rights in the Property and Borrower's
obligation to pay the sums secured by this Secudty Instrument shall continue unchanged. Upon reinstatement by Borrower,
this Secudty instrument and the obligations secured hereby shall remain fully effective as il no acceleration had occurred.
However, this right to reinstate shall not apply in the case of acceleration under paragraph 17.
16. Sale of Note; Change of Loan Servicer. The Note or a partial interest in the Note (together with this Security
Instrument) may be sold one or more times withoul prior notice to Borrower. A sale may result in a change in the entity
(known as the 'Loan Servicer') that collects monthly payments due under the Note and this Secunty Instrument. There also
may be onu or more changes of the Loan Servicer unrelated to a sale ot trte Nole. ir tnere is a change of tile Loan Servicer,
Borrower will be given written notice of the change in accordance with paragraph 14 and applicable law. The notice wilt
state the name and address of the new Loan Servicer and the address to which payments should be made. The notice will
also contain any other information required by applicable law.
17. Hazardous Substances. Borrower shall not cause or permit the presence, use, disposal, storage, or release
of any Hazardous Substances on or in the Property. Borrower shall not do, nor allow anyone else to do, anything affecting
the Properly that is in violation of any Environmental Law. The preceding two sentences shall not apply to the presence,
use, or storage on the Property o! small quantities of Hazardous Substances that are generally recognized to
to normal residential uses and to maintenance of the Property.
Borrower shall promptly give Lender written notice for any investigation, claim, demand, lawsuit or other actior
governmental or regulatory agency or private party involving the Property and any Hazardous Substance or Er
Law of which Borrower has actual knowledge, if Borrower learns, or is notified by any governmental or regulal
that any removal or other remediation of any Hazardous Substance affecting the Property is necessary, Borro~
promptly take all necessary remedial actions in accordance with Environmental Law.
As used in this paragraph 20, 'Hazardous Substances' are those substances defined as toxic or hazardous SL
Environmental Law and the following substances: gasoline, kerosene, other flammable or toxic petroleum pre
pesticides and herbicides, volatile solvents, matenals containing asbestos or formaldehyde, and
appropriate
y any AGENDA ~
.onm ,
! aut kidr~,',
r shall
,stan,N8 / 2 7 2001
ucts, toxic
radioactive materials. As used in this paragraph 20, 'Environmental Law' means federal laws and laws of the jurisdiction
where the Properly is located that relate to health, safety or environmental protection.
18. Acceleration; Remedies. Lender shall give notice to Borrower pdor to acceleration following Borrower's
breach of any covenant or agreement in this Security Instrument (but not prior to acceleration under paragraph 17 unless
applicable law provides otherwise). The notice shall specify:. (a) the default; (b) the action required to cure the default; (c) a
date, not less than 30 days from the date the notice is given to Borrower, by which the default must be cured; and (d) that
failure to cure the default on or belore the date specified in the notice may result in acceleration of the sums secured by th,s
Secudty Instrument, foreclosure by judicial proceeding and sale of the Property. The notice shall further inform Borrower ol
the right to reinstate after acceleration and the dght to assert in the foreclosure proceeding the non-existence of a default or
any other defense of Borrower to acceleration and foreclosure. It the delault is not cured on or before the date specified in
the notice, Lender, at its option, may require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument
without further demand and may foreclose this Security Instrument by judicial proceeding. Lender shall be entitled to collect
all expenses incurred in pursuing the remedies provided in this paragraph 21, including, but not limited to, reasonable
attorney's fees and costs of the title evidence.
19. Release. Upon payment of all sums secured by this Secudty Instrument, Lender shall release this Security
Instrument, without charge, to Borrower. Borrower shall pay any recordation costs.
20. Attorneys' Fees. As used in this Secudty Instrument and the Note, 'attomeys' fees' shall include any
attorneys' fees awarded by an appellate court.
SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and covenants contained in this Security Instrument and in
any rider(s) executed by Borrower and recorded with it.
Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of:
Witness#l: '"~'~"""'"~ ~
Signature; ~[~ Ir~'~ i £ ~ JgJO'{'; C
Signature:_ ~,O~. ~ ~'N,_O W 1~"~ %
STATE OF Florida.
The Shelter for Abused Women of Collier County
Signature: -(~--'~'f', .~~/'~/
Borrower: K~t h~¢~'0
Address:
COUNTY OF Collier
The foregoing Mortgage was acknowledged before me this /1~ q -OJ . by Kathy4-{.e~an of The
(date) (name) (corporation
Shelter for Abused Women of Collier County. She is Eersonally known..
as identification.
syature of I~erson t'aking ~knoW~edgment
name)
.to m____~e or has produced
- AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
Attachment A, Shelter for Abused Women of Collier County - Legal Description:
Parcel B
A PARCEL OF LAND LYLNG AND BEENG PART OF LOT 39, NAPLES GROVES AND
TRUCK COMPANY'S LITTLE FARMS NO. 2, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK A, PAGE 27, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID LOT 39
WITH THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 41 (TAMIAMI
TRAIL); THENCE RUN SOUTH 51 DEGREES 52'10" EAST, ALONG THE SOUTHERLY
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 41, A DISTANCE OF 354.01 FEET TO THE
EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 39,; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREES 03'10" WEST, ALONG THE
EST LINE OF LOT 39, A DISTANCE OF 211.02 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF
THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL; THENCE CONTINUE SOUTH 0 DEGREES 03' 10"
WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 39, A DISTANCE OF 1235.97 FEET TO THE
NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WEEKS AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES
58'45" WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WEEKS AVENUE, A
DISTANCE OF 277.13 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 39; THENCE NORTH 0
DEGREES 0'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 278.27 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
AND LESS THE NORTH 280 FEET THEREOF.
~.g. lqOA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
PROMISSORY NOTE
November 1, 2001
Borrower: The Shelter for Abused Women of Collier County
Na~es Florida
2635 weeks Ave (State}
- _-- (City)
(Property Address)
1. BOrROWER(S) PROMISE TO PAY: I/We promise to pay O~e ~,~4~ed Eighty Thousand Dollars
($150,000.00) (this ammunt will be called .principal') to the order of Collier County o~
to any other holder of this Note (the "Lender'), whose address is 2800 Horseshoe
Drive North, Naples, Florida 34104 . I/We understand that the Lender may transfer
the Promissory Note. The Lender or anyo~,e who takes this Note by transfer and who is
entitled to receive payments under this Note will be called the "Note Holder".
2. INTEREST: Interest on this Note shall be zero percent (0%) per annum; except that if I/We
fail to pay this Note as required, the interest rate shall be twelve percent (12%) per
annum from the date when payment of this Note is due until I/We pay it in full.
3. pAY~ENTS: Principal payments of $18,000.00 shall be made yearly beginning on July 1, 2004
of each year to the Collier County Housing and Urban Improvement Department until payment
in full is received by July 1, 2013. My/Our total payment shall be U.S. $180,000.00 .
PAY' I/We have the right to make payments of principal at any time
4. BORROWER'S KIGHT TO pRE . - · '---~ ^--~,, ~s know as a -prepayment". When I/We
before they are due. A p~yment o~ prlnclp~ u,,~ .~ . . · .
make a prepayment, I/we wlI1 tell the Note Holder in writing that I/we am doing so
I/We may make a full prepayment or partial prepayment charge. The Note Holder will use all
of my prepayments to reduce the amount of the principal that I owe under this Note. If
I/We make a partial prepayment, there will be no changes in the due date er in the amount
of my monthly payment unless the Note Holder agrees in writing to those changes. If I/We
make a partial prepayment, there will be no prepayment penalty acLhering to or associated
with such prepayment
~ =:ch a~lies to this loan and which sets maximum loan charges, is
5. LOAN CHARGES: If a ~aw, wn~ _ ~ ..... ~ ~a_n char~es collected or to be collected
~inally interpreted so that the lnteresu u~ ~ ........
in connection with this loan exceed the permitted limits; then {i) any such loan charges
shall be reduced by the amount necessary to reduce the charges to the permitted limit; and
(ii) any sums already collected from me which exceeded permitted limits will be refunded to
me/us. The Note Holder may choose to make this refund by reducing the principal that I/We
owe under this Note or by m~king a direct payment to me/us. If a refund reduces principal,
the reduction will be treated as a partial prepayment.
6. SUBOi~DIMATION: Lender and Borrower acknowledge and agree that this Security Instrument is
subject and subordinate in all respects to the l~ens, terms, covenants and conditions of
any First Deed of Trust or mortgage and to all advances heretofore made or which may
hereafter be made pursuant to the First Deed of Trust or mortgage including all sums
advanced for the purpose of (a) protecting or further securing the lien of the First Deed
of Trust or mortgage, curing defaults by the Borrower under the First Deed of Trust or
mortgage or for any other purpose expressly permitted by the First Deed of Trust or
mortgage or (b) constructing, renovating, repairing, furnishing, fixturing or equipping the
Property. The terms and provisions of the First Deed of Trust or mortgage are parar~ount
and controlling, and they supersede any other terms and provisions hereof in conflict
therewith. In the event of a foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure of the First Deed
of Trust, any provisions herein or any provisions in any other collateral agreement
restricting the use of the Property to low or moderate income households or otherwise
restricting the Borrower's ability to sell the Property shall have no further force or
effect on subsequent owners or purchasers of the Property. Any person, including his
successors or assigns (other than the Borrower or a related entity of the Borrowerl,
receiving title to the Property through a foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure of the
First Deed of TruSt shall receive title to the Property free and clear from such
restrictions.
Further, if the Senior Lien Holder acquires title to the Property pursuant to a deed in
lieu of foreclosure, the lien of this Security Instrument shall automatically terminate
upon the Senior Lien Holder's acquisition of title, provided that (i) the Lender has been
given written notice of a default under the First Deed of Trust and {ii) the Lender shall
not have cured the default under the First Deed of Trusu within the 30-day period provided
in such notice sent to the Lender.
BORROWeR(S) FAILURE TO PAY AS REQUESTED:
(A) Default
If I/we do not pay the full amount as required in Section 3 above, I/we will be in default.
If I am in default, the Note Holder may bring about any actions not prohibited by
applicable law and require me/Us to pay the Note Holder's cost and expenses as described in
(B) below.
(B) payment of Note Holder's Cost and ExlDenses
If the Note Holder takes such actions as described above, the Note Holder will
right to be paid back for all of its costs and expenses, including, but not lin
reasonable attorneys' fees.
GIVING OF NOTICES: Unless applicable law required a different method, any notice
be given to me/us under the Note will be given by delivering it or by mailing it
class mail to me at the Property Address on Page 1 or at a different address if
1
hat 2 7 2001
by first
/w~ give ~
the Note Holder a notice of my/our different address.
· Any notice that must be given to the Note Holder under this Note will be given by mailing
it by first class mail to the Note Holder at the address stated in Section 3(A) or at a
different address if I/we have been given a notice of that different address.
9. OBLIC~ATIONS OF PERSONS UNDER THIS NOTE: If more than one person signs this Note, each
person is fully and personally obligated to keep all of the promises made in this Note,
including the promise to pay the full amount owed. Any person who is a guarantor, surety
or endorser of this Note is also obligated to do these things. Any person who takes over
these obligations, including the obligations of a guarantor, surety or endorser of this
Note, is also obligated to keep all of the promises made in this Note. The Note Holder may
enforce its rights under this Note against each person individually or against all of us
together. This means that any one of us may be required to pay all of the amounts owed
under this Note.
10. MAXVERS: I and any other person who has obligations under this Note waive the rights of
presentment and notice of dishonor. "Presentment" means the right to require the Note
Holder to demand payment of amounts due. "Notice of Dishonor" means the right to require
the Note Holder to give notice to other persons that an~unts due have not been paid.
11. UNIFORM SECURED NOTE: This Note is a uniform instrument with limited variations in some
jurisdictions. In addition to the protection given to the Note Holder under this Note, a
Mortgage, Deed of Trust or Security Deed (the 'Security Instrument"), dated the same date
as this Note, protects the Note Holder from possible losses which might result if I/we do
not keep the promises which I/we make in this Note. That Security Instrument describes how
and under what conditions I/we may be required to make immediate payment in full of all
amounts I/we owe under this Note. Some of those conditions are described as follows:
Transfer of the Property or a Beneficial Interest in Borrower. If all or any part of the
property or any interest in it is sold or transferred {or if a beneficial interest in
Borrower is sold or transferred And Borrower is not a natural person) without Lender's
prior written consent, Lender may, at its option, require immediate payment in full or all
sums secured by this Security Instrument. However, this option shall not be exercised by
Lender if exercise is prohibited by federal law as of the date of this Security Instrument.
If Lender exercises this option, Lender shall give Borrower notice of acceleration. The
notice shall provide a period of not less than thirty (30) days from the date ~he notice is
delivered or mailed, within which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this Security
Instru~nent. If Borrower(s) fail to pay these sums prior to the expiration of this period,
Lender may invoke any remedies permitted by this Security Instrument without further notice
or demand on Borrower.
Notwithstanding the above, the Lender's rights to collect and apply the insurance proceeds
hereunder shall be subject and subordinate to the rights of the Senior Lien Holder to
collect and apply such proceeds in accordance with the First Deed of Trust.
12. This note is governed and construed in accordance with the Laws of the State of Florida.
WIT~ESS THE HAND(S) AND SEAL(S) OF THE UNDERSIGNED.
~ , .(Seal)
Borrow~ ' Kathy F,~a~, ~EO
The Shelter for Abused Women of Collier County
========================================================================================
RETURN TO: Collier County Housing & Urban Improvement Department
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Phone: (941) 403-2330 Fax: (941) 403-23~'-
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FISCAL YEAR 2002 TOURISM AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE TOURISM ALLIANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY REGARDING
ADVERTISING, PROMOTION AND SPECIAL EVENTS
OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners approve the 2002 Tourism
Agreement between Collier County and the Tourism Alliance of Collier County.
CONSIDERATION: This Tourism Agreement will bring the procurement of the
Advertising/Promotion and Special Events under the Counties Policies and Procedures and thc
Purchasing Procedures. The TDC Coordinator will administer these functions for the County
from the Tourism Alliance and will work closely with the Finance
with some recommendations '
Department to monitor the expenditures for Category :'B" Advertising/Promotion and Special
Events.
The Clerk o£ Courts, Finance Director and the Count3"s Legal Department have all recommended
this change.
The Tourism Alliance of Collier County may participate in the review and selection of vendors
for the Advertising and Promotion of Collier County as deemed appropriate by the County. The
Alliance ma3' provide recommendations to the TDC Coordinator regarding funding matters
presented to the Tourist Development Council for funding matters. This will be a cooperative
effort between Collier County and the private sector.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact with this contract, per se. However, by bringing
the fiscal responsibility in house, it procures uniform conformance to Count3' procedures in all
aspects.
RECOMMENDATIONS;. That the Board of Count' Commissioners approve staffs
recommendations and authorize the Chairman to sign the 2002 Tourism Agreement between
Collier County and the Tourism Alliance o£ Collier Count'.
pREPARED -/ja~e E.-Eichhom, TDC Coordma o
(.. busing and Urban Improvement
DATe:_ 1/ ' 20' (V /
REVIEWED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Greg Mihalic, HUI Director
Housing and Urban Improvement
DATE:
/~bhn M. Dunnuck, Interim Administrator .
Qommunity Development & Environmental Servaces AGF. NDA, iTeM
FISCAL YEAR 2002 TOURISM AGREEMENT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE TOURISM
ALLIANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY REGARDING
ADVERTISING, PROMOTION AND.SPECIAL EVENTS
THIS AGREEMENT, is made and entered into this .. day of December, 2001, by and
between Tourism Alliance of Collier County, a Florida corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"Alliance" and Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred
to as "COUNTY."
WHEREAS, the COUNTY has adopted a Tourist Development Plan (hereinafter referred
to as "Plan") funded by proceeds from the Tourist Development Tax; and
WHEREAS, the Plan provides that certain of the revenues generated by the Tourist
Development Tax are to be allocated for the promotion and advertising of Collier County
nationally and internationally and for the promotion and advertising of activities or events
intended to bring tourists to Collier County and special events; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE MUTUAL COVENANTS AND PREM-
ISES PROVIDED HEREIN, AND OTHER VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, 1T IS MUTU-
ALLY AGREED AS FOII~OWS:
1. SCOPE OF WORK: The Alliance will be responsible for the following:
a. Continue joint monthly marketing meetings with representatives of all of the communi-
ties in Collier County and the retained Advertising Agency.
b. The Alliance may review the content and design of advertising paid with Tourist
Development Tax Revenue.
c. The Alliance will continue monthly Tourism Alliance Board Meetings to discus the best
possible way to promote Collier County as a destination.
d. The Alliance will assist the~Tourist Development Council Coordinator (TDC) with the
preparation of the Request for Proposals (RFP) for Advertising and Marketing Services.
e. The Alliance may participate in the review and selection of vendors for the Advertising
and Promotion of Collier County as deemed appropriate by the County.
f. The Alliance may provide recommendations to the TDC Coordinator regarding funding
matters presented to the Tourist Development Council for funding.
g. The Alliance may certify to County staff that the goods and services have been properly
provided in a timely fashion, but in any event, it shall so inform the County no later than 10 days
i' '
after receipt of any invoice by the County. N°'A~E~D~!~;~'
NOV
2. CHOICE OF VENDORS AND FAIR DEALING: The Alliance may negotiate
with and recommend to the County's Purchasing Department vendors or subcontractors to
provide services. In the event of a difference of opinion in the vendor recommended by the
Alliance and County staff, the Alliance's recommendation will be presented as such to the
Tourist Development Council as information. The COUNTY shall be responsible for paying
vendors and shall select all subcontractors or vendors. The "Alliance" agrees to disclose any
relationship between it and any subcontractors or vendors, including, but not limited to, similar
or related employees, agents, officers, directors and/or shareholders
3. INDEMNIFICATION: The Alliance shall hold harmless and defend COUNTY,
and its agents and employees, from any and all suits and actions including attorney's fees and all
costs of litigation and judgments of any name and description arising out of or incidental to the
performance of this Agreement by the Alliance or work performed hereunder by the Alliance.
This provision shall also pertain to any claims brought against the COUNTY by any employee of
the Alliance, any subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed or authorized to
perform work by any of them. The Alliance's obligation under this provision shall not be limited
in any way by the agreed upon Agreement price as shown in this Agreement or the Alliance's
limit of, or lack of, sufficient insurance protection.
4. NOTICES: All notices from the COUN~TY to the Alliance shall be in writing and
deemed duly served if mailed by registered or certified mail to the GRANTEE at the fOllowing
address:
Tourism Alliance of Collier County
George Percel
5395 Park Central Court
Naples, Florida 34109
All notices from the Alliance to the COUNTY shall be in writing and deemed duly served if
mailed by registered or certified mail to the COUNTY to:
Jane E. Eichhorn
TDC Coordinator
3050 N. Horseshoe Drive, Suite 145
Naples, Florida 34104
The Alliance and the COUNTY may change the above mailing address at any time upon
giving the other party written notification pursuant to this Section.
5. NO PARTNERSHIP: Nothing herein contained shall be construed as creating a
partnership between the COUNTY and the Alliance. The Alliance shall follow all Collier
County Purchasing Procedures
6. TERMINATION: The COUNTY or the Alliance may cancel this Agreement with
or without cause by giving 30 days advance written notice of such termination, specifying the
effective date of the termination
7. AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS: Alliance shall maintain records, books,
documents, papers and financial information pertaining to work performed under this Agreement.
Alliance agrees that the COUNTY, or any of its duly authorized representatives, shall, until the
expiration of three (3) years after final payment under this Agreement, have access to, and the
fight to examine and photocopy any pertinent books, documents, papers, and records of
GRANTEE involving transactions related to this Agreement.
8. PROHIBITION OF ASSIGNMENT: Alliance shall not assign, convey, or transfer
in whole or in part its interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the
COUNTY.
9. TERM: This A,~reement becomes effective on December 1, 2001 and shall
terminate no later than September 30, 2002.
10. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS This Agreement is subject to budget and collection
of tourist development tax funds.
11. EVALUATION OF TOURISM IMPACT: If advertising and promotion:
Alliance shall monitor and evaluate the tourism impact of the Alliance's activities, explaining
how the tourism impact was evaluated and shall provide a written report to the County Manager
or his designee annually.
12. REQUIRED NOTATION: All promotional material including any literature,
and media advertising including websites that state "The Greater Naples, Marco Island and The
Everglades" must prominently list Collier County as one of the sponsors.
13. AMENDMENTS: This Agreement may only be amended by mutual
agreement of the parties and after ~-ecommendation by the Tourist Development Council.
19. COOPERATION: Alliance shall fully cooperate with the COUNTY in all matters
pertaining to this agreement and provide ali information and docume[ts asArll~g0!¢~Pb' tiie
'County from time to time. Failure to cooperate, as interpreted by the COUNTY shall constitute
grounds for the COUNTY to impose sanctions that do not result in termination of this agreement.
20. The COUNTY shall be the owner of and in possession of the originals of all
intellectual property created or furnished pursuant to this agreement, including, but not limited to
drawings, paintings, photography, film, video, and printed documents, unless specifically
exempted by the COUNTY.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Alliance and COUNTY have each respectively, by an
authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the date and year first above
written.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, PhD, Chairman
WITNESSES:
TOURISM ALI .lANCE OF COLLAR
COUNTY, INC.
(1) By:
Printed/Typed Name
(2)
Printed/Typed Name
Printed/Typed Title
Printed/Typed Name
Approved as to form and
Legal sufficiency
arc'Robinson
A3sistSnt County Attorney
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
REQUEST TO REVIEW THE BOARD'S PREVIOUS DECISION TO PRESENT
A SPECIAL TREATMENT PERMIT AND FINAL PLAT FOR LITTLE PALM
ISLAND SIMULTANEOUSLY.
OBJECTIVE: To protect the community's interest as development occurs.
CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner, during a public petition at the November 13,
2001 Board of County Commissioners meeting, requested that this item be placed on the
December 11,2001 agenda. The Board agreed.
The Special Treatment (ST) permit petition was continued, at the petitioner's request, at
the Board of County Commissioners meeting of February 13 , 2001. At that time, the
Board directed the petitioner to return only when the ST permit and the Final Plat were
ready and could be heard at the same public hearing because of issues dealing' with the
protection of Gopher Tortoises onsite.
The petitioner would like the Board to reconsider this direction and follow standard
County procedure by allowing the ST petition and the Final Plat to be heard at separate
Board meetings. At that time, the petitioner will present changes to address the Board's
previous concerns.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the County associated with this
petition.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this request will have no effect
on the Growth Management Plan.
RECOMMENDATION: Because the presentation of an ST and Final Plat at separate
meetings is County procedure, staff recommends approval of the petitioner's request.
pREPARED BY:
- DATE
ADMINISTRATOR
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/Little Palm Island petition
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
Pg.._.~
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
REQUEST BOARD APPROVAL OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT TRANSFERRING FUNDS
FROM RESERVES FOR THE SAN MARCO ROAD CULVERT PROJECT.
OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board approval of a budget amendment transferring funds from
Reserves for Contingency of Fund 313 for the San Marco Road Culvert Project (#60059).
CONSIDERATIONS: Staff previously requested Board approval of a budget amendment in
the amount of $15,500 for a change order to Work Order WD-018, San Marco Road Storm
Sewer Culvert. The change order was for the installation of 12 lineal feet of new vinyl seawall.
The transfer of funds came too late in last fiscal year to modify the purchase order and encumber
the funds. As such, the funds rolled into this fiscal year as carry forward. As the work is
progressing, it is necessary to transfer funds to continue to move forward with the project as
outlined in the change order.
,~FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer funds in the amount of $15,500
from the Transportation Gas Tax Reserve Fund and appropriate in the project. Source of Funds
are Gas Taxes.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None
RECOMMENDATION: That the. Board approve a budget amendment transferring funds in the
amount of $15,500 from Reserves for Continge_ncy for change order to Work Order #WD-018,
San Marco Road Stormsewer Culvert Project #60059.
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
rjita 7~in~, Sr~ ~
Edwd~d 3. Kant,~ ~po~tion ~rations Director
Noman E. Feder, ~CP, Transpomtion Adminis~ator
DATE: 11/7/01
DATE:
DATE: 1//! ¢-"/~'
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #1 TO WORK ORDER #BRC-FT-01-03 FOR INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS AT SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD/GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY,
PROJECT #60016.
OBJECTIVE: To gain Board approval of a change order to the work order for intersection
improvements at Santa Barbara Boulevard/Golden Gate Parkway.
CONSIDERATIONS: While work was progressing on the Santa Barbara Boulevard/Golden
Gate Parkway intersection improvement project, it was determined that the northbound right
turn-lane needed to be extended 85 feet to the south in order to maximize capacity.
The Contractor, Better Roads, Inc., provided the attached quote in the amount of $8,602.18 for
the additional work. This increase is 14% above the original contract amount, thereby requiring
Board approval.
?FISC AL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $8,602.18 are available in the Road Construction
~as Tax Fund (313i, Project #60016.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve Change Order #1 to Work Order #BRC-FT-
01-03.
DATE: 11/9/01
DATE:
DATE:
NOV 2 ? 2001
CHANGE ORDER
CHANGE ORDERNO. 1
TO: Better Road, Inc.
P.O. Box 9979
Naples, Flodda
WORK ORDER #: BRC-FT-01-03
P.O. #: 106249
BCC Date: 6/26/01
Agenda Item: 16(B)8
DATE: October 2, 2001
PROJECT NO.: 60016
PROJECT NAME: INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT SANTA BARBARA BLVD./GOLDEN GATE
PARKWAY
Under our AGREEMENT# 98-2905 dated March 9. 1999
You hereby are authorized and directed to make the following change(s) in accordance with terms
and conditions of the Agreement: EXTEND THE NORTHBOUND RIGHT TURN LANE 85 FEET TO
THE SOUTH (See attached Exhibit "A")
FOR THE Additive Sum of: Ten thousand dollars exactly ($10,000.00).
Odginal Agreement Amount
$ 60,458.63
Sum of Previous Changes
$ 0.00
This Change Order (Add) (Deduct) $
8,602.18
Present Agreement Amount
$ 69,060.81
The time for completion shall be increased by 10 calendar days due to this Change Order. The
final completion date is October 5, 2001 . Your acceptance of this Change Order shall constitute a
modification to our Agreement and will be performed subject to all the same terms and conditions as
contained in our Agreement indicated above, as fully as if the same were repeated in this acceptance.
The adjustment, if any, to the Agreement shall constitute a full and final settlement of any and all
claims of the Contractor arising out of or related to the change set forth herein, including claims for
impact and delay costs.
Accepted: October 2, 2001
CONTRACTOR:
BETTER ROADS, INC.
/ 2'oe Restino, Vi( '-Dr"-~!'~-t ~
/ / ~AGI~IIIg,Jg~ITE~
NOV 2 ? 2001
OWN ER:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OE LIER .,COUNTY, FLORE)A
By: .>'f~-.'-/"'t _~-~'~ ' "-
Julio F'.,:/Ord'or~e~-;-P.E, P'm. ject Mar~ager Ill
Edward d. Kant, P.E.
Transportation Operations Director
BETTER ROADS INC.
P.O. BOX 9979
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34101
PHONE: (941) 597-2181
FAX: (941) 597-1597
PROJECT: SANTA BARBARA BLVD.
LOCATION: GOLDEN GATE PARK.
QUOTE
ITEM DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
IPLAN
QUANTITY
285-709-990
331-72-14
43~14~325
520-1-10
522-1
575-1-1
70~3
711-3
711-4
711-35-61
ASPHALT BASE ABC -3 ( 10' )
ASPHALT CONC, TYPE S 1-1/2"
CONC. PIPE CULVERT CL 18 18" DIA.
CONCRETE CURB & Gu~-rER TYPE "F"
SIDEWALK CONC. 4"
SODDING ( BAHIA )
REFLECTIVE PAMENT MARKER
PAVEMENT MESSAGES, THERMO.
DIRECTIONAL ARROWS, THERMO.
TRAFtC STRIPE SOLID THERMO 6" W
115.00
115.00
85.00
85.00
56.00
85.00
4.00
1.00
1.00
170.00
TOTAL
09121/01
RID NO.: 01085
JUNIT' J
SY
SY
LF
LF
SY
SY
EA
EA
EA
LF
UNIT
AMOUNT
$29.50
$9.55
$23.65
$9.10
$15.70
$2.20
,~.40
$115.50
$44.00
$0.50
$3,392.73
$1,098.25
$2,010.25
$773.50
$879.20
$187.00
$17.60
$115.50
$44.00
$84.15
$8,602.18
Page 1
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ESTABLISHMENT OF A "NO FISHING" RESTRICTION ON BRIDGE NUMBER 030210,
PLANTATION PARKWAY OVER THE EVERGLADES DRAINAGE CANAL.
OBJECTIVE: The establishment of a "No Fishing From Bridge" restriction for Bridge Number
030210, Plantation Parkway over the Everglades Drainage Canal.
CONSIDERATIONS: This department has received complaints regarding traffic conflicts
caused by people fishing from the bridge. Upon inspection of the bridge, this department
concurs with the safety concerns, as the bridge construction leaves no safe area for individuals to
stand along the bridge railing while fishing.
FISCAL IMPACT: The signs will be posted by Collier County Transportation Operations and
will cost approximately $120 for 2 signs to be posted. Funds are available in Transportation
Services Fund (101).
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This action will result in no growth management
impact.
RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of this department that the Board of County
Commissioners approve the Resolution, authorize the Chairman to execute the Resolution
restriction to prohibit fishing from the bridge on Plantation Parkway, and direct the
Transportation Operations Department to install appropriate signing at the Bridge.
PREPARED BY: ,/~_ ,- _f.~.~ ../'/ DATE:
R~. Tipton, P -- ns Manager
REVIEWED BY: Edward J. Kant, pE,~fioortation Operations Director
BY:
Norman E.l~eder, AICP Transportation Division Administrator
DATE:
DATE: /////~' /
NOV 2 7 2001
$
6
?
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
41
42
43
45
46
47
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-~
RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A FISHING PROHIBITION
FROM BRIDGE NUMBER 030210, PLANTATION PARKWAY
OVER THE EVERGLADES DRAINAGE CANAL.
WHEREAS, on May 20, 1980, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Collier County Ordinance
No. 80-47 regulating standing or stopping on the public road rights-of-way in the unincorporated areas of
Collier County; and
WHEREAS, Section Four, Paragraph 2 of said ordinance authorizes the Board of County
Commissioners to adopt resolutions designating certain areas along County roads as being areas in which
parking, standing or stopping are restricted or prohibited, and upon adoption of said resolutions by the Board
of Commissioners. such roads shall be posted with signs specifying the restrictions or prohibitions of parking.
standing, or stopping; and
WHEREAS, a request has been submitted for the establishment of a "no fishing" zone on County road
right-of-way in the area of Bridge 030210 on Plantation Parkway; and
WHEREAS, through an investigation.of the area by Collier County Transportation Operations
Department, it has been determined to be in the interest of the County to establish a "No Fishing From Bridge"
Zone along the County road right-of-way within the area of Bridge 030210 on Plantation Parkway over the
Everglades drainage canal.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA THAT the following County road right-of-way be designated as a "No
Fishing From Bridge" Zone and said road be posted as necessary with signs specifying that fishing from the
bridge is prohibited at any time:
"NO FISHING FROM BRIDGE" is to extend along BRIDGE 030210, Plantation Parkway over the
Everglades Drainage Canal.
THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second, and majority vote favoring same this
da),
of ,200 I.
ATI'EST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
BY:
Approved as to form and legal
su~ciency: ~
Heid ff Xs~fiton
Assistant Collier County Attorney
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., Chairman
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY,
ACCEPT AN ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
FOUNTAINS CONDOMINIUM THAT WILL FACILITATE THE
MAINTAINING AN EXISTING DRAINAGE EASEMENT
RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD.
FROM THE
COUNTY IN
NORTH OF
OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, accept
an Access and Maintenance Easement from The Fountains Unit No. 4 Condominium
Association, Inc., a Florida corporation not for profit (hereafter referred to as "Fountains
Condominium") that will allow Collier County to access and maintain an existing drainage
easement.
CONSIDERATIONS: An Access and Maintenance Easement is required from the
Fountains Condominiums which will enable the Collier County Stormwater Management
Department to access and maintain the existing drainage easement that was dedicated in
favor of Collier County in the Plat of Riviera Golf Estates, Plat Book 10, Page 104. This
drainage easement is located along the eastern border of the Fountains Condominium and
north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and is necessary in alleviating flooding in this East
Naples neighborhood.
The required documents have been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office
as to their legal form and sufficiency in preparation for acceptance by the Board of County
Commissioners. The required easement is being acquired via donation.
(~.~"~FlSCAL IMPACT: The cost of securing this easement will not exceed $50.00. This
includes recording fees and documentary stamps. These costs will be expended from the
Stormwater Capital improvement Fund (325) under the Lely Canal project number
31101.
GROVVTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The maintenance of the County's secondary canal
system is implemented in accordance with commitments made in the County's Growth
Management Plan,
RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida: (1) Approve and accept the easement as granted by the Fountains
Condominium; (2) Authorize its Chairman to execute the affiliated Donation Agreement; and
(3) Authorize staff to proceed with the related real estate closing transactions and to record
with the Clerk of Court the easement and appropriate documents that will assist to clear title
in Public Records of Collier County, Florida.
No._ ?
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Fountains Condominium Easement
Pa.qe 2
SUBMITTED BY:
Er'¢~ W. Kerskie, Senior Property Acquisitioq Specialist
Real Property Management Department
REVIEWED Toni~A.~Mott, ReaT-Property ~upervrsor
Real Property Management Department
REVIEWED BY: -
- ~- ' r
Charles E. Carrington, Jrt~ SR/W,~, D~recto
Real Property Management Department
DATE:
DATE:
REVIEWED BY:
Johr;{)H. Boldt, 'PE, PSM, Director
Stor~water Management Department
DATE:
APPROVED BY:
Norman E. Feder, AICP, Administrator
Transportation Division
DATE: ,///, ¢"-/4~ !
~o,_t~_' 77 -
NOV 2 7 2001
F,9__ ~ _
PROJECT: FOUNTAINS/RIVIERA GOLF ESTATES
PARCEL: FOUNTAINS UNIT 4
EASEMENT
THIS EASEMENT, made and entered into this z'~ pt day of /~'E;,,~//~'/~-- ,
2001, by THE FOUNTAINS UNIT NO, 4 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a
Florida Corporation not-for-profit, whose mailing address is 4640 Chantelle Ddve,
Naples, FL 34112 as Grantor to COLUER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State
of Florida, whose mailing address is 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Flodda 34112,
its successors and assigns, as Grantee.
(Wherever used herein the terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" include all the parties to
this instrument and their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors and
assigns.)
WlTNESSETH:
Grantor, for and in consideration of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) and other valuable
consideration paid by the Grantee, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, hereby conveys, grants, bargains and sells unto the Grantee, a
perpetual, non-exclusive easement for access and maintenance purposes, on the
following described lands located in Collier County, Florida, to wit:
See attached Exhibit "A" which is
incorporated herein by reference.
Subject to easements, restrictions, and reservations of record.
THIS IS NOT HOMESTEAD PROPERTY
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the Grantee, together with the right to enter
upon said land, place, excavate, and take materials for the purpose of accessing,
constructing, operating and maintaining the existing adjacent drainage and utility
facilities. Grantor and Grantee are used for singular or plural, as the context requires.
The easement granted herein shall constitute easements running with the land and
shall burden the lands described above.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has caused these presents to be executed the
date and year first above written.
IN THE PRESENCE OF:
THE FOUNTAINS UNIT NO. 4
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a
FIRST WITNESS (Signature).
(Print Name) ~ .
(Print Name)
Flodd, c~orporation2aot)for profit
Vice President
NOV 2 7 ; 001
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
a he fore_qoin~ Easement was acknowledged before.me this day of
~. V c'~/v~'"3~' ,2001, by .J~l-~l I/} /10 ~/~ ;//~'5. iNam---~-~tle), on behalf
of The Fountains Unit No. 4 Condominium Associatidn, Inc., a Florida Corporation not
for profit, and who is personally known to me or has produced
D£{v'c'f~ L.t (.-~,5E, ~- [type of Identification] as identification.
(Affix notarial seal)
(Signature of N, otary) ,.
~?',-- Ernest W. Kerskie
(Print Name of Notary) _
Commission #
My Commission Expires:
~c~er~ N. Zschary, 'E{quire
Office of the County Attorney
3~01 '-East Tamlarni Trail
t~, Florida 34112
1~1) ??4-84oo
AGENDA')~T~I~
NOV 2 7 2001
PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DI~PAKTMENT
3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112
(941) 774-8192
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (NOT A SURVEY)
PROJECT NO .........................
pARCEL NO ......
FOLIO NO ..............................
FOUNTAINS UNIT 4
TH~ WEST 30 FEET OF THE EAST 60 FEET OF THE NORTH 354.90 FEET OF
TIIE SOUTH 614.90 FEET OF TRACT "K" OF ~ PLAT THEREOF, RIVIERA
COLONY GOLF ESTATES,TRACT MAP AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 10,
PAGES 104-108 OF ~ PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR-FI- REQ, # 2406
PUBLIC WORY~S ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMPLEX
3301 F_ABT TAMIANII TRAIL
NAPLES. FLORIDA 341'12 at4F. ET '1 OF 1
NOV 2 7 2001
PROJECT:
PARCEL:
Fountains/Riviera Golf Estates
Fountains Unit 4
DONATION AGREEMENT
THIS DONATION AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as the 'Agreement') is made
and entered into by and between THE FOUNTAINS UNIT NO. 4 CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida Corporation not for profit, (hereinafter referred to as
· Owner~), whose mailing address is 4640 Chantelle Ddve, Naples, FL 34112, and COLEER
COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, (hereinafter referred to as 'County'),
whose mailing address is 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Flodda 34112.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, County has requested that Owner convey to the County an Access and
Maintenance Easement for the right to enter upon said land, excavate, and place or remove
materials for the purpose of accessing, constructing, operating and maintaining the existing
adjacent drainage and utility facilities. The Access and' Maintenance Easement shall be
over, under, upon and across the lands described in Exhibit "A" (said Access and
Maintenance Easement hereinafter referred to as the "Property"), which is attached hereto
and made a part of this Agreement;
WHEREAS, Owner desires to convey the Property to County for the stated purposes,
on the terms and conditions set forth herein; and
WHEREAS, Owner recognizes the benefit to Owner and desires to convey the Property
to the County for the stated purposes, on the terms and conditions set forth herein, said
terms including that no compensation shall be due and payable for the Property requested by
County; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of these premises, the sum of Ten Dollars
($10.00), and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
hereby mutually acknowledged, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows:
1. Owner shall convey the Property via an Easement to County at no cost to the
County, unless otherwise stated herein.
2. Owner is aware and understands that this Agreement is subject to the acceptance
and approval by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida.
3. The Closing ('Closing') of the transaction shall be held on or before ninety (90)
days following execution of this Agreement by the County, unless extended by mutual written
agreement of the parties hereto.
4. Prior to Closing, Owner shall obtain from the holders of any liens, exceptions and/or
qualifications encumbering the Property, the execution of such instruments which will
remove, release or subordinate such encumbrances from the Property upon their recording
in the public records of Collier County, Florida. Owner shall provide such instruments,
properly executed, to County on or before the date of Closing.
5. The County shall pay for all costs of recording the conveyance instrument in
transaction in the Public Records of Collier County, Flodda. Any and all other costs shall be
paid by Owner.
6. Owner represents that the Property and all uses of the Property have been and
presently are in compliance with all Federal, State and Local environmental laws; that no
hazardous substances have been generated, stored, treated or transferred on the Property
except as specifically disclosed to the County; that the Owner has no knowledge of any spill
NOV 2 7 2 01
'i
or environmental law violation on any property contiguous to or in the vicinity of the Property
.~j~o be conveyed to the County, that the Owner has not received notice and otherwise has no
lowledge of a) any spill on the Property, b) any existing or threatened environmental lien
,gainst the Properb/or c) any lawsuit, proceeding or investigation regarding the generation,
storage, treatment, spill or transfer of hazardous substances on the Property. This provision
shall survive Closing and is not deemed satisfied by conveyance of title.
7. Owner shall indemnify, defend, save and hold harmless the County against and
from, and to reimburse the County with respect to, any and all damages, claims, liabilities,
laws, costs and expenses (including without limitation reasonable paralegal and attorney fees
and expenses whether in court, out of court, in bankruptcy or administrative proceedings or
on appeal), penalties or fines incurred by or asserted against the COunty by reason or arising
out of the breach of Owner's representation under Section 6. This provision shall survive
Closing and is not deemed satisfied by conveyance of title.
8. This Agreement and the terms and provisions hereof shall be effective as of the
date this Agreement is executed by both parties and shall inure to the benefit of and be
binding upon the parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, personal
representatives, successors, successor trustees, and/or assignees, whenever the context so
requires or admits.
9. Conveyance of the Property by Owner is contingent upon no other provisions,
conditions, or premises other than those so stated above; and the written Agreement,
including all exhibits attached hereto, shall constitute the entire Agreement and
understanding of the parties, and there are no other prior or contemporaneous written or oral
agreements, undertakings, promises, warranties, or covenants not contained herein.
10. This Agreement is governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State
of Florida
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has caused these presents to be executed the
date and year first above written.
DATE ACQUISITION APPROVED BY BCC:
AS TO COUNTY:
DATED:
A'i-rEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
,Deputy Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
James D. Carter, Ph.D, Chairman
NOV 2 7 2001
AS TO OWNER:
WITNESSES:
First Witness (Signature)
Name:. P~ST ~. ~-5~1 ~'
Second Witness (Sig at~) O
Narne:,/~~._. /-~ ,~_0~/''''r '~'
(Print or Type)
The Fountains Unit No. 4 Condominium
Association, Inc., a F}odda Corporation
notfo~
(Print or type)
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
Assistant County Attorney
PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
3301 EAS~ TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112
~41) 774-8 ! 92
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (NOT A SURVEY)
PRO~ECT NO .........................
PARCEL NO .....
FOLIO NO ............................
TH~ FOUNTAINS UNIT 4
THE WEST 30 FEET OF THE EAST 60 FEET OF THE NORTH 354.90 FEET OF
THE SOUTH 624.90 FEET OF TRACT "K" OF THE PLAT THEREOF, RIVIERA
COLONY GOLF ESTATES,TRACT MAP AS RECORDED llq PLAT BOOK 10,
PAGES 104-[08 OF TH~ PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
PROFEE~IONAL LAND SURVEYOR-FL REG. # 240~
PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
COUJER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMPLEX
3301 F.A~T TAMIAM1 ~
NAPLES, FLORIDA :~1'12 ~IEET I OF !
2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION BY GIFT OR
PURCHASE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY IN FEE SIMPLE TITLE, AS WELL AS
PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS,
TEMPORARY DRIVEWAY RESTORATION EASEMENTS, AND TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS WHICH WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF ROADWAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
FOR PHASE ONE OF THE IMMOKALEE ROAD FOUR-LANING PROJECT
(FROM JUST WEST OF WILSON BOULEVARD TO 43R~) AVENUE NORTHEAST,
PROJECT NO. 60018).
OBJECTIVE: To obtain authorization from the Board of County Commissioners to acquire
by gift or purchase all rights and interests in real property required for the construction and
maintenance of a four-lane section (and ultimate six-lane section) of Immokalee Road
between Wilson Boulevard and 43rd Avenue NE.
CONSIDERATIONS: The expansion of Immokalee Road between CR-951 (Collier
Boulevard) and 4;~rd Avenue NE, from two lanes to four lanes, was added to the
transportation five-year work program in October 1999 by the Board of County
Commissioners, upon its adoption of the annual budget for capital improvements.
On May 2, 2000, a professional engineering services contract for design of the four-laning
project was awarded to the firm of CH2MHilI. CH2MHilI's design plans have now reached
the 60% stage indicating the right-of-way and other interests in real property required to
construct the project. Right-of-way maps and legal descriptions of the right-of-way and
easement parcels along the project corridor are currently being prepared.
Adoption of the attached Resolution will provide the Board's directive and authorization to
staff to secure title work, obtain independent real estate appraisals, make written purchase
offers for the real property interests required to construct the project, and to negotiate and
close on the purchase of the aforementioned right-of-way and easement parcels.
Due to the length of the total project (8.1 miles) and the number of parcels of property that
must be acquired (130), the project is being split into three phases for right-of-way
acquisition. Phase One will extend from 43rd Avenue Northeast (just north of the Collier
County Fairgrounds) to Wilson Boulevard; Phase Two will extend from Wilson Boulevard to
Rivers Road; and Phase Three from Rivers Road to CR-951 (Collier Boulevard).
FISCAL IMPACT: The total estimated cost of right-of-way acquisition for Phase One is
$1,672,475. This figure includes all land and improvements, appraisal fees, title
commitments and policies, staff overhead, and miscellaneous expenses associated with the
acquisition of the right-of-way between 43rd Avenue Northeast and Wilson Boulevard. This
&ti
amount does not include cost associated with condemning any unsec[~t?~
expenses will be funded from the Road Construction - Gas Tax CIP (Fund
NOV 2 ? 2001
P~. I
Road - CR 951 to Wilson Blvd. (Project No. 60018). Prior to commencement of right-of-way
acquisition for Phases Two and Three, staff will report back to the Board on the estimated
costs of each phase.
GROVVTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT_: As the expansion of Immokalee Road from two lanes
t~ four lanes between CR-951 (Cullier Boulevard) and 43rd Avenue NE is identified as
Capital Improvement Element No. 071 within the County's Growth Management Plan, the
recommendation is consistent with the County's long-range planning effort.
RECOMMENDATION_: That the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida:
1. Adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the acquisition by gift or purchase of all rights
and interests in real property which are required for the construction and maintenance of
a four-lane section (and ultimate six-lane section) of Immokalee Road between CR-951
(Collier Boulevard) and 43fd Avenue Northeast;
2. Authorize the Chairman to execute the Resolution on behalf of the Board; and
3. Approve any and ~~quir~ed.
SUBMITTED BY: ~/~//'/'/~~~~~isor
REVIEWED BY: ~&~"~, ¢ ~ t~o ~ j~r ,~~RNV"~A,~ D~irecto r
~harles E. Carri% , ·
Real Property Management Department
DATE:
REVIEWED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Stephen Miller, P.E., Director,
Transpo~ation Engineering and Construction Management
~"/~~. ~..- DATE:
Norrr~n E. Feder, AICP, Administrator
Tra~~/~portation Division
NOV 2 7 2001
pg.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -
A RESOLUTION AUTHORrZING THE ACQUISITION BY GIFT OR PURCHASE OF
RIGHT-OF-WAY IN FEE SIMPLE TITLE, AS WELL AS PERPETUAL, NON-
EXCLUSIVE DRAINAGE AND UTIL1TY EASEMENTS AND TEMPORARY
DRIVEWAY RESTORATION EASEaMENTS AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
EASEMENTS WHICH WlII~ BE REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR TI-IE IMMOKALEE
ROAD FOUR-LANING PROJECT FROM COUNTY ROAD CR-951 (COLLIER
BOULEVARD) TO 43:u> AVENUE NORTHEAST (PROJECT NO. 60018).
WHEREAS, due to increased traffic On Immokalee Road (County Road CR-846) between
Collier Boulevard (County CR-951) and 43rd Avenue Northeast, it has become necessary and it is in
the best interests of the citizens of Collier County to expand the capacity of Immokalee Road from two
lanes to four lanes between Collier Boulevard (County CR-951) and 43rd Avenue Northeast; and
WHEREAS, in October 1999, after review of the AUIR (Annual Update and Inventory
Report), the expansion of Immokalee Road from two lanes to four lanes between Collier Boulevard
(County CR-951) and 43~d Avenue Northeast was added to the five year work program by the Board of
County Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, on May 2, 2000, the Board of County Commissioners approved a negotiated
contract for professional engineering services with the fh'm of CH2MHill for the design of four-laning
improvements to Immokalee Road, Project No. 60018 (CIE No. 071); and
WHEREAS, CH2Mhill has produced a 60% design plan which shows the need for additional
right-of-way along the south side of Immokalee Road from County Road CR-951 (Collier Boulevard)
to Randall Boulevard, and additional fight-of-way along both the east and west sides of the existing
right-of-way corridor between Randall Boulevard and 43~a Avenue Northeast, as well as the need for
stormwater retention and treatment ponds at strategic intervals along the project corridor; and
WHEREAS, the 60% design plan for the four-laning of Immokalee Road between Collier
Boulevard (County CR-951) and 43'a Avenue Northeast, allows for the future expansion of the facility
into six lanes by the addition of two lanes within the median, eliminating the need for future right-of-
way acquisition; and
WHEREAS, the construction of the transportation improvements and related facilities currently
being designed by CH2Mhill along the project corridor as depicted on Exhibit "A" are necessary in
.... Drder to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Collier County, and will assist Collier
NOV 2 7 2001
3
County in meeting certain concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Plan for Collier
County.
NOW, THEREFOr, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
CO!-I-IN-':R COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. The Board has determined that the expansion of Immokalee Road from two lanes to four lanes
between Collier Boulevard (County CR-951) and 43~l Avenue Northeast is necessary and is in the best
interest of Collier County.
2. The construction and maintenance of the transportation improvements and related facilities are
compatible with the long range planning goals and objectives of the Growth Management Plan for
Collier County.
3. It is necessary and in the best interest of Collier County for the Board to acquire fee simple
right-of-way parcels, and stormwater retention treatment pond parcels, as well as perpetual, non-
exclusive drainage and utility easements, and temporary construction and driveway restoration
easements within the project corridor identified on Exhibit "A;" and County Staff is hereby authorized
and directed to acquire said right-of-way and pond parcels and associated easement interests by gift or
purchase.
4. The Board hereby directs staff to use independent appraisal reports or internal compensation
estimates as staff determines is necessary to best serve the needs of the Project in a timely and cost-
effective manner.
5. The Board, in accordance with the provisions of Section 125.355, Florida Statutes, hereby
formally waives the requirement for a formal, independent appraisal report for the purchase of a
property where the purchase price of the pamel (the compensation due to the property owner) is less
than One Hundred Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($100,000.00). In lieu of the independent appraisal
report, staff is hereby authorized to make purchase offers for the properties, the dollar amounts of
which shall be predicated on "staff compensation estimates" based upon independent appraisals (and
the data therefrom) obtained on similar properties and upon consideration and application of
appropriate market value and cost data pertinent to the subject parcels.
6. Upon the approval by the County Attorney's Office of all documents necessary for the subject
property acquisition, Real Property Management Department staff is hereby directed to offer
immediate delivery to the respective property owners of the full compensation (as established' by the
-Page 2-
AGENDA ITEM
No. /b
NOV 27 2001
~ppraisal or staff compensation estimates in accordance with the provisions of Section 125.355,
~lorida Statutes), in tatum for the immediate and proper execution of the respective easements, or
other legal decuments and/or affidavits as the County Attorney's Office deems appropriate in order to
protect the interests of the County; and the Board hereby authorizes its present Chairman and any
subsequent Chairman, for the life of the Project, to execute any instruments which have been approved
by the Office of the County Attorney, to remove the lien of any encumbrance and for any such other
purpose as may be require&
7. In those instances where negotiatexi settlements may be obtained via the "Purchase Agreement"
or "Easement Agreement" mechanism, the Director of the Transportation Engineering and
Construction Management Department, or any Project Manager of his designation, is hereby delegated
thc authority to approve the purchase of land interests above the staff compensation estimate or
appraised value and pay normally related costs when it is in the best interest of thc Project, within thc
pro-rata share of thc land rights acquisition budget for thc parcel being acquired, only when thc
difference betw~n the purchase price and compensation estimate or appraised value is less than
Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($25,000.00) or the current purchasing limits established
--' by the Collier County Purchasing Department; provided, Project funding is available.
8. That the settlement approval authority is delegated by the Board to the extent that such
approvals do not conflict with thc provisions of Section 125.355, Florida Statutes.
9. The Chairman of the Board is hereby authorized to execute Easement Agreements and
Purchase Agreements where the land owner has agreed to sell ~he required land rights to thc County at
its appraised value or at that amount considered thc "Administrative Settlement Amount" as such term
is internally used by the administrative agencies of Collier County.
10. Where the property owner agrees, through the execution of a "Purchase Agreement" or
"Easement Agreement," to convey a necessary interest in real property to the County, and upon the
proper execution by the property owner of those easements or such other legal documents as the Office
of the County Attorney may require, the Board hereby authorizes the Finance Department to issue
warrants, payable to the property owner(s) of record, in those amounts as shall be specified on a
closing statement and which shall be based upon the appraisal or staff compensation estimate in
accordance with this Resolution and the provisions.of Section 125.355, Florida Statutes.
~-~ 11. All title to properties or interests in properties which have been obtained in the manner
described above shall be deemed "accepted" by the Board of County Commissioners, as the governing
-Page 3-
AGENDA ITEM
NOV ? 7
g..5
body of Collier County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and as such, staff is
hereby authorized to record in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, said easements or other
instruments as may be required to remove the lien of any encumbrance from the acquired properties.
THIS RESOL~ON ADOPTED on this
second and majority vote.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CIFRK
day of ,2001, after motion,
BOARD OF COLrNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
CO! I JER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
Clerk
Approved as to form and
lega~l sufficiency:
Ellen T. Chadwell
Assistant County Attorney
-Page 4-
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 27 2001
SHEET ,.9 OF 18
~EET 4 (~- 18
SHEET 5 OF 18
SHEET 6 OF 18
SHEET 7 OF 18
~EET 8 OF 18
SHEET 9 OF 18
10 OF 18
SHEET 11 OF 18
L
AGEN,~ AJ~T F?..M
No.~.
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. "7 .....
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AWARD RFP 01-3296 - BAYSHORE STREET LIGHTING
OBJECTIVE: To purchase decorative streetlights to enhance the beautification of Bayshore
Drive.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The Bayshore MSTU will require 101 single decorative light fixtures and four (4) double light
fixtures to complete the lighting installation on the roadway. Repair and maintenance is required
from time to time.A Selection Committee approved by the County Manager met on November 5,
2001 to discuss and review the proposals. By consensus, the Selection Committee wishes to
contract with the number one shortlisted finn in order to supply the decorative lighting for the
Bayshore MSTU. The shortlist is as follows:
1. Lumec Inc.(R.J. Steedman,agent)
2. Consolidated Electrical Distribution Inc.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $122,182.00 are budgeted and available in the
Bayshore MSTU Fund 160.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact involved
with this decision.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners award RFP 01-3296 -
Bayshore Street Lighting to Lumec Inc.(R.J. Steedman, agent) and authorize Staff to issue a
purchase order i~p of a formal c~p,~r~a ~_~h. as~.~ftreetlights.
· / / Date:
PREPARED BY~'~'-' ~'' ~ -- --
~~. ~?~ Lulich,~LA/v'~~erati°ns Manager /
REVIEWED BY: 7,~/~'//~~/ Date: 'Z/(/
Edward J. ~/t~., Transportation Operations Director /
REVIEWED BY: .~~ ~// ~'f~ Date:Il
'~tepfien ¥. 0'amell, Purchasing Director
APPROVED BY:
Norman E. Feder, AICP, Transportation Administrator
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AWARD BID #01-3295 FOR THE PURCHASE OF SODIUM CHLORITE FOR
ODOR CONTROL OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE IN SLUDGE.
OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the governing
Board of the County Water/Sewer District provide approval of the bid for the purchase of
sodium chlorite for use as a odor control inhibiting agent for hydrogen sulfide in sludge.
CONSIDERATION:
1. Sodium Chlorite is used as an odor control inhibiting agent of hydrogen sulfide
injected into the sludge prior to the sludge belt press at the North County Water
Reclamation Facility.
2. Bid 01-3295 was posted on October 18, 2001. Seventy six (76) inquiries were sent
and two (2) bids were received and opened on November 1, 2001.
3. Staffhas reviewed the bids and recommends award to Vulcan Performance Chemicals
as the lowest qualified responsive bidder.
FISCAL IMPACT; Total expenditures for Sodium Chlorite are estimated to be $44,900
for FY 02. Funds are budgeted in the North County Water Reclamation Facility budget,
County Water/Sewer Fund (408).
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact.
RECOMMENDATION; That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the
Governing Board of the County Water-Sewer District, approve the award of Bid 01-3295
for the purchase of sodium chlorite to Vulcan Performance Chemicals.
Dennis Ba~nard, Plaint 5upenmenaem
REVIEWED BY: (~ ~ Date:
(J Joe Cheatham, Wastewater Director
Steve ~Camefl, ~r~hasing Director
APPROVED BY: ~t97/ ~~ Date: ///~/~0/ ,
Tom Wides, Interim Public Utilities ,~drn4nistrator
NOV 2 7 2001
6000/275
21.81818182
1755
Int'l
(annual)
38,290.91
1,200.00
6000/275 Total Gal/Gal.per Tote
21.81818182 # of Totes
1916.48 Unit Price Per Tote
Vulcan
41,814.11 Total Price
2,400.00 Rental Equip,
Service Agreement
No._
I NOV27~O01 1
Pg.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUTHORIZE PUBLIC UTILITIES ADMINISTRATOR TO NEGOTIATE ~
EXEEUTE A BINDING AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION RELATED TO RECLAIMED WATER
STORAGE PONDS AT EAGLE LAKES PARK
~ To enter into an agreement with the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (FDEP) to avoid delaying the construction of time-critical capacity improvements
in the South Sewer Service Area.
CONSIDERATION: On October 9, 2001, agenda item 10(D), the Board approved
~ontracts for services to construct an expansion to the South County Water Reclamation
Facility (SCWRF) to increase capacity to 16 million gallons per day (mgd) maximum month
average day flow. However, the FDEP permit needed to begin the expansion work has not
been issued.
The FDEP will not issue the permit to expand the treatment plant until issues related to
FDEP's Environmental Resource Permit for the reclaimed water storage ponds are resolved.
FDEP has offered to enter into a binding agreement to address unresolved issues related to
the operation and maintenance of the reclaimed water storage ponds.
The agreement will address the following issues related to the ponds:
1. Impact on groundwater
2. Operation and maintenance plans
a. Operating protocol to augment water to the ponds in a way that simulates
water level fluctuations experienced by natural wetlands
b. Periodic exotic vegetation removal and inspection
c. Periodic inspection of the earthen dikes around the ponds for structural
integrity
3. Boardwalk access, interpretive nature center, and education
· A binding agreement will commit the County to provide additional improvements including
groundwater monitoring wells, boardwalks into the wetland mitigation areas, and a nature
interpretive center. The binding agreement will also enable FDEP to resume processing of
our application for a permit to expand the SCWRF.
Our April 10, 2001 Consent Order with FDEP stipulates that the SCWRF must be expanded
to 16 mgd by November 2003. To meet this date, our construction contractor needed to start
work on November 1, 2001. Staff is communicating with FDEP to coordinate an appropriate
time extension in the event that the delay in issuing the permit causes the plant expansion to
be completed after the compliance, deadline in the Consent Order.
NOV 2 7 2001
~,~. /
Executive Summary
Bi~ding Agreement with FDEP Related to Reclaimed Water Storage Ponds
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT: No funds are needed at this time; however, funds will be needed for
capital improvements anticipated to be required by the binding agreement with FI)EP. The
fiscal impact associated with the binding agreement cannot be quantified at this time. No
funds are specifically budgeted in FY 200~for the anticipated improvements.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Execution of the binding agreement with FDEP
is needed as a precursor to FDEP issuing a permit to construct the South County Water
Reclamation Facility expansion, Project 73949.
Increasing capacity to accept and treat wastewater in the South Sewer Service Area is
consistent with CIE 916 of our Growth Management Plan, and also, our 201 (Wastewater)
Master Plan Update adopted by the Board on July 22, 1997 under items 12(C)(4) and
12(C)(5).
In accordance with the Ninth Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) on Public
Facilities approved by the BCC on January 12~ 1999, additional SCWRF capacity was to be
achieved by re-rating. As part of the re-rating process, Hole Montes and Associates
evaluated the existing treatment capacity and found that additional facilities are required.
Based on population and flow projections developed in the 1997 Master Plan Update, the
existing 8-mgd annual average day flow capacity will be exceeded by the year 2004.
However, the 2000 Census accelerated population projections resulting in capacity being
exceeded in year 2002. The proposed SCWRF expansion Will increase the capacity to 16
mgd Maximum Month Average Day Flow.
RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the
Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, authorize the Public Utilities
Administrator to negotiate ~ an agreement with Florida Department of
Environmental Protection related to the South County Reclaimed Water Storage Ponds
located adjacent to Eagle Lakes Park, pending approval by the County Attorney.
SUBMITTED BY: '~~'~~ Date:
Karl W. Boyer, P.E., Utilities Engineering Principal Project Manager
APPROVED BY: t Date: / / Roy B.?Anderson, P.E., Utilities Engineering Director
APPROVED BY: ~~~--'%~ Date:
Tom Wides, Interim Public Utilities Administrator
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPROVE FUNDING AND AN AMENDMENT TO A WORK ORDER FOR
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING INSPECTION SERVICES FOR A 12"
WATER MAIN ON EAST US 41 FROM MANATEE ROAD TO BOYNE SOUTH
AND A 6" FORCE MAIN FROM PUMP STATION 3.17 TO BOYNE SOUTH,
PROJECTS 70862 AND 73061.
OBJECTIVE: To improve water and sewer service to customers along East US 41
between Manatee Road and Boyne South.
CONSIDERATIONS: This is a two-part item. The first part is to approve funding for
engineering inspection services during construction of the water main and the wastewater
force main. The second part of this item is to approve an amendment to a work order for
engineering inspection services for both the water main and force main.
The Board awarded a contract for construction of a water main and a wastewater force
main along East US 41 on October 24, 2000 (Agenda Item 16-C-3).
On December 12, 2000 (Agenda Item 16-C-10), the Board approved Work Order JEI-FT-
01-01 to Johnson Engineering, Inc., for inspection of the water main and force main
construction. The work order was issued under the Agreement for Fixed Term
Construction Engineering Inspection Services dated December 14, 1999, Contract 98-
2960.
Construction of the project has been delayed by heavy rains and flooding of the project
area throughout the summer. The amended Work Order JEI-FT-01-01-A will provide for
engineering inspection services to continue until the anticipated completion of
construction.
FISCAL IMPACT: The work order amendment in the amount of $28,800 will be funded
as follows: $25,921.08 from water funds and $2,878.92 from wastewater funds.
A budget amendment is needed in the Water Impact Fee Capital Project fund (411) to
transfer $25,922 from reserves to Project 70862 - US 41 Water Main from Manatee Road
to Boyne South. Source of funds is water impact fees.
A budget amendment is needed in the Sewer Capital Projects fund (414) to transfer
$2,879 from reserves to Project 73061 - Boyne South Force Main. Source of funds is
wastewater user fees.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The project is consistent with the Water and
the Wastewater Master Plans.
NO. /6~ ~
NOV 2 7 2001
Executive Summary
Approve Funding and Amended Work Order
Page 2
RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-officio the
Goveming Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve and authorize the
Public Utilities Engineering Director to execute amended Work Order JEI-FT-01-01-A in
the amount of $28,800.00, and approve the necessary budget amendments.
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Ronald F. Dillard, P.E., Project Manager
Public Utilities Engineering Department
Roy/B.'Anderson, P.E., Director
Public Utilities Engineering Department
Paul E. Mattausch, Water Director
JoSeph 1~. Cheatham, Wastewater Director
Thomas G. Wides, Interim Administrator
Public Utilities Division -
DATE:
DATE: //-/-~ -c~ /
DATE:
DATE:
RFD:rfd
AG~NOA IT£M'
NO. /a~ ~
NOV 2 7 2001
la(;, g:~
WORK ORDER # JEI-FT-01-01-A
AMENDMENT 1
Agreement for Fixed Term Construction Engineering Inspection Services
Dated December 14, 1999 (Contract #99-2960)
This Work Order is for construction engineering inspection services for work known as
T'tle U 4 a 12" W t r Main Man te Rd. to Bo ne South and 6" Force ain Pum
ration3. 7 oBo ne South
Reason forPro'ect I s ectionofUtilit Contractor' Work
The additional work is specified in the proposal dated O~ctober 17, 2001, which is attached
hereto and made · part of this Work Order. In accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the
Agreement referenced above, Work Order # ]EI-FT-01-01-A is assigned to
Johnson Eneineerin£. Inc.
(Firm Name)
Scope of Work~
Task 1: Engineering Inspection Services
Schedule of Work: Complete work within 200 days from receipt of the Notice to
Proceed authorizing start of work.
'Compensatiom In accordance with Article Five of the Agreement, the County will compensate
the Firm in accordance with the time and materials amount indicated in the schedule below (if
a task is time and material, so indicate and use the established hourly rate(s) as enumerated in
Schedule "A" of the Agreement).
Original Am[~ Amendment I AmL
Task 1 ];78,840 00. $28,800.00_ (time & material)
'SUBTOTAL $78,840.00 $28,800.00
AMENDED TOTAL FEE NOT TO EXCEED ~107,640.00
Any change within monetary authority of this Work Order made subsequent to final
department approval will be considered an additional service and charged according to
Schedule "A" of the Agreement.
Date
Ronald F.,DillarO, P.E., Project Manager
AUTHORIZED BY: Jo~l~ph Cheatham, Wastewater Director Date
APPROVED BY: Date
Roy B. Anderson, P.E., Director
Public Utilities Engineering Department
Approved as to Form and
Legal Sufficiency: ~ f
Ass~tant ~ounty Attorney
ATTEST:
(Corporate Secretary)
/ Typ-~N~me a~d Title
ACCEPTED ~ {~
Date:
Johnson Engineering, Inc. Name of Firm
Signature
Fund: 41~: Ct~=t C~nter: 273511 Object Code: 631400
414 263611 631400
Project Number: 70862
73061
AG~NOA
NOV 2 7 2001
PG.
ENGINEERING
October 17, 2001
SINCE 1946
COLLIER COU}~i ¥
PUBLIC UTILITIES
DIVISION
[Jl e,[-' 22 I: 38
Collier County Board of Commissioners
Mr. Ron Dillard, PE
Project Manager
Collier County Utilities Engineering
3301 Tamiami Trail
Naples, Florida 33962
Re;
Additional - CEI Services Proposal for 00-3145, US 41 East 12" Water Main, From
Manatee Road to Boyne South and 6" Force Main from Pump Station 3.17 to Boyne
South.
Dear Mr. Dillard:
This letter is to confirm that Johnson Engineering, Inc. will continue to provide to Collier
County under the Fixed Term Construction Engineering Inspection Services Agreement No. 99-
2960 Roy Godshall, Technician IV. His rate is as indicated in the agreement is $60.00 per hour.
Per your request these services will be provided for an additional three (3) months, October 1,
2001 through December 31, 2001 at 160 man-hours per month for a total of 480 man-hours. The
total cost therefore for these additional services is 480 man-hours at $60.00 per man-hour or
$28,800.O0.
In the event additional information is needed to expedite the processing of this proposal
please let me know at your earliest convenience.
Cc: file
Very truly yours,
JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC.
/dVlark K' Beaverson CEI Director
3000 Immokalee Road, Suite 9. Naples, Florida 34110
(941) 593-7370, Fax (941) 593-7375
AG~)A IT[FI
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUTHORIZE FUNDS FOR ADDITIONAL COUNTY UTILITY RELOCATIONS
IN CONJUNCTION WITH US 41 ROAD WIDENING FROM MYRTLE ROAD
TO OLD US 41, PROJECTS 70047, 70048 AND 73048.
OBJECTIVE: To minimize disruptions to water and sewer service associated with the
timely construction of this important road improvement project.
CONSIDERATIONS: On October 13, 1998 (Item 16-B-8) the Board approved a Joint
Project Agreement (JPA) with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for
construction and FDOT administration of County utility relocations necessitated by the
widening of US 41 between Myrtle Road and Old US 41. In accordance with the JPA,
$3,000,000 was deposited into an escrow account to cover the cost of County utility
relocations. After bids were received, the amount of the bid for the JPA work was
retained in the escrow account along with ten percent for contingencies and five percent
for administration. The remainder of $385,053.89 was refunded to the County.
On September 25, 2001 the County was notified that costs had exceeded the amount of
the escrow account and that it would be necessary to replenish the account. The additional
costs are due to numerous unforeseen conditions that required the relocation of additional
County utility facilities. The unforeseen conditions occurred because inaccurate utility
record drawings were used to show existing utilities throughout both the road plans and
the utility relocation plans. This resulted in both road improvements and proposed utility
relocations being designed in conflict with the actual utilities, as they existed in the field.
In order to cover approved changes, changes currently being processed, and an anticipated
future change, it will be necessary to deposit $275,960.62 into the escrow account.
FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed in the Water Capital Projects fund
(412) to recognize carry forward in the amount of $110,053 to project number 70047 -
Relocate 20"/12" Water Main on US 41 from Immokalee Road to Old 41 and to
recognize carry forward in the amount $140,472 to project number 70048 - Relocate 12"
Water Main on US 41 from Myrtle Road to Immokalee Road.
A budget amendment is needed in the Sewer Capital Projects fund (414) to transfer
$25,437 from reserves to project number 73048 - Relocation of Reclaimed Water Main
and Force Main on US 41 North.
The sources of funds are water and wastewater user fees.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This project involves the relocation of
existing utility facilities and will have no impact on growth management.
AGENDA ITEM
No._ /~- '~ ~
NOV 2 7 2001
pg. /
Executive Summary
Authorize Funds
Page 2
RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-officio the
Governing Board of the Collier County Water Sewer District, authorize additional funds
in FY 2002, in the amount of $275,960.62 for a Joint Project Agreement with the Florida
Department Of Transportation for County utility relocations in conjunction with US 41
road widening from Myrtle Road to Old US 41. and approve all necessary budget
amendments.
SUBMITTED BY:
Ronald F. Dillard, P.E., Project Manager
Public Utilities Engineering Department
REVIEWED BY: Ro~ B. Anderson, P.E., Director
Public Utilities Engineering Department
REVIEWED BY:
Paul E. Mattausch, Water Director
REVIEWED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Thomas G. Wides, Interim Administrator
Public Utilities Division
DATE: //- q- ~' /
DATE:
DATE:
DATE: I}' I'~'0 1
RFD:rfd
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPROVE THE EMERGENCY PURCHASE OF A LINE STOP FOR
A 24" DUCTILE IRON FORCE MAIN
OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio the Governing
Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District approve the emergency purchase of
parts and service from Rangeline Tapping Services for a 24" ductile iron force main.
CONSIDERATION:
1. A 24" force main on South US 41 was being re-routed. The contractor performing the
re-routing' was told that the valve was completely closed by the county. They then
proceeded to cut the line and determined ~hat the valve was not closing completely.
The flow of effluent had to be stopped in order to complete the job and to protect the
public safety and health.
2. Emergency purchase order Z-01-012 was issued on October 18, 2001 in the amount of
$25,900.00 in order to expedite repair of the force main.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $25,900 are available in the FY02 budget
in the County Water/Sewer User Fees (414) Project # 73045.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management
impact.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio,
the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District approve emergency
purchase Z-01-012 for parts and service from Rangeline Tapping Services to expedite
repairs on the 24" Ductile Iron Force Main.
SUBMITTED BY: ~ ~ t~ ~(~-
t""~ ~.~Steve Nagy~o~ec:on~~sor
REVEIWED BY: L .~i~
J~heathan~ Wastewater DirectOr
~;teve-~amdl, liffrchasing/GS Director
APPROVED BY: ~'~/'o~r.e-.~ .,,'~gf~~) Date:
Th'~mas G. Wides, Interim Public Utilities Administrator
fi-lq- O l
Date: /J"'lq
AGENDA ITEM
No.
N 0V 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPROVE FUNDING FOR FINAL PAYMENT FOR LEGAL COUNSEL RELATED
TO LAWSUIT AGAINST BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION FOR CLAIMS
ARISING FROM THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL
NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT, PROJECT 70002
OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the Governing
Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve funding for legal fees associated
with a lawsuit, Case No. 98-4456-CA.
CONSIDERATION: The lawsuit was settled following mediation. On June 12, 2001 as
agenda item 12(A), the Board of County Commissioners approved the final settlement in the
amount of $900,000 in favor of the County
On December 15, 1998, under agenda item 16(B)(13), the Board of County Commissioners
authorized the County Attorney to file a lawsuit against Boyle Engineering Corporation for
claims arising from the design and construction of the original North County Regional Water
Treatment Plant, Project 70002. Since then, legal fees for services provided through final
settlement of the lawsuit total $235,358.01. To date, $203,350.45 has been paid for legal
services provided through April 30, 2001. There is $6,059.33 remaining on the current
purchase order for legal services. Additional funds are needed to make final payment.
FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer funds in the amount of
$25,950 from Reserves for Water Capital Outlay to the North County Regional Water
Treatment Plant project number 70002. The source of funds is user fees.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None.
RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the
Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve the necessary budget
amendment related to legal fees to achieve final settlement on the lawsuit against Boyle
Engineering Corporation for claims arising from the design and construction of the original
North County Regional Water Treatment Plant, Project 70002.
Karl W. Boyer, P.E., Engineering Principal Project Manager
APPROVED BY: Date: //~
Roy B. g/nderson, P.E., Utilities Engineering Director
APPROVED BY: "~t'9~ ~c~) Date: //,/-r/or
Tom Wides, Interim Public Utilities Administrator
AGENDA ITEM
No. /g d_..
NOV 2 7 200t
Pg. /
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST I For Sudge~:ioance use only
~ VA# ..... a.~.~.~ ...........
I JE# .................................
I BAR# ..............................
A,P.H. Date .......................
I Attach ExeCutive
]Dateprl Appr~pared: IItem No. /~, e... Summary
ved by BCC on ///~7/o /
EXPENSE BUDGET DETAIL
tReserves ]919010 [00000
Cost Center I t IPr°ject
Title I Project No.
Title[Cost Center No.
Expenditure Expenditure Increase Current Revised
Object Code Title (Decrease) Budget Budget
993000 Reserve for -25,950.00 201,564.00 175,614.00
Capital Outlay
TOTAL .25,95£
Combined Water
Capital Projects
Cost Center Title
Expenditure
Object Code
631100
1273511
Cost Center No.
IINCRWTP
lProject Title
70002
I Project No.
Expenditure
Title
Legal Fees
(Decrease) Budget [ Budget
25,950.00
6,109.33
32,059.33
TOTAL 25,950.00
REVENUE BUDGET DETAIL
Cost Center Title Cost Center No. Project Title Project No.
Expense Expense Title Increase Current Revised
Object Code (Decrease) Budget Budget
TOTAL
EXPLANATION
Why are funds needed?
Additional funds are needed to pay for legal services provided through settlement of the Collier County
vs. Boyle Engineering Corporation law suit.
Where are funds available?
Funds are available in Water Capital Projects, Fund 412 (Reserves).
Cost Center Director:
Division Administrator:
,Budget Department:
Agency Manager:
Finance Department:
Clerk of Board Admin.:
Input by:
B.A. No.:
REVIEW PROCESS
DATE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT A POSITION FOR FLORIDA YARDS
NEIGHBORItOODS FUNDED BY A UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA GRANT.
~ To obtain the Board of County Commissioners authorization to accept a University
of Florida grant funded position for Florida Yards & Neighborhoods, a statewide program with in-
county mileage match.
CONSIDERATIONS: The Florida Yards & Neighborhoods program will target home owners and
landscaping professionals to reduce non point source pollution derived from landscapes that could
potentially damage water quality and ecosystems through distribution of information, on site
assessments and yard certifications. The University of Florida Extension received a statewide grant
and is adding sections of the state each year. Collier is included this year.
FISCAL IMPACT: A grant of $30,000 will pay salary, benefits, and out of county travel and the
county will provide office space, furniture, and equipment which is already available. $1,200 for in-
county mileage ($100 or 345 miles per month) direct funds are needed for match and are in FY02
approved budget. The grant is for three years. The county's on-going commitment is mileage only.
There is no commitment to continue funding the position once the grant funds are terminated.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact.
RECOMMENDATION.:. That the Board authorize the acceptance of a position for Florida Yards &
Neighborhoods being funded and paid for by a University of Florida grant.
Prepared by:
Denise L. Blanton, Director
Date: November 20, 2001...
Reviewed and
Approved By: I -
Peter Kraley, Inte~~'i'c~Services Administrator
Date:
//-2o -ca/
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
~WARD WORK ORDER PBS-01-03 TO PROFESSIONAL BUILDING SYSTEMS (PBS), INC. FOR THE
.......... · )NSTRUCTION OF SOUTH MARCO BEACH ACCESS RESTROOM FACILITY.
Objective: Utilizing the general contractor services contract 99-3025, approve Work Order PBS-01-03 with the
recommended bidder, Professional Building Systems (PBS), Inc., for the construction of the South Marco Beach Access
RestroomFacility (project number 00173) ·
Consideration: On September 7, 2001 staff sent a request for bids, to the five contractors currently on the County's
General Contractor Services Contract, for the Restroom project. This project includes the construction of a family restroom
facility, sidewalk, lift station, sewer and water connections, and sitework.
Written quotes for this project were solicited of the five Contractors on the County's General Contractors Service Contracl,
by the Parks and Recreation Department, and were received on September 18, 2001. Staff has reviewed the quotes
received and recommends award to Professional Building Systems (PBS), Inc., as the lowest, qualified and responsive
general contractor that can meet the required time frame· Five quotes were received and are as follows:
Professional Building Systems
Varian Construction
Surety Construction
Vanderbilt Bay Construction
Chris-Tel Construction
$ 85,939.00
$100,155.00
$109,986.00
$112,642.00
$136,775.00
~iscal Impact: Funds are budgeted in Parks and Recreation, Community Park Impact Fee Fund·
Growth Management: The value of this facility will be inventoried in the Growth Management Plan.
Recommendation: That the Board of County Commissioners award work order PBS-01-03 to Professional Building
Systems (PBS), Inc. in the amount of $85,939.00.
Prepared by: ~,~ __Date: I{{~"{~'~{
'~C Jam/es Fitzek, Operations Manager
Department of Parks and Recreation
Reviewed and ",4//7/~ _ ~2~,
Approved bY:~tion
Date:
Reviewed and ] / ~ '
· 3'
Approved by: ' ' ' 3'
Steve Carnell, Director
Department of Purchasing
Approved by: ' st~'att~r
Peter Kraley, Interim A.~d~i53J
Division of Public Servicing
.Date: ///'2/~ /
Agenda Item
uo
Pg ,__~....._
WORK ORDER # PBS-01-03
"General Contractor's Services"
Contract #99 - 3025, dated February 22, 2000
This Work Order is for general contracting services, subject to the
terms and conditions of the Contract referenced above, for Work known
as:
~ South Marco Beach Access Restroom Facility
The work is specified in the proposal dated October 29, 2001 from
Professional Building Systems, Inc. (PBS), which is attached hereto
and made apart of this Work Order. In accordance with Terms and
Conditions of the Agreement referenced above, Work Order # PBS-01-03
is assigned to Professional Building Systems, Inc. (PBS).
co_S_GD~9: Task I: Contractor to supply labor and material for
construction of a Family Restroom, lift station, concrete walks, water
service, sewer, and sitework in accordance with the contract drawings,
specifications and documents.
Schedule of Work: Complete within 75 calendar days from Notice
to Proceed, which will be delivery of building materials.
Liquidated Damaqes:.. $350.00 per day for each and every day that the
75 calendar days is exceeded.
~ompensatio~: In accordance with Item 3 of the Agreement, the County
will compensate the Firm in accordance with the negotiated lump sum
amount provided in the schedule below.
Task #1
$85,939.00
TOTAL FEE $85,939.00
Any change made subsequent to final department approval will be
considered an additional service and charged according to an executed
Change Order as enumerated in Exhibit D of the Agreement.
Lp ~kgen da Iten~
NO.._../_& .P
Prepared By2~--
j Project Manager
Park~ ~nd Recre/~on Department
REVIEWED
M~r~ Ramsey,' ~irector~
Parks and Recreation~epartment
REVIEWED BY
Facilities Management Department
Date
D~tet
Date
ATTEST:
Dwight E. Brock, Clerk
By:
Deputy Clerk
Date:
ATTEST:
(Corporate Secretary)
By:
BOARD OF COUNTY COFIMISSIONERS
By:
James D. Carter, Ph.D., Chairman
Pro~ding Syste
Typed Name and Title
(or)/~itnesses~/~ ;~ ~
(Print N~e)
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency
.
Thomas Palmer
Assistant County Attorney
(2)
SiGnature
(Print Name)
i.Ic'r.,,
G£NER~L CONTRACTORS ...................
4395 Corporate Square · Naples, FL .34104 · Phon~: 941/043-6527 · fax: g411543-2T67
Monday. October 29, 2001
Victor I. Latavish, AIA
Naples, FL 34104
liE: Value gngineering, Do~ 00I
So,,th Marco B~ch Access Restroom Facility- 21-518
VIA FAC$1M U.,E
Mr Lata,dsh,
Pursuant to your request we are pleased to present the following Value Engineering and resultant savings to the
O~,mer.
I. All [empora~ toilets to be provided by Owner during construction.
2. Builder's Risk insurance to be provided and maintaned by Owner.
3. Contractor will at the Comracor's optio,'L excavate, use existing handholes and conduit or provide a directional
bore under the parking lot to provide conduit and power feed from the power pole to the proposed building
4. Substitute specified Ell station with fiberglass P~BS tank and system .
5. Re bid of plumbing labor.
Item:
1. ($225.00)
2. ($500.00)
3. N/C
4 ($$45.00)
5. ($4,075.00_)
Subtotal Credit; ($5.645.00)
10% Profit and Overhead: ($564.00)
Total Credit (6,200.00)
Base Construction Bid
Building Allowance
Total Base Bid
$70,74o:0v
$2 ! ,400.00
$ .ct2,148 00
Adjusted Ba~e Bid
939.00
PROFESSIONAL BUILDING SYSTEMS
t~ .' , /- /
55P-18-~001 17~? 1 91~! 3S3 1882 P.0S~09
TO: Collier County Board of Cotmty Commissioners, hereinafter called "Owner"
The undersigned, having carefully examined the Contract Documents £o;the South Marco Beach
Restroom Facility, Marco Island, Florida, issued by Victor J. Latavish AIA Architect dated 9-6-01,
with related Civil Engineering documents ['or the project issued by Kepple Engineering inc., dated
6-6-01, plus Romtec Shop Drawings dated 8-01 and other documents enumerated in Addendum
Number 1 dated 9-10-01, and having visited the site and examined the conditions affecting the Work,
herebyproposes and agrees to furnish all labor: materials, equipment, & accessories, and to perform
operations necessary to complete the Work as required by said proposed Contract Documents, for
the stipulated sums of:
BASE BID
The total cost of all sitework, allowances, and building construction costs including all
materials, equipment, allowances, and related work required to c. dmpletely and properly
construct the project as indicated in the Construction Documents:
· _ )
BASE BID COST BREAKDOWN:
Sitework & Utilities
Romtec Building cost
Balance of General Contract
Total Base Bid
cO 8t I I(.o,
$21,400.00 allowance
O0
· ALTERNATE NUMBER 1:
Alternative building manufacturer and/or design as identified in item 7 Addendum No. 1
(this Altemate is not.cl~o, ry, write N/A if altemative is not proposed)'
Deduct
DOL~ ($ )
ADDENDA:
The undersigned acknowledges receipt of Addenda numbered:.
7-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AWARD CONTRACTS # 01-3235 "ANNUAL CONTRACT
SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY TO FOUR FIRMS
FOR ARCHITECTURAL
OBJECTIVE: To receive the Boards' approval for award of professional Architectural services
contracts to four firms.
CONSIDERATIONS,: On Sept. 11, 2001, the Board approved Agenda Item No. (16) (G) (1)- 4
authorizing staff to begin contract negotiations with the top ranked firms for professional
Architectural Services for Collier County. Contract negotiations have been successfully
completed by staff. All firms have agreed to a standardized fee schedule for their services
which staff believes will provide the opportunity for an equitable and fair distribution of work.
Following is a list of the firms: (in no order)
1. Disney & Associates
2. Victor Latavish
3. Schenkel Schultz Architecture
4. Barany, Schmitt, Summers, Weaver and Partners, Inc.
FISCAL IMPACT: The funding for each work order that is assigned under the approved
contracts will come from each user department.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: While these contracts have no direct Growth
Management Impact, they are consistent with the County's long-tern growth plans.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners (1) award a professional
services agreement to the four firms and (2) authorize the Chairman of the Board to sign the
standard, County Attorney approved agreements.
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
APPROVED BY:
els~y War. d/Senior Purchasing &
/~/.~,acts gu:Jen,, Purchas,ng Department
Steve Carnell, Director
Purchasing/General Services Department
Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer,
Administrative Services Division Administrator
Date:'
I '
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AWARD
BID #01-3298 FOR TEMPORARY CLERICAL SERVICES
Objective: To provide Collier County with temporary clerical personnel in a cost
effective and responsive manner.
Considerations: The County utilizes temporary employment agencies to address
clerical staffing needs resulting from normal attrition, authorized leave or excessive
workload.
On October 8, 2001, invitation to bid notices were sent to seventeen (17) firms providing
this service. On October 18, 2001, bids were received and opened from four (4) firms,
all of whom were located in the Naples area. Bids were analyzed by comparing the
hourly rates offered by each bidder for the following categories:
1. Filing Clerk
2. Receptionist (filing and telephone only)
3. Receptionist (typing and telephone)
4. Secretarial/Clerical
5. Executive Secretary
6. Customer Service Representative
Arrangements for these services are often made on short notice. Therefore, it is
imperative that this bid be awarded to multiple firms to ensure that the necessary
personnel are available. Accordingly, staff recommends award of this bid to all four (4)
firms for each category shown on the bid tabulation (attached), on a line by line basis. In
each case, the lowest bidder would be given the right of first refusal to provide services.
The methodology described above ensures the utilization of the least costly firm
available to provide the specified service.
Fiscal Impact: It is estimated that approximately $100,000 will be spent over the next
twelve (12) months under this agreement. Funds are appropriated in the operating
budgets of the respective user departments.
Growth Management Impact: None
Recommendation:
Coastal Staffing Service, Inc., Manpower, Kelly
Services in the manner described above.
Prepared by: '..~, ,(-"?Z'"'.
Fr/e/~ E. Blatc,~y, Purchasing Agent
That the Boards of County Commissioners award Bid #01-3298 to
Services and Adecco Employment
Approved by: ~ ~.
Stephen Y. C~nell,
Purchasing/General Services Director
Date ///u/'¢ !
Date
Reviewed and [~-~t
Approved by: Date
Jo-Anne Leamer,
Administrative Services Administrator
2001
2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARy
APPROVE COMMITTEE SELECTION OF FIRMS FOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS
FOR RFP 01-3289 "FIXED TERM MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES"
OBJECTIVE: Obtain Board's approval of Committee's selection of firms
consultant services for upcoming electrical mechanical engineering services
authorization to begin contract negotiations for subsequent Board approval.
for professional
as needed, and
CONSIDERATIONS: The RFP was issued in accordance with Florida State Statute 287.055,
Consultant Competitive Negotiation Act, and publicly advertised on October 4, 2001. Notices were
sent to 141 firms with 12 vendors requesting full packages. 5 responses were received by the due
date of October 26, 2001. One proposal was deemed to be unresponsive (Taskin & Associates) and
was eliminated from consideration. A Selection Committee Meeting was held on November 13,
2001 and after review and discussion; by consensus of the members, the following 4 firms were
recommended for award (in no order):
1. CH2M Hill
2. Anchor Engineering Consultants
3. TECO BGA Inc.
4. Tilden Lobnitz Cooper
The RFP referenced that work orders would be issued in accordance with the County's Purchasing
Policy. Purchasing Policy Section VII 1 limits each work order assignment to a maximum initial
amount of $90,000 and a maximum initial contract amount of $500,000.
FISCAL IMPACT: Each using department shall allocate funds from the appropriate cost centers as
the work orders are assigned.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This has no growth management impact.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners; (1) Approve the Committee's
selection of firms. (2) Authorize staff to begin Contract negotiations with the selected firms.
SUBMI"I'TED BY: ~~'~4 ,-:~'~/~/~/~'~/ Date: _///-/~-d /
Ke/1 s/e y Ward/-
Senior Purcl~tsing & Contracts Agent
REVIEWED BY:
APPROVED BY:
~[.t~f Date:
Steve Carnell, Director
Purchasing/General Services Department
~/'~~ Date:
Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer
Administrative Services Division Administrator
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TO AWARD BID 01-3287 "OFFICE SUPPLIES"
Objective: To contract with multiple firms in order to provide office supplies for all
County Departments to use as needed.
Considerations: On September 25, 2001, invitation to bid notices were sent to forty-
four (44) firms providing this service. Twenty-five (25) firms requested complete bid
packages. On October 17, 2001 bids were received and opened from seven (7) firms.
Bidders were requested to offer fixed prices for 56 office supply items which were
classified as high-use items. Bidders were allowed to offer equivalent products for each
item. If an equivalent product was offered, samples were to be provided and approved
by the Purchasing Department.
Staff completed a price evaluation of each proposal submitted. Based on this evaluation,
staff recommends Corporate Express for purchase of general office supplies and Marco
Office Supply for purchase of toner and paper products. Staff does not wish to award
office equipment or office furniture at this time.
Growth Manaqement Impact: This will not affect the Growth Management Impact.
Fiscal Impact: The County will spend approximately $150,000 a year under this
contract. Funds are appropriated in the operating budgets of the respective using
agencies.
Recommendation: That the Board of County Commissioners award Bid #01-3287
"Office Supplies" to Corporate Express and Marco Office Supply in the manner specified
herein.
Prepared by: ~___~.~ Z"/"~ ./,~ z ~ ,.~, Date
Fred E'. Blatchley"
Purchasing Agent
Reviewed and ~~,,/ ~/,~. ~'../'~/// Date
Approved by: Stepl~e~ Y. car~ll,
Purchasing/General Services.~Director
Reviewed and
Approved by: Date
Jo-Anne Learner,
Administrative Services Administrator
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY,,
AWARD BID NO. 01-3286, HANDYMAN/MINOR CARPENTRY SERVICES,
OBJECTIVE: To obtain handyman, repair, minor renovation and minor carpentry services in a cost
effective and expedite manner.
CONSIDERATIONS: Currently the County has a contract for General Contractors in place that
covers large construction projects. Several County departments have had minor construction work
done, which includes, door repair/installation, construction and/or installation of cabinets, etc.
Staff has found that using the General Contractors contract is not always the most cost effective
manner in handling small jobs. Therefore, staff prepared a handyman and minor carpentry services
bid to handle smaller repair & renovation projects. No single job under this bid can exceed the formal
competitive threshold without subsequent Board approval. Notices were sent to one hundred and
seventy (170) vendors on September 19, 2001. Four proposals were received on the due date of
October 10, 2001.
Staff has evaluated the proposals received as set forth by the award criteria in the bid specifications..
'It is recommended that award be made to three (3) of the four (4) vendors. Each of the recommended
'-"endors were found to be fully responsive to all requirements of the bid.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are appropriated in the individual operating budgets of the using agencies.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management Impact resulting from this
action.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners award Bid No. 01-3286,
"Handyman/Minor Carpentry Services to Bradanna, Inc., Wm. J. Varian and Made in Rio, Inc.
Rhonda L. Tibbetts, Purchasing Agent
-Steph~n Y. C~rnell
Purchasing/General Services Director
APPROVED BY:
Date:
Date:
Jo-Anne Leamer, Administrator
Administrative Services Division
NOV 2. 7 2001
Pg.__ /
N
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY,.
APPROVAL OF A SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH MEDTRONIC PHYSIO-
CONTROL FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND UPGRADE OF LIFEPAK
MONITORS FOR THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OBJECTIVE: Board of County Commissioners approval of a Technical Service
Support Agreement with Medtronic Physio Control to maintain and upgrade LifePak
monitors for the Emergency Medical Services department.
CONSIDERATION: On November 3, 1998, the Collier County Board of
Commissioners approved the lease / purchase of twenty-six (26) Physio-Control LifePak
monitors and battery support systems from Medtronic Physio- Control. The monitors
require periodic maintenance and upgrades to continue working at optimum levels.
Medtronie Physio Control is the sole source provider &these services.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $31,404 have been budgeted for FY 02 in
EMS Fund 490. Annual cost will increase as the number of units increases.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the
Technical Service Support Agreement between Collier County and Medtronic Physio-
Control for service and upgrades of LifePak monitors. The Agreement to remain in force
for as long as Medtronic Physio-Control is the sole source provider of these services.
SUBMITTED BY: ~~'~?~/ff/~de~ieal Date:
~len-$d'dL'r~,-l~n~'g~y Med'c Services
REVIEWED BY: ~v('/ h,l,t..~ Date: /t//~"/O,/
Je~ Operations Director, Emergency Medfcaf Services
Steve Ca'rnell, 15irector, ~urc~asing Department
~a4quel~e Hubbard, Assistant County Attorney
APPROVED BY: ~ . · ..,
Thomas Storrar, CEM, Emergency Services Adm~mstrator
AGENDA. ITEM
No. /~-/'- /
NOV 2 7 2001
MEDTRONIC PHYSIO - CONTROL COPY
TECHNICAL SERVICE SUPPORT AGREEMENT
PHYSIO-CONTROL
Contract Number:
End User # 01304202
COLLIER COUNTY EMS
3301 E TAMIAMI TRAIL
NAPLF_~, FL 34112
Bill To #' 01304202
COLLIER COUNTY EMS
3301 E TAMIAMI TRAIL
NAPLES, FL 34112
This Technical Service Support Agreement begins on 10/01/2001 and expires on 09/30/2002.
The designated Covered Equipment and/or Software is listed on Schedule A. This Technical Service Agreement
is subject to the Terms and Conditions on the reverse side of this documem and any Schedule B, ff attached.
filmy Data Management Supl~rt and Upgrade Service is included on Schedule A then this Technical Service
Support Agreement is also subject to Medtronic Physio-Comrol Corp's Data Management Support and Upgrade
Service Terms and Conditions, rev 7/99-1.
Price of coverage specified on Schedale A is $31,404.00 per term, payable in Monthly installments.
Special Terms
Noll~
Accepted: ,MET)TRONIC PI~SI~~OL CORP.
Temtory Rep: EASS57
BILL SUGGE'Tr
Phone: 800442-1142 X2464
FAX: 800-772-3340
Reference Number: S57-2222 Renewal
Cu~omcr: COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSION
By:
Pfinl: James D. Carter, Ph. D.
Title: Chairman
Da~:
Purchase Order Number:
Customer Contact:
GLEN ALDERFER
Phone: 941-732-2538
FAX: 941-775-4454
Prir/t~xl: 06/22/2001
AGENDA ITEM
No. /r.~ /
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg. ~
MEDTRONIC PHYSIO-CONTROL CORP
SERVICE ORDER TERMS AND CONDITIONS
T~$
Medtromc Physic-Control's ("Physic") acceptance of Customer's Service Order is expressly conditioned on Customer's assent to the terms set forth in this document
and *~s attachments. Physic agrees to furnish the serwces ordered by Customer only on these terms, and Customer's acceptance of any portion of the goods and ser-
vices covered by this document shall confirm their acceptance by Customer. These terms constitute the complete agreement between the parties and they shall gov-
er" any conflicting or ambiguous terms on Customer's purchase order or on other documents submitted to Physic by Customer. These terms may not be revised
~r, any manner without the prior written consent of an officer of Physic.
REPAIR SERVICES
~f "Repair' serwces are designated, subject to the Exclusions identified below, they shall include, for the designated Covered Equipment, all repair parts and materials
'e~.."ea a]~ required Physic service technician labor, aod~all~related travel expenses. For offsite (ship-in) services, units will be returned to Customer by Physic freight
~NSPECTION SERVICES
~ "lnspecbon" serv,ces are designated, subject to the Exclusions identified below, they shall include, for the designated Covered Equipment, verification of proper
.~ s:rurr, em cal,:)rat~on, venhcat~on that instrument mechanical operations and output measurements are consistent with applicable product specifications, performance
o~ an e~ectrical safety check in accordance with National Fire and Protection Guidelines, alt required Physic service technician labor and all/related travel expenses.
For ohs,re Isn;p-~n) services, units will be returned to Customer by Physic freight prepaid. ·
DOCUMENTATION J~) ~' #'''""'
r-c,o.,0',ng each Repmr and/or Inspection. Physio will provide Customer w~th a written report of actions taken or recommended and identification of any materials
-eo,acec or recommenaed for replacement.
"a Pn)s,~ prOduCt ~$ designated as a unit of Covered Equipment for Repair Services and needs to be removed from service to complete repairs, an appropriate
._~a~er umt wfl~ be provided, if available, until the removed unit is returned. Customer assumes complete responsibility for the Loaner and shall return the Loaner to
-:"., s,o ,ntr, e same condibon as recewed, at Customer's expense, upon the earlier of the return of the removed unit or Physio's request.
s Se".',ce Order aces not include: supply or repair of accessories or dtsposables (e.g., pabent cables, recorder paper, etc.); repair of damage caused by misuse.
..?. a.~cc.ma~ operating conditions, operator errors, and/or acts of God: repairs to return an instrument to normal operating edu~pment at the time of in~tia[ seer,ce
.so jr'3er tins Seo. qce Order: case changes; repmr or replacement of items not onginally distributed or installed by Physic: and exclusions on Schedule B to tins
.'ce O,ce- ,f an.~ ',vmch apply to Covered Equipment
S_ ~ULE SERVICES
~es~gnmed Repair and Inspections Serv,ces will be performed at the designated service frequency and during designated service hours. Customer ~s to ensure
.'ered Equipment is available for Repair and/or Inspection at scheduled times. If Covered Equipment is not available as scheduled and Customer requests
addmonal serwces to be performed or if Physic is requested to perform Repair or Inspection services not designated in this Service Order (due to the nature of
ser.,,:es selected, instruments involved not being Covered Equipment, request being outside of designated service frequency or hours, or application of the
E¢::~s,or, s): Customer shall reimburse Physic at Physio's standard labor rates less 10% (including overtime, if appropriate), plus standard list prices for related parts
--ater:als.!es$~.t~.~ ~ .~,..I...5:/~' ptus actua! travel costs ~ncurred. ~ · .... ~ l,U 1~/~. ~-"$. J'- ~
=:~s ~o ~u~u, ,~, ,i', ..F;t~, In addition to the cost of se~ices pedormed, Customer shall pay or reimburse P~ys~o lor any taxes assessed P~ysio. If t~e number~
conflcurabo~ of Covered Equipment is altered during the Term of th~s Se~ce Order, the price of Se~i~s shall be adLUsted accordingly. . ~ ~
,,..a~ams Se~,ces pedormed under t~s Serv,ce Order and replacement parts provtdeQ ~n pedormmg such Services against defects ~n matenal and workmaR-
mne~' (90) ~ays from the date a Se~ice was pedormed or a pad was provided. Customer's sole remedy shall be rese~cing t~e aff~t~ unit and/or reolace-
any Dan determined to be defective, w~tbout any addit,onal Customer charge, provided Customer nobfies Physic of any allegedly defective condrt~on w~tmn ten
calendar days of its Otscove~ by Customer. ~o,~ ,,,aka. ,,u utl,~, we, ,~, ,t,u~. =xp, ~2 0.' ;m. plic~, ~3~d~RG, ..~ihout ',~:t~9~, ~O W.*.~A~;~,' OF MER
:T;m, ,~ mF ...... 00 ~n ~ r~n ~u~ ....... ~¢~Z ¢,~u ,~ ,.~ ............ L ......... L;ADLE FOR ',r;StDENT.".L
TEPMINATIOr.
pa~ may terminate this Se~ice Order at any time upon sixty (60) days prior written nobce to the other, except that Physic may terminate t~is Se~ice Order
'-rrec,atery upon Customer's fa*lure to make timely payments for se~tces rendered under this Se~ice Order. In the event of termination, Customer shall be obhgated
.e mcurse Physic for that po~on of the designated price which corresponds to that podion of the Term and the scope of Se~ices provided prior to the effective date
D_E_.WS
~- .s.¢.... It not De hable for any loss or damage of any kind due to its failure to perform or delays in its performance resulting from any cause beyond its reasonable con-
:.:~i ,nc~od,ng. Put not lim~teq to. acts of God, labor disputes, labor shortages, the requirements of any governmental authority, war, civil unrest, delays in manufacture.
:2ta:",ng any required hcense of permit, and Physio'~ inability to obtain goods from its usual sources. Any such delay shall not be considered a breach
s' Pnys,o's obhgat*ons and the performance dates shall be extended for the length of such delay.
Customer agrees to not employ or offer employment to anyone performing Services on Phys~o's behalf durm~ t~of this Service Order or for one (1)
/ear fohowtng ,ts exp~rabon w,thout Physio's prior written consent ~'/ ~'~ ¢~
Tins Service Order. and any related obligation of other party, may,a,~ be assign~ in whole or in pa~ wit~ the pdor wri~en consent of the other
The ngnts and obhgations of Physic and Customer under this Se~ce Order shall be governed by the laws of the State of ~~ ~d
Approved as to form & legal sufficiency
~ ~. Cou~ Attorney
AGENDA ITEM
No. /a.~ 1
NOV 2 7 2001
pg. ~
MEDTRONIC PHYSIO-CONTROL CORP.
TECHNICAL SERVICE SUPPORT AGII~KMENT
SCHEDULE A
BILL SU~, EASS$7
Sou'rx]~I - 4O759
g00 *.~2-1142 X2464
~00.772-3340
COLLIER COUNTY EMS, 01304202
On Site Repair ~t 1 On Site Inspection per Year:M-F/8-5
Ret Effec6ve Expiration
Line Dd~ Date
20 10/1./2001 9/30/2002
35 10/1/200! 9,'30,'2O02
34 10/1/2001 9/30/2f)02
3:3 10/U3001 9/30/2O02
32 10/I/2001 9/30/20O2
31 10/1/2001 9/30/2002
50 I~/I~2001 9/'30/2002
36 liYl/2001 9/3Gt2002
2~ 10/1/2001 9/3(Y2002
30 10/1/2001 9/30/'2002
28 IG'U2001 9/30/2002
27 10/1/2001 9/30/2002
26 lO/I/2001 9/30/2002
25 10/1/2001 9/30/2002
24 10/1/2001 9/30/2002
23 10/1/2001 9/3(Y2002
22 lO/U2001 9/30/2002
~$ lO/I/2001 9/30/2002
41 lO/L/2001 9/30/2002
37 1 O/1/2001 9/3(Y2002
42 1 O/1/2001 9/30/2002
43 10/1/2001 9/30/2002
44 IiYU2/)OI 9/3/Y2~02
4~ !0/1/2001 9/3(Y2002
40 10/1/2001 9/3(Y2002
30 10/1/2001 9/30/2/)02
20 lO/l/2001 9/30t2002
47 10/1/2001 9/3G/2002
48 I(Yl/2001 9/3(Y2002
40 i(Yl/2001 9/3G/2/)02
38 10/1/2001 9/3(Y2002
P.,cf'emnce Number:. S57-2222 Re, newal
]:~-i. nted: 06/22/2001
Tol~l
1
!
1
1
1
!
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
Pag~ 2 of 4
AGENDA ITEM
No. /r_ ~!
NOV 2 7 2001
pgo
~I~r~PAK~ 12
Ret Effective
Line Date
9/'~M2002
EXl~m~n
BA'I"XERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATTERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATTERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATTERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATTERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BA~T..RY SUPPORT SYSTE~
BATTERY SUPPORT 8"TSTEM
BATI~.~Y SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATTERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATI~tY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATI'F..RY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BA'FFF. RY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BA'VFER¥ ~UPPORT SYSTEM
BATI~RY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATTERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATTERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATTERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
BATTERY SUPPORT SYSTEM
V~~ 11226278 8 10/1/2001
Nrl~S2-02-0000~ 1127~'9 4 10/1/2001
VBSS2-02-O00q~ 11210571 1 10/1/2001
VI~S2-02-000009 I122~65 2 10/1/2001
~BSS2-02~0000~ 11~ 5 10/1/2001
V~S~ 11~04~00 16 10/I/Z001
VBSS2-02-(K)000~ 11226281 7 10/t/2001
VBSS2-0~ 1122MS~ 9 10/t/2001
V~S2*0~ ! 122~64 10 10/1/~001
VBSS~ 1121585S 12 10/1/2001
VI~S~ 1121~18~ 13 10/1~1
VI~S2-02-~ 112i0~80 ~4 10/!/~00 I
VBSS2.O~ 11210~9~ 19 10/I/2001
VBSS2-02-000009 11201~ 18 10/1/2001
VBSS2-02-000009 11201S0~ 17 10/1/2001
V~S2.02-000009 11226~4~ 6 10/I/2001
9/30/2002
9/30/2OO2
9/30C20~
9/30/2002
9~002
9/~002
9~2002
9/3O/2OO2
9~
9~
9~
9~
9~2
9~
9~2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
** Dmot~ m invmt~y ti~ ttat h~s chms~l dncc thc ~ ~ rcvi~ioo or acidmd~n.
Reference N-mifF.
S57-2222
Pas~ 3 of 4
AGENDA ITI~M i
No. lc ~ ! [
"'t'
MEDTRONIC PHYSIO-CONTROL CORP.
TECHNICAL SERVICE SUPPORT AGREEMENT
SCgl~DULE B
LIFEPAK® 12 DEY]BRILLATORYMONITOR
· Batty ~ Sys~m included ~ listed on equil~nent inventory (Schedu/e A).
· Balt~ Sui~t ~ 2 ~ ~ li~ on cquitxx~nt invcnlmT (Sc~ A)'
· AC Power Adapter included ~ listed on equ~.pm~t invc~ (Sc _bech_~,~ A).
· IX: Power Adal~r included when ~ on eqm~ invenU~ (8c _t,~,u,- A).
· $pO2 Iknsers ~e ex~l,__,ded__
· D~t of 17% from th~ field installed list ixice for any curreni ~d/or futu~ avnilabl¢ LIFEPAK®12 uptu'adc is
· ~ of 17~ ~m list price f~ any lvi~nic Physio-Cou~ol® DnIa lV~_ n~emeni ixoduc! is included_
dis~trckd (~'ycl~d).
above and/or tbe ~___"__~ Pak nge exceeds 2 yenrs, l~c Physio-~l ,{,,1! repince snid lv~uic
Phy,i~l B,,",~y Pak 0~ f~ 1~) i.e. I~ASTPAK for I~ASTPAI~ FASTPAI<2 for I~AS~PAK2. LI~AK SLA for
LIFEPAK SLA. or LI~AK NiCd for LIFEPAK NiCd. up to a maximmu of 4 lyric Pl~ysi~l ~_"~,y Paks
e~ two yeno (inc,,d{,,.- prior 8uppori Plan pe~) per LIYEPAX~® 12 d~tib~mouitor
To -_,,{,~ in proper r~cyctin8 mud removal of low cal~city ~,~-k=s. rep~ _~u~,_____,~y Paks become ih~ {x~ of
Iv~ l={mysi~nlrol nnd must be ~ atthe time o£ excl~¢.
Lifapek'~12 Software Upda~
--~" ~~ ~ end Imlxction .crvic~ ac d-~ on t~ TocImical Scrvioc Support ~ invc~o~y
for Litcpak 12 lmlt~, at tlm customar's mquast, a Iv[_ _ _~A-mrd¢ Plrysin-Comrol Tcchn/cal S~ic~ R~prc~cntativ¢ will
install Lifq3ak 12 sofh~r~ uixlaIgs at no ma,i~nal cl~rge lxovid~d it L~ instalkxl at thc lime
o~ tl~ cutrc~ l~t l~CC of a new a~ambly. Software ul~-~t'~ raqug~s~gxi ~o be installed at a tiw~ °thcr fh~n thc rcgulm~Y
scheduled impection will bebilled at $:205 Per unit Per ~oftwarcUlXiatc. Tbe cost or'thc software utxlalc vall be billed
on a sepma~ invoice. ~ -~-'2="--- := ''-:-
. . ,-,_ . ,-, ......... ? ...... ' , "' ...... .':: -'r ~') .,.,o, .....
~_._..:, .......... __,.:..· 4,_._,.: ~ · ...........
-~-~.~ ......... u,~ ...... ii~t ~;~ ufo ~.-.~ .... "'" 'r~ ~ cc~ 'c- ?-Y-= ~--~;.~:: ~
· Approved am to form & leoal lufftclenoy
,.,'+. e, omw ^,o ey .-
Refetunce N,_,m~r. S57-2222
Printed: 06/22/2001 Pa~ 4 of 4
AGE N DA..IT~.M
No. Zc ~ - ./
NOV 2 ? 2001
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
FOR BOARD ACTION:
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes,
Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for
the period:
1. Disbursements for October 24, 2001- October 30, 2001.
2. Disbursements for October 31,2001, - November 6, 2001.
Districts:
1. Pelican Marsh Community Development - Agenda for their Annual
Report - Audit dated September 30, 2000, Management Letter and
Rebuttal to Management Letter.
2. Key Marco Community Development District - Minutes of the Meeting
held July 17,2001, FY 2002 Budget and Financial Statement Unaudited
June 30, 2001.
3. Fiddler's Creek Community Development District - Minutes of June 27,
2001, Operating Budget for FY 2002 and Financial Statement Unaudited
May 31, 2001.
4. Mediterra South Community Development District - Minutes of July 13,
2001, July 25, 2001, District Map, Budget FY 2002 and Financial
Statements Unaudited June 30, 2001.
5. Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District - Final Budget for
FY 2000-2001 and Final Budget for FY 2001-2002.
Golden Gate Fire Control & Rescue District - Agenda for November 14,
2001
Co
H:Data/Format
Minutes:
1. Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage M.S.T.U. - Meeting Minutes of
September 21, 2001.
2. Collier County Tourist Development Council - Agenda for November 8,
2001.
AGENDA ITEM
No. /6.7(.,) _
NOV 2 7 200!
Pg. / .
o
o
o
Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. - Meeting Minutes of October 15,
2001.
1-75/Golden Gate Interchange Advisory Committee - Agenda for
November 8, 2001, Meeting Minutes of October 19, 2001.
Rural Fringe Area Assessment Oversight Committee - Agenda for
November 7, 2001.
Immokalee Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee - Meeting
Minutes of October 17, 2001
H:Data/Format
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 ?.001
Pg. 2 _
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPROVE THE STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 13-70 IN THE LAWSUIT
ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. JOHN B. FASSETT, TRUSTEE, ET AL.,
(LIVINGSTON ROAD PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 65041).
OB_Q_B.J_ECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Stipulated Final
Judgment as full and final compensation to be paid for the acquisition of the easement designated
as Parcel 13-70 for the Livingston Road project in the lawsuit entitled Collier Count. v. John B.
Fassett, Trustee, et al., Case No. 99-3040-CA.
CONSIDERATIONS: On, December 2, 1999, an Order of Taking was entered in Collier
County Circuit Court regarding the acquisition of easements for the Livingston Road project
(Project No. 65041). On December 8, 1999, Collier County deposited with the Registry of the
Court the sum of $84,950.00 for Parcel 13-70 in accordance with the Order of Taking. The last
offer to the owner was made on June 10, 1999 in the amount of $84,950.00
Through negotiations, the parties have reached a settlement agreement whereby the property
owner, Robert Sorrentino, Trustee, Sorrentino Florida Land Trust Number RS 2000-1, will be
fully and fairly compensated for the property interests taken for the public purposes enumerated
in the resolution of condemnation (Resolution No. 99-250). The terms of the settlement
agreement are set out in the Stipulated Final Judgment (attached as Exhibit "1").
The Stipulated Final Judgment provides for $140,434.00 to be paid to the Respondent as full
compensation for the property rights taken, less any amount previously paid, as to Parcel 13-70;
$18,309.72 to be paid to Daniel H. Cox, Esq. as reasonable attorney fees; $4,762.50 to be paid to
W. Michael Maxell & Associates, Inc. for appraisal fees; $1,260.00 to be paid to Hole Montes
for engineering/planning fees; and $745.00 to be paid to Wilson/Miller for engineering fees.
The Stipulated Final Judgment provides that Collier County shall deposit the additional amount
of $80,561.22 with the Registry of the Court.
Staff has reviewed the County's obligations stated in the Stipulated Final Judgment and consider
them to be reasonable.
,r~ISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $80,561.22 are available in the Road Construction
Gas Tax Fund. Source of Funds are Gas Taxes.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Consistent with the
Management Plan for CIE Project No. 53.
Collier County Growth
~0. ~
40V 2 ? 200t
PS. ~-
RECOMMENDATION:
1.
2.
3.
That the Board of County Commissioners:
approve the Stipulated Final Judgment;
approve the expenditure of the funds as stated; and
direct staff to deposit the sum of $80,561.22 into the Registry of the Court.
SUBMITTED BY:
.~.~& ) ,~,.~'---~ Date:
Heidi F. Ashton
Assistant County Attorney
f Mitch Riley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager
Transportation Engineering &
Construction Management
Date: t ~- g _~ 1
REVIEWED BY:
Steve Miller, P.E., Director
Transportation Engineering &
Construction Management
REVIEWED BY:
..n, /? t
.-;, ,/
~o~ea~r, Aadinistrator
Trlihsportation Division
David C. Weigel
County Attorney
Date:
Date:
Date:/l-t q-o[ ,
h: LitXEmDomXFassettXExS um- P 13-70SFJ
AG EN, D~A I,T E/M
NO. ~
NOV 2 7 2001
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIVIL ACTION
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
a political subdivision of the State of Florida,
Petitioner,
VS.
JOHN B. FASSETr, Trustee of the
Anne M. Fassett Trust dated 6/5/85, et al.,
Respondents.
Case No.: 99-3040-CA
Parcel No.: 13-70
and for damages resulting to the remainder, if less than the entire property was
damages, and for all other damages in connection with said parcel; it is further
1
Land Trust Number RS
thereof, it is thereupon
2000-1, and the Court being otherwise fully advised in the premises
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Respondent, ROBERT SORRENTINO, Trustee,
Sorrentino Florida Land Trust Number RS 2000-1, have and recover from Petitioner, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, the sum of One Hundred Forty Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Four
No/100 Dollars ($140,434.00) for Parcel No. 13-70 as full payment for the property interests taken
AGENDA liE
NO. ~
NOV 2 7 2001
/
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE having come before the Court upon Joint Motion made by Petitioner, by and
through its undersigned counsel, and Respondent, ROBERT SORRENTINO, Trustee, Sorrentino
Florida Land Trust Number RS 2000-1, by and through his undersigned counsel, for entry of a
Stipulated Final Judgment as to Parcel No. 13-70, and it appearing to the Court that the parties are
authorized to make such Motion, the Court finding that the compensation to be paid by Petitioner is
the full compensation due the Respondent, ROBERT SORRENTINO, Trustee, Sorrentino Florida
ORDERED that Respondent, ROBERT SORRENTINO, Trustee, Sorrentino Florida Land
Trust Number RS 2000-1, receive from Petitioner as a reasonable attorney fee the sum of Eighteen
Thousand Three Hundred Nine and 72/100 Dollars ($18,309.72); it is further
ORDERED that Respondent, ROBERT SORRENTINO, Trustee, Sorrentino Florida Land
Trust Number RS 2000-1, receive from Petitioner as a reasonable planning fee the sum of One
Thousand Two Hundred Sixty and 00Il00 Dollar ($1,260.00); it is further
ORDERED that Respondent, ROBERT SORRENTINO, Trustee, Sorrentino Florida Land
Trust Number RS 2000-1, receive from Petitioner as a reasonable engineering fee the sum of Seven
Hundred Forty Fife and 00/100 Dollar ($745.00); it is further
ORDERED that Respondent, ROBERT SORRENTINO, Trustee, Sorrentino Florida Land
Trust Number RS 2000-1, receive from Petitioner as a reasonable appraisal fee the sum of Four
Thousand, Seven Hundred Sixty Two and 50/100 Dollar ($4,762.50); it is further
ORDERED that Petitioner shall deposit an additional Eighty Thousand Five Hundred
.Sixty One and 22/100 Dollars ($80,561.22) subject to approval of the Board of County
Commissioners within forty-five (45) days of the date of this Stipulated Final Judgment; it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court shall disburse the total amount of Eighteen
Thousand Three Hundred Nine and 72/100 Dollars ($18,309.72), being the Respondent's
reasonable attorney fees, to Daniel H. Cox, Esq. YOUNG, VANASSENDERP, VARNADOE &
ANDERSON, P.A., P.O. Box 7007, Naples, FL 34101-7907; it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court shall disburse the total amount of One Hundred
Forty Seven Thousand Two Hundred One and 50/100 Dollars ($147,201.50) to YOUNG,
VANASSENDERP, VARNADOE & ANDERSON, P.A. Trust Account, c/o Daniel H. Cox, Est
P.O. Box 7007, Naples, FL 34101-7907, less any amounts previously paid
2
NOV
Respondent, ROBERT SORRENTINO, Trustee, Sorrentino Florida Land Trust Number RS 2000-
1; it is further
ORDERED that disbursement to respondent shall be subject to any claims to a portion of
the proceeds by Respondent Evemia Corporation, a dissolved Florida corporation; it is further
ORDERED that title to Parcel No. 13-70, fee simple, being fully described in Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and incorporated herein, which vested in Petitioner pursuant to the Stipulated Order
of Taking dated December 2, 1999, and the deposit of money heretofore made, are appro~,ed,
ratified, and confirmed; it is further
ORDERED that the Notice of Lis Pendens filed in the above-styled cause and recorded in
Official Record Book 2592, at Page 2869, and the Amended Notice of Lis Pendens filed in the
above-styled cause and recorded in Official Record Book 2598, at Page 0001 of the Public Records
of Collier County, Florida be dismissed as to Parcel No. 13-70; and it is further
ORDERED that this Stipulated Final Judgment is to be recorded in the Official Records of
Collier County, Florida; it is therefore
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Naples, Collier County, Florida, this
day of ,2001.
conformed copies to:
Heidi F. Ashton, Esq.
Joe W. Fixel, Esq.
Daniel H. Cox, Esq.
David P. Hopstetter, Esq.
Jean G. Howard, Esq.
Evernia Corporation
E. Glenn Tucker, Esq.
Jim Spalla, Esq.
Bookkeeping
Circuit Court Judge
AGENDA ITEM
NO. _~L~
NOV 2 7 2001
JOINT MOTION FOR STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT
The Parties hereby stipulate and respectfully request this Court to enter the foregoing
Stipulated Final Judgment as to Parcel 13-70.
Dated:
Dated:
DAVID P. HOPSTETTER, ESQ.
Florida Bar No. 0199923
DANIEL H. COX, ESQ.
Florida Bar No. 0146420
Young, VanAssenderp, Varnadoe
& Anderson, P.A.
P.O. Box 7007
Naples, FL 34101-7907
(941) 597-2814 - Telephone
(941) 597-1060 - Facsimile
ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT
HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQ.
Florida Bar No. 0966770
Office of the County Attorney
Harmon Turner Building
3301 East Tamiami Trail
Naples, Florida 34112
(941) 774-8400 - Telephone
(941) 774-0225 - Facsimile
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER
Dated:
A.J. JIM SPALLA, ESQ.
' Florida Bar No. 0129618
Young, VanAssenderp, Varnadoe
& Anderson, P.A.
P.O. Box 1833
Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1833
(850) 224-4361 - Telephone
(851) 561-6834 - Facsimile
ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT
11/07/2001 10:49
!I-05-01
85/)-561-6834
Fr~-i:olli~r (:ount~ Attarnoy
A J JIH SPALLA PA PAGE 02
g41 ??4 0225 T'Hi4 P.O0S/00$ F'41Z
30IN'r MOTION FOE STIPUIATED FINAL .IUDG~
The pan/as hen:by sdtmlam mud ~spe. c~y -~1u~ ~his Court ~o cut~r th~ I'or¢~omg
DAVID P. HOPS~i~-I'I'I~,
l~ofida Bar No. 0199923
DANI~ H. COX,
Yom~ V~~, V~
P.O. ~x ~
N~l~, ~ ~101-7~
~1) ~97-~ 14 -
A~O~ FOR
y~m~ VanAssenck:lp, Vamado~
& And~on, P.A.
P.O. Box 1~
· T~ Fladda 32302-1833
(8~) ~351 - T~I~
(~) ~51~ - ~~
HEIDI F. ASHTON,
Florida Bar No. 0966770
Of S~e of ~e County ~Y
~~ T~ B~dint
3301 ~-~ T~i T~
(~1) 77~2~ -
A~O~ ~OR ~O~
AGENDA ITEM
NO. ~
NOV 2 7 2001
Pg._ ?
By: YVVA~
941 597 1060; Nov-7-01 10:57AM; Page
Froa~ol I let County Attorney Ofttce 041 114 022~ T-163 P.O0$/OO? F-461
2/2
JOINT MOTION FOR STIPULATED FI~AJ., JUD~~
Parties tin, by s6pulat~ and mspecrfidly z~jue~t this Court to cn~er th~ foresoing
: S~ipulated Final ludgm~ut am to Pmrc=I 13-70.
: lrlofiaa BarNo. 01999~
· DA~m~- ~ COX,
i Flodda B~ No. 01,~0
~SQ.
~I F./BEt'ON, ESQ.
Flodda Bar Ho. 0966770
Office of thc County Attotn-y
l-Im'mon ~ Building
3301 East Tamiami Tn~
blsples, Florida 34112
(941) 774-S4~ - T~lepho~
(941) 774.-0225 - Facsimile
ATTORNEY FOR ~N'ER
"Florida Bar No. 019~q618
.Your~ VanAssenderp, Var~ndc~
;.& Anderson, P.A.
~.0. Box 1833
:.TaIlah~see, Florida 32302-1833
[85X) 561-6834 - FacaimiJe
4
AGENDA.
Nc). ~
NOV 2 7 2001
P~.
PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL
NAPLES, FLORIDA 3,1112
(941) 774-8192
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (NOT A SURVEY)
PROJECT NO ..... , ......... .~....-~..~....~..~. .....
PROJECT PARCEL NO,,,),,~,..';,,'~,,O, ........
TAX PARCEL NO ........
COMd~ENCINO AT THE SOUTHEAST COfLNER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 Ii SOUTH, ltA.blOE
35 EAST, COLLIEA COUNTY, ?LOPJDA; TI IENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 3 i MINUTES 3'7 -
SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAiD SECTION l] A DISTANCE OF 6'7t.16 FEET.
TIJENCE SOUl'lt lib DEOfLEES Z~ MINUTES 40 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF J2.00 FEE'i
TO THE POINT OF BEOINttING; THENCE CONTINUE SOUT~{ ~ DEGP~ES 22 M. INUTES 40
SECONDS W~.ST ^ DISTANCE OF 216.1~ FEET TO TI{~ POINT OF CU~VATU~ OF A NON-
T~OE~ CU~, CONCAVE TO T~ W~ST, HAVINO A ~IUS OF 117~.~6 FEET, A
C~N~ ANQL~ O~ 2] D~G~S 5~ ~BS 4J SECONDS, AND A CHO~ O~ ~03.~1 FEET
BEiNg NOK~ 18 DEG~BS 58 MIN~BS ~? S~CONDS WEST; THENC~ NOK~{ ALOf'~G
SAID CUKV~, A DISTANCE OF ?0B.t2 FEET; T~NCE NOKTH 8B DEG~ES ~5 MINUTES O]
SECONDS ~AST, A DISTANCE OF ]0~.TB FEET TO~E POINT OF CUKVA~ OF A NOt4.
T~O~NT CUKVE, CONCA~ TO T~ ~ST, HA~NG A ~IUS OF 2047.]6 FBET, A
CB~ ANGLE O~ 1~ D~G~ES ]1 MINUTES SS SECONDS, AND A C~ OF 69~.~6 FEE r
BE~NQ 80~H I~ DEQ~ES ~g ~N~ES 5i S&CONDS BASTi T~NC~ SOUTH ~ONO
8A~ CU~V~, A DISTANCE OF 6~.94 FEBTTO~ POI~ OF B~OI~INQ; S~ DESCRIBED
1~' CO~MNINO 4.~]6 AC~S (I g],~] J SQU~ FEET), MO~ OK LESS.
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
PREPARED BY,~,,~'/.~.~ ....... DA T E.../?/.,~. ,~,~
,,~/'G EORG E R. RICHMO.ND
PROFESSIONAL LANDSORVEYOR.FL REG.#
PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPT.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMPLEX
3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34~12 SHEET 1 OF 2
UBLIC ...~I!~tKS ENGINEERING DE, ,.]~RTMENT
3301 EAST TA~'IAMI TRAIL ,, NAPLES/~:LORIDA 34112
(941) 774-8192
SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION
NOT A SURVEY
3
N
P,O
$ 66'22'40"W
'..o.o. ' '"°°'
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTTON 13, ....~__[
TOWNSHIP 4~ SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
Redlul Arc Tlngenl Chord
1772.3B ?0822 355.90 ?03,51
2047.30 0~7.'g4 352.3'9 694.66
Chord 8 airing
U 18'5B'27" W
$ %~'29'51' E
GENERAL NOTES
I} P.Q,O, ', POINT 91= COMMENCEMENT
2) P.O.B. · POINT OF
4) ~P, = TOWNSHIP
5) ROE. · RANOE
6) ~ - RiOHT OF WAY
7) ALL DIITAHCEa ARE IN FEET AND DEeI~LS THEREOF
B) NOT VAL[O UNLES9 81QNEO AND B~ED W~TH THE
EUBOSSED SEAL OF A PROF~IONAL'~HD =URVEYOR
AGENDA ITEM
NO. ~
NOV 2 7 2001
pg. Z d
LIV4$TN
SHEET,2 OF 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO
RESPONDENTS PETER B. FRANK AND ANN T. FRANK FOR
PARCELS 155 AND 855 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY
V. RONALD G. BENDER AND MICHELE J. BENDER, TRUSTEES UNDER
THAT CERTAIN DECLARATION OF TRUST DATED THE 17TM DAY OF
MAY, 1991, ET AL, CASE NO. 98-1394-CA (LIVINGSTON ROAD
EXTENSION - GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY TO RADIO ROAD)
PROJECT NO. 60061.
OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve and authorize the making of
an Offer of Judgment pursuant to Section 73.032 Fla. Stat. to Respondents, PETER B. FRANK
and ANN T. FRANK, in the amount of $43,000.00 as full compensation for the condemnation of
Parcel Nos. 155 and 855 in the lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Ronald G. Bender and Michele
,1. Bender, Trustees Under That Certain Declaration of Trust Dated the 17'h of May, 1991, et al..,
Case No. 98-1394-CA. for the Livingston Road Extension - Golden Gate Parkway to Radio Road
project.
CONSIDERATIONS: On April 15, 1998, an eminent domain action was filed for the
acquisition of property for fee simple, sidewalk, utility, drainage, maintenance and slope
easements. On July 23, 1998, an Order of Taking was entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcels
155 and 855 fee simple, sidewalk, utility, drainage, maintenance and slope easements, and on
August 12, 1998, the good faith estimate of value for this parcel was deposited into the Court
registry, thereby vesting title in the parcel in Collier County.
The Offer of Judgment, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owners of these Parcels,
Peter B. and Ann T. Frank, the sum of $43,000.00 as full compensation for the property taken,
including any severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to
cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the appraised value and the potential risks and
costs in proceeding to trial. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property
owners to carefully assess their claims for compensation. Peter B. and Ann T. Frank have thirty
days from the date of mailing the offer to accept. If Peter B. and Ann T. Frank accept, the
County will be required to deposit an additional $28,450.00 into the registry, and the total sum of
funds on deposit, or $43,000.00, will be paid to Peter B. and Ann T. Frank by Stipulated Final
Judgment of the court. If Peter B. and Ann T. Frank reject the offer, and fail to recover more
than $43,000.00 for Parcels 155 and 855, either through settlement or jury verdict, the County
will not be required to pay any costs incurred by Peter B. and Ann T. Frank after the date of the
offer's rejection. This would include any expert witness fees, such as appraisal fees.
The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment
and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken.
This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable.
NOV 2 7 2001
FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer $28,450.00 from the
(~ Transportation Impact Fee District 2 Reserve Fund and appropriate in the project. Source of
funds are Impact Fees.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Consistent with the Collier County Growth
Management Plan for CIE Project No. 53.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners:
2.
3.
4.
SUBMITYED BY:
approve the StipUlated Final Judgment;
approve the expenditure of the funds as stated; and
direct staff to deposit the sum of $28,450.00 into the Registry of the Court.
approve the necessary budget amendment.
p_'.!~',,~(', i;'- ~ ( ~ .... Date:
He~di F. Ashton
Assistant County Attorney
REVIEWED BY:
Mitch Riley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager
Transportation Engineering &
Construction Management
Date:
/
REVIEWED BY:
Steve Miller, P.E., Director
Transportation Engineering &
Construction Management
Date:
REVIEWED BY:
Norm Feder, Administrator
Transportation Division
Date:
~-~ ~vid ~: Weige~/ .... County Attorney
Date: //~
AGEND6 i.T,E,I~
NO, __~
2 7 2001
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIVIL ACTION
CO! I .mR COUNTY, FLORIDA a political
subdivision of the State of Florida,
Plaintiff
VS.
CASE NO. 98-1394-CA
RONALD G. BENDER and MICHE! ~E J.
BENDER, Trustees Under That Certain
Declaration of Trust Dated the 17th day of
May, 1991, et al.
Parcels: 155/855
Respondents
TO:
OFFER OF JUDGMENT
Peter B. and Ann T. Frank
c/o Charles R. Forman, Esq.
Forman, Hanratty & Montgomery
320 NW Third Avenue
Ocala, FL 34475
Plaintiff, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, Florida Statues,
and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to the
Respondents, PETER B. FRANK and ANN T. FRANK, for all compensation, including severance
damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other
claims of Respondents, PETER B. FRANK and ANN T. FRANK, arising out of the taking of
Parcels 155/855, in the total amount of FORTY THREE THOUSAND and NO/100 DOLLARS
($43,000.00), for Parcels 155/855, which includes the $14,550.00 previously deposited pursuant to
the Order of Taking. AGEN.D.A.ITEJ~
No.
NOV'2 7 200I
The Petitioner agrees to place shields or covers around the street lights adjacent to Parcels
155 and 855 to prevent the lights from shining directly on the Respondents' remainder property and
residence.
There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer except that this
offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attorneys fees and costs.
The construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have
been previously and continue to be made available for the Respondent(s) review upon reasonable
notice of such a request.
Dated this
__ day of ,2001.
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
Harmon Turner Building
3301 East Tamiami Trail
Naples, Florida 34112
(941) 774-8400 - Telephone
(941) 774-0225 - Facsimile
BY:
HEIDI F. ASHTON
Florida Bar No. 0966770
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served via U.S.
mail to all parties on the attached service list on this day of ,2001.
HEIDI ASHTON, ESQ.
AGE?I, D~, ~.M..-)
NO.
!OV 2 ? 20D
SERVICE LIST
Peter B. and Ann T. Frank
c/o Charles R. Forman, Esq.
and Christopher Lombardo, Esq.
Forman, Hanratty & Montgomery
320 NW Third Avenue
Ocala, FL 34475
Joe W. Fixel, Esq.
Fixel & Maguire
211 South Gadsden Street
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Capital Quest LLC
101 Executive Blvd.
Elmsford, NY 10523
Eastland Bank, f/k/a Woonsocket Institution
Trust Company, a Rhode Island Corporation
Unknown address
Cablevision Industries of Florida, Inc.
1610 40th Terrace SW
Golden Gate, FL 33999
Avatar f/k/a Gulf American Land
Corporation, a Florida Corporation
C/o Juanita I. Kerrigan, Registered Agent
255 Alhambra Circle
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Mitzie Engle Sheehan
Address unknown
AGEN.D.~ ~
NO. ~
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO
RESPONDENTS, KATHLEEN G. SEDLACEK AND DONALD E. CLINE,
FOR PARCELS 219 AND 219T IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,100.00 IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. KATHRYN HANKINS, ET AL.,
CASE NO. 99-1296-CA. PROJECT NO. 63041.
OBJECTIVE: To approve and authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to
Section 73.032 Fla. Stat. to Respondents, KATI-II~EEN G. SEDLACEK and DONALD E.
CLINE, in the amount of $5,100.00 as full compensation for the condemnation of Parcels 219
and 219T in Collier County v. Kathryn Hankins, et al., Case No. 99-1296-CA.
CONSIDERATIONS: On April 11, 2000, an eminent domain action was filed for the
acquisition of property for the Golden Gate Boulevard project. On June 30, 2000, an Order of
Taking was entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcels 219 and 219T utility, drainage,
maintenance and temporary driveway easements. The County's last offer dated June 22, 1999
was in the amount of $2,900.00. On July 17, 2000, the good faith estimate of value for this
parcel in the amount of $3,400.00 was deposited into the Court registry, thereby vesting title in
the parcel in Collier County.
The Offer of Judgment, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owners of these Parcels,
KATHI,EEN G. SEDLACEK and DONALD E. CLINE, the sum of $5,100.00 as full
compensation for the property taken, including any severance damages, business damages,
damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the
.appraised value and the potential risks and costs in proceeding to trial. The making of the Offer
of Judgment will require the property owners to carefully assess their claims for compensation.
KATHLEEN G. SEDLACEK and DONALD E. CLINE have thirty days from the date of
mailing the offer to accept. If KATHLEEN G. SEDLACEK and DONALD E. CLINE accept,
the County will be required to deposit an additional $1.700.00 into the registry, and the total sum
of funds on deposit, or $5,100.00, will be paid to KATHLEEN G. SEDLACEK and DONALD
E. CLINE by Stipulated Final Judgment of the court. If KATHLEEN G. SEDLACEK and
· DONALD E. CLINE reject the offer, and fail to recover more than $5,100.00 for Parcels 219 and
219T, either through settlement or jury verdict, the County will not be required to pay any costs
incurred by KATHI.F. ENG. SEDLACEK and DONALD E. CLINE after the date of the offer's
rejection. This would include any expert witness fees, such as appraisal fees.
The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment
and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken.
This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
.,~ Funds in the amount of $1,700.00 are available in the Road Construction Gas
'\,~' of Funds are Gas Taxes.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners:
2.
3.
4.
Approve the terms of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service on Respondents,
KATHLEEN G. SEDLACEK and DONALD E. CLINE; and
Approve the expenditure of funds as stated; and
Authorize $1,700.00 to be paid into the Registry of the Court in the event the Offer of
Judgment is accepted by KATHLEEN G. SEDLACEK and DONALD E. CLINE; and
Approve Stipulated Final Judgment based on the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment.
SUBM1TI~D BY:
REVIEWED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Heidi F. Ashton
Assistant County Attorney
A. N. Korti, Project Manager
Transportation/ECM
Mitch Riley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager
Transportation/ECM
Date:
Date:
REVIEWED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Steve Miller, P.E., Director
Transp/~tio~CM
NornyFeder, Administrator
Tra~gportation Division
/
APPROVED BY: ~~-'~2-
~(' David C. Weigel
County Attorney
2
Date: /t/'~/o /
Date:
Date://- / t'-] -(Di
AGENDA. ~
Nc). ~
NOV 2 .t 2ool
Pg,
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN
AND FOR COl 3 IER COUNTY, FLORIDA
COl .1 .mR COUNTY, FLORIDA a
political subdivision of the State of Florida,
VS.
Petitioner,
KATHRYN HANKINS, et al.,
Respondents.
TO:
CASE NO.: 00-1296-CA
CIVIL ACTION
PARCELS: 219 & 219T
/
OFFER OF JUDGMENT
William A. Keyes, Esq.
STEWART & KEYES
Post Office Drawer 790
Fort Myers, Florida 33902-0790
Plaintiff, CO! I .IER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, Florida Statues, and
Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to the
Respondents, KATHLEEN G. SEDLACEK and DONALD E. CLINE, for all compensation,
including severance damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking,
and any other claims of Respondents, KATHLEEN G. SEDLACEK and DONALD E. CLINE,
arising out of the taking of Parcels 219 & 219T, in the total amount of Five Thousand One
Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($5,100.00), for Parcels 219 & 219T, which includes the amount of
$3,400.00 which was deposited pursuant to the Order of Taking dated June 30, 2000.
There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer except that this
offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking Or attorneys fees and costs.
AGENDA ITEM
NO.
NOV 2 7 2001
J~,i,i,,,,,,,,,,,~
The construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have
been previously and continue to be made available for the Respondents review upon reasonable
notice of such a request.
Dated this ~ day of ,2001.
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
Harmon Turner Building
3301 East Tamiami Trail
Naples, Florida 34112
(941) 774-8400 - Telephone
(941) 774-0225 - Facsimile
I-miDI F. ASHTON
Florida Bar No. 0966770
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Offer of Judgment has
been fumished via regular U.S. Mail this ~ day of ,2001, to the parties
listed in the attached service list.
William A. Keyes, Esq.
STEWART & KEYES
Post Office Drawer 790
Fort Myers, Florida 33902-0790
Bank of America, N.A.
1201 Main Street
Dallas, TX 75202
Market Street Mortgage Corporation
P. O. Box 22128
Tampa, FL 33622
HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQ.
Service List
Avatar Properties, Inc. f/k/a GAC Properties,
ffk/a Gulf American Corporation,
ffk/a Gulf American Land Corporation
Juanita I. Kerrigan, Registered Agent
201 Alhambra Circle, 12th Floor
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Hurricane Shutter Company
11650 Chipwood Drive SW
Ft. Myers, FL 33908
AGEND. A, rl~M_
No. ~
27 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO
RESPONDENT, H.R. MOAG, JR., FOR PARCEL 218 IN THE AMOUNT
OF $800.00 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. KATHRYN
HANKINS, ETAL., CASE NO. 99-1296-CA. PROJECT NO. 63041.
OB.JECTIVE: To approve and authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to
Section 73.032 Fla. Stat. to Respondent, H.R. MOAG, JR., in the amount of $800.00 as full
compensation for the condemnation of Parcel 218 in Collier County v. Kath~'n Hankins, et al..
Case No. 99-1296-CA.
CONSIDERATIONS: On April 11, 2000, an eminent domain action was filed for the
acquisition of property for the Golden Gate Boulevard project. On June 30, 2000, an Order of
Taking was entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcel 218 utility, drainage and maintenance
easement. The County's last offer dated August 27, 1998 was in the amount of $400.00. On
July 17, 2000, the good faith estimate of value for this parcel was deposited into the Court
registry, thereby vesting title in the parcel in Collier County.
The Offer of Judgment, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owner of this Parcel,
H.R. MOAG, JR., the sum of $800.00 as full compensation for the property taken, including any
severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure
takes into account the basis for the appraised value and the potential risks and costs in
proceeding to trial. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property owner to
carefully assess his claims for compensation. H.R. MOAG, JR. has thirty days from the date of
mailing the offer to accept. If H.R, MOAG, JR. accepts, the County will be required to deposit
an additional $400.00 into the registry, and the total sum of funds on deposit, or $800.00, will be
paid to H.R. MOAG, JR. by Stipulated Final Judgment of the court. If H.R. MOAG. JR. rejects
the offer, and fails to recover more than $800.00 for Parcel 218, either through settlement or jury
verdict, the County will not be required to pay any costs incurred by H.P,. MOAG, JR. after the
date of the offer's rejection. This would include any expert witness fees, such as appraisal fees.
The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment
and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken.
This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
t~K_Funds in the amount of $400.00 are available in the Road Construction Gas Tax Fund. Source of
? Funds are Gas Taxes.
N0. ~
NOV 2 7 2001
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None.
RECOMMENDATION:
2.
3.
4.
That the Board of County Commissioners:
Approve the terms of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service on Respondent,
H.R. MOAG, JR.; and
Approve the expenditure of funds as stated; and
Authorize $400 to be paid into the Registry of the Court in the event the Offer of
Judgment is accepted by H.R. MOAG, JR.; and
Approve Stipulated Final Judgment based on the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment.
SUBMITTED BY:
Heidi F. Ashton
Assistant County Attorney
Date:
REVIEWED BY:
A. N. Korti, Project Manager
Transportation/ECM
Date:
REVIEWED BY:
Mitch Riley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager
Transportation/ECM
Date:
REVIEWED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Steve Miller, P.E., Director
Transpo,r~tion/ECM
//
Norm Feder, Administrator
TransPortation Division
~C-'~avid C. Weigei
County Attorney
2
Date:
Date:
Date:
II-lq-ol ,,,
I
NO. ~
NOV 2 7.2001
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN
AND FOR CO! I IF~R COUNTY, FLORIDA
COl I ~mR COUNTY, FLORIDA a
political subdivision of the State of Florida,
VS.
Petitioner,
KATHRYN HANKINS, et al.,
Respondents.
OFFER OF JUDGMENT
CASE NO.: 00-1296-CA
CIVIL ACTION
PARCEL: 218
TO:
Respondent, H.
H. R. MOAG, JR.
1104 Gretchen Lane
Greensboro, NC 27410
Plaintiff, COl I IER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, Florida Statues, and
R. Civ. P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to the
R. MOAG, JR., for all compensation, including severance damages, business
damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other claims of Respondent,
H. R. MOAG, JR., arising out of the taking of Parcel 218, in the total amount of Eight Hundred
and No/100 Dollars ($800.00), for Parcel 218, which includes the amount of $400.00 which was
deposited pursuant to the Order of Taking dated June 30, 2000.
There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer except that this
offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attorneys fees and costs.
The construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have
been previously and continue to be made available for the Respondent(s) review' upon reasonable
notice of such a request, bi0. ~
7 200
Dated this
day of
,2001.
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
Harmon Turner Building
3301 East Tamiami Trail
Naples, Florida 34112
(941) 774-8400 - Telephone
(941) 774-0225 - Facsimile
HEIDI F. ASHTON
Florida Bar No. 0966770
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Offer of Judgment has
been furnished via regular U.S. Mail this day of , 2001, to H. R.
MOAG, JR., 1104 Gretchen Lane, Greensboro, NC 27410 and Avatar Properties, Inc., Juanita I.
Kemgan, Registered Agent, 201 Alhambra Circle, 12th Floor, Coral Gables, FL 33134.
HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQ.
NO. ~
NOV 2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARy
APPROVE THE STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
CONDEMNATION OF PARCEL NO. 169 IN COLLIER COUNTY V.
GEORGE VISNICH, ET AL., CASE NO. 91-2776-CA.
OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Stipulated Final
Judgment as full and final compensation to be paid for the condemnation of the interest of John
L. Cowan in Parcel No. 169 in Collier County v. George Visnich, et al., Case No. 91-2776-CA.
CONSIDERATIONS: On October 23, 1991, an Order of Taking was entered by the Circuit
Court as to Parcel 169 (drainage easement), and in November, 1991, the good faith estimate of
value for this parcel in the amount of $8,000 was deposited into the Court registry, thereby
vesting title in the parcel in Collier County.
Through negotiations, the parties have reached a settlement agreement whereby the Defendant,
John L. Cowan has agreed to accept the sum of $39,500.00 as full payment for the property
interests taken as to Parcel 169, which includes the good faith estimate of value previously
deposited by the County, the Defendant's costs, including attorney's fees and appraisal fees, and
interest. Pursuant to statute, the County is required to pay the Defendant's costs, including expert
witness and attorney's fees, and $10,500 of the total settlement is allocated to these costs.
The Stipulated Final Judgment provides that Collier County shall deposit an additional amount
of $31,500.00 with the Registry of the Court. The specific terms of the proposed settlement are
set out in the Stipulated Final Judgment attached hereto as Exhibit "A."
Staff has reviewed the County's obligations stated in the Stipulated Final Judgment and consider
them to be reasonable.
FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of this stipulated final judgment is $31,500.00. Funds for
this purpose are available in the reserves of Fund 132, Pine Ridge Industrial Park. Approval of a
budget amendment is necessary whereby funds in the amount of $31,500.00 will be transferred
'from the reserves into the operating budget of Fund 132.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners:
Approve the terms of the Stipulated Final Judgment and authorize the assistant county
attorney to sign;
Approve the expenditure ot~ the funds as stated;
Approve the necessary budget amendment; and
Direct staff to deposit the sum of $31,500.00 into the Registry of the Co
NO. /4. ~
rt. NOV 2 7 2001
F'g._ /
Ellen T. Chadwell
Assistant County Attorney
REVIEWED BY: ~~a~~'~
Harry Huber, Senior Project Manager
Public Utilities Engineering Department
APPROVED BY:
Tom Wides, Interim Administrator
Public Utilities Division
Date:
Date:
~'6F'T)-avid C. Weigel County Attorney
Date://
H:XPublickLitigationkEminent DomainkELLEN"3 CASES\Visnich',Exec Summary - Cowan SFJ.doc
AGF...N.D~A ~T£M
NOV 2 7 2001
NOV- 8-01THU 1~:42
E~RLE & PRTCHEN, P~,
NO, 13053723691
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
TV,rENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO. 91-2776-CA-01
,P, 03
COT.LIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
A political subdivision of the
State of Florida,
Plaintiff,
GEORGE VISNICH, ct al.,
Defendants.
PARCEL NO. 169
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE having come before the Court upon joint motion of the parties for entry
of a Stipulated Final Jud2ment made by the Plaintiff, COLLIEK COUNTY, FLORIDA, and
Defendant, JOHN L. COWAN, owner of Parcel 169, and the Court being fully advised in the
premises and finding that the parties were authorized to enter into such a motion and that the
compensation to bc paid by thc Plaintiff is full, just and reasonable for all parties concerned it is
hereby
ORDEI~RD AND ADYU-DGED that the Defendant, JOHN L. COWAN, shall have
and recover of and from Plaintiff the sum of TWENTY NINE THOUSAND and no/100
($29,000.00) DOLLARS, as full compensation for the property (designated Parcel 169) taken and for
all other damages of any nature, exclusive of attorneys' fees and costs and expert wimess fees and
costs. It is further
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Defendant, IOHN L. (
EXHIBIT
,,i'%X;,'.A'NT ~1~.!1 1.-A-.~.. --
'__ NOV 2 7 2001
NOV- 8-01THU 15:43 EARLE & PATOHEN, PA, FAX NO, 13053723681 .P, 04
and recover of and from Plaintiff thc sum of TEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED and no/100
($10,500.00) DOLLARS, in full payment for this Defendant's attorney's fees and expert witness fees
and costs. It is further
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff, COLLIER COUNqW, FLORIDA shall,
within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order, pay to EARLE & PATCH~N, P.A. TRUST
ACCOUNT, by mailing suchpayment to Brian P. Patchen, Esq., 1000 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1112,
Miami.', Florida 33131, as attorneys for Defendant, JOHN L. COWAN, the sum of THIR~ ONE
THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED and no/100 ($31,500.00) DOLLARS, that sum being the remainder
due under this judgment lcss thc sum of $$,000.00 previously paid to Defendant, to be distributed in
accordance with this Stipulated Final Judgment.
DO1N'E AND ORDERED in Chambers at Naples, Collier County, Florida this
day of November, 2001.
CC:
Ellen T. Chadwell, Esq.
Brian P. Patchen, Esq
HUGH D. HAYES, Circuit Court Judge
JOINT MOTION
The parties, by and through their undersigned attorneys, move the Court for entry of
the foregoing Stipulated Final ;Iudgment as to Parcel 169..
2
ELLEN T. CHADWELL, Esq.
FL Bar No. 9838650
Attorney for Plaintiff
Assistant Collier County Attorney
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Naples, FL 34112-4902
(941/774-8400)
BR/A~ P. P2
FL B~r No. 157545
A~omey fo~ Dcfendan~ ~ohn L. Co. an
Earle & Patchen, P.A.
1000 Brickell Ave., Suite 1112
Miami, FL 33131
(305/372-1112) AGENDA I'I~M.;"- '~ [
NOV 2 7 ~Oi'-i
Pg.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION PUDA-2001-AR-881. WILLIAM L. HOOVER OF HOOVER PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT, INC. REPRESENTING THE SALVATION ARMY A NOT FOR
PROFIT ORGANIZATION, REQUESTING TO REPEAL THE CURRENT SALVATION
ARMY PUD AND TO ADOPT A NEW PUD FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING
THE SITE AREA BY 0.73 ACRES AND ADDING MOTOR VEHICLE DISPLAY AND
SALES TO THE LIST OF PERMITTED USES FOR THE COMMERCIAL TRACT OF
THE PUD. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
AIRPORT ROAD SOUTH OF ESTEY AVENUE IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. THIS PROPERTY
CONSISTS OF 6.51 ACRES.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners consider an application seeking to repeal
the current Salvation Army PUD and to adopt a new PUD for the purpose of increasing
the site area by 0.73 acres and adding motor vehicle display and sales to the list of
permitted uses for the Commercial Tract of the PUD while maintaining the community's
interest.
CONSIDERATIONS:
This PUD was originally approved in December 18, 1990 (Ordinance No. 90-107). The
approved PUD contained a Commercial Tract consisting of 0.55 acres approved for a
thrift store, and a Residential/Community Tract consisting of 5.23 acres approved for up
to 20 residential dwelling units, adult and child day care centers, churches, community
centers, non-profit administration centers and non-profit recreational facilities. The
applicants have purchased 0.73 acres of land currently zoned RMF-6 to the northwest
of the existing PUD and wish to incorporate it into the residential/Community Tract of
the PUD. They are not proposing any new uses for the additional parcel. The
Commercial Tract of the PUD fronting on Airport Road contains automobile dealerships
on either side of it. The applicants are requesting to add automobile sales and display to
the list of permitted uses for this commercial tract. This tract will be leased to the
automobile dealership that owns the dealership on both sides of the tract in question.
The site-generated trips from the new project will be 1736 Average Weekday Trips. The
proposed amendment will not change the site generated trips over the amount that
could be generated by the currently approved PUD. As a result, this petition will not
create new trips that exceed the significance test standard (5 percent of the LOS "C"
design volume) on Airport Road or any other County Road. Therefore, this petition is
consistent with Policies 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation Element of the Growth
Management Plan.
No, /'7 J~
NOV 2 ? 2001
1 ' Pg- J
FISCAL IMPACT:
The applicant is not proposing to build any structures on the commercial
Therefore, there will be no impact fees associated with the approval of this project.
tract.
Additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates. The revenue
that will be generated by the ad valorem tax depends on the value of the improvements.
At this point in time, staff has not developed a method to arrive at a reasonable estimate
of tax revenue based on ad valorem tax rates.
The above discussion deals with revenue schemes. A fiscal impact analysis is
incomplete without an estimate of costs that will be generated by a particular land use
development project.
Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that not withstanding fiscal impact relationship,
development takes place in an environment of concurrency relationship. When level of
service requirements fall below then developed standard a mechanism is in place to
bring about a cessation of building activities. Certain LOS standards apply countywide
and would therefore bring about a countywide concurrency determination versus roads,
which may have geographic concurrency implications.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict), as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan.
The Urban Mixed Use District, the Office and In-fill Commercial Subdistrict (OIC)
provides that development of land abutting commercial zoning on both sides may
include those of the highest intensity of the abutting commercial zoning district.
Based on the above analysis, the proposed PUD amendment is deemed consistent with
the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
There are no environmental issues with this PUD Amendment request.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is
required.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommended that the CCPC forward Petition PUDA-2001-AR-881 to the Board of
County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval.
AG~A I~
NOV 2 ? 2001
2
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION:
This petition was exempt from the review by the EAC as there were no environmental
issues with this PUD Amendment request.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed this petition on October Ist 2001 and
by a unanimous vote recommended approval.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
REVIEWED BY:
/.~?. ,SAN MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
DATE
DATE
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
APPROVED BY:
~' DATE
JOHI~M. DUNNU(~K III
INTF_~IM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADM~IISTRATOR
Petition Number: PUDA-2001-AR-881
.o. l? F'
NOV 2 ? 2001
AGENDA ITEM 8-D
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
MEMORANDUM
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
September 12, 2001
PETITION NO: PUD-2001-AR-881
OWNER/AGENT:
Agent:
William L. Hoover, AICP
Hoover Planning and Development, Inc.
3785 Airport Road North, Suite B-1
Naples, FL. 34105
Owner:
Salvation Army
CIO Major Cleo Damon, Area Coordinator
3180 Estey Avenue
Naples, FL. 34104
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner seeks to repeal the current Salvation Army PUD and to adopt a new PUD
for the purpose of increasing the site area by 0.73 acres and adding motor vehicle
display and sales to the list of permitted uses for the Commercial Tract of the PUD.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located on the west side of Airport Road south of Estey Avenue
in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. This property
consists of 6.51 acres.
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
This PUD was originally approved in December 18, 1990 (Ordinance No. 90-107). The
approve PUD contained a Commercial Tract consisting of 0.55 acres approved for a
thrift store, and a Residential/Community Tract consisting of 5.23 acres approved for up
to 20 residential dwelling units, adult and child day care centers, churches, community
centers, non-profit administration centers and non-profit recreational facilities. The
AGEJ~A ITEM~
.~, /? ~"
NOV 2 ? 2001
,LS ~
~ or ~
NOV 2 7 2001
applicants have purchased 0.73 acres of land currently zoned RMF-6 to the northwest
of the existing PUD and wish to incorporate it into the residential/Community Tract of
the PUD. They are not proposing any new uses for the additional parcel. The
Commercial Tract of the PUD fronting on Airport Road contains automobile dealerships
on either side of it. The applicants are requesting to add automobile sales and display to
the list of permitted uses for this commercial tract. This tract will be leased to the
automobile dealership that owns the dealership on both sides of the tract in question.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Existing: - Salvation Army's administration center and vacant, zoned PUD
Surrounding: North - vacant and single family residences, zoned RMF-6
and "C-4" Commercial
East - Automobile dealership, zoned "C-5" Commercial
South - Commercial uses, zoned "C-5" Commercial
West -Vacant and single family residences, zoned RSF-4
residential
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict), as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan.
The Urban Mixed Use District, the Office and In-fill Commercial Subdistrict (OIC)
provides that development of land abutting commercial zoning on both sides may
include those of the highest intensity of the abutting commercial zoning district.
Based on the above analysis, the proposed PUD amendment is deemed consistent with
the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
Transportation Element:
The site-generated trips from the new project will be 1736 Average Weekday Trips. The
proposed amendment will not change the site generated trips over the amount that
could be generated by the currently approved PUD. As a result, this petition will not
create new trips that exceed the significance test standard (5 percent of the LOS "C"
design volume) on Airport Road or any other County Road. Therefore, this petition is
consistent with Policies 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation Element of the Growth
Management Plan.
Airport Road is currently a'6-1ane arterial road with a 1999 traffic count of 56,138 and is
operating at LOS "C". This road segment is not projected to be deficient by the build-out
of this project. Based on this data, this petition is consistent with policies 1.3 and 1.4 of
the Transportation Element.
Conservation and Open Space.'
2
NOV 2 7 2001
PUD development commitments provide open space consisting of at least thirty (30)
percent of the gross land area. Native vegetation preservation or re-vegetation
requirements of the LDC will be achieved by the design for preservation areas and by
re-vegetation of native species, therefore, the Conservation and Open Space Elements
of the GMP will be achieved through PUD development commitments.
Utility and Water Manaqement:
Development of the land will proceed on the basis of connection to the County's sewer
and water distribution system. These facilities are to be designed, constructed,
conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with the Collier County Ordinance
Number 88-76.
Water management facilities will be constructed to meet County Ordinances and they
will be reviewed and approved as a function of obtaining subsequent development order
approvals. The above-prescribed course of action makes this petition consistent with
this element of the GMP.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is
required.
ENVIRONMENTAL~ TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE EVALUATION:
The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff responsible for
oversight related to the above referenced areas of critical concern. This includes a
review by the Community Development Environmental and Engineering staff, and the
Transportation Services Division staff. The comments and concerns of these reviewing
agencies have helped to shape the content of the PUD Document.
ANALYSIS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on
which a favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide
an objective comprehensive overview of the impact of the proposed land use change,
be they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that
comprehensive overview. The list of criteria is specifically noted in Section 2.7.2.5. and
Section 2.7.3.2.5. of the Land Development Code thus requiring staff evaluation and
comment, and shall be the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the
Planning Commission to the BCC. Each of the potential impacts or considerations
identified during the staff review are listed under each of the criterion noted and are
categorized as either pro or con, whichever the case may be, in the opinion of staff.
3
.~ /7
NOV 2 ? 2001
pg, I-7
Staff review of each of the criterion is followed by a summary conclusion culminating in
a determination of compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These
evaluations are completed as separate documents and are attached to the staff report.
Appropriate evaluation of petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for
supportive action by appropriate evaluation of decision makers. The evaluation by
professional staff should typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the
community's future land use plan, and whether or not a rezoning action would be
consistent with the Collier County GMP in all of its related elements. Other evaluation
considerations should include an assessment of adequacy of transportation
infrastructure, other infrastructure, and compatibility with adjacent land uses, a
consideration usually dealt with as a facet of analyzing the relationship of the rezoning
action to the long range plan for future land uses.
Following are staff findings for this PUD amendment:
Relationship to Future and Existing Land Uses:
This refers to the relationship of the proposed zoning action to the Future Land Use
Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. As discussed above, this area
is located within the Residential Mixed Use Subdistrict, allowing commercial activities as
Office and In-fill commercial (OIC). This amendment will only add a 0.73 acres of
additional land to the PUD and add one more use to the list of permitted uses of the
commercial tract.
Traffic:
The site-generated trips from the amended PUD will be 1736 Average Weekday Trips.
The proposed amendment will not change the site generated trips over the amount that
could be generated by the currently approved PUD. As a result, this petition will not
create new trips that exceed the significance test standard (5 percent of the LOS "C"
design volume) on Airport Road or any other County Road.
Infrastructure:
The subject ~roperty is served by the County water and sewer system. Storm water
management will be provided on site.
PUD Document and Master Plan:,
PUD Document.:
The Salvation Army PUD Document is modeled after a County Planning Services model
PUD Document in terms of format, general provisions covering references to GMP and
LDC. The PUD document provides the required format for addressing land uses and
development standards and development commitments. The PUD contains all of the
recommendations of reviewing staff.
4 I'
NOV 2 ? 2001
Master Plan:
The Master Plan two entrances to the site. One from Airport Road and one from Estey
Avenue
EAC RECOMMENDATION'
The property does not contain environmentally sensitive lands; therefore, this PUD was
exempt from the EAC review.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION'
Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUD-2001-AR-881 to the Board of
County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
REVIEWED BY:
la //5,,¢,I
DATE
.x/SUSAN__ MURRAY, AICP j
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
DATE
APPROVED BY:
JOl-Jl~ U. DdNNUCEIII DATE
INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
5
NOV 2 7 200I
Petition Number: PUD-2001-AR-881, Salvation Army
Staff Report for November 1,2001 CCPC meeting.
NOTE: This Petition has been tentatively scheduled for the November 27, 2001 BCC meeting.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION:
JOYCE~NNA J. RAUTIO, CHAIRM,~
6
NOV 2 7 2001
FINDINGS FOR PUD
PUD-2001-AR-881
Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning
Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the
following criteria:
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.
Pro: (i)
Intensifying land development patterns produces economics of scale
relative to public utilities, facilities and services, which are currently
available in this area.
(ii)
The subject property is served by a network of County roads, all of
which are within the urbanized area providing easy access to a host of
community services and facilities.
(iii) Comprehensive multi-disciplined analysis supports the suitability of the
land for the uses proposed.
Con: (i) As with all actions that intensify urban development patterns there is
some loss to travel time for users of the same arterial road system.
Summary Finding: Jurisdictional reviews by County staff support the manner
and pattern of development proposed for the subject property. Development
conditions contained in the PUD document give assurance that all infrastructure
will be developed and be consistent with County regulations. Any inadequacies
which require supplementing the PUD Document will be recommended to the
Board of County Commissioners as conditions of approval by staff.
Recommended mitigation measures will assure compliance with Level of Service
relationships as prescribed by the Growth Management Plan.
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.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
NOV 2 ? 2001
Summary Findin_cl: Documents submitted with the application provide evidence
of unified control. The PUD document makes appropriate provisions for
continuing operation and maintenance of common areas.
Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals,
objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan.
Pro:
The development strategy for the subject property is entirely consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management
Plan.
Con: None.
Summary Finding: The subject petition has been found consistent with the
goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. A more detailed
description of this conformity is addressed in the Staff Report.
Additional Finding: The subject property is designated Urban Commercial
District, Residential Mixed Use Subdistrict on the FLUE to the GMP. Office and
In-fill Commercial provisions authorize zoning actions aimed at allowing the land
to be used for commercial purposes.
This petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff for compliance with the
applicable elements of the Growth Management Plan, as note below:
Future Land Use Element - Consistency with FLUE requirements is further
described as follows:
Land Use - The Office and In-fill Subdistrict allows commercial land use and
related activities.
Transportation Element - Analysis of the subject petition concluded with a finding
that with development phasing this petition is consistent with the policies of the
TE.
Recreation and Open Space Element - Thirty (30%) percent or more of the land
area is to be developed as open space consisting of a wetland areas, lakes and
landscape buffers.
This area is exclusive of the amount of open space that remains as each
development parcel or tract is developed. Said amount of open space is equal to
the open space requirement of 30 percent for commercial and industrial PUD's.
NOV 2 ? 2001
Other Applicable Element (s) - By virtue of development commitments and
master plan development strategy, staff is of the opinion that the Salvation Army
PUD is entirely consistent with provisions of the Collier County GMP.
Staff review indicates that this petition has been designed to account for the
necessary relationships dictated by the GMP. Where appropriate, stipulations
have been generated to ensure consistency with the GMP during the permitting
process. Therefore, this petition has been deemed to be consistent with the
Growth Management Plan.
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.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinq: The PUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize
internal land use relationship through the use of various forms of open space
separation. External relationships are automatically regulated by the Land
Development Code to assure harmonious relationships between projects.
The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to
serve the development.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinq: The amount of open space set aside by this project is
consistent with the provisions of the Land Development Code.
The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the
adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinq: Timing or sequence of development in light of concurrency
requirements is not a significant problem. (See Staff report)
The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to
accommodate expansion.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
3
N~. 17
NOV 2 ? 2001
Summary Finding: Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting
infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies,
characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is
supportive of conditions emanating from urban development. This assessment is
described at length in the staff report adopted by the CCPC. Relative to this
petition, development of the subject property is timely, because supporting
infrastructure is available.
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.
Pro/Con:.. Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findin.q: This finding essentially requires an evaluation of the extent
;~o which development standards proposed for this PUD depart from development
standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district.
The development standards in this PUD are similar to those standards used for
in the Industrial and commercial zoning districts.
NOV 2 7 2001
REZONE FINDINGS
PETITION PUD-2001-AR-881
Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report
and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County
Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered
the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable:
Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives,
and policies and Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth
Management Plan.
Pro: Development Orders deemed consistent with all applicable elements of
the FLUE of the GMP should be considered a positive relationship.
Con: None
Summary Findinqs: The propoSed development is in compliance with the
Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
2. The existing land use pattern;
Pro: The commercial portion of this project is adjacent on both sides to similar
commercial zoning and land use.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The proposed land uses are generally consistent with the
existing and future land use pattern in the area.
J
The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and
nearby districts;
Pro: The proposed rezone is for commercial and institutional uses. This PUD is
of sufficient size and is adjacent to similar land uses, therefore, this rezone will
not create an isolated district.
Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinc~s: The parcel will not result in an isolated district unrelated to
adjacent and nearby districts because it is located within close proximity of other
NOV ? 7 001
w
approved commercially zoned properties. It is also consistent with expected land
uses by virtue of its location within the "Urban Mixed Use Subdistrict" on the
Future Land Use Element.
Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to
existing conditions on the property proposed for change.
Pro:, The district boundaries are logically drawn and they are consistent with the
FLUE of the GMP.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The boundaries are logically drawn by virtue of the site's
location within the "Urban Mixed Use Subdistrict" on the Future Land Use
Element.
Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the
proposed amendment necessary.
Pro: The proposed zoning change is appropriate based on the existing
conditions of the property and because its relationship to the FLUE (Future Land
Use Element of the Growth Management Plan) is a positive one.
Con.'. None.
Summary Findings: Consistent with the Growth Management Plan.
Whether the proposed Change will adversely influence living conditions in
the neighborhood;
Pro Recommended mitigation actions included in the PUD Document will go a
long way towards offsetting any potential adverse influences on the residential
communities in the area.
Con: The additional commercial activities could cause increased noise and
traffi~ impacts on the nearby properties. However, due to it's location and the
proposed preserve and buffer areas, the proposed PUD should not adversely
impact the adjacent properties.
Summary Findinqs: The proposed change will not adversely influence living
conditions in the neighborhood because the development standards of the PUD
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
Document have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of
adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments.
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,
Pro: (i) An action to rezone the property as requested is consistent with all
applicable traffic circulation elements.
(ii) The property fronts directly on a public road thereby providing an
immediate access to the arterial road network over which traffic
from this residential development would be defused.
Con: (i) Urban intensification results in greater volumes of traffic on the
- " local, arterial and collector road system serving the PUD. Other
projects dependent upon the same street system may perceive this
result as one which will reduce their perceived comfort levels.
Summary Findin.qs: Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement
for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Traffic Element of the GMP and was found
consistent, a statement advising that this project when developed will not
excessively increase traffic congestion. Additionally certain traffic management
system improvements are required as a condition of approval (i.e. turn lanes,
traffic signals, dedications, etc.). In the final analysis all rezone actions are
subject to the Concurrency Management System.
Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem;
Pro: The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite
development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby
properties. New development in and of itself is not supposed to increase flooding
potential on adjacent property over and above what would occur without
development.
Con: Urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to
intra:county drainage appurtenances would increase the risk of flooding in areas
when the drainage outfall condition is inadequate.
NOV 2 7 2001
10.
11.
Summary Findin_cls: Every project approved in Collier County involving the
utilization of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate
all sub-surface drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of
approval. This project was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and
construction plans are required to meet County standards as a condition of
approval.
Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to
adjacent areas;
Pro: The proposed commercial development conforms to the similar commercial
development standards of the LDC which are designed to protect the circulation
of light and air to adjacent areas.
Con;, None.
Summary Findings: All projects in Collier County are subject to the
development standards that are unique to the zoning district in which it is located.
These development standards and others apply generally and equally to all
zoning districts (i.e. open space requirement, corridor management provisions,
etc.) were designed to ensure that light penetration and circulation of air does not
adversely affect adjacent areas.
Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the
adjacent area;
Pro: Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous
underutilized land, a condition which exists on the north and east sides.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated
results which may be internal or external to the subject property that can affect
property values. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including
zoning, however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value
determination by law is driven by market value. The mere fact that a property is
given a new zonin~ designation may or may not affect value.
Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations;
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
NOV 2 ? 2001
12.
Summary Findings: The basic premise underlying all of the development
standards in the zoning division of the LDC is that their sound application when
combined with the administrative site development plan approval process, gives
reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in a deterrence to
improvement of adjacent property.
Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to
an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare;
13.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The proposed PUD complies with the Growth
Management Plan, a public policy statement supporting Zoning actions when
they are consistent with said plan. In light of this fact the proposed change does
not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further
determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with
plans are in the public interest.
Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning;
14.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findin_qs: The subject property can be developed in accordance with
the existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the
opportunity to maximize the development potential of the site as made possible
by its consistency relationship with the FLUE as contained in the Growth
Management Plan.
Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the
neighborhood or the County;
Pro: The proposed development complies with the GMP.
15.
Con;. Evaluation not applicable.
Summary FindinRs: A policy statement which has evaluated the scale and
intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable for this site.
Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.
5
AGEh~)A
NOv 2 7 200!
16.
17.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findinqs: There are many sites which are zoned to accommodate
the proposed commercial development. This is not the determining factor when
evaluating the appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of
zoning are consistency with all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of
infrastructure and to some extent the timing of the action and all of the above
criteria.
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.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findin_qs: Physical alteration is a product of developing vacant land
which cannot be avoided.
The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities
and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier
County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through
the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary FindinRs: Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of
service determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established
relationships.
NOV 2 7 2001
PETITION NUMBER
DATE
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING
FOR
PUD AMENDMENT/DO AMENDMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
PLANNING SERVICES
Name of Applicant #1 Ma'or Cleo Damo Area Coordinator Salvation Arm
Applicant's Mailing Address _3180 Este¥ Avenue
City ~ State Florida Zip Code 34104_
Applicant's Phone Number _941-775-9447_ Fax Number _941-775-9732 and
Name of Applicant #2 James A. Morande, Jr., Morande Kia, Inc.
Applicant's Mailing Address 1472 Airport Road South
City __N_aples State Florida Zip Code 34104
Applicant's Ph~>ne Number 9~41-732-891~ Fax Number 9__41-732-1105
Is the applicant the owner of the subject property?
No
XX (Applicant#1 Only) Yes _
(a) If applicant is a land trust, so indicate and name beneficiaries belov,'.
~ (b) If applicant is a corporation other than a public corporation, so indicate and
name officers and major stockholders below.
(c) If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity, so
---'--- indicate and name principals below.
_,---- (d) If applicant is an owner, indicate exactly as recorded, and list all other
owners, if any.
~ (e) If applicant is a lessee, attach copy of lease, and indicate actual owners if not
indicated on the lease.
(f) If applicant is a contract purchaser, attach copy of contract, and indicate
-- actual owner(s) name and address below.
The sub'ect roe is owned b A hcant #1 the Salvation Arm Inc. a Geor ia
co ration. A licant #2 is a lessee fi.om A licant #1 for onl the commercial ortion of the
pUD. A licant #2 is formall Auto Ne ot~ators Inc. dba Morande Ki with James A
Moran& Jr. as President and ma'or stockholder Michael Morande as Vice-President and
m__~g~r stockholder, and Kerney Pinkston as Secretary. ~
[ Dev~.;4-~i¢-/7 ,Q'Y-
Name of Agent William L. Hoover, AICP Firm Hoover Planning,
Agent's Mailing Xddress 3785 Airport Road North, Suite B-1..
City ~ State Florida_ Zip Code 34105
Phone Number 941-403-8899 Fax Number _941-403-900~9
NOV 2 7 2001
3. PUD ORDINANCE NAME AND NUMBER: The Salvation Army PUD - Ord. #90-107
~ DETAILED LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THE
APPLICATION (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page. If
request involves change to more than one zoning district, include
separate legal description for property involved in each district.
If property is odd-shaped, submit five (5) copies of survey (1" to
400' scale).
THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPLYING THE CORRECT LEGAL
DESCRIPTION. IF QUESTIONS ARISE CONCERNING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION,
AN ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION SHALL BE REQUIRED.
SECTION ? TOWNSHIP 50s RANGE 25E
See attached legal description.
Address or location of subject property The west side of Airport
Road, approximately 600 feet north of Davis Blvd.
Does property owner own contiguous property to the subject
property? If so, give complete legal description of entire
contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on
separate page).
NO.
TYPE OF AMENDMENT:
×× A. PUD Document Language Amendment
×× B. PUD Master Plan Amendment
C. Development Order Language Amendment
DOES AMENDMENT COMPLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: XX
No If no, explain:
HAS A PUBLIC HEARING BEEN HELD ON THIS PROPERTY WITHIN THE
LAST YEAR? IF SO, IN WHOSE NAME? No.
PETITION #: NA DATE: ~
Yes
AGENDA
NOV 7 2001
10.
HAS ANY pORTION OF THE PUD BEENSOLD AND/OR WW
DEVELOPED? ARE ANY CHANGES pRqPOSED FOR THE AREA SOLD AND/O~
DEVELOPED?
XX Yes. No. IF YES, DESCRIBE: (ATTACH
ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NECESSARY)-
The Salvation Arm Communit Center f · · cted.
The thrif~t store that could v rtion
frontin on Air ort Road
AFFIDAVIT
49, w~ll~m L. ~oover aaent_ being first duly sworn,
depos~"an~-say that we are the~°i the property described
herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing;
that all the answers to the questions in this application, and all
sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and
made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best
of our knowledge and belief. We understand this application must
be completed and accurate before a hearing can be advertised. We
further permit the undersigned to act as our representative in any
matters regarding this Petition.
NOTE: SIGNATURES OF ALL OWNERS ARE MANDATORY.
See attached lease from owner and applicant's notarized authorization
! t t e r. ~~X ~X~__~
SIGNATUR~ OF AGENT
State of Florida
County of Collier
. e oin ADDlication was acknowledged befQre me this
The for g g o~ ~ , who
,~5- day of
i_--~-~pe~sonally ~wn to me or who h--~s produced ....... ~= -ot~
~tO~, ~ ~, ~W'~
take an oath.
___ (Signature ~ Notary Public)
Margaret Hendrix
.,:t~;. ,,?, MARGARET E. HENDRIXIi
~1 ....~o;~EXPIRES: Februau 1~, 2003
..-,, ,~..,~;,,,Ik,,ded Thru No. fy putYic Undew.~ers ,
NOTARY PUBLIC
Commission # ~ ~/&'
My Commission Expires:
PUD\DO APPLICATION/md/4128
NOV 2 7 2001
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
New Parcel Being Added
The West 100 feet of the North 1/2 of Lot 137, Naples; Grove and Truck Co's Little
Farms No. 2, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 1, page 27, Public
Records, Collier County, Florida, less and except the North 30 feet thereof for roadway
and the West 25 feet of the North 160 feet of said Lot 137.
A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN AND BEING A PART OF LOT [37,
NAPLES'GROVE & TRUCK CO.'S LITll-E FARMS NO. 2 AS RECORDED
IN EAT BOOK 1, PAGE 27A, PUBLIC ECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNT%,. FLORIDA,. BEING MORE PARTIOULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 35, BLOCK 'B',
ROCK.CREEK PARK, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 79,
F~_IBLIC RECORDS.OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG
T!~ .~RT~ LINE OF S~ID. ROCK CREEK.PARK ~D THE SOUTH LINE
~ SAID LOT.i~7~ S'~9 DEG~ES ~ MI~ES ~ SECONDS WEST
~_&l FEET TO T~ SO~EST ~RN~ OF SAID LOT 1~7 AND
~ ~UT~ST CORNER OF A~INGTON ~RRAOE, AS RECORDED IN
~T BOOK ~, PA~.64,.P~LIC ~CO~S OF COLLIER ~UNTY,
~ORiDA;''~E~E'ALONG ~E WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 1~7 ~D
TH~ EAST LINE ~ SAID ARLI~TON TE~CE, NORTH gl DEGREES
18 MiN~JTES 2g SECONDS WEST ~.S& FEET; THENCE ALONG A
'LI~ PARA~L'TO A~ ~17.8~ FEET (MEA~RED AT 9~ DEGREES)
SOUTH OF THE SO~H RIGHT--OF-WAY LINE OF ESTEY AVENUE,
NORTH 89 DEGREES ~ NINUTES ~ SECONDS EAST 1~.~ FEET;
~CE ALONG A LINE lg8 FEET (flE~URED AT 9~ DEGREES)
EAST OF'T~ WEST LINE OF ~ID LOT 1~7 AND THE EAST LI~
OF A~I~TON TERRACE, NORTH 81 DEGREES 18 MINUTES 2g
SECONDS WEST ~17.8& F~T TO Th~ SOUT~ RIGHT--OF-WAY LINE
OF SAID ESTEY AVENUE; THENCE ALONG T}~E SOUTH RIGHT--OEFWAY
LINE OF SAID ESTEY AVENUE, NORTH 8g DEGREES g~ MINUTES 2Q
~CONDS E~T ~87.~2 FEET; THENCE ALONG A LINE 24~.B~ FEET
(DEAS~ED AT 9~ DEGREES) WEST OF THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY
LI~ OF AIRPORT ROAD (C--~1), SOUTH B~ DEGREES 57 ~INUTES
&~ ~CONDS EAST 5&g.74 F~T; TH~CE ALONG A LINE PARALLEL
TO AND 1~ FEET (~E~SURED AT gg DEGREES) NORTH OF THE
SOUTH LINE 0 F SAID LOT 1~7 AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
ROCK CREEK P~K, NORTH 89 DEGREES Q4 MINUTES ~8 SECONDS
EAST 24~.88 FEET TO THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF AIRPORT
ROAD (C-~1); THENCE ALONG THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
SAID AIRPORT ROAD (C--~1), SOUTH B8 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 2~
SECONDS EAST l~.g~ FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID
PARCEL CONTAINING 5_78 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS.
AC.~A
NOV 2 7 2001
es, Fi 3410S
:,.~ IP ~l..,,b.,: 618,43640006
,rranty Deed
ds hitler:lure, M.dc ~hls
chael Paul Valentine
*** 2772157 OR: 2799 PG: 3235 **'
IICOIDID in OFFICIAL IICOIDS of COLL]il COIITI, fL
O41O]lZOOl it 05:10~ ~l~r I, BLOCK, C~II~
ilC FEI
BOC-.lO
le~:
$1117 & SOL15 LLP
IlH 5TH AVIIU! $1391
II'LIS FL 3410Z
, 2001 ^]).. Between
sm W Florida , granlor,
Cm~ of cOLLIER '
salvation Army, a corporation existing under the laws of the State
~orgia
~" ~'~ P.O. Box 8209 Naples~ fqorida 34101-8209
m.~c of Florida . ~r~nlee.
c=,.~ .f ~llier
..... A~ f~ ~ ~ ~ ori~ ~s of 10 ) ....................... I X)I.I.A~S.
......................... ~
· by GRA~ ~ ~ci~ ~f
s.. ur Florida ~M,-
~,~ ~ ~ m ~cm~ collier
The West 100 feet of the North 1/2 Of ~t 137, Naples Grove and Truck
Co's Little Fa~S No. 2, according to the plat thereof recorded in
Plat Book 1, pmge 27, Public RecordS, Collier County, Florlda, less
and e~Pt the North 30 feet thereof for roadway and the West 25 feet
of the North 160 feet of said Lot 137.
The property herein' conveyed DOES NOT constitute the ~o~STE~
of the Grantor. The Grantor's M~STE~ ~ddress is
200 Sand~r Strut , Naples, FL.
~ubject to restrictions, reser~tions and easements of record, if
ny, mad ~xes subsequent %o 2000.
ses are not the homstead ~erty of the grantor her~ln n~r contiguous
, his bc~estead prcq3erty. Grantor resides at 1200 Sandpiper Street, Naples, F1
102
%ted Name:
ess
fated Name:
tnesS
Michael Paul valentine
ILO. Add~s: 1200 S~JdpIJ~r ~re~ NAfLt~, f't J4]U2
OF- Florida
qTY OF COLLIER ,,,~m~- ~n~/] ~ W March ,2OO1
~hael Paul Valentine
Ll..__.lmpdu*~hls Florida driver' s~cens~
AGE~A ITEM/~ _
NOV 2 7 2001
Pi. ~
RE:
NOTARIZED LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION FROM PETITIONER
Proposed Amendment of the Salvation Army PUD, Located on the West Side of
Airport Road Approximately 1/8 Mile North of Davis Blvd., Collier County, Florida
To Whom It May Concern:
Please be advised that Hoover Planning & Dev., Inc., 3785 Airport Road North, Suite
B-l, Naples, Florida 34105 and Davidson Engineering, Inc., 1720 J. & C. Blvd., Suite 3,
Naples, Florida 34109 have been engaged by the lessee shown below to act as
authorized agents and to request necessary applications during the PUD Amendment
petition process and Site Development Plan process for the subject project. The lessee
· ' of the property owners for pursuing this PUD
acknowledges having perm~.ss~on . ,-,, ....-~ ~,s control of the commercial portion of
Amendment and a Site ueve~opmem man ,~,,,~
the Salvation Army PUD through a valid lease agreement.
tinted Name/Title ~-~ c.5iC~Cr~
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
in, instrument was acknowledged before me this _lC)~h-.._
The forego g -- b a~"~"~'~<T" ~~~--
r', r'~l , 2001 D_y . ' '.' -' ~'
~sonally k~o-w~-to~r have produceo
~as identification and who~not) take an oath.
Printed Name
My Commission Expires:
SEAL
day of
NOV 2 7 2001
.
~1 10 01 Ol:13p
THE SRLVRTIOM ARMY
1941) 403-9009
B. Hoover
RE:
NOTARIZED LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION pROM PROPERTY oWNER
Mino~ Expansion of the Salvation Army PUD, Located
proposed Amendment for Approximately 1/8 Mile North of Davis Blvd.,
on the West Side o! Airport Road
Collier County, Florida
To Whom It May Concern:
Please be advised that HooveT Planning & Dev., Inc., 3785 Airport Road North, Suite
8-1, Naples, Flo¢ida 3,4105 and Davidson Engineering, inc.. 1720 J- & C. Blvd., Suite 3,
Naples, Florida 34109 have been engaged by the Salvation Army to act as authorized
agents and to request necessary applications during the PUD Amendment petition
process and Site Development Plan process for the subject project,
Sincerely,
nator
STATE OF FLORIDA
cOUNTY OF COLLIER
~ ~. ,~ ,2001 by ,....
~v. k~__W.i~o me oT have proouceo
as identification and who did (did not) take an oath.
/~) day of
~-~ted Name
My Commission Expires:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF EXHIBITS
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
SECTION I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION
SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
SECTION III RESIDENTIAL/COMMUNITY FACILITY AREAS PLAN
SECTION IV COMMERCIAL AREAS PLAN
SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
PAGE
ii
iii
1
3
5
8
12
15
~_/7 r1
NOV 2 7 2001
EXHIBIT "A"
EXHIBIT "B"
LIST OF EXHIBITS
PUD MASTER PLAN
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
iii
A~A IT~
NOV 2 7 2001
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
The development of approximately 5.87 6.51+ acres of property in Collier County, as a
Planned Unit Development (PUD) known as The Salvation Army PUD, will be in
compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as set forth in the
Collier County Growth Management Plan. The residential, community, and commercial
facilities of the PUD will be consistent with the growth policies, land development
regulations, and applicable comprehensive planning objectives for the following reasons:
The subject property is within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Sub-District as shown on the Future Land Use Map and the Commercial Area of
the subject property meets the requirements of the Office and In-fill Commercial
Sub-District of the Urban Mixed Use District. The Future Land Use Element
permits commercial land uses on the Commercial Area of the subject land, since
the project meets the requirements of the Office and In-fill Commercial Sub-
District as follows: fronting on a collector or arterial roadway, abutting commercial
zoning along both its northern and southern boundaries, the depth of proposed
commercial uses does not exceed the depth of the abutting commercial uses, the
project will be served by public water and sewer, the project will be compatible
with existing and permitted future land uses on surrounding properties, and the
subject land area is less than twelve acres.
The project development is compatible with and complimentary to surrounding
land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element.
Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable sections of the
Collier County Land Development Code, as set forth in Objective 3 of the Future
Land Use Element.
The project's location in relation to existing or proposed community facilities and
services permits the development's proposed residential, community facility, and
commercial uses as described in Objective 2 of the Future Land Use Element.
o
The project development is planned to protect the functioning of natural drainage
features and natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas as described in
Objective 1.5 of the prainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element.
The Project is located within an Urban Residential Mixed Use designation of the
Future Land Use Element. The projected density of 3.82 dwelling units per acre
on the Residential/Community Facility Area of the Project is in compliance with the
Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan based on the following
relationships to required criteria:
Base Density
Maximum Permitted Density
4
4
dwellinq units/acre
dwelling unitsh ~ ~TEf~
NOV 2 7 2001
i
r
Maximum permitted units = 5.96 acres x 4 dwelling units/acre = 23 units.
Requested dwelling units = 20, which results in a requested density of 3.36
dwelling units/acre.
All final local development orders for this Project are subject to Division 3.15,
Adequate Public Facilities, of the Collier County Land Development Code.
NOV 2 7 2001
SECTION I
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the
property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be
developed under the Project name of The Salvation Army PUD.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The subject property being 5.",,7 6.51+_ acres, is located in Section 2, Township 50
South, Range 25 East, and is fully described on Exhibit "B".
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
The subject property is owned by:
The Salvation Army, a Georgia Corporation, 3180 Estey Avenue, Naples,
Florida 34104.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA
A. The unique-shaped subject property is located on the western side of
Airport Road, approximately 600 feet north of Davis Boulevard, in
unincorporated Collier County, Florida.
The site currently has PUD Zoning for mixed uses and RMF-6 zoning for
residential uses and is proposed to be rezoned to PUD for mixed uses.
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
The Salvation Army PUD site has an existing water management system and
landscape vegetation and previously constructed buildings and parking.
The area designated as "Commercial Area" on the PUD Master Plan is currently
without vegetation other than grass.
The water management system existing on the Salvation Army site is designed to
handle flows from the Commercial Area. The existing retention area is located
along the western portion of the site.
NOV 2 7 200
1.6
1.7
The Salvation Army PUD is located in FEMA Flood Zone "AE". The majority of
the site has a base flood elevation of 8' N.G.V.D. A small portion of the
Commercial Area, adjacent to Airport Road, has a base flood elevation of 7'
N.G.V.D.
Existing ground elevation varies from a Iow of 3.5' N.G.V.D. in the existing
retention areas to a finished floor elevation of 8.5' N.G.V.D.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Salvation Army PUD is a Project comprised of a maximum of 20 residential
units, community facilities and limited commercial uses on the eastern 0.55 acres
of the site, that is designated Commercial Area. The mixed uses and signage are
designed to be harmonious with one another in a natural setting by using common
architecture, quality screening/buffering, and native vegetation, whenever feasible.
SHORT TITLE
This Ordinance shall be known and cited as "The Salvation Army Planned Unit
Development Ordinance."
4
NOV 2 7 2001
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
2.1
2.2
2.3
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the Project plan
of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the respective
land uses of the tracts included in the Project, as well as other Project
relationships.
GENERAL
A. Regulations for development of The Salvation Army PUD shall be in
accordance with the contents of this document, PUD - Planned Unit
Development, and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County
Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan in effect at the
time of issuance of any development order, to which said regulations relate
which authorizes the construction of improvements, such as, but not limited
to, final subdivision plat, final site development plan (SDP), excavation
permit and preliminary work authorization. Where these regulations fail to
provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar
district in the Land Development Code shall apply.
B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the
definitions set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect
at the time of building permit application.
C. All conditions imposed and graphic material presented depicting restrictions
for the development of The Salvation Army PUD shall become part of the
regulations, which govern the manner in which the PUD site may be
developed.
D. All applicable regulations, unless specifically waived through a variance
procedure or separate provision provided for in this PUD Document, shall
remain in full force and effect.
E. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a
concurrency review under the provisions of Division 3.15, Adequate Public
Facilities, of the Collier County Land Development Code at the earliest, or
next to occur of either final site development plan approval, final plat
approval, or building permit issuance applicable to this Development.
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY AND INTENSITY OF LAND USES~c~_~TF~
NOV ? 7 2001
A maximum of 20 residential units shall be constructed in the
Residential/Community Facility Areas, that comprise a total of 5.96 acres of the
total 6.51 acres within the Salvation Army PUD. The remaining 0.55 acres of the
subject PUD are designated Commercial Area.
2.4
RELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS
Ao
The general configuration of the land uses are illustrated graphically on
Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan, which constitutes the required PUD
Development Plan. Any division of the property and the Development of
the land shall be in compliance with the PUD Master Plan, Division 3.2,
Subdivisions, of the Land Development Code, and the platting laws of the
State of Florida.
Co
The provisions of Division 3.3, Site Development Plans, of the Land
Development Code, when applicable, shall apply to the development of all
platted tracts, or parcels of land as provided in said Division 3.3 in effect
prior to the issuance of a building permit or other development order.
Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructural
improvements regarding any dedications to Collier County and the
methodology for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities.
2.5
MODEL UNITS AND SALES FACILITIES
Ao
In conjunction with the promotion of the development, residential units may
be designated as models. Such model units shall be governed by Section
2.6.33.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Bo
Temporary sales trailers and construction trailers may be placed on the site
after Site Development Plan approval and prior to the recording of
Subdivision Plats, subject to the requirements of Section 2.6.33.3 of the
Land Development Code.
2.6
PROVISION FOR OFF-SITE REMOVAL OF EARTHEN MATERIAL
The excavation of earthen material and its stock-piling in preparation of water
management facilities or to otherwise develop water bodies is hereby permitted, in
accordance with Section 3.2.8.3.6 of the Land Development Code, as amended.
Off-site disposal is also hereby permitted subject to the following conditions:
A. Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a "Development
Excavation" pursuant to Section 3.5.5.1.3 of the Land Development Code,
10% of the total volume
whereby off-site removal shall be limited to
excavated but not to exceed 20,000 cubic yards.
NOV ? ? 200!
All other provisions of Division 3.5, Excavation, of the Land Development
Code shall apply.
NOV 2 7 2001
3.1
3.2
3.3
SECTION III
RESIDENTIAL/COMMUNITY FACILITY AREAS PLAN
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the
Residential Areas as shown on Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan.
MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS
The maximum number of residential dwelling units within the PUD shall be 20
units and 1 caretaker's residence or staff member's residence.
PERMITTED USES
No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land
used, in whole or part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1. Multi-family dwellings.
2. Adult day care centers.
3. Child day care centers.
4. Non-commercial recreational facilities.
5. Non-profit administration centers.
6. Community centers.
7. Churches, chapels and houses of worship.
8.Caretaker's residence or staff member's residence (limited to a total
of one).
9. Any other use deemed comparable in nature by the Development
Services Director.
B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1 Customary accessory uses for both residential and
· bS'AGE. N~A IT~ _
facilities including storage, maintenance, and utility buildin
NOV 2 7 2001
3.4
o
Recreational uses and facilities including swimming pools, volleyball
courts, picnic areas, recreation buildings, tot lots, and basketball
courts.
Essential services, including interim and permanent utility and
maintenance facilities.
Water management facilities.
Any other accessory use deemed comparable by the Development
Services Director.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Minimum Lot Area:
Ten thousand (10,000) square feet.
B. Minimum Lot Width:
(1)
(2)
Interior lots - Ninety (90) feet.
Corner lots - One hundred (100) feet.
C. Minimum Yards:
Principal structures:
(a) Front Yards Along Estey Avenue - Thirty-five (35) feet.
(b) Side and Rear Yards along the east PUD boundary - Fifteen
(15) feet.
(c) Side and Rear Yards along the west PUD boundary - Twenty
(20) feet.
(e) Side and Rear Yards along the south PUD boundary - Twenty
(20) feet.
(2)
Accessory Structures:
(a) Grounds equipment and storage/utility buildings - Thirty (30)
feet.from the north PUD boundaries and twenty (20) feet from
the west PUD boundaries.
AC_Cr_NDA
NOV 2 7 2001
Ho
(b)
Other structure setbacks shall be as required by Division 2.6.2
of the Land Development Code in effect at time of building
permit application.
Distance Between Principal Structures on the Same Parcel:
Ten (10)feet with unobstructed passageway unless attached.
Minimum Floor Area:
One thoUsand (1000) square feet for the principal structure on the first
habitable floor.
Maximum Height:
Thirty-five (35) feet, exclusive of any church steeples.
Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements:
As required by Division 2.3 of the Land Development Code in effect at the
time of building permit application.
Open Space Requirements:
1. A minimum of thirty (30) percent open space, as described in
Section 2.6.32 of the Land Development Code, shall be provided on-
site.
Landscaping and Buffering Requirements:
A twenty (20) foot wide landscape buffer shall be provided along the
western PUD boundary. A six (6) foot high opaque fence and trees,
one (1) per every twenty-five (25) feet, shall be provided along the
western PUD boundary. A six (6) foot high fence shall be provided
around the remaining PUD boundaries for the Residential/
Community Facility Area, except for access points.
Other landscaping and buffering areas shall be provided per Division
2.4. of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Public Use
The community services center and outdoor recreation areas shall be open
to the public (both to children and adults).
NOV 2 7 2001
Signs
Signs shall be permitted as described within Division 2.5 of the Collier
County Land Development Code.
1!
---------=~"'~"----'i
AG,c.j~A
~_/7
NOV ? 7 200!
SECTION IV
COMMERCIAL AREAS PLAN
4.1
4.2
4.3
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the
Commercial Areas as shown on Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan.
PERMITTED USES
No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or hand
used, in whole or part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
Thrift store.
Motor vehicle display and sale of new and used automobiles, vans,
~vehicles and trucks not excee~Of one_ii)
ton.
Any other principal use deemed comparable in nature by the
Development Services Director.
Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1. Customary accessory uses including customer parking.
2. Essential services, including interim and permanent
maintenance facilities.
utility and
Water management facilities.
Any other accessory use deemed comparable by the Development
Services Director.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Minimum Lot Area:
Ten thousand (10,000) square feet.
Minimum Lot Width:
12
NOV 2 7 2001
Eo
Ninety (90) feet.
Minimum Yards:
(1)
Principal structures:
(a)
(b)
Front Yards Along Airport Road - Twenty-five (25) feet.
Side Yard along the north PUD boundary - None or five (5)
feet.
(c) Other Side and Rear Yards - Ten (10) feet.
(2) Accessory Structures:
Other structure setbacks shall be as required by Division 2.6.2 of the
Land Development Code in effect at time of building permit
application.
Distance Between Principal Structures on the Same Parcel:
Ten (10) feet with unobstructed passageway unless attached.
Minimum Floor Area:
One thousand (1000) square feet for the principal structure on the first
habitable floor.
Maximum Height:
Thirty-five (35) feet.
Off-Street Parkin.q and Loading Requirements:
As required by Division 2.3 of the Land Development Code in effect at the
time of buildin, g permit application.
Open Space Requirements:
A minimum of thirty (30) percent open space, as described in Section
2.6.32 of the Land Development Code, shall be provided on-site.
Landscape and Bufferin_q;
NOV 2 7 2001
(2)
(3)
If the Commercial Area is developed in conjunction with the
automobile dealerships to the south and to the north, buffering along
the northern and southern PUD boundaries shall not be required.
Buffering along Airport Road shall be designed to match that for the
recently approved and developed Morande Kia dealership abutting
to the south.
A ten (10) foot wide Buffer "A" shall be provided between the
Commercial Area and Residential/Community Facility Area of the
PUD.
Ko
Signs
Signs shall be permitted as described within
County Land Development Code.
Division 2.5 of the Collier
14
NOV 2 ? 2001
SECTION V
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
5.1
5.2
5.3
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the commitments for the development of
this Project.
GENERAL
All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with final site development
plans, final subdivision plans and all applicable State and local laws, codes, and
regulations applicable to this PUD, in effect at the time of final plat, final site
development plan approval or building permit application, as the case may be.
Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and
specifications of the official County Land Development Code shall apply to this
Project even if the land within the PUD is not to be platted. The developer, his
successor or assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this
Document.
The developer, his successor or assignee, shall follow the PUD Master Plan and
the regulations of this PUD as adopted, and any other conditions or modifications
as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor in
title or assignee is subject to the commitments within this Document.
PUD MASTER PLAN
Ao
Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed Development and is
conceptual in nature. Proposed area, lot or land use boundaries, or special
land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at
any subsequent approval phase such as final platting or site development
plan approval. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier
County Land Development Code, amendments may be made from time to
time.
All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be
granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all service
utilities and all common areas in the Project.
NOV 2 ? 200!
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT/MONITORING REPORT
A Site Development Plan shall be submitted per County regulations in effect at
time of site plan submittal. The Project is expected to be completed in a several
phases.
A. The landowners shall proceed and be governed according to the time limits
pursuant to Section 2.7.3.4 of the Land Development Code.
B. Monitorin.ci Report.' An annual monitoring report shall be submitted
pursuant to Section 2.7.3.6 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
ENGINEERING
A. This Project shall be required to meet all County Ordinances in effect at the
time final construction documents are submitted for Development approval.
B. Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance
with appropriate provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code,
Division 3.2., Subdivisions, and Division 3.3., Site Development Plans.
WATER MANAGEMENT
Bo
In accordance with the rules of the South Florida Water Management
District, the project shall be designed for a storm event of three (3) day
duration and twenty-five (25) year frequency.
Landscaping shall not be placed within the water management areas
unless specifically approved by Collier County Development Services.
UTILITIES
Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and interim water
and/or sewage treatment facilities to serve the Project are to be designed,
constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with Collier
County Ordinance No. 88-76, as amended, and other applicable County
rules and regulations.
TRAFFIC
A. Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with Ordinance 2001-13, and
shall be paid at the time building permits are issued unless otherwise
approved by the Board of County Commissioners.
NOV 7 2001
pg.
5.9
5.10
Bo
Access improvements shall not be subject to road impact fee credits and
shall be in place before any certificates of occupancy are issued.
PLANNING
Ao
If during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity
a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the
minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately
stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted.
Furthermore, the procedures of Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land
Development Code shall be followed.
FIRE PROTECTION
The developer shall provide fire hydrants spaced at intervals no greater
than three hundred (300) feet so no portion of the community services
building or the family services center is further than three hundred (300)
feet from a fire hydrant measured as apparatus and as firefighters would
utilize fire hoses.
Bo
The developer shall provide a fire lane plan so that all portions of structures
further than one hundred fifty (150) feet from 'Estey Avenue or Airport Road
are directly accessible via designated fire lanes, which are immediately
contiguous to the structures.
l?
NOV 2 ? 2001
ORDINANCE NO. 01 -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NUMBER 91-102, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR
THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE
OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP NUMBERED
0502S AND BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED
REAL PROPERTY FROM "PUD" AND "RMF-6" TO
"PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR
RESIDENTIAL, COMMUNITY FACILITY AND
COMMERCIAL USE KNOWN AS THE
SALVATION ARMY PUD, FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
CONSISTING OF 6.51+/- ACRES; PROVIDING FOR
THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 90-I07
THE FORMER SALVATION ARMY PUD; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, William L. Hoover of Hoover Planning & Development, Inc., representing the
Salvation Army, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning
classification of the herein described real property;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION ONE:
The Zoning Classification of the herein described real property located in Section 2,
Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "PUD"and "RMF-6"
to "PUD" Planned Unit Development in accordance with the PUD Document, attached hereto as
Exhibit "A", which is incorporated herein and by reference made a part hereof. The Official Zoning
Atlas Map numbered 0502S as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land
Development Code, is hereby amended accordingly.
SECTION TWO:
Ordinance Number 90-107, known as the Salvation Army PUD, adopted on December 18,
1990, by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, is hereby repealed in its entirety.
SECTION THREE:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Departn
ent of 8~A
NOV ? 7 001
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, this __ day of ,2001.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Approved as to Form and
Legal Sufficiency
19latjorie {~l/l. Student
Assistant County Attorney
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
~[NOA ~TEm~ F~ _
NOV ~ 7 ZOO1
THE SALVATION ARMY PUD
A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PREPARED FOR:
THE SALVATION ARMY
A GEORGIA CORPORATION
3180 ESTEY AVENUE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PREPARED BY:
WILLIAM L. HOOVER, AICP
HOOVER PLANNING & DEV., INC.
3785 AIRPORT ROAD N., SUITE B-1
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34105
and
JEFFREY L. DAVIDSON, P.E.
DAVlDSON ENGINEERING, INC.
1720 J. & C. BOULEVARD, SUITE C
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109
DATE FILED May 9, 2001
DATE REVISED November 7, 2001
DATE REVIEWED BY CCPC~
DATE APPROVED BY BCC
ORDINANCE NUMBER
EXHIBIT "A"
NOV ? 7 2001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF EXHIBITS
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
SECTION I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION
SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
SECTION III RESIDENTIAL/COMMUNITY FACILITY AREAS PLAN
SECTION IV COMMERCIAL AREAS PLAN
SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
PAGE
ii
iii
1
3
5
8
12
15
ii
AGE~A ITEJ~_
NOV 2 7 2001
EXHIBIT "A"
EXHIBIT "B"
LIST OF EXHIBITS
PUD MASTER PLAN
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
iii
NOV 2 7 2001
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
The development of approximately 6.51+ acres of property in Collier County, as a
Planned Unit Development (PUD) known as The Salvation Army PUD, will be in
compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as set forth in the
Collier County Growth Management Plan. The residential, community, and commercial
facilities of the PUD will be consistent with the growth policies, land development
regulations, and applicable comprehensive planning objectives for the following reasons:
1. The subject property is within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Sub-District as shown on the Future Land Use Map and the Commercial Area of
the subject property meets the requirements of the Office and In-fill Commercial
Sub-District of the Urban Mixed Use District. The Future Land Use Element
permits commercial land uses on the Commercial Area of the subject land, since
the project meets the requirements of the Office and In-fill Commercial Sub-
District as follows: The project fronts on a collector or arterial roadway, abuts
commercial zoning along both its northern and southern boundaries, the depth of
proposed commercial uses does not exceed the depth of the abutting commercial
uses, the project will be served by public water and sewer facilities, the project will
be compatible with existing and permitted future land uses on surrounding
properties, and the subject land area is less than twelve acres.
2. The project development is compatible with and complimentary to surrounding
land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element.
3. Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable sections of the
Collier County Land Development Code, as set forth in Objective 3 of the Future
Land Use Element.
o
The project's location in relation to existing or proposed community facilities and
services permits the development's proposed residential, community facility, and
commercial uses as described in Objective 2 of the Future Land Use Element.
o
The project development is planned to protect the functioning of natural drainage
features and natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas as described in
Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element.
The Project is located within an Urban Residential Mixed Use designation of the
Future Land Use Element. The projected density of 3.82 dwelling units per acre
on the Residential/Community Facility Area of the Project is in compliance with the
Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan based on the following
relationships to required criteria:
NOV 2 7 2001
Base Density
Maximum Permitted Density
4 dwelling units/acre
4 dwelling units/acre
Maximum permitted units = 5.96 acres x 4 dwelling units/acre -- 23 units.
Requested dwelling units -- 20, which results in a requested density of 3.36
dwelling units/acre.
All final local development orders for this Project are subject to Division 3.15,
Adequate Public Facilities, of the Collier County Land Development Code.
NOV 2 7 2001
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
SECTION I
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the
property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be
developed under the project name of The Salvation Army PUD.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The subject property being 6.51+ acres, is located in Section 2, Township 50
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida,and is fully described on Exhibit "B".
PROPERTy OWNERSHIP
The subject property is owned by:
The Salvation Army, a Georgia Corporation, 3180 Estey Avenue, Naples,
Florida 34104.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA
The unique-shaped subject property is located on the western side of
Airport Road, approximately 600 feet north of Davis Boulevard, in
unincorporated Collier County, Florida.
The site currently has PUD Zoning for mixed uses and RMF-6 zoning for
residential uses and is proposed to be rezoned to PUD for mixed uses.
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
The Salvation Army PUD site has an existing water management system and
landscape vegetation and previously constructed buildings and parking facilities.
The area designated as "Commercial Area" on the PUD Master Plan is currently
without vegetation other than grass.
The water management system existing on the Salvation Army site is designed to
handle flows from the Commercial Area. The existing retention area is located
along the western portion of the site.
NOV 2 7 2001
1.6
1.7
The Salvation Army PUD is located in FEMA Flood Zone "AE". The majority of
the site has a base flood elevation of 8' N.G.V.D. A small portion of the
Commercial Area, adjacent to Airport Road, has a base flood elevation of 7'
N.G.V.D.
Existing ground elevation varies from a Iow of 3.5' N.G.V.D. in the existing
retention areas to a finished floor elevation of 8.5' N.G.V.D.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Salvation Army PUD is a project comprised of a maximum of 20 residential
units, community facilities and limited commercial uses on the eastern 0.55 acres
of the site, that is designated Commercial Area. The mixed uses and signage are
designed to be harmonious with one another in a natural setting by using common
architecture, quality screening/buffering, and native vegetation.
SHORT TITLE
This Ordinance shall be known and cited as "The Salvation Army Planned Unit
Development Ordinance."
A~A I*IT:J~
NOV 2 7 2001
2.1
2.2
SECTION Ii
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project plan
of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the respective
land uses of the tracts included in the project, as well as other project
relationships.
GENERAL
Ao
Regulations for development of The Salvation Army PUD shall be in
accordance with the contents of this Document, PUD - Planned Unit
Development, and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County
Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan in effect at the
time of issuance of any development order, to which said regulations relate
which authorizes the construction of improvements, such as, but not limited
to, final subdivision plat, final site development plan (SDP), excavation
permit and preliminary work authorization. Where these regulations fail to
provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar
district in the Land Development Code shall apply.
Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the
definitions set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect
at the time of building permit application.
All conditions imposed and graphic material presented depicting restrictions
for the development of The Salvation Army PUD shall become part of the
regulations which govern the manner in which the PUD site may be
developed.
All applicable regulations, unless specifically waived through a variance
procedure or separate provision provided for in this PUD Document, shall
remain in full force and effect.
Eo
Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a
concurrency review under the provisions of Division 3.15, Adequate Public
Facilities, of the Collier County Land Development Code-at the earliest, or next
to occur of either final site development plan approval, final plat approval, or
building permit issuance applicable to this Development.
NOV 7 2001
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY AND INTENSITY OF LAND USES
A maximum of 20 residential units shall be constructed in the
Residential/Community Facility Areas, that comprise a total of 5.96 acres of the
total 6.51 acres within the Salvation Army PUD. The remaining 0.55 acres of the
subject PUD are designated Commercial Area.
RELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS
Ao
The general configuration of the land uses are illustrated graphically on
Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan, which constitutes the required PUD
Development Plan. Any division of the property and the development of
the land shall be in compliance with the PUD Master Plan, Division 3.2,
Subdivisions, of the Land Development Code, and the platting laws of the
State of Florida.
Bo
The provisions of Division 3.3, Site Development Plans, of the Land
Development Code, when applicable, shall apply to the development of all
platted tracts, or parcels of' land as provided in said Division 3.3 in effect
prior to the issuance of a building permit or other development order.
Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructural
improvements regarding any dedications to Collier County and the
methodology for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities.
MODEL UNITS AND SALES FACILITIES
Ao
In conjunction with the promotion of the development, residential units may
be designated as models. Such model units shall be governed by Section
2.6.33.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Temporary sales trailers and construction trailers may be placed on the site
after Site Development Plan approval and prior to the recording of
subdivision plats, subject to the requirements of Section 2.6.33.3 of the
Land Development Code.
PROVISION FOR OFF-SITE REMOVAL OF EARTHEN MATERIAL
The excavation of earthen material and its stock-piling in preparation of water
management facilities or to otherwise develop water bodies is hereby permitted, in
accordance with Section 3.2.8.3.6 of the Land Development Code, as amended.
Off-site disposal is also hereby permitted subject to the following conditions:
NOV ? 7 2001
Ao
Bo
Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a "development
excavation" pursuant to Section 3.5.5.1.3 of the Land Development Code,
whereby off-site removal shall be limited to 10% of the total volume
excavated but not to exceed 20,000 cubic yards.
All other provisions of Division 3.5, Excavation, of the Land Development
Code shall apply.
~,_ 1 ? r/~--
NOV 2 ? 200~
3.1
3.2
3.3
SECTION III
RESIDENTIAL/COMMUNITY FACILITY AREAS PLAN
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the
Residential Areas as shown on Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan.
MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS
The maximum number of residential dwelling units within the PUD shall be 20
units and 1 caretaker's residence or staff member's residence.
PERMITTED USES
No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land
used, in whole or part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1. Multi-family dwellings.
2. Adult day care centers.
3. Child day care centers.
4. Non-commercial recreational facilities.
5. Non-profit administration centers.
6. Community centers.
7. Churches, chapels and houses of worship.
8. Caretaker's residence or staff member's residence (limited to a total
of one).
9. Any other use deemed comparable in nature
compatible by the Development Services Director.
Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
and deemed
NOV 2 ? 2001
3.4
Customary accessory uses for both residential and community
facilities including storage, maintenance, and utility buildings.
Recreational uses and facilities including swimming pools, volleyball
courts, picnic areas, recreation buildings, tot lots, and basketball
courts.
Essential services, including intedm and permanent utility and
maintenance facilities.
4. Water management facilities.
5. Any other accessory use comparable in nature and deemed
compatible by the Development Services Director.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Minimum Lot Area:
Ten thousand (10,000) square feet.
Minimum Lot Width:
(1) Interior lots - Ninety (90) feet.
(2) Corner lots - One hundred (100) feet.
Minimum Yards:
(1) Principal structures:
(a)
(b)
(c) '
(2)
Bo
(e)
Front Yards Along Estey Avenue - Thirty-five (35) feet.
Side and Rear Yards along the east PUD boundary - Fifteen
(15) feet.
Side and Rear Yards along the west PUD boundary - Twenty
(20) feet.
Side and Rear Yards along the south PUD boundary - Twenty
(20) feet.
Accessory Structures:
NOV 2 7 2001
Do
Ho
(a)
Grounds equipment and storage/utility buildings - Thirty (30)
feet from the north PUD boundaries and twenty (20) feet from
the west PUD boundaries.
(b)
Other structure setbacks shall be as required by Division 2.6.2
of the Land Development Code in effect at time of building
permit application.
Distance Between Principal Structures on the Same Parcel:
Ten (10) feet with unobstructed passageway unless attached.
Minimum Floor Area:
One thousand (1000) square feet for the principal structure on the first
habitable floor.
Maximum Height:
Thirty-five (35) feet, exclusive of any church steeples.
Off-Street Parkinq and Loading Requirements:
As required by Division 2.3 of the Land Development Code in effect at the
time of building permit application.
Open Space Requirements:
A minimum of thirty (30) percent open space, as described in
Section 2.6.32 of the Land Development Code, shall be provided on-
site.
Landscaping and Buffering Requirements:
A twenty (20) foot wide landscape buffer shall be provided along the
western PUD boundary. A six (6) foot high opaque fence and trees,
one (1) per every twenty-five (25) feet, shall be provided along the
western PUD boundary. A six (6) foot high fence shall be provided
around the remaining PUD boundaries for the Residential/
Community Facility Area, except for access points.
Other landscaping and buffering areas shall be provided per Division
2.4. of the Collier County Land Development Code.
NOV 2 7 2001
Jo
Ko
Public Use
The community services center and outdoor recreation areas shall be open
to the public (both to children and adults).
Signs
Signs shall be permitted as described within Division 2.5 of the Collier
County Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit
application.
NOV 2 7 2001
4.1
4.2
4.3
SECTION IV
COMMERCIAL AREAS PLAN
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the
Commercial Areas as shown on Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan.
PERMITTED USES
No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land
used, in whole or part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1. Thrift store.
2. Motor vehicle display and sale of new and used automobiles, vans,
sport utility vehicles, and trucks not exceeding a capacity of one (1)
ton.
3. Any other principal use comparable in nature and deemed
compatible by the Development Services Director.
B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1. Customary accessory uses including customer parking.
2. Essential services, including interim and permanent utility and
maintenance facilities.
3. Water management facilities.
4. Any other accessory use comparable in nature and deemed
compatible by the Development Services Director.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Minimum Lot Area:
Ten thousand (10,000) square feet.
12
AC.~A ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
Bo
Fo
Minimum Lot Width:
Ninety (90) feet.
Minimum Yards:
(1) Principal structures:
(a) Front Yards Along Airport Road - Twenty-five (25) feet.
(b) Side Yard along the north PUD boundary - None or five (5)
feet.
(c) Other Side and Rear Yards - Ten (10) feet.
(2) Accessory Structures:
Other structure setbacks shall be as required by Division 2.6.2 of the
Land Development Code in effect at time of building permit
application.
Distance Between Principal Structures on the Same Parcel:
Ten (10) feet with unobstructed passageway unless attached.
Minimum Floor Area:
One thousand (1000) square feet for the principal structure on the first
habitable floor.
Maximum Heiqht:
Thirty-five (35) feet.
Off-Street Parkinq and Loadinq Requirements:
As required by Division 2.3 of the Land Development Code in effect at the
time of building permit application.
Open Space Requirements:
A minimum of thirty (30) percent open space, as described in Section
2.6.32 of the Land Development Code, shall be provided on-site.
13
NOV 2 7 2001
Landscape and Buffering:
(1)
If the Commercial Area is developed in conjunction with the
automobile dealerships to the south and to the north, buffering along
the northern and southern PUD boundaries shall not be required.
(2)
A ten (10) foot wide Type "A" Buffer shall be provided between the
Commercial Area and Residential/Community Facility Area of the
PUD.
Si,qns
Signs shall be permitted as described within Division 2.5 of the Collier
County Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit
application.
14
NOV 2 7 200!
SECTION V
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
5.1
5.2
5.3
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the commitments for the development of
this Project.
GENERAL
All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with final site development
plans, final subdivision plans and all applicable State and local laws, codes, and
regulations applicable to this PUD, in effect at the time of final plat, final site
development plan approval or building permit application, as the case may be.
Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and
specifications of the official County Land Development Code shall apply to this
project even if the land within the PUD is not to be platted. The Developer, his
successor or assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this
Document.
The developer, his successor or assignee, shall follow the PUD Master Plan and
the regulations of this PUD as adopted, and any other conditions or modifications
as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor in
title or assignee is subject to the commitments within this Document.
PUD MASTER PLAN
Exhibit "A," PUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is
conceptual in nature. Proposed area, lot or land use boundaries, or special
land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at
any subsequent approval phase such as final platting or site development
plan approval. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier
County Land Development Code, amendments may be made from time to
time.
All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be
granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all service
utilities and all common areas in the project.
AGE. I~A ITE~
NOV 2 7 2001
5.4 SCHEDULE Of DEVELOPMENT/MONITORING REPORT
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
A site development plan shall be submitted per County regulations in effect at time
of site plan submittal. The project is expected to be completed in several phases.
The landowners shall proceed and be governed according to the time limits
pursuant to Section 2.7.3.4 of the Land Development Code.
Monitoring Report: An annual monitoring report shall be submitted
pursuant to Section 2.7.3.6 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
ENGINEERING
Ao
This project shall be required to meet all County Ordinances in effect at the
time final construction documents are submitted for development approval.
Bo
Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance
with appropriate provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code,
Division 3.2., Subdivisions, and Division 3.3., Site Development Plans.
WATER MANAGEMENT
In accordance with the rules of the South Florida Water Management
District, the project shall be designed for a storm event of three (3) day
duration and twenty-five (25) year frequency.
Landscaping shall not be placed within the water management areas
unless specifically approved by Collier County Development Services.
UTILITIES
Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and interim water
and/or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project are to be designed,
constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with Collier
County Ordinance No. 88-76, as amended, and other applicable County
rules and regulations.
TRAFFIC
Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with Ordinance 2001-13, and
shall be paid at the time building permits are issued unless otherwise
approved by the Board of County Commissioners.
~./Tt~_
NOV 2 7 2001
5.9
5.10
Bo
Access improvements shall not be subject to any additional road impact fee
credits and shall be in place before any certificates of occupancy are
issued.
PLANNING
Ao
If during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity
a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the
minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately
stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted.
Furthermore, the procedures of Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land
Development Code shall be followed.
FIRE PROTECTION
The developer shall provide fire hydrants spaced at intervals no greater
than three hundred (300) feet so no portion of the community services
building or the family services center is further than three hundred (300)
feet from a fire hydrant.
The developer shall provide a fire lane plan so that all portions of structures
further than one hundred fifty (150) feet from Estey Avenue or Airport Road
are directly accessible to fire fighting equipment via designated fire lanes,
which are immediately contiguous to the structures.
l?
^ c.,b~ ~-~
~_/7 P
NOV 2 ? 2001
- RE-SUBMITTAL
SALVATION ARMY
PROJECT # 19990309
DATE: 7/26/01
CHAHRAM BADAMTCH1A!
: .:..
4lA ~ Ifil _
I
, v-.}r!g_. .. '""' .... ' ]SALVATION ARMY
EX. BIT "B"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
New Parcel Being Added
The West 100 feet of the North 1/2 of Lot 137, Naples Grove and Truck Co's Little
Farms No. 2, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 1, page 27, Public
Records, Collier County, Florida, less and except the North 30 feet thereof for roadway
and the West 25 feet of the North 160 feet of said Lot 137.
Existing Land
A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN AND BEING A PART OF LOT 137,
NAPLES GROVE & TRUCK CO.'S LITTLE FARMS NO_ 2 AS RECORDED
IN PI_AT BOOK 1, PAGE 27A, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA,. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLCA4S:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 35, BLOCK 'B',
ROCK.C~EEK PA~.K, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 79,
PqJBLIC RECORDS.OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG
'Fh~ .P4ORTH LINE OF SAID. ROCK CREEK PARK AND THE SOUTH LINE
OF SAID LOT,137~ S 89 DEGRI~ES N MINUTES 88 SECONDS WEST
~3_41 FEET TO T~ SO~EST ~RN~ OF SAID LOT 137 AND
~ ~UT~ST CORNER OF A~INGTON ~RACE, AS RECORDED IN
~T BOOK 3, PA~.64, P~LIC ~CO~S OF COLLIER ~UNTY,
EORIDA; '~E~E ALONG ~E WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 137 AND
Th~ EAST LINE ~ SAID ARLI~TON TRACE, NORTH 81DE~EES
18 ~iN~JTES 2B SECONDS WEST ~_24 FEET; THENCE ALONG A
LI~ PARA.EL'TO A~ 317_83 FEET (HEA~RED AT 90 DEGREES)
SOUTH OF THE SOUTH R~GHT--OF-HAY LIN~ O~ ESTEY AVENUe,
NORTH 89 DEGREES ~ RINUTES 2B SECONDS EAST 1~O_OO FEET;
~CE ALONG A LINE lgB FEET (ME~URED AT 9~ DEGREES)
EAST OF'T~ ~EST LINE OF ~ID LOT 1~7 AND THE EAST LI~
OF A~I~TON TERRACE, NORTH ~1 DEGREES 18 NINUTES 20
SECONDS WEST 317_54 FEI TO THE SOUTH ~IGHT--GF--~AY LI~E
OF SAID ESTEY AVENUE; THENCE ALONG TigE SOUTH RIGHT--OFrMAY
LINE OF SAID ESTEY AVENUE, NORTH 89 DEGREES O3 ~INUT~S 20
~CONDS E~T 3~7_32 FEET; THENCE ALONG A LINE 24~_~ FEET
(~EAS~ED AT 90 DEGREES) LEST OF THE ~EST RIGHT-OF-LAY
kI~ OF AIRPORT ROAD (C--31), SOUTH B~ DEGREES 57 NINUTES
4e ~CONDS EAST 54~_74 F~T; TH~CE ALONG A LINE PARALLEL
TO AND lee FEET (~EASU~ED AT 9~ DEGREES) NORTH OF THE
SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 137 AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
ROCK CREEK P~K, NORTH 89 DEGREES ~4 NINUTES ~B SECONDS
EAST 24e.~ FEET TO THE LEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF;AIR~AI~
ROAD (C-31); THENCE ALONG THE WEST RiGHT-OF-LAY L ~NE~.F~
sA D OAO SOUTH DEGrEeS S7 m."T S
SECO.DS E ST e.ee FEET 7 2001
PARCEL CONTAINING 5_78 ACRES OF LAND, mORE OR LES:;,~ pi.--~Ft
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION RZ-2001-AR-1208. WILLIAM L. HOOVER, AICP OF HOOVER PLANNING &
DEVELOPMENT, INC. REPRESENTING LARRY J. AND MARCY A. GODE REQUESTING A
REZONE FROM ITS CURRENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF "C-3" COMMERCIAL
INTERMEDIATE ZONING DISTRICT TO "RMF-6" RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT
FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 109TM AVENUE NORTH
APPROXIMATELY 275 FEET WEST OF TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH AND IS FURTHER
DESCRIBED AS LOT 9, BLOCK 2, NAPLES PARK UNIT 1, SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. THIS SITE CONSISTS OF 6750
SQUARE FEET.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners consider a request for a rezoning of land from its
current zoning classification of "C-3" Commercial Intermediate to "RMF-6" residential multi-
family, while maintaining the community's best interest.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The petitioner wishes to rezone the subject property from "C-3" Commercial Intermediate
Zoning District to "RMF-6' Residential Multi-Family Zoning District to allow the construction of a
single-family residence. The lot in question, like most lots in Naples Park, is 50 feet wide. This
lot is also adjacent to RMF-6 residentially zoned lot. The Collier County Land development
Code requires a 25-foot setback for commercial properties adjacent to residential parcels. Due
to the size of the lot and the required setbacks it is not feasible to build a commercial building
with adequate size on this property; therefore, the applicant wishes to change the zoning to
residential, similar to all residential lots in Naples Park, enabling them to build a single family
residence on the property.
Earlier this year, a commercial project on this property requiring a setback variance and an off-
site parking approval on the adjoining residentially zoned property to support the commercial
development on this site was reviewed by the BZA. At the hearing several people spoke against
this petition. The applicant, realizing that they will not receive approval from the Board, asked for
a continuance and later withdrew the petition. Prior to applying to this rezone, the applicant
contacted the Naples Park Civic Association and obtained their verbal approval for this petition.
Staff notified the Naples Park Civic Association regarding this project and did not receive a
reply.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Should this rezone be granted, the applicant will be able to build one single-family residence,
which will generate the following impact fees.
Road Impact fee:
Public Schools Impact fee:
$2,433.00
$1,778.OO
AC~.DQ:)A
No. /? ~
NOV 2 7 200!
Regional Parks, Impact fee:
Community Parks Impact fee:
Libraries Impact fee:
Correctional facilities impact fee:
Fire Impact Fee:
EMS Impact Fee:
Radon Gas
Buildin.q Code Administration
Total
$179.00
$399.0O
$180.52
$117.98
$600.00
$14.00
$10.00
$10.00
$5,721.5O
In addition to the Impact Fees described there are building permit review fees. Building permit
fees have traditionally offset the cost of administrating the community development review
process. There are no utility impact fees associated with this residence, as there are no utilities
available to the site at this time.
Finally additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates. The revenue that
will be generated by the ad valorem tax depends on the value of the improvements.
GROVVTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict), as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
The Urban Residential Subdistrict permits residential development at a base density of 4
dwelling units per acre. The subject site is located within a Traffic Congestion Area, resulting in
a density reduction of one dwelling unit per acre from the base density of 4 dwelling units per
acre. However, the petitioner's request to rezone the property from C-3 to RMF-6 meets the
criteria of Density Rating System, Conversion of Commercial Zoning provision which states: if
the project includes conversion of commercial zoning which is not within a Mixed Use Activity
Center or Interchange Activity Center and is not consistent with the Neighborhood Village
Center Subdistrict, a bonus of up to 16 dwelling units may be added for every acre of
commercial zoning which is converted. The applicant is requesting a density of 6 units per acre,
which is consistent with the requirements of the GMP and the existing density in the area.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
There are no environmentally sensitive areas on the site.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and
archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map.
Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required.
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommended that the CCPC review RZ-2001-AR-1208 and forward it to the BCC with a
recommendation for approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION:
There were no environmental issues involved with this request; therefore, this petition was
exempt from the EAC review.
2
NOV 2 7 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed this petition on October 4, 2001 and by a
unanimous vote recommended approval.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
REVIEWED BY:
RAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
DATE
APPROVED BY:
JC~N M. DUNNUCK, Ill DATE
IN'~ERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR
3
7.00I
AGENDA ITEM ~-C
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
SEPTEMBER 12, 2001
RZ-2001 -AR- 1208
OWNER/AGENT:
OWNER:
AGENT:
Larry J. and Marcy A. Gode
5672 Strand Court, Suite #3
Naples, FL. 34110
William L. Hoover, AICP
Hoover Planning & Development, Inc.
3785 Airport Road, Suite B-1
Naples, FL. 34105
REQUESTED ACTION:
The applicant is requesting to change the zoning classification of the subject property
from "C-3" Commercial Intermediate Zoning District to "RMF-6" Residential Multi-Family
District.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION'
The subject property is located on the north side of 109th Avenue North approximately
275 feet west of Tamiami Trail North and is further described as Lot 9, Block 2, Naples
Park Unit 1, Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
This site consists of 6750 square feet..
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The petitioner wishes to rezone the subject property from "C-3" Commercial
Intermediate Zoning District to "RMF-6" Residential Multi-Family Zoning Distdct to allow
the construction of a single family residence. The lot in question, like most lots in Naples
^~-A ~TEM
~D~ 2 7 2001
Park, is 50 feet wide. This lot is also adjacent to RMF-6 residentially zoned lot. The
Collier County Land development Code requires a 25-foot setback for commercial
properties adjacent to residential parcels. Due to the size of the lot and the required
setbacks it is not feasible to build a commercial building with adequate size on this
property; therefore, the applicant wishes to change the zoning to residential, similar to
all residential lots in Naples Park, enabling them to build a single family residence on
the property.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Existing:Vacant, zoned "C-3" Commercial Intermediate
Surrounding: North-
East -
South-
West-
Parking lot, zoned "C-3" Commercial Intermediate
Single-family residence, zoned "C-3" Commercial Intermediate
Single-family residence, zoned "C-3" Commercial Intermediate
Triplex, zoned "RMF-6" Residential Multi-Family
GROVV'rH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict), as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan
(GMP). A consistency review analysis with applicable elements of the GMP is as
follows:
FLUE and Density:
The Urban Residential Subdistrict permits residential development at a base density of
4 dwelling units per acre. The subject site is located within a Traffic Congestion Area,
resulting in a density reduction of one dwelling unit per acre from the base density of 4
dwelling units per acre. However, the petitioner's request to rezone the property from C-
3 to RMF-6 meets the criteria of Density Rating System, Conversion of Commercial
Zoning provision which states: if the project includes conversion of commercial zoning
which is not within a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center and is not
consistent with the Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, a bonus of up to 16
dwelling units may be added for every acre of commercial zoning which is converted.
Based on the above analysis, the proposed use and density for the site is deemed
consistent with the Future Land Use Element.
Transportation Element:
The proposed RMF-6 zoning will result in 10 trips per day. Based on this data, the site-
generated traffic will not exceed the significance test standard (5 percent of the LOS "C"
design volume) on any County roads. In addition, this project will not lower the level of
2
Nb¥'2 7 2001
service below any adopted LOS "D" standard on any road within the project's radius of
development influence (RDI).
The proposed rezone will not create or excessively increase traffic congestion on the
artedal road system at build-out and complies with Policies 1.3, 1.4, 5.1 and 5.2 of the
Transportation Element.
Sewer and water:
~'Vater and sewer is available to this site.
Water management requirements will be addressed at the time of Building Permit
review and approval. Such approvals will be made consistent with Collier County
drainage requirements.
Sixty percent of the project site will be devoted to open space pursuant to applicable
provisions of the LDC.
Conservation:
Conservation goals, objectives and policies are achieved by applying LDC requirements
to required subsequent approvals.
Other applicable element_s
Staff's review indicates that this petition has been designed to account for the
necessary relationships dictated by the Future Land Use Element of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP). Mitigation measures and stipulations have been developed
(where appropriate) to ensure consistency with the GMP during the permitting process.
Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency
review under the provisions of Section 3.15 of the Collier County Land Development
Code, Adequate Public facilities, at the earliest or the next to occur of either Final SDP
approval, final plat approval, or building permit applicable to this development.
Therefore, this proposed rezone is consistent with the goals and policies of the GMP.
Staff has concluded that no level of service standards will be adversely affected by this
rezone request. Appropriate mitigation measures and stipulations will assure that the
County's interests are maintained. Consistency with the goals, objectives and policies of
other applicable elements of the GMP and level of service relationships are to be
achieved by stipulations and/or development commitments made a part of the approval
of this development order.
HiSTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
~taff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located within an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
3
NoV 2 7 2001
Probability Map. However, a waiver of Historical/Archaeological Survey and
Assessment was recommended for approval by the Collier County Historical and
Archaeological Board.
EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE:
The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff responsible for
oversight related to the above referenced areas of critical concern. This primarily
includes a review by the Community Development Environmental staff, and the
Transportation Division staff. This petition was administratively reviewed on behalf of
the EAC and staff recommended approval.
CRITERIA EVALUATION:
Appropriate evaluation of petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for
supportive action by appointed and elected decision-makers. The evaluation by
professional staff should typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the
community's future land use plan, and whether or not a rezoning action would be
consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan in all of its related
elements. Other evaluation considerations should include an assessment of adequacy
of transportation infrastructure, other infrastructure, and compatibility with adjacent land
uses, a consideration usually dealt with as a facet of analyzing the relationship of the
rezoning action to the long range plan for future land uses.
The most important facet of the rezoning is that it constitutes a legislative statement that
authorizes the use of land for a specific development strategy, provided the
development of the land can go forward. It may or may not affect the timing of
development because of subsequent permitting requirements. Staff completed a
comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria upon which a
favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an
objective, comprehensive overview of the impacts of the proposed land use change, be
they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that
comprehensive overview. The listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.3.2.5.
(Rezone Findings) of the LDC thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and form
the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission.
Each of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff review are
listed under each of the criterion noted and are categorized as either pro or con or not
applicable, whichever the case may be, in the opinion of staff. Staff review of each of
the criterion is followed by a summary conclusion culminating in a determination of
compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These evaluations are
completed as separate documents and have been attached to the staff report as Exhibit
"A". (See Attached)
4
.o.___/?
NoY'2 7 2001
Pl. ~
Relationship to Future and Existing Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship, as it
applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning refers to the
relationship of the proposed zoning action to the Future Land Use Element of the Collier
County Growth Management Plan.
A rezoning action having the effect of rezoning approximately 6750 square feet to
Residential Single Family will be consistent with the provisions of the FLUE.
~ The subject property abuts other RMF-6 residential zoned properties
developed with single-family residences. By the virtue of the fact that this property
qualifies for Residential Single Family under the Future Land Use Element of the
Growth Management Plan, this residential rezoning is compatible with surrounding and
nearby land uses.
Timing; Cleady the timing of a rezoning action from "C-3" commercial is present when
the land is impacted with nearby residential land uses and it is not economically feasible
to build a commercial development on the property.
Traffic: The site-generated traffic will not exceed the significance test standard (5
percent of the LOS "C" design volume). The added trips will not lower the level of
service below adopted standards within the project's radius of development influence
(RDI). Therefore, the rezoning action will be consistent with the TE.
Infrastructure: All required infrastructures are already in place.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition RZ-2001-AR-1208 to the BCC with a
recommendation for rezoning this property from "C-3" Commercial Intermediate to
"RMF-6" Residential Multi-Family zoning district.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
5
DATE
2001
REVIEWED BY:
SI~SAN MURRAY, AICP /
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
DATE
HOMAS E. KUCK, P.E. ~"
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
APPROVED BY:
,11
IN~RI~ COMMUNITYI DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
Petition RZ-2001-AR-1208
This petition has been tentatively scheduled for November 13, 01 BCC Public Hearing.
COLLIEI~ COUNTYE.f_.t~4~,.~ .._~ '--Pt-"~ c-z, 'PLANNI~CO-~ISSlON:
JOYCEANI IA J. RAUTIO, CHAIRMAN
6
NOv 2 7 2001
., lC)
REZONE FINDINGS
PETITION RZ-2001-AR-1208
Section 2.7.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report
and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the. Board of County
Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered
the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable:
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives,
and policies and Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth
Management Plan.
Pro: It is the opinion of the Comprehensive Planning Section that a rezone to P, MF-6
will be in compliance with the Growth Management Plan.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: The proposed reZOne to RMF-6 will be in compliance with the
Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
2. The existing land use pattern.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: This property is surrounded on three sides by bommercially zoned
properties and on one side with a residentially zoned property.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts.
Pro: This property is adjacent to properties developed with single-family dwellings.
· Con: None.
Summary Findings: This property is adjacent on one side to a parcel zone RMF-6
developed with a residential structure.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Pro: The district boundaries are logically drawn and consistent with the GMP.
NoV 2 7 2001
Con: None.
Summary Findings: This project will be adjacent to residentially developed properties.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment necessary.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary FindingS: The proposed zoning change is appropriate because its
relationship to the FLUE is a positive one.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions
in the area because the recommended development standards and other conditions for
approval have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of adverse
impact on adjacent and nearby developments.
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.
Pro: An action to rezone the property as requested is consistent with all applicable
transportation elements.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for
consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP and was found
consistent a statement advising that this project when developed will not increase traffic
congestion.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
Pro: The Land development Code specifically addresses prerequisite development
standards that are designed to reduce the dsk of flooding on nearby properties. New
A~A
NOV' 2 7 2001
development in and of itself is not supposed to increase flooding potential on adjacent
property over and above what would occur without development.
Con: Urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to intra-
county drainage appurtenances would increase the dsk of flooding in areas when
drainage outfall condition is inadequate.
Summary Findings: Every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization of
land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface
drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project
was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plans are required
to meet County standards as a condition of approval. In the event area wide
deficiencies develop, which deficiencies would be further exacerbated by developing
vacant land, the County is required to react through its Concurrency Management
system.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent
areas.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: All projects in Collier County are subject to the development
standards that are unique to that zoning district. These development standards and
others apply generally and equally to all zoning districts and were designed to ensure
that light penetration and air circulation are minimally affected by development.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the
adjacent area.
Pro: Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous land.
Con: None.
Summary Findings: This is a subjective determination based upon factors, which may
be internal or external to the subject property. Zoning is only one component, which
may affect property values.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
2001
Summary Findings: The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in
the zoning division of the Land Development Code is that their sound application when
combined with the administrative site development plan approval process, gives
reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not act as a deterrent to
improvement or development of adjacent property.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The proposed development is in compliance with the Growth
Management Plan a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does
not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further
determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with the GMP
are in the public interest.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: The subject property can be developed in accordance with the
existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the opportunity to
maximize the development potential of the site as made possible by its consistency
relationship with the FLUE.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the
neighborhood or the County.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: A policy statement, which has evaluated the scale, density and
intensity of land uses, deemed to be acceptable for this site.
15. Whether it is impos*sible to find other adequate sites in the County for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.
Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: There are many sites, which are zoned to accommodate the
proposed residence. This is not the determining factor when evaluating the
jo.v' 2 7 2001
- pg._ /~'/
appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are consistency
with all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of infrastructure and to some
extent the timing of the action and ali of the above criteria.
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.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: Development of the land will necessitate alteration of the site in
some form.
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and
services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Growth Management
Plan and as defined and implemented through the Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance, as amended.
ProlCon: Evaluation not applicable.
Summary Findings: Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of service
determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established relationship.
200!
p~.~/¢ _
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-102,
THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH
ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSWE ZONING
REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL
ZONING ATLAS MAP NUMBERED 8528N BY CHANGING THE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED
PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 109TH
AVENUE NORTH IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIF 48 SOLYrH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FROM "C-3"
TO "RMF-6" FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE
OF 109TH AVENUE NORTH; PROVIDING FOR STAFF AND
PLANNING COMMISSION ST~ULATIONS; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS. William L. Hoover, of Hoover Planning and Development, Inc.. representing Lan'). J. and
Marcy A. Gode. petitioned the Board of County. Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein
described real proper~d.
NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT ORDArNED BY THE Board of Count)., Commissioners of Collier Count'.
Florida. that
SECTION ONE:
The zoning classification of the real property as more particularly described as:
Lot 9, Block 2, Naples Park Unit # I as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 108. o£
the Official Records of Collier Count). Florida
is changed from C-3 to ILMF-6 and the Official Zoning Atlas Map numbered 8528N, as described in Ordinance
91-102, the Collier County. Land Development Code is hereby amended accordingly. The herein described real
propert3.' is the same [or which the rezone is hereby approved
SECTION TWO:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing v, ith the Depar'n'nent o[ State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this
__ day of 2001.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
Matjon~M. Student
Assistant County Attorney
P,Z-12C8
AGENDA ITEM~L'
2 7 2001
pg.. /~
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC H'F~ARING FOR: STANDARD REZONE
Petition No.:
Commission District:
RZ-2001-AR-1208
GODE REZONE
Date Petition Received: PROJECT #2001070037
DATE: 7/24,/01
Planner Assigned:__ CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN
ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF
1. General Information:
Name of Applicant(s) Larry J.
Applicant's Mailing Address 5 6 7 2
Ch}' Naples
and Marcy A. Gode
Strand Courtt Suite
StateFlorida
Zip 3411 0
Applicant's Telephone # ~ q I - 4 2 3 1
Name of Agent William L. Hoover
Agent's Mailing Address 3785 Airport
City Naples
Agent's Telephone # 403-8899
Firm
Road
Fax# 591-4102
Hoover Planninq
& Dev.t Inc.
N_: Suite
State Florida Z~
Fax# 403-9009
34105
COLLllgR COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING
2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE-NAPLES, FL 34104
PHONE (941) 403-2400fFAX (941) 643-6968
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98
~OY 2 7 2001
' Pg. /7
Complete ~e following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petkion. (Provide additional
sheets if necessary)
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address City State ~ Zip.
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
City State ~ Zip
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
City State __ Zip
Name of Master Association: Maples p_~_r-k A~-~:m A~c~c~imi-i~q
Mailing Address 655 1 03rd Ave. N. City Naples State FL Zip 341 08
Name of Civic Association: Naples Park Civic Association
Vera Fitz-Gerald, Pres. (Phone 597-5648) They have already
Mailing Address Cit~ State __ Zip
reviewed.
2. Disclosure of Interest Information:
If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entireD,,
tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as
well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary).
Name~dAddr~s Per~nhage~Owne~p
Larry J. and Marcy A. Gode 100%
5672 Strand Courtt Suite 3
Naples, FL 34110
If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers
and the p~centage of stock owned by each.
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC H~ARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98
Name and Address, and Office Percentage of Stock
Co
If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with
the percentage of interest.
Name and Address
Percentage of Interest
do
If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, lis~
the name of the general and/or limit~! partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a
Corporation, Trustee, or a Parmership, list the names of the contract purchasers
below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
f.
Date of Contract:
If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional
individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust.
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC E[EARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98
parl~, list all
2 ? 2001
p~. / ~] _.
Name and Address
Date subject property, acquired~ leased [--] A,,.l.3__a~e~m of lease yrs./mos.
6-17-99
Ill Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option
terminates: , or anticipated closing date
Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur
subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public
hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his beha~ to submit
a supplemental disclosure of interest form
Detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: (If space is
inadequate, attach on separate page.) fi request involves change to more than one zonin~
district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applican~
shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months,
maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting.
NOTE: The applicant is responm'ble for supplying the correct legal description. If
questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed sun:ey
may be required.
Section: 2 8 Township: 4 8 Range: 2 5
Lot: 9 Block:. 2 Subdivision: Naples Park Unit No. I
Plat Book 1 Page #: I fl t~ Property
I.D.//: 6:241 n~c)onr)l
Metes & Bounds Description:
Size of propert3': 5 ~) ft. X 1 3 5 fi. = Total Sq. Ft. 6 7 5 0
Acres o_ 1 5
5. Address/eenerallocationofsubie, ct property: On th~ north .qido. of
109th Ave. North~ about 275 feet west of
6. Adjacent zoning and land use:
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC I~EARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10tgg
41 North.
AC.~=.hlDA ITEM/')
NoV 2 7 2001
Z0ni-g
N C-3
S RMF-6
E C-3
W RMF-6
Land use
Commercial parking
Singlo-Pamily ~mm~
Sinqle-Famil¥ Home
Tri-plex
lot
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property?
If so, give complete legal description of entke contiguous property. (If space is
inadequate, attach on separate page).
Section: 28 Township: 48 Range: 25
Lot: 10 Block: 2 Subdivision: Naples Park
Plat Book 1 Page #: 1 06 Property
I.D.#: 6241 0240003
Unit No 1
Metes & Bounds Description:
o
Rezone Request: This application is requesting a rezone from the
zoning district (s) to the RMF-6 zoning district(s).
C-3
Present Use of the Property:
Vacant
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Si ng] o-fam5 ] y homo_
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ltEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98
Evaluation Criteria: Pursuant to Section 2.7.2.5.. of the Collier County Land
Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and
the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall
be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative
statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the crite ,ri~~
Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. ]
17
Standard Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7.2.5.) ~Ox~ 2 7 2001
Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies and future land use map and the elements of the growth management plan.
The existing land use pattern.
The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts.
o
°
}Yhether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn tn relation to existing
conditions on the property for the proposed change.
Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment (rezone) necessa~.,.
~7~ether the prot~gsed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or
create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surroutdmg land uses, because qf
peak volumes or pro./ected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during
construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safet),.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light aid air to adjacent areas.
Whether the proposed change will seriously affect property values in the adjacent
area.
11. Whether the proposed change wilt be a deterrent to the improvement or developmen!
of ad)acent property in accordance with existing regulations.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public we~are.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
the count),.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites itt the county for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use.
16.
The physical characteristics of the property a~ the degree of site alter
wouM be required to make the property usable for any of the range oft
under the proposed zoning classification.
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ~EARI3/G FOR S-'rANDARD REZONE - 10/98
~ttot which ' 7
otettt~l~-j-Z- ~
Nbv 2 ? 2001
10.
11.
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 growth
management plan and ax defined and implemented through the Collier County
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. I]J, as amended.
18. Such other factors, stand, orals, or criteria that the board of county commissioners
shah deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and weyare.
Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded fi:om enforcing deed restrictions,
however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the
civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in
order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions.
Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public
hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that
hearing? ¥~_q a v~rian~ p~t-i~-ic~n w~aawcling setb~oks (was ~ontinued)
V-99-29. An OSP was also requeste~ for lot to the west to serve this
Additional Submittal requirements: In addition to this completed application, the lot.
following shall be submitted in order for your application to be deemed sufficient, unless
otherwise waived during the pre-application meeting.
a. A copy of the pre-application meeting notes;
b o
If this rezone is being requested for a specific use, provide fifteen (15) copies of a 24"
x 36" conceptual site plan [and one reduced 8Vz" x 11" copy of site plan], drawn to a
maximum scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet, depicting the following [Additional copies of
the plan may be requested upon completion of staff evaluation for distribution to the
Board and various advisory boards such as the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB),
or CCPC];
· all existing and proposed structures and the dimensions thereo£
· provisions for existing and/or proposed ingress and egress (including pedestrian
ingress and egress to the site and the structure(s) on site),
· all existing and/or proposed parking and loading areas [include matrix indicating
required and provided parking and loading, including required parking for the
disabled],
· required yards, open space and preserve areas,
· proposed locations for utilities (as well as location ofexSsting utility services to
the site),
· proposed and/or existing landscaping and buffering as may be required by the
County,
c. An architectural rendering of any proposed structures.
d. An Environmental Impact Statement (ELS), as required by Section
Development Code (LDC), or a request for waiver if appropriate.
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98
so~ /7
3.8. of the Land
NvV 2 7 2001
Whether or not an ElS is required, two copies of a recent aerial photograph, (taken
within the previous twelve months), minimum scale of one inch equals 400 feet, shah
be submitted. Said aerial shall identify plant and/or wilcLLife habitats and their
boundaries. Such identification shall be consistent with Florida Department of
Transportation Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System. Additionally, a
calculation of the acreage (or square feet) of native vegetation on site, by area, and a
calculation and location(s) of the required portion of native vegetation to be
preserved (per LDC Section 3.9.5.5.4.).
Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments and sketches);
A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS). unless waived at the pre-application meeting:
A historical and archeological survey or waiver application if property is located
within an area of historical or archaeological probability (as identified at pre-
application meeting);
Any additional requirements as may be applicable to specific conditional uses and
identified during the pre-application meeting, including but not limited to any required
state or federal permits.
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC H~EARING FOR STANDARD REZONE
AGENDA ITEM~
2 7 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION SNR-2001-AR 1503, THE OPERATIONS
DEPARTMENT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION,
REPRESENTING THE TRANSPORTATION
ADMINISTRATOR, REQUESTING A STREET NAME
CHANGE FROM A PORTION OF LIVINGSTON ROAD
NORTH AND SOUTH TO OLD LIVINGSTON ROAD,
LOCATED IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 35, IN
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
AND ALSO IN SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners render a decision on a request to rename
a street from North and South Livingston Road to Old Livingston Road.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The Petitioner is requesting that all of Livingston Road North and part of Livingston
Road South, extending from a point just north of Livingston Woods Lane and continuing
north to Daniels Road, be changed to Old Livingston Road. This is in order that a future
road, which will run parallel to the existing Livingston Road North and South, may be
named "Livingston Road."
In a memorandum dated 31 August 2001, Assistant County Attorney Jacqueline
Hubbard Robinson states, in part, that, under Ordinance 99-76, the BCC has the
discretion to rename a road, and that the Transportation Administrator may therefore
legally rename the existing road.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Fiscal impact to the County Administrator's agency will be incurred in the form of staff
time spent revising plats and addressing records. Fiscal impact to fire, police (Sheriff's
Office), Post Office, EMS, and 911 Emergency Services will be incurred in the form of
costs to update records and maps.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
The renaming of the street will have no impact on the Growth Managemer
NOV 2 7 2001
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
There are no environmental issues associated with this petition
HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
There are no historical/archaeological issues associated with this petition.
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commi.ssioners approve Petition SNR-
2001-AR-1503, changing the name of a portion of Livingston Road North and South to
Old Livingston Road.
EAC RECOMMENDATION:
The EAC does not review street name change petitions.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission does not review street name change petitions.
AGENDA ITEM
No. /~
NOV 2 ? Z001
PREPARED BY:
J-.'~6 S S~;~)C H~ N AOR, PLANNER
CURRENT PLANNING
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
y,~/~-~-~ ~ ~
AICP, /
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.,
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
JOI"~M. DUNNUCK, III, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
DATE
SNR-2001 AR-1503
AGENDA
No. i '/
NOV ~B ? ~001
Pg.__ ~)
CHURCH OF NAPLES
OL
TI IE COMMUNITY
GLEN
N~PL~S PROGRESSIVE
IYMIASllCS CAMP
ST. ALBANS APTS.
13
18
PINE V1EW
SEAGAT~
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
RESOLUTION RENAMING A PORTION OF
LIVINGSTON ROAD NORTH AND SOUTH TO OLD
LIVINGSTON ROAD, WHICH STREET IS LOCATED IN,
GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 35, IN SECTION 7,
TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND ALSO
LOCATED IN SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
VOtEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners is authorized pursuant to authority of
Chapter 336.05, Florida Statutes, to name or rename streets and roads, except for certain state roads;
and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has been requested to confirm the
renaming of a portion of Livingston Road North and South to Old Livingston Road. This street is
located in Section 7, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, in Golden Gate
Estates Subdivision Unit 35, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 85, of the
Official Records of Collier County, Florida and also located in Section 6, Township 49 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
WHEREAS, there appears to be no street in Collier County with this name or any similar
sounding name; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for identification purposes to confirm the name of this street,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida, that:
The name of this street is hereby changed from Livingston Road North and South to Old
Livingston Road, and is confirmed as such.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the Public Records of
Collier County, Florida, and noted upon the maps of the street and zoning atlases of Collier County,
and notations made on the referenced Plat.
This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote.
Done this day of ,2001.
AGENDA ITEM
No. ]'~ ~
NOV 2 7 2001
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
Approved as to Form
and Legal Sufficimcy:
'-r~qn-~'~.~. ~.
Ma~jori~ ]V~.-Smdent
Assistant County Attorney
SNR-2001-AR-1503
AGENDA ITEI~
NOV g 7 2001
.g.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION CU-2001-AR-371, RWA, INC. REPRESENTING HIDEOUT GOLF CLUB
LTD., REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR EARTH MINING ACTIVITY ON A
PARCEL OF LAND ZONED "A" AGRICULTURAL FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF KEAN AVENUE (A.K.A. BRANTLEY
BOULEVARD) AND GARLAND ROAD APPROXIMATELY TWO MILES EAST OF
COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR. 951) IN SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE
26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA. THIS PARCEL CONSISTS OF
APPROXIMATELY 20.5 ACRES.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of Zoning Appeals consider an application for a Conditional Use
permitting an earth mining activity in the "A" Agricultural zoning district while maintaining
the community's best interest.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The applicant is requesting Conditional Use "1" of the "A" Agricultural zoning district for
an earth mining business. The petitioner is proposing to excavate a lake with an area of
13 acres and move the fill to an offsite location. The petitioner is proposing to excavate
the site to a maximum depth of 20 feet. Due to the existence of residential units within
close proximity of the subject site staff recommends that blasting only be permitted for
no more than 4 weeks and the excavation activities be limited to no more than 12
months. The access to the site will be provided via Brantley Boulevard which is a 2 lane
paved road.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This petition is for an earth mining operation. The only impact fee applicable to this
operation is the road impact fee. Based on the transportation impact fee calculation
criteria this operation generating an average of 20 truck trips per day for one (1) year
will be assessed a transportation impact fee of $15,683.11.
GROVVTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
The subject property is located in the Rural Agricultural area as shown on the FLUE
map of the GMP. The Agricultural/Rural designation is subject to the 6/22/99 Final
Order from the Governor ~nd Cabinet.
The Agricultural/Rural designation permits agricultural uses including excavation/earth
mining; the Final Order does not prohibit agricultural uses, or earth mining in the
Agricultural/Rural designation.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
This petition was reviewed by the Environmental Staff of Current Planning Section.
Their review comments did not indicate any environmental issues. Furthermore, since
there were no environmental concerns with this site, this project did qualify for
exemption from the EAC review.
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an area of
historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County
Probability Map. Therefore, a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment was
required.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommendation to the CCPC was to forward this petition to the Board of Zoning
Appeals with a recommendation for a conditional approval subject to all stipulations
listed in Exhibit "C" of the Resolution of Approval. Staffs original stipulation was to
prohibit blasting; however, the CCPC modified that to allow some blasting in compliance
with the Collier County Blasting and Excavation Ordinances, to which staff agreed.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION:
This petition was exempt from the review by the EAC as there were no environmental
issues with this Conditional Use request.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed CU-2001-AR-371 and by a
unanimous vote recommended that the Board of Zoning appeals approve this petition.
The CCPC modified the blasting stipulation to allow some blasting and reduced the
duration of the excavation from 18 months, as was stipulated by staff to 12 months, and
added a stipulation requiring the applicant to comply with the newly amended
Excavation Ordinance. A neighbor spoke at the CCPC requesting clarifications and
assurances about the blasting and the impact of it on her residence. She was satisfied
with the answer she received and did not object to the granting of this petition.
PREPARED BY:
(.j~T~ m,',.- ~~--
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
2
DATE
NO:V 2 7 2001
REVIEWED BY:
USAN MURRA~
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
THOMAS E. KUCK,~.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
APPROVED BY:
JOHI~M. DONNUCK III DATE
INTEI~IM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
Petition Nu mberCU-2001-AR-371
3
ITEM
NOV 2 ? 2001
AGENDA ITEM 8-H
MEMORANDUM
TO:
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
DATE'
October 11,2001
RE:
PETITION NO: CU-2001-AR-371
OWNER/AGENT:
owner:
Hideout Golf Club LTD.
Maurice Kent, Lawrence Kent, Terry Kent & Larry Bird
3025 Brantley Boulevard
Naples, FL. 34117
Agent:
RWA, Inc.
3050 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL. 34104
REQUESTED ACTION:
The applicant is requesting the approval of a conditional use for an earth mining activity
on a parcel of land zoned "A" Agricultural.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located at the southeast inteisection of Kean Avenue (A.K.A.
Brantley Boulevard) and Gadand Road approximately two miles east of Collier
Boulevard (CR. 951) in Section 25, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County
Flodda. This parcel consists of approximately 20.5 acres.
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The applicant is requesting Conditional Use "1" of the "A" Agricultural zoning district for
an earth mining activity for the purpose of creating a private fishing lake. The petitioner
is proposing to excavate a 13 acre lake to a depth of 20 feet. Due to the existence of
residential units within close proximity of the subject site staff recommends that no
~bv ? 7 200~
blasting be permitted with this excavation. The access to the site will be provided via
Friendship Lane which is a 2-lane unpaved pdvate road.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Existing:
Surrounding:
-Vacant, zoned "A" Agricultural.
North- Vacant and single-family residences, zoned
Agricultural.
East - Vacant and single-family residences, zoned
Agricultural.
South-Vacant and single-family residences, zoned
Agricultural.
West- Vacant and single-family residences, zoned
Agricultural.
"A"
"A"
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
The subject property is located in the Rural Agricultural area as identified on the FLUM
of the GMP. The property is zoned "A" Rural Agricultural. This district allows for certain
conditional uses, which may include commercial earth mining. The site is within the area
of the County subject to Final Order No. AC-99-002, issued June 22, 1999, by the
Flodda Governor and Cabinet. However, the Final Order does not prohibit the
conditional use of earth mining. Therefore, this request is consistent with the FLUE of
the GMP.
Other applicable elements of the GMP for which a consistency review was made are as
follows:
Transportation Element: Ingress and egress to the site will be provided through Brantley
Boulevard, which is a paved road.
The ITE Trip Generation manual indicates that this site will generate 80 to 90 trips on a
weekday for one year. Based on this data, the site-generated traffic will not exceed the
significance test standard (5 percent of the level of service LOS "C" design volume) on
any County road. In addition, the site-generated trips will not lower the LOS below the
adopted LOS "D" standard for any segment within the project's radius of development
influence (RDI).
Therefore, this project is consistent with Policy 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation
Element (TE).
-2-
A~.h~)A FFE. M
2001
Conservation Element: This petition was reviewed by the Environmental Staff of
Development Services and found to be consistent with the Conservation and Coastal
Management Element of the GMP.
STAFF ANALYSIS
The Current Planning staff has coordinated a comprehensive evaluation of this land use
petition and the criteria on which a favorable determination must be based. This
evaluation is intended to provide objective, comprehensive overview of the impacts of
the proposed land use change, be they positive or negative, culminating in a staff
recommendation based on that comprehensive overview. The below listed cdteria are
specifically noted in Section 2.7.4.4. of the Land Development Code thus requiring staff
evaluation and comment,, and shall be used as the basis for a recommendation for
approval or denial by the Planning Commission to the .Board of County Commissioners.
Each of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff review are
listed under each of the criterion noted below, and are categorized as either pro or con
as the case may be, in the opinion of staff. Staff review of each criterion is followed by a
summary conclusion culminating in a determination of compliance, non-compliance or
compliance with mitigation.
Consistency with this code and Growth Management Plan.
Pro: The site in question is zoned "A". Earth mining is permitted as a Conditional
Use in the Agricultural district. The subject property is designated Rural
Agricultural on the Future Land Use of the GMP.
Con: None.
Summary Conclusion (Findin(~s):
The use in question is permitted within the Rural Agricultural district. This district
allows certain non-agricultural land uses, provided certain criteria are met. This
request is deemed to be consistent with the requirements of the Growth
Management Plan.'
Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with
particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe.
Pro: The access to the site will be provided from Brantley Boulevard, which is a
private road maintained by the Hideout Golf Club, Inc..
Con: Trucks, leaving the site, will drive on Brantley Boulevard and then will turn
to 23rd Street SW, which is a residential Estates road containing several homes.
-3-
NOV 2 7 2001
P£. q
After a 2-mile trip on 23rd Street SW, truck will reach White Boulevard for another
2-mile trip to Collier Boulevard (CR-951).
Summary Conclusion (Findings):
Adequate ingress and egress to the site will be provided through Brantley
Boulevard; however, the travel route includes Golden Gate Estates roads, with
residences, before reaching Collier Boulevard.
The effect the conditional use would have on neighboring properties in
relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects.
Pro:
Neighboring properties are only partially developed. This mining activity should
have minimal impact on neighboring properties at the present time because
existing housing in this area is sparse.
Con: This activity will generate some noise and dust, which may affect the
neighboring properties.
Summary Conclusion (Findings):
The proposed earth mining activity will generate some noise and dust in the area.
This activity is not anticipated to generate any glare or odor. In order to limit the
negative effects of this activity on the neighboring properties, staff is proposing
stipulations to limit this activity to 12 months and limiting the hours of operation.
Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district.
Pro: This property is surrounded on two sides by vacant properties.
Con: This property, on two sides, abuts parcels that are developed with
residential dwelling units.
Summary Conclusion (Findings):
The parcel in question is surrounded on two sides with vacant properties and on
the remaining sides it is adjacent to parcels with residential dwellings. The earth
mining activity will last a maximum of 12 months, and then the property will
function as a private fishing lake, which will generate very little automobile traffic.
Currently, no structures are proposed to be built on this property.
-4-
A~A ITEM
200!
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition CU-2001-AR-371to the BCC with a
recommendation for conditional approval subject to all staff stipulations.
PREPARED BY:
CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
SUSAN MUR , I
INTERIM CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E.
INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE
/¢ -,/~
DATE
APPROVED BY:
JOHN ~. DUNNUCK, III
INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
Petition CU-2001-AR-371
This petition has been tentatively scheduled for November 27, 01, BCC Public Hearing.
COLLIER COUNTY PLAN. I~ING COMMISSION:
~OYCEINNA J. I~UTIO, 'CHAIR
-5-
N¢~' 2 7 2001
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF EARTHMINING CONDITIONAL USE "1" IN THE "A"
RURAL AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT
TO SECTION 2.2.2.3. OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN
SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST.
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 67-1246, Laws of
Florida, and Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on Collier County the power
to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as ar~
necessary for the protection of the public; and
WHEREAS. the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development
Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which includes a Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
establishing regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County.
among which is the granting of Conditional Uses; and
WHEREAS. the Collier County Planning Commission, being the duty appointed
and constituted planning board for the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing
after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the
advisability of Conditional Use "1" of Section 2.2.2.3. in an "A" Rural Agricultural Zone
for earthmining on the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact
(Exhibit "A") that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning
alt applicable' matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Subsection
2.7.4.4 of the Land Development Code for the Collier County Planning Commission:
and
WHEREAS. all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by
this Board in a public meeting assembled and the Board having considered all matters
presented.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Zoning Appeals of
Collier County, Flodda that:
The petition filed by RWA, Inc., representing Hideout Golf Club, Ltd.. with
respect to the property hereinafter described as:
The North 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of Section 25,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
? 2001
be and the same is hereby approved for Conditional Use "1" of Section 2.2.2.3. of the
"A" Rural Agricultural Zoning District for earthmining in accordance with the Conceptual
Master Plan (Exhibit "B") and subject to the following conditions:
Exhibit "C" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of
this Board.
This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote.
Done this day of ,2001.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COLLIER CQUNTY, FLORIDA
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
Approved as to Form and
Legal Sufficiency:
o4j~ I~1. Student
Assistant County Attorney
-2-
AC.~u4OA
/7
lI ¥ 2 7
FINDING OF FACT
BY
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION
FOR
CU-2001-AR-371
The following facts are found:
1. Section 2.2.2.3 of the Land Development Code
authorized the condi~ionai use.
o
Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the
public interest and will not adversely affect other property
or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of:
ao
Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth
Management Plan:
Yes ~' No
S o
Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures
thereon with particular reference to automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and
control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe:
Adequate ingress & egress
Yes vj- No
Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise,
glare, economic or odor effects:
u~/ No affect or Affect mitigated by
Affect cannot be mitigated
D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other
property in the district:
Compatible use within district
Yes ~'~- No
Based on the above findings, this conditional use~oUl~jJ;ith
stipulations, (copl; attached) (~ho~ not) be reco~ed for
approval
EXHIBIT
NoV 2 7 2001
FINDING OF FACT
BY
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION
FOR
CU-2001-AR-371
The following facts are found:
1. Section __2.2.2.3. of the Land Development Code
authorized the conditional use.
2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the
public interest and will not adversely affect other property
or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of:
A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and
Growth Management Plan:
Yes ~'~' No
B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed
structures thereon with particular reference to
automotive and pedestrian safeny and convenience,
traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or
catastrophe:
Adequate ingress & egress
Yes .L-~' No
C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise,
glare, economic or odor effects:
No affect or Affect mitigated by
~"-~Affect cannot be mitigated
D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other
property in the district:
Compatible use within district
Yes No
Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with
stipulations, (copy attached) (should not) be recommended for
approval
DATE:~
2001
FINDING OF FACT~
BY
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION
FOR
CU-2001-AR-371
The following facts are found:
~ ich 2.2.2.3. cf the Land Development Code
authorized the conditional use.
Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the
public interest and will not adversely affect other property
or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of:
Consistency with the~and Development Code and
Growth Management ~n:
Yes No
Ingress and egress to property and proposed
structures thereon with particular reference to
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or
catastrophe: ~g
Adequate ingress & ress
Yes ~ No
Affecps neighboring properties in relation to noise,
glare, economic or odor effects:
~ No affect or Affecn mitigated by
Affect cannot be mitigated
Compatibility with adjacent proDeruies
property in the distr~ct:
Compatible use/~ithin district
Yes V No
and other
Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with
stipulations,_ (copy attached) (should not) be recommended for
approval
AGE~A ITEM~
I~V 2 7 200I
FINDING OF FACT
BY
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION
FOR
CU-2001-AR-371
The following facts are found:
1. Section __2.2.2.3. of the Land Development Code
authorized the conditional use.
2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the
public interest and will not adversely affect other property
or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of:
A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and
Growth Management Plan:
Yes \ No
B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed
structures thereon with particular reference to
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or
catastrophe:
Adequate ingress & egress
Yes ~ No
C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise,
glare, economic or odor effects:
\ No affect or Affect mitigated by
Affect cannot be mitigated
D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other
property in the district:
Compatible use within district
Yes ~ No
this conditional use should with
Based on the above findings, '
stipulations, (copy attached) ~hould,)not) be recommended for
approval ~. ~
DATE: i\ I~jt MEMBER: . ~
Nc ¥ 2 ? 200
FINDING OF FACT'
BY
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION
FOR
CU-2001-AR-371
The following facts are found:
Section 2.2.2.3. of the Land Development Code
authorized the conditional use.
o
Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the
public interest and will not adversely affect other property
or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of:
Ao
Consistency with the Land Development Code and
Growth Management Plan:
Yes No
o
Ingress and egress to property and proposed
structures thereon with particular reference to
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or
catastrophe:
Adequate ingress & egress
Yes o No
C 0
Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise,
glare, economic or odor effects:
No affect or Affect mitigated by
Affect cannot be mitigated
D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other
property in the district:
Compatible use within district
Yes ~-" No
Bage~.on-~6~e above findings, this conditional use 6shouldk with,
~_ipulations, (copy attached) (should not) be reco~-ended for
approval ~- .i~-~
DATE: , ,,///'~ / MEMBER: ~?,~ L~ ,---~ ,~. .'~,~"~' "~"",
2 7 2001
FINDING OF FACT
BY
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION
FOR
CU-2001-AR-371
The following facts are found:
!. Section .2.2.2.3. of the Land Development Code
aunhoriz~d t~e conditional use.
2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the
public interest and will not adversely affect other property
or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of:
A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and
Growth Management Plan:
'/ No
Yes ~
B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed
structures thereon with particular reference to
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or
catastrophe:
Adequate ingress & egress
Yes V No
Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise,
glare, economic or odor effects:
No affect or ~. Affect mz~zgate by
Affect cannot be mitigated
D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other
property in the district:
Compatible use within district
No
Yes !,~ _
Based on the above findings, this condi, tional use should, with
stipu!ations, (copy attached) (should not) be recommended for
approval ' /C- '"' ' '
. . j ,, ~
.~ ,.~ f -%.?.'.i,.,, ."'' --
'- Nov 2 7 2001
FINDING OF FACT'
BY
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION
FOR
CU-2001-AR-371
The following facts are found:
Secnzon 2.2.2.2. cf the Land Deveiopmenn Code
authorized the conditional use.
Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the
public interest and will not adversely affect other property
or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of:
Consistency with the Land Development Code and
Growth Management Plan:
Yes X No
Ingress and egress to property and proposed
structures thereon with particular reference to
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or
catastrophe:
Adequate ingress & egress
Yes ~ No
C o
Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise,
glare, economic or odor effects:
No affect or Affect mitigated by
~ Affect c~nnot be mitigated
Compatibility with adjacent properties and other
property in the district:
Compatible use within district
Yes No ~
Based on the above-findings,
stipulations, (copy attached)
approval
this conditional use~--0-U-~d') with
(should not) be recommended for
2001
FINDING OF FACT
BY
COLLIER COUNTY PIJkNNING COMMISSION
FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION
FOR
CU-2001-AR-371
The following facts are found:
1. Section __2.2.2.3. of the Land Development Code
authorized the conditional use.
2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the
public interest and will not adversely affect other property
or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of:
A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and
Growth Management Pi~:
Yes ~-- No
B o
C o
Ingress and egress to property and proposed
structures thereon with particular reference to
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or
catastrophe:
Adequate ingress & eg3~ess
Yes ~,~No
Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise,
gla~e, economic or odor effects:
~/' No affect or / Affect mitigated by
Affect cannot be mitigated
Compatibility with adjacent properties and other
property in the district:
Compatible use ~ithin district
Yes ~ No
Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with
stipulations, !~py attached)
approval
DATE: ' c ,
(should not) b.e./commended for
MEMBER: .~'/ '/~ ~"~'~'-L~--'
//
/7 19
N_QV 2 ? 2001
m
H~v"2~7 200i
. ~,~.~ 0
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CU-2001-AR-371
This approval is conditioned upon the following stipulations:
1. The Current Planning Manager may approve minor changes in the location,
siting, or height of buildings, structures, and improvements authorized by the
conditional use. Expansion of the uses identified and approved within this
conditional use. application, or major changes to the site plan submitted as part of
this application, shall require the submittal of a new conditional use application,
and shall comply with all applicable County ordinances in effect at the time of
submittal, including Division 3.3, Site Development Plan Review and Approval, of
the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance (91-102).
Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code, if, during the
course of site clearing, excavation, or other construction related activity, an
historic or archeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area
necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped, and the Collier
County Code Enforcement Director shall be contacted.
3. This excavation shall comply with the requirements of the Excavation Ordinance.
4. This Conditional Use shall expire 12 months after the date of issuance of the
Clearing Permit.
5. Blasting shall require a blasting permit and shall be limited to 4 weeks in duration.
7. The excavation will be limited to a bottom elevation of 20 feet below original
grade.
8. Off-site removal of the excavated material
conditions imposed by the Transportation
document dated May 24, 1988.
shall be subject to the standard
Services Division in the attached
An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring and maintenance plan for the site shall
be submitted to Planning Services Section Staff for review and approval prior to
any excavation work beginning on the site.
EXHIBIT "C"
Page 1 of 3
2001
COLLIER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
"STANDARD CONDITIONS"
EXCAVATION PERMIT APPLICATIONS INVOLVING
OFF-SITE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL
The intent of these "Standard Conditions" are to provide excavation permit applicants a summary of
conditions which may affect their projects and which should be taken into consideration during all
stages of project development:
Haul routes bem'een an excavation site and an arterial road shall be private with property
owner(s) approval or be a public collector road built to standards applicable to handle the
resulting track traffic. Where residential areas front collector roads, appropriate mm lanes,
buffer and bikepath shall be required as minimal site improvements and if recommended for
approval, shall be so with the condition that the Transportation Services Administration
reserves the right to suspend or prohibit off-site removal of excavated material should such
removal create a hazardous road condition or substantially deteriorate a road condition; such
action by the Transportation Services Administration shall be subject to appeal before the
Board of County Commissioners.
Haul routes utilizing public roads shall be subject to road maintenance and road repair or an
appropriate fair share by the permittee in accordance with Excavation Ordinance No. 91-102
as amended Div. 3.5 and Right-of-Way Ordinance No. 93-64.
Off-site removal of excavated material shall be subject to Ordinance No. 92-22 (Road
Impact Ordinance). A traffic and road impact analysis shall be made by the County to
determine the effects that off-site removal of excavated material will have on the road
system within the excavation project's zone of influence. If appropriate, road impact fees in
accordance with Ordinance No. 92-22 shall be paid prior to the issuance of an excavation
permit.
The Transportation Services Administration reserves the fight to establish emergency weight
limits on public roadways affected by the off-site removal of excavated material; the
procedure for establishment of weight limits shall be the presentation of an applicable
resolution before the Board of County Commissioners. Should weight limits be instituted,
the permittee shall be responsible to implement measures to assure that all heavy truck
loadings leaving the permit's property conform to the applicable weight restriction.
The Excavation Performance Guarantee shall apply to excavation operations and also the
maintenance/repair of public roads in accordance with current ordinances and applicable
permit stipulations.
^C, DA
/? ._ L)
Exhibit "C" NO_V 2 7:200I
Page 2 of 3
o
Based on soil boring information per Ordinance No. 91-102 as amended, a blasting permit
may be appropriate. Should a blasting permit application be submitted and should
residential areas exist within one mile of the excavation site, the County reserves the right to
deny a blasting permit based on concerns for off-site impacts from blasting at an excavation
site. Should a blasting permit be considered and approved, the minimum conditions of
approval in addition to conditions per Ordinance No. 91-102 as amended are as follows:
A. Structure inventory/monitoring and applicable property owner release as required by
the Development Services Director.
B. Security bond applicable to private property damage acceptable to the County.
C. Control of size/depth/number of charges per blast by the Development Services
Director.
D. The right of the County to suspend and/or revoke blasting permit authority should it
be determined that blasting activities are creating unacceptable off-site conditions
either in terms of private property damage and/or related physical effects of blasting
operations.
No excavation permit shall be issued until receipt of a release from the Transportation
Services Administration applicable to proper mitigation of off-site impacts, meeting of
applicable provisions of Ordinance No. 93-64, Ordinance No. 92-22, and Ordinance No.
91-102 as amended.
Reference to letter of 5/24/88
Revised 1/13/98
Exhibit "C"
Page 3 of 3
2001
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
PETITION NUMBER:
DATE OF APPLICATION:
COMMiSSiON DISTRICT: District V
CU-2001-AR-371
Hideout Golf Club
Project # 2001020027
Date: 2/14/01
PLANNER ASSIGNED:
Chahram Badamtchian
ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: CONDITIONAL USE
General Information:
Name of Applicant(s)Hideout Golf Club Ltd.
Applicant's Mailing Address:
City Naples
Applicant's Telephone No.
Fax No. 941-352-4022
3025 Brantl¥ Boulevard
State Florida Zip341i7
941-352-4141
Name of Agent
Firm RWA Inc.
Agent's Mailing Address:3050 North Horseshoe Drive
City Naples State
Agent's Telephone No.
Fax No. (941) 649-7056
Florida Zip 34104
(941) 649-1509
G:%2000 Projects\00-0175 Mideout Lightning Shelter\Conditional Use Application
Golf Course Final.doc
kPPLICATION FOR PUBLIC MEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE
/7
Nov 2 2' 2001
Disclosure of Interest Information:
a. If the property is owned fee simple by an
INDIVIDUAL tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in
common, or joint tendency, list all parties with
an ownership interest as well as the percentage
of such interest. (Use additional sheets if
necessary)).
Name and Address Percent of Ownership
If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list
the officers and stockholders and the percenta9e
of stock owned by each.
Name, Address, and Office
Percent of Stock
Hideout Golf Club Ltd. One general ~artner:
Hideout Golf Club, Inc. (!%) . The directors of
Hideout Golf Club, Inc. are: Maurice Ken%,
Lawrence Kent and Terr~ Archer
The limited p_~rtners and remaininq_99% interests
are listed below.
Maurice Kent 40%
1207 Third Suite South, Suite 2
N_~pies, Florida 34102
Lawrence Kent
40%
1207 Third Suite South, Suite 2
N_~ples, Florida 34102
20%
~arr~ Bird
1207 Third Suite South, Suite 2
~aples, Florida 34102
Date of Contract: N/
G:\2000 Projects\00-0175 Hideout Lightning ShelterkConditional Use Application
Golf Course Final.doc
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE
2
2 ? 2001
Hideout
C ·
If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list
the beneficiaries of the trust with the
percentage of interest.
Name and Address
Percent of Interest
If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the names of the
general and/or limited partners.
Name and Address
Percent of Ownership
G:\2000 Projects\00-0175 Hideout Lightning Shelter\Conditional Use Applicatior
Golf Course Final.doc
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ~EARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE
2 7 2001
Hideout
e o
If the property is a CONTP~ACT FOR PURCHASE, with
an individual or individuals, a Corporation,
Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the
contract purchasers below, including the
officers, stockholders beneficiaries, or
partners.
Name and Address Percent of Ownership
Date of Contract:
If any contingency clause or contract terms
involve additional parties, list all individuals
or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or
trust.
Name and Address Percent of Ownership
G:\2000 Projects\00-0175 Hideout Lightning Shelter\Conditional Use Applicatio
Golf Course Final.doc
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE
2 7 2001
Hideout9 --
o
Date subject property acquired( )leased ( ):
Term of lease
yrs./mos.
If Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of
option:
and date option terminates:
anticipated closing date:
or
ho
Should any changes of ownership or changes in
contracts for purchase subsequent to the date of
application, but prior to the date of the final
public hearing, it is the responsibility of the
applicant, or agent on his behalf to submit a
supplemental disclosure of interest form.
Detailed legal description of the property covered by
the application: The north ~ of the northeast ~ of
the northeast ~ of Section 25, Township 49 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
Section: 25 Township: 49S
Range: 26E
Size of property: 1318 FT. x 680 FT.= 896,240 S.F.
Total Approximate Sq. Ft.896,240 Acres 20.5
of subject property: The
located at the Southwest
Address/~eneral location
~ubject property is
intersection of Kean Avenue (A.K.A. Brantley
Boulevard) and Garland Road, east of Collier
Boulevard, North of Interstate 75, and ~ mile East of
Hideout Golf Club.
6. ~d~acent zoning and land use:
Zoning
Land Use
North: "A" Rural Aqricultural,
Brantley Bou
right-of-way,
homes.
semi-developed with
single
G:\2000 Projects\00-0175 Mideout Lightning Shelter\Conditional Use Application
Golf Course Final.doc
APPLICATION FOR pUBLIC MEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE
L eva~9~OA
NOV 2 7 2001
Hideout
South: "A" Rural Agricultural,
Larqe forested
tracts, with scattered single family homes.
East:
West:
"A" Rural Agricultural, Garland Road riqht-
of-way, large forested lots with scattered sinqle
family homes.
"A" Rural Aqricu!tural, Larqe forested
tracts, with scattered single family homes.
Does property owner own contiguous property to the
subject property? If so, give complete legal
description of entire contiguous property. (If space
is inadequate, attach on separate page).
The applicant does not own contiguous
adjacent to this proposed development.
Section: N/A Township: N/A Range: N/A
property
Lot: N/A Block: N/A Subdivision: N/A
Plat Book_Page No.: N/A Property I.D. No.: N/A
Metes & Bounds Description:
N/A
Type of Conditional Use: This application is
~equesting condition use No. 1 of the
A district for (TYPE OF USE) Earthmining
in accordance with Section 2.2.2.3.1 of the LDC for a
12 acre private fishing lake.
Present use of the property: Vacant forested lands.
Elevation Criteria: Provide a narrative s
describing this request for conditional use.
Pursuant to Section 2.7.4 of the Collier Cou~
G:\2000 Projects\00-0175 Hideout Lightning Shelter\Conditional Use Applicatior
Golf Course Final.doc
APPLICATION FOR pUBLIC KEA.RING FOR CONDITIONAL USE
ltyL~nd
2 ? 2001
Development Code, staff's recommendation to the
Planning Commission and the Planning Commission's
recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals shall be
based upon a finding that the granting of the
conditional use will not adversely affect the public
interest and that the specific requirements governing
the individual conditional use, if any, have been met,
and that further, satisfactory provision and
arrangement have been made concerning -the following
maters, where applicable. Please provide detailed
response to each of the criterion listed below.
Specify how and why the request is consistent with
each. (Attach additional pages as may be necessary).
a. Describe how the project is consistent with the
Collier County Land Development Code and Growth
Management Plan (include information on how the
request is consistent with the applicable section
or portions of the future land use element): The
requested use is consistent with the applicable
elements of the GMP and provisions of the LDC. The
proposed use is authorized in the
Rural/Agricultural Mixed Use District and Rural
Agricultural zoning district, which provides for
the requested use as a conditionally permitted use.
b. Describe the existing or planned means of ingress
and egress to the property and proposed structure
thereon with particular reference to automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and
control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe:
The major point of ingress/egress to the subject
property will be provided by a private gated drive
from Brantely Boulevard. The fishing lake is
private and will not be open to the public.
c. Describe the effect the conditional use will have on
neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare,
economic and odor effect: The subject site is
located in a relatively remote area of the
with surrounding properties generally consis
large forested tracts 9enerally being us
G:\2000 Projects\00-0175 Hideout Lightning Shelter\Conditional 'Use Application
Golf Course Final.doc
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE
sin_~_~e famil~ residences. Initially, during_the six
month course of earthminin~ and lake contourinq_a
area residents ma_9~erience some discomfort from
noise, truck traffic and dust. However, once the
excavation process is com~ted, the ~rivate fishinq
lake will remain harmonious with the adjacent land
uses.
d. Describe the site's and the proposed use's
compatibility with adjacent properties or other
properties in the district: The current activity
level and t~oe of uses which occur on nei~hborinq
rp_~erties consist of fallow and active agricultural
uses, residential uses, and qolf course, which are
~enerall~ of low intensit~ and could be considered
com___~Datible with the rp_~osed use of the lake. The
rop~_~ is located in the A~icuitural/Rural Mixed
Use area as designated on the Future Land Use Map.
Thi__~etition as r~osed should have minimal impact
to nei hborin ro erties.
Please provide any additional information which you
may feel is relevant to this request: The owner of
the sub~wishes to develoap~rivate 12
acre fishing_ lake on-site for the en'oQ_~ent of his
family. The fishin~ lake will be _~rofessionally
de_~ned, contoured, vegetated, and stocked. These
ke_e_y_ eiements will ensure diversit~ on-site for fish
and wildlife _p_o~ulations as the_~ co-minqi__~e
harmoniously as a natural environment. The lake
will meander throughout the center of the 20 acre
forested parcel, providing a natural buffer and
transition to adjacent property boundaries. Th~
lake will be private and not o~en to the ~ublic.
Maintenance of the lake will be ~rofessionally
~rovided and the installation of oxeny~_q~s will
ensure adec~u~ate water circulation throu~_hout the
lake strata.
The excavation of the lake and off-site haulinq is
expected to occur durin9 a six month time frame.
9. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally p
from enforcing deed restrictions, howeve]
communities have adopted such restrictions,
G:\2000 Projects\00-0175 Hideout Ligh~nin~ shelter\Conditional Use Applicatior
Golf Course Final.doc
AppLICATiON FOR pUBLIC HEARIN~ FOR CONDITIONA~ US~-
You may
2 ? 2001
I
10.
wish to contact the civic or property owners'
association in the area for which this use is being
requested in order to ascertain whether or not the
request is affected by existing deed restrictions.
Previous land use petitions on the subject property:
To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on
this property within the last year? If so, what was
the nature of that hearing? No known land use
petitions within 1 year of this application
Additional Submittal requirements: In addition to
this completed application, the following must be
submitted in order for your application to be deemed
sufficient, unless otherwise waived during the pre-
application meeting.
a. A copy of the pre-application meeting notes;
Ten (10) copies of a 24" x 36" conceptual site plan
[and one reduced 8 1/2 x 11" copy of the site plan],
drawn to a maximum scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet,
depicting the following [Additional copies of the plan
may be requested upon completion of staff evaluation
for distribution.
G:\2000 Projects\00-0175 Mideout Lightning Shelter\Conditional Use Application
Golf Course Final.doc
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE
2 7 2001
ideout
AFFIDAVIT
I, (Y~f~q m, ce.. "~. ~o.~-w being duly sworn, depose and say that I am the owner of the
property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the
questions in this application, and all sketches, data and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of
this application, are honest and true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I understand this application must be
completed and accurate before a hearing can be advertised. I further permit_ RWA Inc.
(AGENT'S NAME)
to act as my representative in any matters regarding this petition.
State of Florida
County of Collier ~
The foregoing Agreement Sheet ~vas acknowledged before me this. ...--~ q4--- day of ~'c
2000 ... by ["xlX. ~4./CXA.~ ~ ~.~ 'v,- ~ , who is personally known to me or-who-ha*'~r~x~
~ as identification and who ~ (did not) take an oath.
(Signature of Notary Public)
NOTARY PUBLIC
My Commission Expires:
2001
G:L2000 Prol~-'~sx0043175 Hictcou[ Lightning Shchca-~cmditional usc ap131icationLa. PPI~cati~n for Conditional Usa.doc I 1/20/00 10:47 AM
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, RATIFYING AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE MORE EFFICIENT
ADMINISTRATION OF THE COUNTY'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) PROGRAM FUNDED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) BY PROVIDING FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE CDBG PROGRAM
THROUGH FEDERAL FISCAL YEARS 2001-2005, AND BY PROVIDING FOR MORE
CLEARLY DEFINED DELEGATION OF SIGNATURE AUTHORITY FOR CDBG PROGRAM
DOCUMENTS TO SPECIFIED COUNTY OFFICIALS (COUNTY MANAGER OR THE
DIVISON ADMNISTRATOR FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES); PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners approve an Ordinance a.uthorizing the more efficient
administration of the County's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program funded by the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by providing for participation in the CDBG program through federal fiscal
years 2001-2005, and by providing for more clearly defined delegation of signature authority for CDBG program
documents to specified County officials (County Manager or the Division Administrator for Community Development
and Environmental Services) providing for conflict and severability; and providing for an effective date.
CONSIDERATION: On September 26, 2000 (#2000-339), the Board approved submission of an application to HUD
for Urban County qualification for Entitlement status for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. In that
resolution the Board authorized the County Manager, or the Division Administrator for Community Development &
Environmental Services, as their designee to sign documents pertaining to the implementation and administration of the
CDBG program.
However, Resolution #2000-339 contemplated and referenced participation in the CDBG Program for fiscal years 2001-
2003. On May 8, 2001, the Consolidated Plan submitted to HUD under Resolution No. 2001-181 referenced Collier
County's five-year Consolidated Plan for July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2006 (federal fiscal years 2001-2005).
FISCAL LMPACT: The total amount anticipated to be funded annually, by HUD is $2 million.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The receipt of Community Development Block Grant funds from HUD can
affect several policies and objectives of the Growth Management Plan, including the Housing, Immokalee Area Master
Plan, Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Transportation elements.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve an Ordinance authorizing the more efficient
administration of the County's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program funded by the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by providing for participation in the CDBG program through federal fiscal
years 2001-2005, and by providing for more clearly defined delegation of signature authority for CDBG program
documents to specified County officials (County Manager or the Division Administrator for Community Development
and Environmental Services) providing for conflict and severability; and providing for an effective date.
AGENDA ITEM
NOV 2 7 2001
SUB M'ITYED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
APPROVED BY:
§u~a~-E~ ,kdden, Manager
Housing and Urban Improvement
Date:
~ Date:: ~~~_
~/[~ x_~ousihg and Urban Improvement
d,~R/r~J Date:////~"~/
~n ~. iSunnuc~"lll, Interim Administrator
{~ommunity Development and Environmental Services
NOV 2 7 2001
ORDINANCE NO. 2001 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RATIFYING AND FURTHER
AUTHORIZrNG THE MORE EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF THE
COUNTY'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
PROGRAM FUNDED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) BY PROVIDING FOR
PARTICIPATION IN THE CDBG PROGRAM THROUGH FEDERAL
FISCAL YEARS 2001-2005, AND BY PROVIDING FOR MORE
CLEARLY DEFINED DELEGATION OF SIGNATURE AUTHORITY
FOR CDBG PROGRAM DOCUMENTS TO SPECIFIED COUNTY
OFFICIALS (THE COUNTY MANAGER OR THE CD&ES DMSION
ADi~LUNISTRATOR); PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDLNG FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, as of September 1, 2000 the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) notified Collier County (County) that it qualifies for entitlement status as an
urban county, based on a total combined population of 200,000 or more from the unincorporated
areas and participating incorporated areas; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2000-339 adopted September 26, 2000, contemplated and
referenced participation in the CDBG Program for Fiscal Years 2001-2003 and,
WHEREAS, the Consolidated Plan submitted to HUD under Resolution No. 2001-181,
adopted May 8, 2001, referenced Collier County's five year Consolidated Strategic Plan for the
time period from July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2006 (federal fiscal years 2001 to 2005) including the
Annual Action Plan for July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the overall goal of the community planning and development programs
covered by the Consolidated Plan is to develop viable communities by providing decent housing
and a suitable living environmental and expanding economic opportunities principally for low- and
moderate-income persons; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners considers it to be in the best interest of
Page I of 4
I OV 2 7 Z001
the County to participate in the CDBG program because it furthers a worthwhile County purpose;
and
WHEREAS, the County believes it to be in the public interest to provide certain activities
to Collier County residents through the projects included in each year's Action Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, under Resolution 2000-339, authorized
either the County Manager or the Division Administrator for Community Development &
Environmental Services, as their designee to sign documents pertaining to the application for
Urban County Status, to accept the CDBG grant funds on behalf of the County, and to act in
behalf of the Board of County Commissioners to sign all documents, including the reports
necessary for administration; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Code of Federal Register (CFR) § 570.3, the Chairman of the
Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Board) is defined as the County's "Chief
Executive Officer;" and
WHEREAS, the Board now desires to ratify and authorize the execution of any prior and
all future documents required to implement and administer the County's CDBG program through
Federal Fiscal Years 2001 through 2005, as now contemplated by the Consolidated Plan, with the
exception of those documents which will be required by law to be signed by the County's Chief
Executive Officer; and
WHEREAS, the HUD software system IDIS (Integrated Data Information Systems) used
for HUD reporting and drawdown of CDBG funds is now established; and
WHEREAS, HUD requires the submission of Environmental Review Records executed by
the "Certifying Officer," which pursuant to 24 CFR 58.2 (2) means the official who is authorized
to execute the Request for Release of Funds and Certification and has the legal capacity to carry
out the responsibilities under 24 CFR § 58.13; and
Page 2 Of 4
WHEREAS, the County Manager and the Community Development & Environmental
Services' Division Administrator are intended to have such signature authority and sign as the
designated official under applicable CFR regulations for any [DIS access authority requests for
HUI employees, certification of Environmental Review Records, and for any related applications,
or other documents required to administer or implement the County's CDBG Consolidated
program, with the exception of those documents required by law to be signed by the County's
Chief Executive Officer.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE
CO*~MISSIONERS OF COLLIER COU~NTY, FLORIDA, THAT:
BOARD OF COUNTY
The foregoing Recitals are adopted as true and accurate statements, and as if fully
stated herein.
The Board authorizes and ratifies the County's five-year CDBG Consolidated
Plan, the 2001 Annual One Year Action Plan, and the designation and delegation
of authority to sign all such documents pertaining to all applications, as well as
those required for the implementation and administration of the five-year
Consolidated Plan for HUD CDBG funding throughout federal fiscal years 2001-
2005, or until the termination of the Consolidated Plan, which ever occurs first,
with the exception of those required by law to be signed by the County's Chief
Executive Officer.
The County Manager and the Community Development & Environmental
Services' Division Administrator are delegated such signature authority and are
designated to sign in all means as the County's "Certifying Officer" under
applicable CFR regulations for any such documents, including [DIS access
authority requests for HUI employees, certification of Environmental Review
Records, Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER), and for
any related applications, or other documents required to administer or implement
the County's CDBG Consolidated Plan, with the exception of those required by
law to be signed by the County's Chief Executive Officer, specifically including
the Application for Federal Assistance, Form # SF-424.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall be liberally construed to effectively carry
Page 3 of 4
NOV g 7 ZOO1
out its purposes. If any section, phrase, sentence or portion of this Ordinance is,
for any reason, held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of' competent
jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent
provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
oftNs Ordinance.
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Florida Department of
State.
This Ordinance approved and duly adopted this __ day of
after motion, second and majority vote favoring same.
· 2001
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
By:
Deputy Clerk By:
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
Patrick G. White
Assistant County Attorney
BOARD OF COUNTY COM~flSSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLOKIDA
JAMES D. CAKTER, Ph.D., CHAIRb, LMq
Page 4 of 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PETITION VA-01-AR-1295, ROBERT L. DUANE OF HOLE MONTES, INC., REPRESENTING
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS/WASTEWATER ADMINISTRATION, REQUESTING A
THREE (3) FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED THIRTY (30) FOOT SIDE YARD
SETBACK TO 27 FEET FOR A PROPOSED SLUDGE HOLDING TANK IN THE "A" RURAL
AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5600 WARREN STREET
IN SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
OBJECTIVE:
This petition seeks a 3-foot variance as noted above from the side yard setback requirement of the "A"
Rural Agricultural Zoning District to allow for a proposed sludge holding tank that is part of the
planned expansion of the South County Water Reclamation Facility (SCWRF) while ensuring that the
community's interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS:
As depicted on the attached plan, the proposed sludge holding tank is located 27-feet off of the western
property line and just south of the existing Sludge Holding Tank Number 1. Since the proposed Sludge
Holding Tank abuts the south side of the existing sludge tank and is west of the existing process
control building, the proposed Sludge Holding Tank No. 2 is boxed in with only room for expansion by
encroaching 3-feet into the side yard setback. Furthermore, the Land Development Code defines a
structure to include a "tank" because of its fixed location on the ground. As a result, the proposed
sludge holding tank is subject to all setback requirements.
It should be noted that this facility is an essential service for the community and that a conditional use
was also recently approved allowing for an expansion of the facility to 16 MGD. It should be noted that
the land to the adjacent land to the west contains the golf maintenance and storage facility for the Royal
Palm Golf Course at Lely, which will not be impacted by the location of the proposed tank. Staff is
also of the opinion that the tank cannot be reduced in size to meet the side yard setback requirement
because of the need for the added tank design and capacity.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this variance request will have no fiscal impact on Collier County.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
Approval of this variance request will not affect or change the project's consistency with the
requirements of the Growth Management Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
AC.~./~A.fTI~I,4
NOV 2 7 2001
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
There are no unusual environmental issues associated with this petition.
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff is of the opinion that there are special conditions such as the limited room for the required
expansion of the facility. This facility is an essential service to the commumty and a conditional use
was recently approved allowing for an expansion to 16 MGD. Since the proposed Sludge Holding Tank
abuts the south side of the existing sludge tank and is west of the existing process control building, the
proposed Sludge Holding Tank No. 2 is boxed in with only room for expansion by encroaching 3-feet
into the side yard setback. It should be noted that the land to the adjacent land to the west contains the
golf maintenance and storage facility for the Royal Palm Golf Course at Lely that will not be impacted
by the location of the proposed tank. Staff is also of the opinion that the tank cannot be reduced in size
to meet the side yard setback requirement because of the need for the added tank capacity. Based on
these unusual circumstances, staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition VA-01-AR-1295 to the
BZA with a recommendation for approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL 0gAC) RECOMMENDATIONS:
The EAC did not review this petition since they do not normally hear variance petitions.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION:
The CCPC heard this petition on November 1, 2001 and they voted 9 to 0 to forward Petition VA-01-
AR-1295 to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval. This
recommendation was based on their findings that there are some special conditions and circumstances.
Since no one spoke in opposition to the granting of the variance, this petition has been placed on the
Summary Agenda.
NOV 2 7 200!
PREPARED BY
RAY~I~ELO~g, CHIEF PLANNER
C~NT PLANNING SECTION
REVIEWED BY:
SUSAN MURRAY, AICP, MANAGER
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
THO~I'~'E.'KUCK, P.E., ACTING DIRECTOR
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
!1-$-o~
DATE
DATE'
DJkTE"
APPROVED BY:
JOHN ~1~. DUNNUCK, m, INT,~E, mRIM~r~ ADMI2qISTRATOR
COM~YNITY DEV. AND ELNA, IRONMENTAL SVCS.
DATE
AR-1295/EX SUMMARY/RVB/rb
,,~ ,t ~.~-
NOV 2 7 2001
AGENDA ITEM '8-C
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
OCTOBER 11, 2001
PETITION NO: VA-01-AR-1295, WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
OWNER/AGENT:
Agent:
Robert Duane
Hole Montes, Inc.
950 Encore Way
Naples, Florida 34110
Owner:
Collier County Government
Public Works/Wastewater Administration
6027 Shirley Street
Naples, Florida 34109
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner is requesting a 3-foot variance fi.om the required 30-foot side yard setback to 27
feet for the proposed Sludge Holding Tank No. 2.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject site is located at 5600 Warren Street, which is on the west sitle of Wildflower way
and east side in Section 20, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. (See illustration on the following
page)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION FOR VARIANCE:
The petitioner is requesting a 3-foot variance to the 30-foot side yard setback requirement of the
"A" Rural Agricultural Zoning District for a proposed sludge holding tank located within the
South County Water Reclamation Facility (SCWRF). As depicted on the attached plan, the
proposed sludge holding tank is located 27-feet off of the western property line and just south of
the existing Sludge Holding Tank Number 1. Since the proposed tank is also west of the existing
Process Control Building, there is no room to shift the tank in order to meet the required side
yard setback requirement. Furthermore, the Land Development Code defines a structure to
include a "tank" because of its fixed location on the ground. As a result, the I: :s';v~-''d ~h,dge.
holding tank is subject to all setback requirements, no..] ~_,~, _
NOV ? ? 200!
-- AGi-~OA I~
OV 2 7 2001
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Existing:
The subject water reclamation site is currently developed and is zoned Rural
Agricultural with a conditional use for an essential service to allow for a proposed
expansion from 8 MGD to 16 MGD.
Surrounding:
North - Developed single-family residential; Zoned: Lely Resort PUD.
East - Vacant; Zoned: Agriculture.
South - Developed residential; Zoned: RSF-4.
West - A golf maintenance/storage building; Zoned: Agricultural.
HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT:
Staff's analysis indicates that the site is located outside an area of historical/archaeological
probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. As a result, no Survey
and Assessment is required. In addition, if, during the course of site clearing, excavation or other
construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the
minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier
County. Code Enforcement Department contacted.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
The subject property lies within the Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district
as designated within the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and map of the GMP. Relevant to this
petition, this district permits non-residential uses including essential services. The base
residential density in this area is 4 units per acre, while a limited selection of non-residential uses
and essential services such as the existing water reclamation facility are also permitted.
Therefore, the existing water treatment facility is consistent with the GMP. Furthermore, the
requested variance does not have any impact on this propert~s consistency with the County's
Groxvth Management Plan.
EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL~
INFRASTRUCTURE:
TRANSPORTATION AND
Approval of this variance request will have no effect on infrastructure, transportation or the
environment.
ANALYSIS:
Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code gives the authority to the Board of Zoning Appeals
(BZA) to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the
provisions of Subsection "4" (a) through (h) which are general guidelines to be used to assist the
Commission in making a determination. Responses to items in this Subsection are ~-~-~j~
2 NOV 2 ? 2001
Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the
location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved?
Yes. The subject 42-acre site contains an existing water reclamation facility with limited
room for the required expansion of the facility. This facility is an essential service to the
community and a conditional use was recently approved allowing for an expansion to 16
MGD. Since the proposed Sludge Holding Tank abuts the south side of the existing
sludge tank and is west of the existing process control building, the proposed Sludge
Holding Tank No. 2 is boxed in with only room for expansion by encroaching 3-feet into
the side yard setback. It should be noted that the land to the adjacent land to the west
contains the golf maintenance and storage facility for the Royal Palm Golf Course at Lely
that will not be impacted by the location of the proposed tank. Staff is also of the opinion
that the tank cannot be reduced in size to meet the side yard setback requirement because
of the need for the added tank capacity. Based on these unusual circumstances, there is
some justification for giving special consideration to this property.
Are there special conditions and circumstances, which are not the result from the
action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property,
which is the subject of the variance request?
Yes. As previously noted, the limited area for the proposed expansion of the plant along
the western property line supports the requested variance. In addition, the size and shape
of the proposed tank is dictated by engineering requirements and capacity requirements,
therefore, the tank cannot be reduced in size. As a result of these pre-existing conditions,
staff is of the opinion that special conditions exist that are not the result of the applicant.
Ce
Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code work
unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on
the applicant?
Yes. Based on the fact that there is a need to expand the existing water reclamation
facility to serve the residents of Collier County on a site that has limited room due to the
existing structures. As a result, the reduction in size of the tank would not meet the
capacity requirements of the facility.
Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the
reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of
health, safety and welfare?
Yes, the petitioner is only seeking the minimum amount to reflect the existing conditions
on the subject lot and to comply with the requirements of the Land Development Code.
The expansion of the facility is intended to promote the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
eo
Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege
that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or ~tructur~ in
the same zoning district? ACa3~A ~
NOV ~ ? 200
f.
Yes, the granting of the requested variance will allow for a reduced side yard setback,
however, all variances effectively do this. However, unique circumstances exist based on
the size and configuration of remaining area available to construct the proposed tank that
is needed to provide a public benefit. In addition, the land use relationship that presently
exists will not be fundamentally altered by the approval of the variance since the adjacent
land use to the west contains a golf maintenance facili~.
Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of
this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or
otherwise detrimental to the public welfare?
Yes, Staffis of the opinion that the granting of this variance is in keeping with the general
intent and purpose of the Land Development Code in that the variance will not be
injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. In addition,
the characteristics of the adjacent land use to the west is non-residential in nature and it
contains a storage and maintenance facility.
Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the
goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses,
etc.?
Yes. The existing landscape buffer is a physically induced condition that ameliorates the
goals and objectives of the setback regulation in that the residential areas will not be able
to view the encroachment. In addition, the proposed side yard encroachment is adjacent to
the existing Lely Golf Course Maintenance Facility and will not impact the circulation of
light and air or have an adverse impact to any residential area.
AC'm~J~A ITEM
17.P
NOV 2 7 2001
h$
Will granting the variance be consist, ent with the Growth Management Plan?
The Growth Management Plan recognizes the need for essential services and the granting
of the requested variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth
Management Plan.
EAC RECOMMENDATION'-,
The Environmental Advisory Council does not normally hear variance petitions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends hat thc Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) recommend approval of
Petition VA-2001-AR-1295 being a petition seeking a 3-foot variance from the 30-foot side yard
setback requirement for property described in the Resolution of Adoption.
NOV 2 7 2001
PREPARED B~: .
RAY~ELLOWS, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
I~'1o, o!
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
S~ AIC~
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E., ACTING DIRECTOR
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
APPROVED BY:
JOHn' fi'. D~NNUCK, m, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR
COlk~MUN1TY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS.
Staff Report for November 1, 2001 CCPC meeting.
COL~? COUNTY PLA~G COMMISSION:
JOYCE~.NNA J. RAUTIO, CHAIRMAN
VA-01 -AR- 1317/STAFF REPORT/RVB/rb
DATE
DATE
DATE
6
At'iDA ITF.,M
NOV 2 7 2001
VARIANCE PETITION
(VARIANCE FROM SETBACK (S) REQUIRED FOR A PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT)
Petition No.
Commission District:
Date Petition Received:
Planner Assigned:
ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Petitioner's Name:
Petitioner's Address:
Collier County Public Utilities/Wastewater Collections
6027 Shirley Street, Naples, FL 34109
Telephone:
941-594-1731
Agent's Name: Robert L Duane, A.I.C.P.
Agent's Address: 950 Encore Way
Naples, FL 34110
Telephone: 941-254-2000
COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING
2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLES, FL 34104
PHONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968
Page
Application for Variance Petition - 8/98
ff 8p,._~ _
Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional
sheets if necessary)
Name of Homeowner Association: Fairway Villas Homeowner's Association
Mailing Address 486 St. Andrews Blvd. City Naples State FL
__ Zip 34113
Name of Homeowner Association: Tanglewood I Homeowner's Association
Mailing Address 108 Quail Hollow Ct. City Naples State FL
__ Zip. 34113
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
City State __ Zip
Name of Master Association: Lely County Club Property Owners Association
Mailing Address 106 Quail Hollow Ct. City Naples State FL Zip
34113
Name of Civic Association' Lely Civic Association c/o Robert Frank
Mailing Address 235 Pebble Beach Circle City Naples State__
FL Zip 34112
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal Description of Subject Property:
Subdivision:
Section 20 Twp. 50 S
Unit
Range 26 E
Lot (s) Block (s)
Property I.D. # 00431680002
Metes & Bounds Description: See attached deeds & legal descriptions
Application for Variance Petition - 8/98
Page
A~A ITF_J~
NOV 2 7 2001
Address of Subject Property: 5600 Warren Street, Naples FL 34112
(If different from petitioner's address)
Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Parcel: "A" Agriculture with A Conditional Use
I
I
I
i'
I
I
Adjacent Zoning & Land Use:
ZONING
LAND USE
N PUD
S RSF-4
W A
E A&P
Residential
Residential
Vacant
Maintenance Building & Park
Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Property:
Front: 50
Comer Lot:
Yes [-']
No ~
Side: 30 .
Waterfront Lot:
Yes [-']
Rear: 50
Application for Variance Petition - 8/98
PI
NOV 2 7 2001
Nature of Petition
Provide a detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and xvhat is
proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback from
25' to 18'; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was
built (include building permit number (s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary: how
existing encroachment came to be; etc.
See attached correspondence
Application for Variance Petition - 8/98
NOv ? 2001
--
Please note that staff and the Collier County Planning Commission shall be guided in their recommendation to the
Board of zoning Appeals, and that the Board of zoning appeals shall be guided in its determination to approve or
deny a variance petition by the below listed criteria (1-8). (Please address this criteria using additional pages if
necessary.)
1. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and
characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved.
SEE ATTACHED CORRESPONDENCE
Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant
such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request.
SEE ATTACHED CORRESPONDENCE
Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessaD' and undue
hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant.
SEE ATTACHED CORRESPONDENCE
Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of
the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety or welfare.
SEE ATTACHED CORRESPONDENCE
Application for Variance Petition - 8/98
Page 5
Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by
these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district.
SEE ATTACHED COKKESPONDENCE
Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be
injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
SEE ATTACHED CORRESPONDENCE
Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and
objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc.
SEE ATTACHED CORRESPONDENCE
8. Will granting the variance be consistent with the growth management plan.
SEE ATTACHED CORRESPONDENCE
Application for Variance Petition - 8/98
Page 6 o ~[
NOV 2 7 2001
VARIANCE PETITION
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION
PACKET!
RE Q UIREMEN TS # o r
COPIES REQUIRED
1. Completed Application 15 15
2. Completed Owner/Agent Affidavit, Notarized 1 l
3. Pre-application notes/minutes 15 N/A
4. Survey of property, showing the encroachment 1 1
(measured in feet)
5. Site Plan depicting the following: 15 15
a) All property boundaries & dimensions
b) All existing and proposed structures (labeled as such)
c) North arrow, date and scale of drawing
d) Required setbacks & proposed setbacks
6. Location map depicting major streets in area for 1 1
reference
7. Application fee and Data Conversion Fee, checks shall - 1
be made payable to Collier Count3.' Board of Commissioners
8. Other Requirements- -
As the authorized agenVapplicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is
included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may
result in the delay of processing of this petition.
Applicant/Agent Signature
Application for Variance Petition - 8/98
Page 7
NOV 2 7 200'~
Applicaht/Agent Signature
Date
A FFIDA VIT,
We/.[, Joseph Cheatbnm being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/7
am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the
proposed hearing; that ali the answers to the questions in this applicat.'on, including the disclosure
of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a
part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief.
understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and
that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered.
Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required
information has been submitted.
As properry owner We~I further authorize Robert Duane
as our/my representative in any matters regarding this .Petition.
to act
Signature of Property Owner
S~ature of Property Owner
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
Joseph Cheatham
Typed or Prin ted Nam e of Owner
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~2~_c~ .. day of
200 ~ j by _E~o~'~ O-~~ec~"' who is personall¥ known to me or has produced
as identification.
State of Florida
County of Collier
Florida)
IZ~ O£ANE JOHNSON
~ ~I Pliantly I~l I I Otl~ LD.
(Print, Type, or Stamp Commissi~
Name of Notary Public)
Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Pag~
.o.
NOV 2 2 200
Sf,, 8 Iq
.
Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional
sheets if necessary)
Name of Homeowner Association; FAIR,jAy ylTJ.A,~..ROIiEOI~-ER.~! ASSOCTATTO~
Mailing Address 686 ST X.m)Rm~S ~LVn City l~,u'~.~..q State ~. Zip 3a~3
Name of Homeowner Association: Th~ICI.~OND T I:INI~.NI,~1~
Mailing Address 108 QUA_fL HOLLOW CT City NAPLESS__
A.~ ~NI~.T A?T N'hl
State m. Zip__.t_qXl~
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address
CiD' State Zip
Name ofMasterAssociation: Ev~'v COUNTRY tTI.1TB pROPERTY O%INtTR.q A.qgNETA'rTNN
Mailing Address ]n~ qnATZ, nn;:r.n~ C'~ Citym~-F-.~ State ~.Zip 2':!!2
Name of Civic Association:
Mailing Address
LELY CIVIC ASSOCIATION
City ~ State
Zip_
2. Disclosure of Interest Information:
If'the property is owned fee simple by an [ND~UAL, tenancy by the entirety,
tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as
well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary).
Name and Address
COLLT_E~ COUNTY PUBLIC IITTLITTEg
61'i27 .~]:IT Rt.la:t'
NAPT.~R I~T.
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE - 02~000
Percentage of Ownership
100Z
PAGE 3
AGENDA !TEJd
F
NOV 2 7 200
If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and
the lJercentage of stock owned by each.
Name, Adckess and Office
Percentage of Stock
If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with
the percentage of interest.
Name and Address
Percentage of Interest
If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the
name of the general and/or limited partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of O,xmership
If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a
Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers
below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
API~LICATION FOR I'UBLIC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE -
PAGE 4
AG~A
NOV 2 7 2001
Date of Contract:
If any contin§ency clause or contract terms involve
individuals or officers, if' a corporation, partnership, or trust.
Name and Address
additional parties,
list all
Date subject property acquired (~ leased ( )LIZkq/~Term of lease
yr./mos.
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: ~/_~_
terminates: , or anticipated closing date
and date option
Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase subsequent to
the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the
responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental
disclosure of interest form.
Detailed legal description of the property covered by the application.:. (If .space is
inadequate, attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning
district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant
shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months,
maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting.
NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If
questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey
may be required.
Section:_ Cn Township: so .qo,'m Range: 7a V.A.qT ....
Lot:
Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book.~ Page #:
Property I.D.#: 00431680002
Metes & Bounds Description:
Size of property: '/000 fi. X 800 ft. =Total Sq. Ft. ~nn nnnAcres
Address/general location of sublect property.' _
~600 WARREN STREET, NAPLES FL 34113 (See alsoLncatton l~ap~ ·
~8
NOV 2 ? 20gl
API'LICATION FOR PUBLIC HEAP, lING I~OR CONDrVIONAL USE - 02Y2~ PAGE
~'' ~ File No. IG. SqE
· 12/22/86
A parcel of 'land located In the South~e~t quarter .of ~ection 21, '~'
Township SO South, Range 26 East, 'Collier County, Florida, being ~ a=-
more particularly described as *follows:
Comnence at the Southwest corner of Section 21, Township SO
South, Range 26 East, Col I let County, Florida the same being the
POINT OF 8EGINNII~ o1" the parcel of' land herein described; thence
run horth 02053'$0" East along the West line of the Southwest
quarter of the said Section 21 for a distance of 510.07 feet;
thence run South 32°2q'30" East for a distance of 236.05 feet;
thence run South 26°09'12' West for a distance of 3q$.$1 feet to*
,the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 0.7957 acres more or less. ;.":.::...' co
:L"l ':- ' -':-'.-'.;.-: c:~
· ,.:..._....:
Date Z I~OLE. MO , I ~,.. .:-,- .~- - -:.j.': ..
' ;.~,
By . 2:. E.S. r~2 .~'.:~,.
· -....'.: ~;~t~-''.'
· %-~'-" :-: 2 '-
2 ? 2001
~,.~..o,. ~BZT "A~ l~age 2 o~ 2
HOLE:. MONTE:S AND ASSOC., INC.
CON~LTING EI~INGERS - LANe SURVEYOI~
HMA File No.
· 12122186
PROPERTY DESCRIPTIO~
A parcel of land located In Sectlon 20~ Township 50 South, ~nge
26 Eaet, Collier County, Florida, being more particularly
described as follo~s: 'a) c~
B~ln at the Southeast corner of Section 20, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida and run North 89°33'27"
West along the South line of said Section 20 for 2,121.8& feet t
the Easterly right-of-way of the Lely Service Road; thence ~rth
38050'53" West along said right-of-way for 123.00 feet; thence
North 79o12'36· East for 13So00 feet; thence North 05o2q~00°.West
for. lq0.71 feet= thence North 39°56~89" West for 515.20 feet to
Intersect non-tangentially a cu~e concaved Southeasterly; thence
run 135.36 feet along the arc of said curve having a radius of
I~,506.16 feet, a central angle of 00°32~05#o a chord of 135.36
feet end a chord bearing of South 78°16~38~ ~est to the East
right-of-way, of said Lely Service Road: thence North tI~59'2~"
~est along said right-of-way for 20.00 feet to the Southwest c~.
corner of Let q of Lely Country Club Tanglewood I according to ~ c:~
the plat thereof recorded In Plat Book 13 at Page 107 of the
Public ~cords of collier Countyo Florida; thence run a2~.52 feet~:~
along the arc of a curve concaved Southeasterly, the same being
the Southerly line of the said Plat of Le~ Country Club
Tanglewood I, having a radius of 1~,526.16 feet, a central angle
of 01°q0~28", a chord of q2q.51 feet and a chord bearing of North
78e$0'50' East to a point of tangency; thence Horth 7goa1~0t"
East along said tangent, the same being the Scdtherly II~e of the
said Plat of Lely Country Club Tanglewood I 'or 1,050.q8 feet;
thence South 10ClaeS6~ ~st for 20°00 fee' .o Intersect,
non-tangentially, a curve concaved Hort~ asterly; thence run
598.38 feet along the arc of said cur'. having a radius of 5~0.00
feet, I central angle of 58e06e3a", a chord of 573.06 feet, ·
chord bearing of North 50737~q7~ East to a point of tangency;
thence North 21e3q~30~ East for 17.16 feet; thence South
68025t30a East for $6,93 feet; 'thence South 32°2qt30" East for
977,7~ feet to eh Intersection with the East line of the
Southeast quarter of the said Section 20; thence South 02e53~50"
West along the East line of the Southeast quarter of the said
Section 20 for 510.07 feet to.the POINT OF BEGINNING. .~.~...
Containing ~6.7517 acres more or less. %¥'~'C:,. -;.
,%~t .$ · .. ...:..
M3NTES~.~- ;~ ~ ,~ ~, ...
ASSOCIATES~IN~. ',, ~ ' -'
~,'~'
By ,'~. ~. I~OS 2~-
~erg~ E% G~/don~es '~te~ Fie.
.. ~;~:~.~ ·
AGENDA ITEM
2.001
ROYAL PAIN OXYNTRY CLUB OF' NAPLES. INC.
400 Fe~t HIl%s ~lev~, ~ples, ~ ~6~ ·
3~1 T~ef Tnt1, ~t, ~ples, ~ 33~2
SEE ATTA~i'~ED IDOtlBIT "A"
,'~tss't'~n expt~s:
-' · .-. · Alexander ~, Hersha,
' "~";" ~tte 27 ,;..
FL 33~40
NOV 2 7 2001
al1
Range
le~s.
Coeuence at the South //4 Coiner oE Section 20, Tovflshlp $0
South, ~Laflge 26 East end run Se~ol.lo~7-g, along the South
line of said Section 20, for 499.47 feet to the hst Eight
of vay o~ a toad knovfl es ~lnte~nce Shop R~d; thence ~un
H38oso*s3uW~ along ~a~d right oE ray, ~o~ 554.8G Eeet to the
point oA ~gvatuge og*a ~gve conceved Hortheasbe~ly; thence
gun 32.57 ~eet, along the u~c of said ~e, havln9 a
oE 284.01 feet, ~'centg~1 angle o[ 6o34.13~, a chozd
32.55 feet and a chord b~$ng o~ H35o33*47'e to the
thence coflhlflue ~or l~.J4 ~ee~ along said ~ht of vay
and arc of a cu=ve ~vlng · =adl~ o~ 284.0A feet,
central am~le of 3o23'52ur a chord of lg.84 feet and a
chord beating o~ H10o34'45'W bo a point of ~aflgemcy;
thence gun H28os2'49uV, along said Eight of- ray
10.58 [eet~ to a point o~ curvature of a curve con-
caved HogtheasteEly3
thenc~ continue ~og 63.18 feet along said Eight of ray
a central angle of X~oSl*24u~ · chord or' 42.35 ~eet
and a chord ~aEkn9 o[ H20P2G*0~uW to a point o~ kan-
gen~;
thence ~ufl HXlO59024u~, alofl~ said Eight o~ yaM, ~or
~S,23 feet to the non-~flqentAal ~ntersectLon vlth
~fve coflca~ Hoc~h~s~erly3
alofl~ the arc of said ~E~ ~vlng a radius of
14,SOG.16 feet, a central a~le of 0032'07', a chord
oZ 135.53 feet e~*u chocd ~a~lng o~ ~78o23'46'E to
non-~entlal lntegsecklon ~l~h a l~ne;
thence tun S39QSG'4SuE~ elo~ sald line, for 103.g7
feet to the Hot,east cor~ o~ the ~ln~e~nce Shop
Slte fo~ the Lely Country
thence gan ~Slo01eXlaW; ~lon~ the HutCh line o~ said
~lng in a~ a ~z~ of Section 20, Tov~htp S0 South,
2~ ~t a~ csntatntng 22,7~0.0~ s~:e feet mote
NOV 2 7 2001
ROYA~ PAU~ ~ CLUB OF ~,PLE$, ll~.
NOV 2 7 2001
OR BOOK
000~ l'4
PAGE
Of land tytng In Section 20, Township 50 South, Range
~St., CQlli.ar Count:y, Florida, more particularly described as
'at the Southeast corner of Section 20, Tovnship SO
~ge 26 East, and ran R~rth 8~33'27' Vest 4long the
~f satd Sectto~ 20 for 2121.85 feet to the East Lin~
rx~ty fOQt (60'} ri§~t-of-vay (con, only knovn as Warren
~ce run NOrth;38'SO'S3' Vest alon9 said East right-
to.the POZRT OF BEGINNING: thence continue
S3' ~est for 31.60 feet to a point of curvature of
:bh~a~ed ~o the Hortheast: thence run 32.S7 feet along
~Of slid cur~ehavlng a radius of 284.01 feet, a centrll
06434'17', · chord of 32.5S feet and I chord bearing of
3~'$~3' ~est ? a no~:tangent ll,e bearing North 51'01'
~ thence ru~ ~orth ST 01'18" East for 196.84 feet;
un'So,th 39 56*49 East for 54.82'feet; thence run South
best for 19D.OS. feet to the Point of Beginning; con-
0.~8 acres more o~ less,
AC.-~ A [ .T.T.T.~
2001
HISTOR_.Y OF PROBLEMS AND CORRECTIVE_IXIEASUKES AT THE
SOUTH COUNTY. WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
The existing site for the South County Water Reclamation Facility (SCWRF) has a long history as
a wastewater treatment faeility site. The first wastewater Izeatment facility was constzucted by Lely
Estates, Inc. in 1971. The developer owned 4,800 acres with the wastewater treatment plant site
centrally located. The plant was expanded fi'om the initial 0.2 mgd capacity to 0.5 mgd in 1977 and
again in 1982 to 1.0 mgd. In mid 1985, the capacity was increased to 1.5 mgd in accordance with
an agreement between Lely and Collier County. These treatment facilities were of the package
plant type. It does not appear that a Provisional Use or Conditional Use w/as granted for this facility
prior to purchase of the site by Collier County.
Subsequent to evaluations by Collier County of the Lely wastewater .system, negotiations were
initiated and Collier County purchased the collection system and leased the plant and site/property
via resolution and agreement dated September 10, 1985. By agreement dated December 23, 1985,
CoLlier County purchased the Lely site and treatment facilities.
Public hearings were held and the Coastal Collier County 201 Facilities Plan Update was approved
by Resolution 86-99 on May 29, 1986. Design of the wastewater treatment plant expansion was
commenced in August 1986. At an advertised public hearing held on May 26, 1987, the Board of
County Commissioners approved the location of the SCWRF at the existing site by Resolution 87-
116 as an update to the 201 Plan. The treatment facility cons~ction project was bid in May 1988
and the contract awarded in August 1988. The construction of the South County WRF (8 mgd) was
completed in January 1991. The existing South County Water Reclamation Facility was designed
to accommodate a future flow of 16 mgd, with the construction of the initial phase being able to
treat 8 mgd.
In response to odor complaints fi.om neighboring residents, two separate odor control projects were
completed in August 1991 and October 1992, respectively. During 1992 and 1993, in response to
complaints from neighboring residents regarding being able to see the plant and the lights at fight,
the County planted additional vegetation along the berm to provide an improved visual buffer.
County Staff installed directional shields on plant lighting to minimize light shining offsite.
During 1993 and 1994, many of the residents of the Lely neighborhood filed complaints about the
SCWR.F. The primary complaints can be categorized into the following groups.
· Offensive odors emanating from the plant,
· safety concerns over the use of pressurized chlorine gas near their homes,
aesthetics associated with view of plant facilities from their homes,
· general appearance of the facilities perimeter and desire for improved landscaping,
problems associated with drainage of rainfall runoff from the landscape berms onto
their property,
· noise from plant equipment, and
· glare from plant facili.ty lighting being an annoyance at night.
In order to address these concerns, the Board of County Commissioners approved a four member
Odor Control Advisory Committee in May 1994 The Committee included Mr..Rick Pr~_tl~___...
' . · ~ ITF_M
President Tanglewood Homeowners, Mr. Dudley Chism, President Lely Co~ntry~ag~7/~
WA2000~2000055~D3[Pcrmit-iocal]~Cond Use PcrmiflCONDIT.USE.do¢ ~ t ~: ! ~ t'/ 200~
Homeowners, Mr. Mike McNees, Acting Utilities Administrator, and Mr. Tom Conrecode. OCPM
Director. Meetings and site visits were held to develop a comprehensive listing of neighborhood
concerns and complaints and to develop a list of possible causes of these problems. Once the
problems and possible causes were identified, potential alternative solutions were developed and
discussed. Evaluations were performed by the consultants and Committee members including site
visits to other treatment facilities to determine effectiveness of potential solutions.
After development of the potential viable alternatives, cost analyses were performed. A summary
of primary advantages and disadvantages along with a description of the problems, causes and
anticipated costs for corrective action alternatives were presented to the Board of County
Commissioners. It was agreed by the Committee that the recommendations being made to the
Board of County Commissioners were believed to be the best available alternatives and approaches
to satisfying neighborhood concerns.
An odor survey was conducted in June 1994. Based on this survey, it was recommended that the
following odor abatement program be implemented at the South County Water Reclamation
Facility.
· Construct a new headworks facility, consisting of mechanical bar screen and grit removal
system. Cover and scrub the foul air through an odor control scrubber. (This work was
completed in 1998.)
· Construct a new covered aeration tank utilizing fzne bubble diffused aeration system.
Collect and scrub all foul air through an odor control scrubber. (This work was completed
in 19980
· Construct a new blower building to provide the necessary air for the proposed aeration
system. Provide noise attenuation to contain equipment noise within the building. (This
was completed in 1998).
· Convert the existing aeration tank to a reuse storage facility. (This was completed in 1998.)
Based on review of potential disinfection alternatives, it was concluded that sodium hypochlorite
(liquid bleach) should be used to replace the previous use of elemental chlorine (liquified gas). The
basis for this recommendation was the Board of County Commissioners direction to fred a safer
alternative method of disinfection. The new bleach system was installed in 1996 and the
pressurized chlorine cylinders removed fi:om the site.
In addition, the following additional actions were recommended:
Make further improvements to the landscape buffer between the residential property
(homeowner's back'yards) and the plant site. Cl-his work has been ongoing during
W:X2000,O.000055\D3[Pcrmit-I°¢M]XC°nd Use Permit\CONDIT.USE.doc
-2-
1993 through present.)
Construction of drainage improvements along the perimeter berm in the area of the
Tanglewood Homeowner's Association pool property and along the rear of some of
the Fairway Villas resident's property were completed in 1995.
Reduce the noise fi:om the irrigation pumps which supply effluent to the Royal Palm
Golf Course. (The pump station was relocated and a sound attenuation wall to
contain noise was constructed and completed in 1995.)
Continue the current program to minimize the lighting complaints. This included
only turning on lights around the plant when necessary and adjust'_ ,~'"* ,~r .~.
NOV 2 7 2001
Ii
shields to direct light away from neighbors and onto areas needing lighting.
On February 14, 1995, the Board of County Commissioners approved an effluent disposal program
which included reuse of effluent as the primary method of disposal and deep well injection as the
secondary method of disposal. In order to implement this effluent disposal program the following
improvements were completed:
· Construct a new Reclaimed Water Pump Station (~ompleted in 1996).
· Construct one deep injection well and one monitoring well, with room for a second
furore deep injection well (Completed in 1996).
· Enlarge the existing Chlorine Contact Tank (Completed in 1996).
In order to improve operation of the SCX,VRI: and to further reduce potential odors, one additional
improvement was completed:
· Construct a new covered Waste Sludge Holding Tank (Completed in 1998).
Following the construction of the above improvements, there were complaints from a couple of
neighbors regarding the noise produced by the Effluent Transfer Pump Station. A noise smd>' was
performed and a plan developed to reduce the noise emanating from this facili~'. A specially
designed noise attenuation structure was installed during 2000 and has eliminated this complaint.
As part of the solutions to noise complaints, the Reclaimed Water Pumping Station for the Royal
Palm Golf Course was relocated farther from the neighbors and a sound attenuating wall was
constructed. During 2001, new pumping equipment will replace the original equipment and be
installed behind the same sound attenuating wall. The new pumping equipment v,411 generate less
noise than the original equipment and it is anticipated that that this improvement will further reduce
the potential for noise that would be heard at the property line due to this pump station.
During 1996, Collier County, relocated offsite field staff who were previously assigned to report to
the SCWRF for daily work assignmenta. This resulted in a significant decrease in traffic in and out
of the SCWRF each day.
W:~2000x2000055kD3 [Permit-local]XCond Use Pcrmit\CONDIT.USE.doc
-3-
NOV 2 7 2001
HOLE MONTES
950 Encore Way. P.O. Box 111629- Naples, Florida 34108 · Phone: 941.254.2000 · Fax: 941.254.2097
October 12, 2001
Mr. Ray Bellows
Collier County Planning Services
North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, Florida 34104
Re:
South County Water Reclamation Facility
Variance Application
HM File No. 2000.055
Dear Mr. Bellows:
Please find enclosed 5 copies of an application for a variance at the South County Water
Reclamation Facility (SCWRF) to permit the proposed Sludge Holding Tank No. 2 to be
developed 3 feet inside the required 30 foot setback. The subject property is located in Section
20, Towns~p 50 South, and Range 26 East. A history of the facility is attached along with
corrective measures taken to minimize impacts on nearby properties. Also attached is a site plan
depicting the proposed structure subject to this variance request with existing and required
setbacks dimensioned. (Exhibit Two)
1. Background
The SCWRF has been owned and operated by Collier County since 1985. The subject
property is zoned "A" (Agriculture) and a Conditional Use was approved for the SCWRF
in 1995. Prior to that time no specific zoning was provided for the facility. Currently a
request for a new Conditional Use has been filed as a companion item to this request to
expand the capacity of the plant from 8 MGD to 16 MGD and was recently approved.
The Agriculture district zoning requires a thirty-foot side yard setback.
Existing Conditions
The variance is requested along the western property line adjacent to a maintenance
building that serves the needs of the Royal Palm Golf Course in Lely. The maintenance
building is also zoned for Agriculture use. A fence separates the SCWRF from the
maintenance area.
Lands to the south are zoned RSF-4 and are developed with single-family uses, and are
well screened from SCWRF. ~~
NOV 27 2001
Mr. Ray Bellows
South County Water Reclamation Facility
Variance Application
October 12, 2001
HM 2000.055
Page 2
Lands to the north are zoned PUD and are developed with single-family uses. A berm
and extensive landscaping separates the SCWRF from adjacent residential uses to the
north.
Between the proposed structure subject to this variance request is a paved driveway area
and a grass strip approximately 10 feet wide, however, in its narrowest area it is +8.5 feet.
A twelve-inch PVC sewer force main is located approximately two feet below the surface
and is located in the middle of the grass strip. Three power poles are also located on the
western edge of the grassed area with a height of between 15 and 20 feet. Some
apurtances also protrude above ground as part of the force main. The existing condition
of the western edge of SCWRF with utilities located close to the ground surface and
power lines is not ideally suited for a landscaped area. No landscaping was previously
required to be installed along the western property line of the sewage treatment facilities
presumably for the foregoing reasons.
3. Land Development Code Criteria for Conditional Uses.
The following criteria outline the requirements for approval of Conditional Uses in the
Collier County Land Development Code along with an explanation of how the proposed
expansion of the SCWRF complies with these requirements.
mo
Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar
to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building
involved.
Yes. The remaining area to expand the plant to its needed capaciO' of 16 mgd is limited
in area along the western portion of the property, based on its remaining size and
configuration, of useable area. The existing land use adjacent to structures for which the
variance is sought will not change the fundamental relationships of the land uses. ?he
land to the west of the subject property is used for a storage and maintenance area.for
the Ro. val Palm Golf Course at Lely. The expansion of the proposed Sludge Holding
Tank No. 2 at approxiniately 3feet into the 30-foot setback area will not be a detriment to
the adjacent maintenance facility to the west. These are the special condition,s and
circumstances that presently exist.
Are such special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the
action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the
property, which is the subject of the variance request.
Yes.
for approval of the variance to meet the communities long-term wastewate
needs. The pre-existing conditions, therefore, necessitate the need fo
WA2000~2000055\RLD\RB011012.doc
The limited area for expansion of the plant along the western edge support the need
·
NOV 2 ~ 200~
Mr. Ray Bellows
South County Water Reclamation Facility
Variance Application
October 5, 2001
HM 2000.055
Page 3
variances for the existing and proposed structures, to better serve the public health,
safety and welfare.
C. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work
unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical
difficulties on the applicant.
Yes. The proposed Sludge Holding Tank No. 2 would have to be reduced in size to meet
the required 30-foot setback because there is insufficient area between the Process
Control Building and the thirty-foot setback area to meet the projected needs of the plant.
D. Will the variance, if granted be the minimum variance that will make
possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and ~vhich
promote standards of health, safety or welfare.
Yes. The variance will be the minimum area that will make reasonable use of the land,
building and structures. The expansion of the plant will promote standards of health,
safety, or welfare.
E. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special
privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings,
or structures in the same zoning district.
Yes. Granting the variance will confer a privilege on the petitioner that is typically not
available to other lands located in the agriculture zoning district. However. unique
circumstances exist based on the size and configuration of remaining area available to
construct the needed facilities that necessitate the need for approval of the variance.
Furthermore, the land use relationship that presently exists will not be fundamentally
altered by approval of the variance due to the nature of the adjacent land use, which is a
maintenance facility.
Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this
zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise
detrimental to the public welfare.
Yes. Granting the variance will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise
detrimental to the public welfare, based on conditions of the subject property and the
characteristics of the adjacent land use to the west, which is non-residential in character.
\La. lr2\WPL2000x2000055~R. LD~B01 ! 008.doe
Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameli2~ate~
the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural pr :serv~Ok~u
golf course, etc.
NOV 2 z 200!
Mr. Ray Bellows
South County Water Reclamation Facility
Variance Application
October 5,2001
HM 2000.055
Page 4
No. There are no natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the
goals and objectives of the regulation.
H. Will granting the variance be consistent with the growth management plan.
The Collier County Growth Management Plan recognizes the need for essential services
and they are generally permitted throughout all planning areas in Collier County. Some
essential services are permitted by right and some are permitted as a Conditional Use by
the Collier County Land Development Code. There is no inconsistency with the Growth
Management Plan with the expansion of the existing sewage treatment at this location.
In closing, we trust you will find the applications for the variance in order and can suPport the
proposed request. If I can provide you any additional information please don't hesitate to contact
me.
Very truly yours,
HOLE MONTES, INC.
Robert L. Duane, A.I.C.P.
Planning Director
RLD/dj
Enclosures
\~,AIr2\Wl~2000X2000055XRLD~.B01 ! 008.doe
t
NOV27200 [
RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER
VA-2001-1295 FOR A VARIANCE ON
PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED
IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida
Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and
enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the
public; and
WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development
Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular
geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted
Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said
regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 3 foot variance
from the required 30 foot side yard setback to 27 feet for a proposed Sludge Holding
Tank No. 2, as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", in a "A" Rural
Agricultural Zone for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of
fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all
applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.7.5 of
the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of
Collier County; and
WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given oppommity to be heard by
this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters
presented;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Zoning Appeals
of Collier County, Florida, that:
The Petition VA-2001-AR-1295 filed by Robert L. Duane, AICP, of Hole,
Montes and Associates, representing the Collier County Public Utilities Department,
with respect to the property hereinafter described as:
(Exhibit "B")
be and the same hereby is approved for a 3 foot variance from the required 30 foot side
yard setback to 27 feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", of the "A"
Rural Agricultural Zoning District wherein said property is located, subject to the
following conditions: kC~Elq0k ITEM
I'-/F
NOV ? 7 2001
(Exhibit "C")
BE IT RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number
VA-2001-AR-1295 be recorded in the minutes of this Board.
This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote.
Done this day of ,2001.
ATTEST
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
JAMES D.CARTER Ph.D.,CHAIRMAN
Approved as to Form
and Legal Sufficiency:
Ma~jo~ M. Student'
Assistant County Attorney
A~A ITE~
NOV 2 ? 2001
l
EXHIBIT
AGENDA iTEI~
NOV 2 7 200!
~.~ __
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
A parcel of 'lend located In the SouthWeSt quarter ~f Section 21,
Tm~ship S0 _Sou.th, .Rang.eb~ East,-Collier County, Florida, being
more particularly ~escr~ as .follows:
corner of Section 21, Township $0
Con, hence at the Sou_thwe~s.t .... ~ .... ,,, Florida, the ssme being the
.... ~ o-n~e 26 East, t~o~llcr ~,,.:~: ..... ,- described: thence
POINT OF 8EGINNiHG of the p~rcel o
~un Horth 0Z~$3'$~ East along the West line of the Southwut
quarter of the said Section 2~ for a distance of $I0.07 feet:
thence run South 32~2~'30" East for a distance of 236.05 feet;
thence run South 26~09.12" West for a distance of 3~$.51 feet to'
,the POINT OF BEGINNIHG.
Containing ~.79~7 acres more or less. : .....
~ parcel of land located in Section 20~ Township 50 South, Range
26 East, Collier County, Florida, being more particularly c:~
described as follOWS: ... '~
Southeast corner of Section 20, Township 50 South, e~
. Florida and run North 89°35~27'
Begin at the Collier Country ....... 20 for 2,121 86 feet tc~
Range 26 East, aid :>ec~,, . .
West along the South line o[ ~.~_ ,.t, Service Road: thence Horth '
the Easterly right-of-way ot [~G
35050~$$. West along said right-of-waY for 123.00 feet: thence
· o 2~3&~ East for 13S.00 feet; thence Horth 05°211t00a West
North 75 1__--_ ...... t4nrth 3ge$6tli9e West for S15.20 feet· to
for. lq0.71 feet: ~,c ....... concaved Southeasterly; thence
intersect non-tangentially a curve
run 13S.35 feet along the arc of said curve'having a radius of
1~i,506.16 feet, a central angle of O0o32.05~' a chord of 135.36
feet and a chord bearing of South 78016*38~ West to the East
said Lely Service Road: thence North 11e$ge2~"
rlg'ht-of-waY' of nf :Lto the Southwest (~'
West along said right-of-waY for 20.00 · ~ c~
f Lely Country Club Tag ood I according to c~
corner of Lot ~ o :2m~.52 feetG~ co
· thereof ~ecorded in Plat Book 13 at Page 107 o[ the
I ords of Collier County,. ?_.o. · being
Publ c..Rec .... · a curve concaveo ~qu~_,,~ C~-~'--[.'~'r- Club
along tn.e a.r~ ¥,,__ .~ the said Plat of Le~.y ~a ....
the Southerly ti~ ~- feet, a central angle
Tanglewood Io having a radius of lq,526.16 chord bearing of H0rth
of 010q0~28~, a chord of ~2q.51 feet and a
7805Q~S0a East to a point of tangency; thence North 7~eel1 0qe
ta eat, the same being the Scdtherly Ii'he of the
East along s_a.ld. ~n~---,r~, Club Tanglewood I 'or 1,OS0.qa feet;
said.Plat of Lely ,..,., u, , .. ~,
thence South 10018'S6'' East for 20.00 fee' .o intersect,
f said cur". having a radius of
non-tangentially, a curve concaved Nortl~ usterly~ thence run
598.38 feet along t.he ar. CoO. o,~a~ a chord of 573.06 feet, a
feet, a central_a.n, gte.~°,l,.[~,~[?= F_~,t tO a point of tangency:
chord bearing of f4ortn ay. - ~ .
thence North 21e3~e30" East for 17.16 feet, thence South
6lo2$t3Oa East for 86,93 feet; 'thence South 32°2~t3oa East for
977,7~ feet to an intersection with the East line of the
Southeast quarter of the said Section 20: thence South 02°55e$0N
· of the Southeast quarter of .the said
West along the East I In, - to the POINT OF BEGINNING..
Section 20 for 510.07 feo~ . -
Containing a6.7517 acres more or less.
EXTtlBIT "B"
NOV 2 7 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VA-2001-AR-1295
a) This variance is for the encroachment shown in Exhibit "A" only. Any other
encroachment shall require a separate variance.
b)
Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code, if, during the
course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity an historic or
archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area
necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier
County Code Enforcement Department contacted.
EXHIBIT "C"
NOV 2 7 200
PJ..~
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 72-1, AS
AMENDED, WHICH CREATED THE COLLIER COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT: TO
ADD WILLOUGHBY ACRES TO THE COLLIER COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT; TO
AMEND THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES TO INCLUDE THOSE AREAS OF
IMMOKALEE NOT CURRENTLY PART OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LIGHTING
DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
OBJECTIVE: That the Board adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 72-1, as amended,
creating and providing for the Collier County Lighting District (CCLD), by adding certain areas
to the Collier County Lighting District.
CONSIDERATIONS,: On December 14, 1999, in follow-up to Board direction of October 12,
1999, staff presented Item 12(C)(3). This item requested amendment to the CCLD Ordinance
No. 72-1, as amended, to add several areas to same. After brief discussion, the Board continued
the item indefinitely. Since that time, a representative of the Willoughby Property Owners
Association (WPOA), contacted staff asking that their request for street lighting be resubmitted
to the Board.
Euclid and Lakeland Avenues are the two main roads into the subdivision, and the WPOA has
requested that streetlights be placed only along these two roadways. However, this is not in
keeping with other lighting areas that are part of the CCLD. Therefore, in order to maintain
consistency and level of service, staff's recommendation is that lighting be placed on all streets
in the Willoughby Acres Subdivision.
With regard to Immokalee, the area has grown considerably since street lighting was first
installed and the area became part of the CCLD. In order to provide street lighting to the areas
that currently fall outside the CCLD, the boundaries need to be amended to include those
· outlying areas. To that end, the County Land Surveyor has provided an updated legal
description, which encompasses all of Immokalee with the exception of the Indian Reservation,
which is considered sovereign land.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no Fiscal Impact at this time, however, if the Board adopts the
~ attached Ordinance, staff will include the required amount in the FY 2002-03 budget request for
the CCLD Fund (760). The cost to light all of the Willoughby Acres subdivision would be
approximately $20,100 annually. 'The cost to light Euclid and Lakeland Avenues only would be
approximately $11,200 annually.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There will be no growth management impact if this
item is approved. -- Ar,.~:~a~a rr~M
I OV 2 7 2001
Executive Summary
Collier County Lighting District Ordinance Amendment
Page 2 of 2
RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the information provided, staff requests that the Board
adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance 72-1, as amended, to enlarge the boundaries of the
County-wide Lighting District to include the Willoughby Acres Subdivision and to amend the
boundaries of the Immokalee lighting area.
SUBMITTED BY: 5*farquim_~ Xi, n~, Sr~i..n~O~ttiv~.e ~~mnt DATE: 10/29/00
REVIEWED BY: ?'/[~/~b~z(//~'~'~,'./;¢x~'f'; DATE:'A~/?~" /
Edw~~~~ion Operations Director
DATE:
APPROVED BY: Norrr~n 1~. i6eder,tJkI~P, Transportation Administrator
AGENP~
NOV 'Z 7 2001
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
ORDINANCE NO. 2001-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 72-1, AS AMENDED, WHICH CREATED
THE COLLIER COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT: TO ADD
WILLOUGHBY ACRES TO THE COLLIER COUNTY
LIGHTING DISTRICT; TO AMEND TIlE EXISTING DISTRICT
BOUNDARIES TO INCLUDE THOSE AREAS OF
IMMOKALEE NOT CURRENTLY PART OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVER. ABILITY;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
SECTION ONE: AMZNDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 72-1, AS
AMENDED
Section One of Collier County. Ordinance No. 72-l, as mended, is hereby amended to
21 add the following geographic area or areas into the Collier County Lighting District:
WILLOUGHBY ACRES, which is more particularly described as follows: ALL OF
WILLOUBHBY ACRES AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 8, PAGES 24-26, INCLUSIVE, Ok
THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;
22
23
24
25
26 PdqD
27
28 IMMOKALEE, which is more particularly described as follows: ALL OF SECTION 36,
29 TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST; AND
30 THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOLrTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28; THE SOUTH
31 HALF OF TH]E SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 29; THE EAST HALF AND THE SOUTH HALF
32 OF THE SOUTHW'EST QUARTER OF SECTION 30; THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
33 SECTION 31; ALL OF SECTION 32; ALL OF SECTION 33: THE SOLrYHWEST QUARTER
34 OF SECTION 34; TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST; AND
35 THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 3; ALL OF SECTION
36 4; THE NORTHEAST QUARTER AND THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST
37 QUARTER OF SECTION 5; ALL OF SECTION 9; THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF
38 OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER AND THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST
39 QUARTER OF SECTION 11 LYING NORTHEAST OF STATE ROAD 29; TOWNSHIP 47
40 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST;
41 ALL LANDS LYING IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
42
43
45
SECTION TWO: INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Collier Count3', Florida. The sections of the Ordin,
Page I of 2
Words undexlmed a~e added; words ~lr.:'ck '~.~.-c=gE are d(
.o.__
NOV 2 7 2001
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
re-lettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article",
or any other appropriate word.
SECTION THREE: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY
In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other
applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any court of competent jurisdiction holds any
phrase or portion of the Ordinance invalid or unconstitutional, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
rernaining portion.
SECTION FOUR: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Secretary of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, this day of ,2001.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
Approved as to form and legal
sufficiency:
Heidi F. Ashton
Assistant County Attorney
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER. Ph.D., Chairman
ORDINANCE NO. 2001-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 72-1, AS AMENDED, WHICH CREATED
THE COLLIER COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT: TO ADD
WII_ZDUGHBY ACRES TO THE CO! I JER COUNTY
LIGHTING DISTRICT; TO AMEND TI-IE EXISTING DISTRICT
BOUNDARIES TO INCLUDE THOSE AREAS OF
IMMOKALEE NOT CURRENTLY PART OF THE COIX,IER
COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING A_N EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 72-1, AS
AMENDED
Section One of Collier County Ordinance No. 72-1, as mended, is hereby mended to
add the following geographic area or areas into the Collier County Lighting District:
WILLO GI-IBY ACRES which is more articularl described as follows: ALL OF
WILL HBY AC AS REC RDED IN PLAT BOOK 8 PAGES 24-26 INCLUSIVE OF
THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COl J-mR COUNTY, FLORIDAi
~lows: ALL OF SECTION 36
TOWNSI-IIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST: AND
THE SOUTH HALF F THE SOUTHWEST 'UARTER OF SECTION 28' THE SOUTH
~TION 29' THE EAST HALF AND THE SOLrrH HALF
~ION 30' THE NORTHEAST UARTER OF
SECTION 31; ALL OF SECTION 32; ALL OF SECTION 33; THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER
OF SECTION 34; TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST; ~
~ OF SECTION 3' ALL OF SECTION
4; TI-[E NORTHEAST QUARTER AND THE NORTH HALF OF TI-IE NORTHWEST
QUARTER OF SEUt~ON 5; ALL OF SECTION 9; THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF
OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER AND THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION 11 LYING NORTHEAST OF STATE ROAD 29; TOWNSHIP 47
SOLrrH, RANGE 29 EAST;
ALL LANDS LYING IN COl .I.mR COUNTY, FLORIDA.,
SECTION TWO: INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida~ The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or
page 1 of 2
Words ~ are added; words ~ are
AGENDA ITEM
No._
NO , 27 2ool
r~-l~tered to accomplish such, and the word "orclin~nce" may be changed w "section", "ar~cl¢",
or any other appropriate word.
SECTION THREE: CONFLICT AND SEVERAB~
In thc event this ~ conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other
applicable law, the mo~ reztri~iv¢ shall apply, ff any court of comp¢~rnt jurisdiction holds any
phrase or portion of thc Ordinance invalid or unconztimtional, such po~on shall be d~erned a
separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect thc validity of the
remaining portion.
SECTION FOUR: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Secretary of Stale.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, this day of ,2001.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COM]vl/SSIONERS
COl .1 .~R COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., Chairman
Approved as to form and legal
Heidi F. Ashton
Assistant County Attorney
NOV
Pg.
Page 2 of 2
Words ~ ~': ached; wor~ ramek-em~ am deleted.
AGENDA IT,~M
N°'-- , / r~.~.
/ ! LUUI