Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CCPC Agenda 12/17/2015
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA DECEMBER 17, 2015 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2015, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, THIRD FLOOR, 3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST,NAPLES,FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. NOTICE: ITEM 9C, THE ARCHITECTURAL LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS, WILL BE HEARD AFTER ALL OF THE LAND USE PETITIONS AND BEFORE 3 PM. THEREAFTER, IT WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—November 19,2015 6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA Note: This item has been continued from the December 3,2015 CCPC meeting: A. PUDA-PL20150000178: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 95-33, the Briarwood PUD, as amended,to add Private Clubs and Private Parking Garages, and associated accessory uses, as a principal use in Tracts B & C: Community Commercial, to add minimum standards for Private Clubs and Private Parking Garages, to increase the maximum floor area for Private Clubs and Private 1 Parking Garages in Tracts B & C: Community Commercial from 20% of the commercial land area to 49% of the commercial land area which comprises 198,500 square feet of the building footprint on the ground level and an additional 97,500 square feet limited to a mezzanine area, to add a deviation allowing an alternative Type D landscape buffer along Livingston Road and Radio Road,to add a deviation allowing the required 8-foot wall at the top of a berm instead of being located at ground level, to add a new Alternative Landscaping exhibit for Livingston Road and Radio Road, and to add a new Conceptual Master Plan for the Private Clubs and Parking Garages, for the PUD property consisting of 209.17+acres located on the east side of Livingston Road, north of Radio Road, in Section 31, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Eric Johnson, AICP, CFM, Principal Planner] B. PUDR-PL20150002246: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from the Agricultural (A) zoning district and the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for a 106.67+ acre parcel to be known as the Rockedge RPUD to allow up to 266 dwelling units on property located near the northeast corner of the intersection of Sabal Palm Road and Collier Boulevard in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 06-31, the former Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development; and providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Dan Smith, AICP, Principal Planner] 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS Note: This item has been continued from the December 3,2015 CCPC meeting: A. DOA-PL20140002309: A Resolution amending Resolution Number 95-71 (Development Order no. 95-01), as amended, for the Pelican Marsh Development of Regional Impact ("DRI") located in Sections 25, 27, 34, 35 and 36, Township 48 South, Range 25 East and Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East in Collier County, Florida by providing for: Section One, Amendments to Development Order by adding 32 acres to the DRI; by revising Exhibit "D" and Map "H3" contained in the DRI Development Order to add 32 acres to the DRI and an access point on Livingston Road; and by reducing the reserve by 2 acres; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Conclusions of Law; and Section Four, Effect of Previously Issued Development Orders, Transmittal to Department of Economic Opportunity and Effective Date. [Companion item to Pelican Marsh PUDR-PL20 1 400022 1 1] [Coordinator:Nancy Gundlach,AICP, RLA, Principal Planner] Note: This item has been continued from the December 3,2015 CCPC meeting: B. PUDR-PL20140002211: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2002-71, the Pelican Marsh Planned Unit Development, and amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, the Collier County Land Development Code, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 32± acres of land zoned Rural Agricultural (A) to the Pelican Marsh PUD; by amending the Planned Unit Development document and the Master Plan to add R1 district parcels for 75 single family dwelling units; by correcting a scrivener's error in the PUD Master Development Plan to Ordinance No. 2002-71 which omitted 141.6 acres east of Livingston Road; by adding an access point to Livingston Road; by providing development standards for the R1 district; by reducing the reserve by 2 acres; and by providing an effective date. The property to be added to the PUD is located in the northeast quadrant of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 2 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 2,245± acres for the entire Pelican Marsh PUD. [Coordinator:Nancy Gundlach,AICP,RLA,Principal Planner] C. An ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive land regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to the Land Development Code to make comprehensive changes to architectural and site design standards, more specifically amending the following: Chapter Two — Zoning Districts and Uses, including section 2.03.06 Planned Unit Development Districts, section 2.03.07 Overlay Zoning Districts; Chapter Four— Site Design and Development Standards, including section 4.02.12 Design Standards for Outdoor Storage, section 4.02.16 Design Standards for Development in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, section 4.02.37 Design Standards for Development in the Golden Gate Downtown Center Commercial Overlay District (GGDCCO), section 4.02.38 Specific Design Criteria for Mixed Use Development Within C-1 Through C-3 Zoning Districts, section 4.05.02 Design Standards, section 4.05.04 Parking Space Requirements, section 4.05.09 Stacking Lane Requirements, section 4.06.02 Buffer Requirements, section 4.06.03 Landscaping Requirements for Vehicular Use Areas and Rights-of-Way, section 4.06.05 General Landscaping Requirements; Chapter Five—Supplemental Standards, including section 5.05.08 Architectural and Site Design Standards; Chapter Six — Infrastructure Improvements and Adequate Public Facilities Requirements, including section 6.06.02 Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements, section 6.06.03 Streetlights; Chapter Ten —Application, Review, and Decision-Making Procedures, including section 10.02.15 Requirements for Mixed Use Projects Within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Six, Effective Date. [Coordinator: Jeremy Frantz, Senior Planner] 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT 13. ADJOURN CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows/jmp 3 November 19, 2015 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples,Florida,November 19,2015 LET IT BE REMEMBERED,that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building"F"of the Government Complex,East Naples,Florida,with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain Wafaa F.Assaad Stan Chrzanowski Diane Ebert Karen Homiak Andrew Solis(absent for roll call) ABSENT: Charlette Roman ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows,Zoning Manager Heidi Ashton-Cicko,Managing Assistant County Attorney Scott Stone,Assistant County Attorney Tom Eastman, School District Representative Page 1 of 62 November 19, 2015 PROCEEDINGS CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning,everyone. Welcome to the Thursday,November 19th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. If everybody will please rise for Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. And before we do roll call I'd like to make a short announcement and welcome Mr. Wafaa Assaad to the Planning Commission. Mr.Assaad represents District 4, generally the City of Naples in that area there.And welcome aboard. You've made our contingent full again,and everybody's here today because it's your first day. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I'm glad you came. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that, if we could have the roll call by the secretary,please. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. Good morning. Mr.Eastman? MR.EASTMAN: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Chrzanowski? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Solis is absent. Ms. Ebert is here. Commissioner Strain? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ms.Homiak? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr.Assaad? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: And Ms.Roman is absent. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We have a quorum. And the first item--next item up is the addenda to the agenda. The agenda has two items on it,two consent items and one advertised public hearing. The first consent item is from last week's or last--two weeks ago meeting. It's 8A on Summit,and 8B is an East Gateway Mixed Use Planned Unit Development for consent also. That one has been requested to be continued to the December 3rd meeting. So is there a motion to continue? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I make a motion to continue. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made and motion seconded for PUDA-20140000548 to be continued to December 3rd CCPC meeting. This is a consent item,and it will go to the first consent agenda on December 3rd. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 5-0. Next is Planning Commission absences. Our next meeting is December 3rd. Does anybody know if they're not going to be able to make it? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'm questionable. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're questionable? Page 2 of 62 November 19, 2015 COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah. I have surgery a couple nights before. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.EASTMAN: I have a course and a conflict. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,Tom and Diane. So everybody else,we have at least four then, probably some of the other two,so I'm sure we'll have a quorum. That takes us to the minutes. The minutes of October 15 were electronically distributed. Has anybody got any changes or comments to the minutes? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made by Karen. Seconded by? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan. And I would suggest that Mr.Assaad, since he wasn't here,probably will not be--will abstain from that vote. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Abstain. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And so the rest of us,all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: (Abstains.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 4-0 with one abstention. And let the record note that Mr. Solis has shown--he is here now. Welcome,Andy. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And,Andy Solis,this is Wafaa Assaad. He's our new member of the Planning Commission-- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: How are you? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --representing District 4,City of Naples. That takes us to the BCC report and recaps,Ray. MR. BELLOWS: Yes. On November 10th the Board of County Commissioners heard the PUD rezone for Southbrook. They approved that by a vote of 4-0,and that was subject to the Planning Commission recommendations. They also heard the amendment to the Pine Ridge Center West PUD,and that was approved on their summary agenda. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Excellent. Thank you. And that takes us to the chairman's report. I have no additional information today. We'll move right into our agenda. ***Agenda Item 8A is our consent agenda. It's for the CU-PL20140000543,and it's for the Summit Church in the Estates zoning district. This is consent. It's a discussion amongst this panel to acknowledge whether or not staff had written up the stipulations and conditions the Planning Commission imposed,and that's what this is for,so it's not open to public input. And,Tim,we don't generally need any comment. So with that,is there any--for those of you that were here. I was not here. Mr.Assaad was not here. So it will have to be the rest of you that will have to weigh in on this. Any comments,changes? COMMISSIONER EBERT: No. I do find most of it in there. The only one thing is No.2 on Page--on the very front page. It's flea market. It should also include farmers market. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That would be--Fred? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Flea/farmer? Page 3 of 62 November 19,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: During the meeting,were your notes reflecting that as an inclusion,or how did that-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No,mine weren't. I don't remember the-- MR.REISCHL: I don't. COMMISSIONER EBERT: It was flea or farmers market. MR.REISCHL: I don't exactly recall,but I'll ask Ray if he interprets-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Do you consider it the same thing? MR.REISCHL: --the LDC,would a flea market and a farmers market be a similar use? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: But farmers market wasn't stated specifically at our meeting. MR.BELLOWS: They're not exactly the same use. A flea market has more items or-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. MR.REISCHL: Nonfood. MR.BELLOWS: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Farmers market are primarily food-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Is food. MR.BELLOWS: Food. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --and vegetables grown,stuff like that. Flea markets are--generally include new and used merchandise in addition to what farmers markets could include. That's my understanding of our code in that regard. MR.BELLOWS: Yes. MR.REISCHL: So if it's your intent,I can add farmers market. COMMISSIONER EBERT: No. That's fine. That's fine. And the interconnection,at the time we just said no Pefa parking,but is--pedestrian and vehicle parking also is No.2 on the above? MR.REISCHL: Yeah. The--sorry. Fred Reischl,Planning and Zoning. The interconnection is via the sidewalk that's existing along Pine Ridge,and then the pedestrian interconnect to the church. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. MR.REISCHL: So it's not from the church directly to the-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah. I was just going from the notes that I had from before. Okay. Very good. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. For the four of you that were here,are there any other changes that need to be made or suggested? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I make a motion to approve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made by Karen. Seconded by? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRPERSON HOMIAK: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: (Abstain.) COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: (Abstain.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And abstentions will be myself and Mr.Assaad. We weren't present at that meeting. So thank you all. We appreciate it. Thank you,Tim. ***Next item up,and the only remaining item for today, is No.9A,advertised public hearing.This item has been continued from the August 20th CCPC meeting and previously--and then the September 17th Page 4 of 62 November 19, 2015 meeting and then again from the October 15th meeting. So ifs been continued several other times prior to today. It's Item PUDA-PL20150000178. It's commonly known as the Briarwood PUD located on the east side of Livingston Road north of Radio Road. All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item, if those members of the public wish to speak on this item,please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And disclosures on the part of the Planning Commission. We'll start with Tom on my right. MR.EASTMAN: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: One very long piece of correspondence from Tony Pires. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Andy? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I have the same piece of correspondence. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I talked with Mr.Hood,and I also--the emails and Mr.Hood and staff. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've had emails;the 555-page staff report from this meeting;the reports from the August 20th meeting,which I've reread,and the minutes from that meeting;the report from the January meeting and the minutes from that meeting,I've read those. I also had separate meetings with the applicant and the applicant's representative and attorney. I've had an email from the applicant. I've also talked with Tony Pires representing some of the homeowners in Briarwood. I've met with various members of staff, specifically including the fire department,the building department,and the impact fee department. With that,that's as extensive as I can say right now. Karen? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Just emails. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wafaa? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Just the email. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,we will move straight into the discussion. And,Fred, it's your presentation. And I would suggest that you try to do a full presentation. We do have a new board member,and it would help to get a full picture. MR.HOOD: Good morning,Commissioners,Mr. Chairman. Fred Hood with Davidson Engineering,for the record. I'd like to start with a video that we've done for the project. It's a fly-through and a walk-through of the project to give you a better idea of what we're-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Speak up. MR.HOOD: Sorry. I'm a little under the weather, so let me know if I'm a little too soft. I'd like to start with a video to show everyone what we're proposing at the Briarwood PUDA Premiere Auto Suites site. (Video being played.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Make sure you send a copy of that to Ray Bellows or Eric so it's part of our record. MR.HOOD: Defmitely. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.HOOD: Okay. So just to give a brief overview of the project and its proposals,the purpose of this PUD amendment application is to allow private clubs and private garages consistent with Exhibit B. Exhibit B is the master site plan that you have in your packets,and I can put that on the visualizer so that everyone knows what we're talking about. Exhibit B,as a principal use within Tracts B and C,the community commercial portion of the Briarwood PUD. The land use requested has been interpreted by review staff in the previous conditional use Page 5 of 62 November 19, 2015 application as well as the PUDA application that is before you today. As the combined permitted conditional uses,per Section 6.2.0 of Ordinance 95.33,private clubs subject to the provisions of Collier County Land Development Code and commercial and private parking lots and parking garages. The principal--the requested principal use is comparable--is a comparable consolidation of those two conditional uses and is,therefore,consistent with the provisions of the PUD and the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Additionally,this application seeks to increase the maximum floor area for private clubs and parking--private parking garages in Tracts B and C,the community commercial,from 20 percent of the commercial land area to 27 percent of the commercial land area for the footprint of the buildings;to add a deviation allowing an alternative Type D landscape buffer along Livingston and Radio Roads;to add a deviation allowing the required 8-foot wall at the top of the berm instead of being located at ground level, existing grade ground level;to add an alternative landscaping exhibit for Livingston and Radio Roads; and to add a new master plan for private clubs and parking garages. As we've gone through the reviews with Collier review staff and at the last Planning Commission hearing,we've made several changes to the document that are outlined in the package that you have been sent and that have also been sent out to the neighbors,I believe,through Mr. Pires. We have also--in coordination with several members of the public and neighborhood information meetings and speaking with review staff,have made some additional changes that you do not have in front of you today but they are for cleanup purposes inside of the document. I have those here for you in paper format,if I can hand them out to you,and then we can go through them. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. Make sure you have a copy for the court reporter as well and County Attorney and Eric. Eric, if you have enough copies,as a courtesy for Mr.Pires,please see if he can be provided with an extra copy since I'm sure he'll be speaking sooner or later. MR.JOHNSON: Sorry,I don't. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You don't? MR.HOOD: I can get it. I'll give him mine. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fred, if you need one to work off of,you could use the court reporter's--okay,because after the meeting I can always give her mine. I prefer things electronically anyway. MR.HOOD: I just took Wayne's from him. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. You don't have one? MR.JOHNSON: That was the last copy that I had. MR. HOOD: It's right there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.HOOD: If we can go through these.Actually,before we go through these,there were three items that were discussed with the Briarwood neighbors a few times,but recently I heard these come back up again,and I wanted to just put them on the record and discuss them. There were three items we were asked to consider. The retention of native trees along the northern border adjacent with the Dover Park development. That is--that is--those trees would be in this general vicinity around Buildings 3,2 and 4. The Skelly Road interconnection,that's where Skelly Road dips into this community commercial property on the northern side. It's also between Buildings 2 and 3. And then the third was the location of the buildings in order of which they shall be built in.We've got--I've got a prepared statement on each those items. For the retention of the native trees,as stated in PUD Section 6.3.7.M that we're proposing,we have committed to retaining native vegetation within the Type B required buffer between the different land uses. We will continue to try and retain as much native vegetation along the shared boundary as possible. The current design does not allow a large retention of the trees that are present south of the border due to the provision of water management areas,the access--the emergency access drive,and the proposed Page 6 of 62 November 19, 2015 Building No. 3,but we'll do our best to try and keep as many of those trees in the buffer area as we can. As for the Skelly Road interconnection, it has consistently been brought to the applicant's attention that members--some members of the Briarwood residential community would like to see the interconnection between this use and their community removed. Through our coordination with county review staff, it was decided that this interconnection be left in place for emergency services access. The applicant is okay with either option,but as a show of good faith and attempting to be good neighbors,we request that Section 6.7 of the PUD document be revised and/or removed to address this request from the neighbors to the north. We do,however,want to make the observation that with this request the burden would fall on the Briarwood residential communities to provide an area for a county-approved fire access turnaround at the end of Skelly Road. Currently the fire exit's turnaround and/or connection is situated on the applicant's side of the shared boundaries. So if we were to close that off,there would be no fire access turnaround on our property anymore, and we would have to place one on the northern side of the border. So I just wanted to make that observation if we were to discuss that any further. The location of the buildings and the order in which they're built. As discussed with the Briarwood neighbors and county review staff,the construction of the buildings,once the PUD zoning is approved,will be contingent upon the open market and selections of buyers for their requested units. The applicant is conscious of the desires for Buildings 1 through 4 to be constructed first,but at this time we don't find it possible for the applicant to commit to the conceptual phasing of building plans. So we'll take it into consideration,but at this point we're not looking at the phasing out any specific portion of the development right now. I'd like to move into the specific changes in the document that I just handed out. We are asked to look at additional language in Section 6.2.A.That's the section that defines what this use actually is and how it will operate. And we were looking at what the private club component and the recreational area of each of the units provided would have to be. I'll put those up on the visualizer for everyone in the crowd to see. So the language that's provided here in 6.2.A.14,bullet point Roman Numerals I and II discuss the features that we would like to be made present inside of Principal Use 14 to move forward. So those items,as you can see on the visualizer,in A we went with common areas and amenities generally associated with the principal use including,but not limited to--and then I added a comma--a clubhouse and its associated parking,B, indoor mezzanine recreation spaces,e.g.,for pool tables,card and other game tables,video gaming systems,and exercise equipment,personal office space,and bathrooms within individual units. We wanted to add this additional language to make sure that the private club recreation portion of each unit was specifically in the PUD document so that we could--so that this use would be consistent with what we have been proposing from the very beginning. Section 6.3.6.A,Roman Numerals I and II have been revised to illustrate the proper square footage based on the percentages requested. The prior square footages were based on a rounding up or down of the percentages to create--or up or down of the square footages to create whole numbers. 6.3.7.A has been updated to reflect the ownerships of the units shall be directly tied with--tied to membership in the private club component of Principal Use 14. Section 6.3.7.B--and,actually,I'm sorry.I'm going to put these up as I go along. This was 6.3.6.A, Roman Numerals I and II. This is where you can see that the square footages have been updated. The first number, 188,062 square feet, is representative of the 27 percent of the commercial land area,and Roman Numeral II,the 92,150 square feet is representative of the maximum 49 percent of the floor area of each of the units,and then the 280,212 is the combination of the floor area and the mezzanine areas for Principal Use No. 14. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How did you get to the 282,012? MR.HOOD: So the 282,012 is the combination of the 188,062,and the 188,062 is 15.99 acres divided--or multiplied by the square footage. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So it's 15.99-- Page 7 of 62 November 19, 2015 MR.HOOD: 15.99,that's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --times 43,560 times .40. MR.HOOD: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Comes up to 278,610. MR.HOOD: Not.40; .27 is the 188,062. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm talking about 282,012. MR.HOOD: The 282,012 is the combination of the 188,062 plus the 92,150. The 92,150 is representative of the maximum square footage that the mezzanine areas can be within the units. So that's--basically,you take the building size,the-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Fred,I'm really understanding how to get there. MR. HOOD: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What I'm trying to understand is if you take 40 percent of the square footage of 15.99,it doesn't come up to 282,012.That's my problem. So we either need to adjust the 40 percent or the number. Well, if you--I've got 278,06---rounded up,278,610. MR.HOOD: Okay. I'm double-checking right now. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: My number could be wrong,but I'll run it again. MR.HOOD: I'm sorry. You are right.278,609.76. So it would be 278,610 if we round up. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.HOOD: I'll make that correction. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.HOOD: Okay. Excuse me. This is 6.3.7.A,as we just discussed,has been updated to reflect the ownership of units shall be directly tied to membership in the private club component of Principal Use No. 14. Section 6.3.7.B has been updated adding language to state the flushing of vessel motors shall not be permitted between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m. This was brought about just in case,you know, someone would take their boat out and come back and have to flush their motor. We wanted to make sure that they wouldn't be doing that at all hours of the early morning and evening,so we put a time limit on that that is also consistent with another item that we'll get to on the staff report moving forward. 6.3.7-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Are we allowed to ask questions while we go? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think that would--and that's something I was--that's a good point. Normally we wait till you finish your presentation,but you have provided us with some brand new information,so I think it would be more relevant, if we're going to go through this document,to ask questions as we have them,as we go along. So,Mr.Assaad,go right ahead. And you need to pull that microphone close to you,because you're being picked up on the-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Number one is,what's the justification for increasing the square footage? MR.HOOD: We looked at the square footage of the buildings that we were proposing in the original conditional use application. When we first looked at that application,we went to the county for our pre-application meeting and discussed the proposed site plan. That site plan was a little bit more--the buildings were a little bit larger in that site plan. When we discussed it with them,we were--we wanted to make sure that in the commercial land area provision of the PUD document that we would be--we would not be held to the maximum floor area. There was a conversation that went back and forth. We got through to the conditional use application. We came through with this plan with the understanding that--on our part that our square footage would be okay as--I believe at the time it was around 28 or 29 percent of the--of the commercial area for just the floor area. Once we got to the last Planning Commission meeting for the conditional use--for the first and the last--for the conditional use,we were made aware that the commercial land area floor area square footage Page 8 of 62 November 19, 2015 maximum we would be held to for this project. At that time we looked at--we had to look at the mezzanine areas as well as the footprint--the building footprint area of each of the buildings. We thought that 7 percent of the footprint area over the maximum 20 percent of the floor area would be--for the purposes of this development with its intensity that we can discuss about with the traffic impacts and a level-of-service impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods and the surrounding right-of-ways,we thought that 7 percent of that area increase would be not extreme,if you will. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: So this is something that--this is something that the developer or the petitioner would like to do? MR.HOOD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: And you couldn't live with the existing limitation on the square footage because of what,economics or-- MR.HOOD: The amount of-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: You want to make more garages? You want to make a more profitable development? You want to make--I just--you gave me the history and you took me through the steps of the meetings,but you didn't give me an answer is,why are you asking for more square footage. MR.HOOD: There was a specific number that our developer was looking for for units,and that's where we got to,and that's where the request came from. So,yes,you're correct,it was-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. MR.HOOD: You're welcome. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: On Item 6.3.7.B. MR. HOOD: Yes. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: The flushing of the vessels. MR.HOOD: Yes. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I think from midnight to 6 a.m.prohibition is not good enough. Why not from six in the afternoon to six in the morning or something? I mean,they can wash till midnight.That is a little bit permissive, if you will. MR.HOOD: The reason I used the 6 a.m.to midnight number, if you flip to--if you have it in front of you--of the staff report. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Yes. MR.HOOD: There is a--county staff is asking us to--or asking you and us to agree to the stipulations of approval. There was a time limit for no semitrailer trucks shall be allowed access to the site between hours of midnight and 6 a.m. I was trying to stay consistent with what was proposed by staff. We can certainly look at different time limits. I would think that 6 p.m.,though, is a little bit restrictive insofar as most people that go out on their boats sometimes go out beyond 6 p.m. So I think we may be able to look at something like 10 p.m. Eight p.m.? We can do 8 p.m. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fred? MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Since you responded to a question that is now on record,I'd like to correct the record. The conditions in which we discovered this error aren't quite--I don't remember them the same way you do. In fact,what I do remember is you submitted an application for a conditional use that came to the Hearing Examiner's Office. MR. HOOD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The staff packet was received by the Hearing Examiner,and during the review of that packet, it was discovered,based on an article that was in the newspaper,that you were going to build units to 1,000 minimum square feet,I believe the article said,and that you had 159 units. That simply is 159,000 square feet,which exceeded the multiplication that would have to have occurred to discover the amount of square footage you could have had allowed by the PUD,which I believe was 134-or 139-,and that is how it got there. Page 9 of 62 November 19, 2015 Now,as far as your pre-app with staff,did staff--was staff told at the time that you were going to be exceeding the square footage that was allowed by the PUD, or was staff told that you were going to a thousand square foot per unit minimum? MR.HOOD: At the time we were looking at a zoning verification letter before we submitted the application from our interpretation,and from what had seemed to be staffs interpretation,that would not force us to go with that 20 percent of the commercial land area requirement of the PUD. That was our understanding, so that's why we submitted it with the square footage that we did. And we backed it up with the Transportation Impact Statement and all of the other justifications that showed that this use was going to be far less intense than most of the other uses that were provided for in the PUD document. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just want to make it clear on the record how this discrepancy between the PUD and the conditional use occurred. It did not occur on January 15th at our meeting. At our meeting is when we emphasized to you you might want to consider a different approach because of the issue.The issue was discovered in advance of that when you previously were scheduled to go through a conditional use process in front of the Hearing Examiner. MR.HOOD: It was discovered before then,but I think it was brought up at that hearing,was it not? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It was,certainly,because that was where we had to refine it and make a decision on how you were going to proceed. At least we would make the recommendation,not the decision. MR.HOOD: The reason I said it that way is that was the first time that it was publicly discovered. It was--we hadn't gotten to a point where we were in front of you as the Hearing Examiner. We had gone through all of the staff review,and this was the first time that we had brought it to a public hearing situation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.HOOD: So that's-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The time frame for that issue was far greater than just January 15th. That's what I wanted to make clear to Mr.Assaad in response to his question on how we got here today. MR.HOOD: I'll agree to that,yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And since we are asking questions as we go along,6.3.7.A,private club memberships shall be directly tied to ownership of a unit. I didn't find in here where you've said how many units you're going to have.And I know--I thought I read somewhere you're down to 148 because of the differences between the buildings,the separation of the buildings. Have you come--have you established a number yet? MR.HOOD: If we do the plan as it's sitting right now without combining any units,yes,we are at 148,but I was reluctant to put the 148 number into the document because if one owner decided to buy two or three units,the 148 would no longer be--I mean,we can write in there a maximum of 148,but I-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's what we usually do. MR.HOOD: Okay. I just--I wanted to avoid any more confusion,so I left it out. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So by club membership--and I understand this has got to be a private club in order to qualify for the zoning-- MR. HOOD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --and it's got to be owners of a unit. How many owners can own a unit? I mean,can you,for example,get the Muscle Car Club of Collier County to buy a unit and all of a sudden you've got 300 members? MR.HOOD: So what we did with that question,because that question was asked at one of our neighborhood information meetings of how many owners could basically chip in and buy a unit. We reran the transportation impact statement,and we decided as a maximum that we would have 10-- 10 people would be able to buy a singular unit; 10 people, 10 entities,whatever the case may be. We ran the membership in the Transportation Impact Statement based on that 10-person or 10-entity rule,if you will, so that's how we came to the membership of the units. So let's just say 10 people go in and buy one unit or buy two or three units together,all 10 of those people would have equal shares in that unit and would be able to access that unit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So your maximum membership capacity based on the number that you're not to exceed would be 1,480 members for the club? Page 10 of 62 November 19, 2015 MR.HOOD: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That's what I needed to understand. Thank you. And why don't we just--and I definitely agree with Mr.Assaad on the flushing. Unlike motorcycles,cars,and tractor trailers, all those vehicles are road worthy;they have mufflers. When you flush an engine that does not have a muffler--in fact,when you flush an engine,in the case between these buildings,as might be the case, it will echo substantially. I live in an area where I can hear motors flushing blocks and blocks away. So the hours of that flushing are going to be sensitive,and we'll certainly listen to public discussion on that as we get into it. MR.HOOD: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.HOOD: Section 6.3.7.F has been revised by adding the word"household." Units are not permitted to provide general storage of household goods not associated with the private club and private garage use. Section 6.3.7.H has been updated to state that members shall not be granted business or occupational licenses for their units. Section 6.3.7.J has-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: So at the very end where it says"indoor mezzanine recreation spaces,"et cetera-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What number are you on? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Fourteen. It was one of the first places we went to. It says something about personal office space and indoor mezzanine spaces being allowed personal office space,so that's just like a desk in your den or something,but not really an office? MR.HOOD: That's correct. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I see where he's coming from. MR. HOOD: 6.3.7.J has been updated to read more specific with regard to maintenance. Minor and routine vehicle maintenance is allowed within each unit by the unit owner. All doors of individual units shall remain closed while any maintenance is performed. "While any,"the word"is,"and"performed"were the added words and highlighted in yellow. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now,the maintenance is theoretically,then,on the vehicles that are there, whether they're vessels or vehicles? MR.HOOD: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. On a vehicle,when you do a simple oil change and filter,as I do all my own,you have to start the engine to charge the filter,which you don't want to do with the doors closed. How are you thinking that's going to be addressed? MR.HOOD: So just like you and I change our own oil,what I typically do is,I change my oil,I put everything back together,I pull up the garage door,and then I turn it on,so the maintenance has been done before you get ready to start the vehicle. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you're--okay. And what about the working on the engines for boats, for example;you're going to--you'll have to run them to see if your work is successful. MR.HOOD: Same difference. If you are working--let's say you're working on the block for,you know,your motor. You're going to have to put it back together to be able to start it first. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I couldn't--I couldn't tell from looking at the video whether the individual garages have secondary doors or not.All I saw was garage doors. MR.HOOD: They have secondary man doors for you to be able to access the door--access the unit without having to roll up the door. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Without having--do they always have light, like windows? MR.HOOD: Yes. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: All of them? Page 11 of 62 November 19, 2015 MR.HOOD: Yes. They'll have to meet architectural standard--commercial architectural standards for-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: But they do have windows? They have daylight coming in? MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tom? MR. EASTMAN: Are there--in the video you showed,all the roofs look like there's no uses up there at all. No one can drag a picnic table up there or anything,but is that an express provision in the documents that the roofs cannot be used--utilized? MR.HOOD: No. What we're proposing on most of the roofs is going to be HVAC equipment. So all of the central air units and equipment that would be associated with each of the units would be up there. I understand that that doesn't take up that much space, but we're not looking to do any type of roof decks or anything like that. MR. EASTMAN: Would you be opposed to putting a restriction on roof use only related to cleaning and maintenance? MR.HOOD: We can do that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Why don't we move on.And I think you left off at J. MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. 6.3.7.K has been updated to illustrate no more than two lifts per unit shall be permitted and that required parking shall be counted with the maximum number of vehicles permitted within each unit. Section 6.3.7.L has also been updated to show that required parking shall count against the maximum number of vehicles permitted in conjunction with the previous standard. Do you have that one? Yes,I do. These two kind of go hand in hand because we wanted to make sure that with the parking standard that we came up with, if we're not able to place parking in the driveways,that the required parking may be permitted inside of the units,and that would count against the maximum number of parking that's allowed inside of the units. So,for instance,if I have my unit and I can't park in the driveway and I have a unit that's big enough to put in eight cars,six of--I would only have to--six of them would be for general parking,and then two of them would have to be required for the actual unit. Section 6.3.7.N has been updated to require that security lighting mounted to structures shall not be placed any higher than eight feet above finished grade. This is consistent with the wall height on the--on our development side of the wall so that if you have security lights,there will be no spillover of those lights onto the adjacent residential properties because they will be no higher than the actual wall. Section 6.3.7.0 has been updated to remove the word "or"and now states "no outdoor amplified sound systems are allowed." Section 6.3.7.Q has been updated to add the word"the"at the beginning of the sentence. So that now reads,the stabilized subgrade pathway identified on Exhibit B shall be for the use of emergency vehicles only. Section 6.3.7.R has been updated to state that each mezzanine must equate to not less than 25 percent and no more than 49 percent of the ground floor area of the individual unit. Section 6.3.7.T has been updated--yes. Section 6.3.7.T has been updated by adding individual roof-mounted central air conditioning units will be provided for each unit. That's the end of the changes to the PUD documents. We also took a look at the deviations that were requesting and made some updates to those as well. Those will be found in Section 8. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Fred? MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: When you did that fly-through-- MR.HOOD: Yes. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: --I would think that the architectural features and ground features are technically accurate. Was the landscaping technically accurate? Page 12 of 62 November 19, 2015 MR.HOOD: It was technically accurate,but we did show in the video a maturation of the vegetation that was proposed. So it won't-- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: So you're not planting 30-foot trees the first day? MR.HOOD: No. No,sir. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. MR.HOOD: So deviations. Deviation No. 1 --and I have Kyle Poole here with ALD to discuss any additional landscaping questions that you may have. But just generally, in one of our neighborhood information meetings, it was discussed--this is about landscaping,by the way. It was discussed that if we could we should try and not make the buffers along the adjacent right-of-ways look like the back of a shopping center buffer where there is a hedge and trees immediately--where there is a hedge and trees immediately to the right-of-way line. It seemed like the attendees liked the idea of a more natural experience with longer vistas. We're looking at these proposed buffers along Livingston and Radio as an opportunity to widen the view of the landscape experience. The proposal lends to opening up longer vistas along portions of the roadway to provide a better viewing experience of the landscape. Longer views across the water management areas and the opportunity to experience them where we have larger open spaces are achieved with this alternative plan. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,Fred,since we're going to ask questions as we go along,Deviation 1 talks about the required 3-gallon--or the hedge. Then it says,where vehicle areas are adjacent to roadway areas is requested. In lieu of these requirements,the developer shall provide alternative D buffer landscaping for principal use and shall contain additional trees and shrubs staggered appropriately. You don't tell us--I mean,you could put one tree and one foot of shrub in there and say,that's it. We've got to tie it to something, and I didn't--I mentioned that to you when we met,and I think that still doesn't come across very clear to me. MR.HOOD: I think if we look at a visual, it can be shown a little bit better. I'm still not--I'm still not resistant,but I'm cautious to place language in the PUD document with regard to an alternative landscaping plan that we haven't finalized yet. We're coming with a concept right now. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And,Fred--but I'm--see,I'm not cautious about that because we do it frequently. Now, if a developer comes forward and says they're going to put additional planting material in, we always ask,okay,what does additional mean? How much? Where? If you're going to stagger the hedge rows,does that mean you put a foot on each end and nothing in between or a spot in between? I know that may be impractical and not what you intend,but we've got to always put the language in to assure--so we don't get the worst-case scenario. So at some point I think that Deviation 1 should be cleaned up to reflect what you're really going to do or intend to do. MR.HOOD: Okay. Moving on to Deviation No.2. We've updated Deviation No.2--thank you, Eric--to revise the language to deviation from LDC Section 5.3.02.F.1.A and B which require that the height of fence or wall shall be measured from the ground level at the fence or wall location to instead require the developer to provide a proposed 8-foot wall at the top of the berm adjacent to existing residential units. "Units"was a changed word from the previous version to this version.The previous version said "homes." We provided "units" instead,within the Briarwood PUD. Where the top of the wall shall not exceed 11 feet as measured above the existing ground level of the adjacent property. The added words of"as measured above the"and"of the adjacent property"were added to make this a little bit more clear. To finish off the deviation,the alternative wall location shall accompany SDP construction drawings for review and approval. Deviation 3 has been updated to reflect in the last portion of the sentence to read,adjacent to parking areas within individual driveways in order to accommodate and maximize the required parking for each unit. This deviation came about to clean up the intent of the request reflecting the individual driveways will not provide large code required terminal islands to maximize the parking. The reason we were asked to take a look at this deviation is that in commercial developments if you Page 13 of 62 November 19,2015 have a parking area--and typically you have no more than 10 spaces in a row--you have terminal islands on the end of each of those parking areas. When we're looking at individual driveways for parking of vehicles,we thought that for the purposes of this amendment,that those terminal islands would not be necessary; so that's why we were looking at that deviation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.HOOD: And those are all of the changes that we have made to the deviations request and the PUD document, so I can answer any questions that you may have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And after we finish asking questions of the applicant,we'll then get a staff report and other questions from staff,and then we'll go into public speakers,for Mr.Assaad's benefit. Mr.Assaad? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Are the roads going to be private or public? MR.HOOD: Private. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: How wide is the right-of-way? MR.HOOD: The drive aisle--the aisleway pavement section I have here,we're looking at about a 30-foot width for pavement. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: The pavement width-- MR.HOOD: Pavement width is going to be-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: --30 feet. MR.HOOD: --30 feet,yes. And we did 30 feet just--for the purposes of recreational vehicles being parked in some of these units. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: And then the buildings will be set back how far from the pavement? MR.HOOD: They'll be--yes. Yes, sir.They'll be set back. It will vary,but anywhere from--I believe it's somewhere between 15 and 25 feet at the maximum. I'd have to double-check it,but that's--there's a variation between the distances. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: The two required parking spaces per unit-- MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: --will those be provided in front of the garage on the driveway? MR.HOOD: In those units that the driveway depth is long enough,they will be provided in the driveway. Where they're not,where the depth isn't deep enough,they'll be provided inside of the unit. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Okay. Thank you. MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions of the applicant at this time? Anybody? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've got a few,Fred. On your master plan,Page 1 of 3,I think with the changes I understand most of the issues. Did you have a breakdown of the square footage per building anywhere? MR.HOOD: I don't have that with me right now. That's part of our ongoing SDP,but I can certainly get that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ongoing SDP. You mean you've resubmitted for-- MR.HOOD: We have not resubmitted it. We're still designing it in our office. It's not even been submitted to the county because we're still-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Because the current SDP you got does not match up to this plan. MR.HOOD: No, it does not. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: On the next page,your general notes,you talk--I don't understand why those general notes are there. It says they'll be per the LDC. Well,everything has to be per the LDC unless you're asking for a deviation. So what do we need those general notes for? MR.HOOD: The first general note-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,you add some language. MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. So the general notes,as required water management and open space areas per the LDC. That's just been--that's been there since the very beginning. We can strike it if you'd like,but Page 14 of 62 November 19, 2015 that's what we've--we've generally done that before, so we left that one there. The second one,development for Principal Use No. 14 shall be consistent with LDC Section 10.02.03.D as of the PUD approval date. That section was added--that last sentence was added so that the standards that are present today would go with this development going forward. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,now that you've added that language,I would need to review 10.02.03.D. Do you have a copy of that you could put on the overhead? Well,during break maybe you could get a copy,or I'll try to get one,too,and see if--I want to make sure that doesn't have anything that,for example,triggers other areas of the code that we haven't thought of in regards to the added language. MR.HOOD: Our intent for that one was for--I believe it was for landscaping and for architectural review. And that 10.02.03 has to do with the SDP application,so we just wanted to make sure that was in the document. So it's kind of a catchall. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If we go to the--well,what I would suggest,depending on whether or not we need that sentence--and we may strike the general notes,but we'll wait and review 10.02.03.D first. Where--the typical aisle pavement section,3 of 3,you indicate that it varies. I've heard you respond to Mr.Assaad that it be 15 to some odd feet. I would suggest then that it would be no less than 15 feet. My concern's going to be when we start discussing the staff recommendations;where they're insistent on one parking space outside the unit, 15 feet won't cover that, so we will have to have that discussion. MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Should be a minimum of 20 feet if you're going to-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Actually,we use 23 feet where there's sidewalks,but 20--I think 20 feet would be--would probably cover it. What we try not to do is have the overhang of the bumper. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Twenty-three is better then. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Most our PUDs use 23 as a standard, so... If we turn to your typical landscape section,A and B, it's .8.A as Exhibit C,there are several comments on Section A that I've requested clarification on,and the first one on that page would have to correspond with the clarification you gave us to Deviation Number 1. It says,additional trees to enhance buffer and screen building per NIM. I don't know what you told the people at the MM. If it was just going to about additional trees in,okay,but then we still need to know the quantity. On the bottom of that,there's two items I have questions of where it says buffer hedge to help in screening,parenthetical,not required by code but added to satisfy NIM. But you're asking for a deviation from it. So if it's not required by code,why are you asking from(sic)a deviation? MR.HOOD: The hedging is not--we're looking at--the hedging is not required by code because there's no parking areas that are adjacent to the right-of-way between the buildings and the right-of-way. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And why are you asking for a deviation? MR.HOOD: So we're asking for the deviation because the way it's written in the LDC,as I recall, it doesn't specify that if there's no--if there's no parking lot between the right-of-way and the building that you can--that you don't have to provide the hedge. It's kind of ambiguous in that sense. So we wanted to clear it up and put in that deviation to allow for us to break up the hedging--the continuous row of hedging. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you're saying it's not required by the LDC,but it might be required by the LDC. And you're asking for the deviation for that reason? MR.HOOD: I'm covering all my bases. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray, is it not or is it required by the LDC;do you know? I mean,I don't--you can check it on break and get back to me. MR.BELLOWS: Yeah. I'd like to check on a break,though I don't recall other projects where a similar building would be adjacent to a roadway where the double hedge wasn't required anyways,but we can check on that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then the other item I have a question of,it says break in buffer hedge for a more natural look. Same point as before. How lengthy are the breaks? How often are the breaks?What was Page 15 of 62 November 19,2015 your intention there? And I see county staff wandering to the podium. Dan, it will be better if we just brought it up during county staff report,okay,and we'll finish with the applicant now. MR. SMITH: That's fine. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fred,I'm just checking to see what else I have that might be pertinent to the time we're at right now. And that really gets me to the end of my questions. Most of the issues you covered in the handout resolve some of the questions I had. So we'll see where it goes when we get done with staff and we get done with the public. MR.HOOD: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. MR.HOOD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And with that,Eric,I know you've been anxiously awaiting to address us this morning. MR.JOHNSON: Sure. Thank you,Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair,members of the commission,my name is Eric Johnson. I'm the principal planner in the zoning section. As you have in your supplemental staff report,the summary of changes have been made since the August 20th meeting and today. There have been changes made to the PUD document,the deviations,the conceptual master plan,and the Traffic Impact Statement,as well as the comparative analysis of public facility impacts. The staff report outlines and discusses our analysis with respect to traffic and future land use,the deviations,and staff concludes that with the conditions of approval,that this would be a private club so, therefore, staff recommends the CCPC forward Petition PUDA-PL20150000178 to the BCC,that's Board of County Commissioners,with a recommendation of approval contingent upon satisfying the following. And I'd like to just read the conditions of approval 1 through 8. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I think,then,to expedite the discussion is,as you read those conditions of approval,if this panel has any questions about any of those conditions as you step through them,we'll ask you at the time you read them. Would that work for you? MR.JOHNSON: That's acceptable. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.JOHNSON: Okay. Number 1,off-street parking shall be based on two spaces per unit with the caveat that one space be provided outside the unit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Your reasoning for that? MR.JOHNSON: Well, it's from a position of enforcement. It's easier to see where people are parking. The applicant and the eventual owners of each unit--you know,these garage doors will be closed. Not sure if they will have the maximum number of cars in the unit or not. So staff is--you know,basically,the applicant shouldn't be penalized--or the use shouldn't be penalized for the amount of parking that's required for a private club normally because,generally speaking, cars and vehicles and vessels take up more space than a human would. So the off-street parking,two per unit and so,therefore,one space should be outside the unit. It's staffs understanding that not all of the driveway spaces would be long enough to accommodate a parked car. Still,staff is moving forward with the condition of approval that one space be provided outside. That lone space has to be in a lawfully parked manner,whether it be in the driveway space,directly in front of the unit,or in an off-street parking area somewhere else on site. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And if they didn't do that,or even if they did do the one outside and the one inside,what leverage or what ability does county staff at any level,any department,have to monitor that,have to acknowledge that that's actually being kept to that standard? MR.BELLOWS: For the record,Ray Bellows. One of the reasons we wanted one space is to ensure that somebody coming up to their unit has a Page 16 of 62 November 19,2015 place to park on their property and not on the adjacent roadway. Any regard to enforcement of required parking Code Enforcement and would be responded to if one of the neighbors in this development complained about people parking on street,then this language could help enforce that requirement. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But we--if they were both inside,we wouldn't really know whether they're inside or not unless you had,like,a search warrant or something to be able to-- MR.BELLOWS: Yeah. If there's a requirement in the PUD about parking,then that would be something staff could--and code enforcement could work with. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I understand your reasoning. Go ahead with the next one. MR.JOHNSON: Okay,certainly. The top of the buffer wall,the location of which depicted on Exhibit B conceptual master plan,shall be no greater than 11 feet in height above the existing grade of the adjacent properties. Just as a point of clarification,when we say the adjacent grade of--the existing grade of the adjacent properties,we mean at the abutting property line,so I just wanted to clarify that. Number 3,the buffer wall shall be decorative in appearance and installed prior to the construction of any buildings. "Decorative,"and I use that in a quote,when used in this context, shall be construct--shall be construed to include or possess characteristics,materials,or finish that is generally accepted as possessing higher aesthetic quality than minimum code. And I wanted to clarify,what this all means is that a decorative wall could mean something to somebody else. I think of a decorative wall as having a finished outside with paint,maybe some swirl lines and decorative caps. I understand that there's a little ambiguity, a little question here,but I tried to word this condition of approval as liberal as possible. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I would suggest,though,we supplement your language with a reference to that it's got to be concrete or masonry. You don't--I mean,a wood wall would not weather well, and the maintenance problems would occur. We typically simply say concrete or masonry. I understand why you went,now,to the higher level of trying to describe a better wall,but I think we do need to make it of solid material. MR.JOHNSON: Staff would be supportive of that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.JOHNSON: That is,masonry or concrete. Number 4,each building facade shall be designed as a primary facade,and that--when I speak of primary facade,I mean pursuant to Section 5.05.08 of the Land Development Code. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And as you and I spoke,there are some--I don't know how to properly say this,but there are some not-so-nice changes coming forward for our architectural code that would virtually eliminate some of the many architectural requirements in Collier County if it's approved. I would suggest to assure that this project, if it's approved, stays consistent with the code we know today,which is a substitute for the architectural review that may or may not apply to this by the homeowners association,that we tie the architectural review of this to a commercial architectural review subject to today's code. And I think that would--that would get us to make sure we're at this time frame and not a future time frame that's diminished. MR.JOHNSON: Yes,Mr.Chair. Shall I proceed? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. MR.JOHNSON: Number 5,the first building to be constructed shall occur at the easternmost portion of the property. This condition was borne from some public comment that--and also staffs anxiety over if the project were not to be developed in its entirety,that the--if the first building to be constructed were along the--away from the corners of the intersection of the rights-of-way,that there would be ample room left over for a subsequent developer to construct something else that's permitted in the PUD. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think that's been a concern and why we added the language to stipulate that any remaining commercial acreage not used will still allow the 20 percent provided by the PUD for square footage to be applied to that remaining acreage. Being that this is a hybrid use,I don't know how successful it will be,and I don't know if anybody does. And it may be a cautionary note to have. We'll have to listen to the applicant again on this issue before the meeting's over. Page 17 of 62 November 19, 2015 COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: So ifs-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: So it's the intention that they start with the first building from the east and they progress next to each other? MR.JOHNSON: Precisely. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Then we need to say that they should progress contiguous to the--you know,each other. MR.JOHNSON: Or kind of a westward manifest destiny. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: But maybe they should give us a phasing plan. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that's where I was going with the square footage. If they--by this consent hearing, if there is one,when we get to consent,they could provide a phasing plan with instructions from today,and that would get us there. MR.JOHNSON: A phasing plan would be very helpful. Number 7--I'm sorry. Number 6,no semitrailer trucks shall be allowed to access the site between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m. That was an additional safeguard that is meant to prohibit excessive noise or the noise of large automobiles,trucks that could disturb the adjacent residents. It's a protectionary measure. As we--as you've discussed with the applicant, staff would not be averse to changing those hours of--those hours from something of a greater--earlier than midnight,certainly. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Eight. MR.JOHNSON: Eight? Staff would be very supportive of that as well. Number 7,any subsequent reuse of the proposed project cannot be used as a commercial self-storage or warehouse facility. Obviously,there's been a lot of discussion about the proposed use being a--you know,a private club versus something else. Staff is concerned that something that would be here,if constructed,would turn into something else, a warehouse facility or self-storage,which wouldn't be allowed in the PUD documents,and so we want to incorporate this condition of approval really as a means to punctuate staffs position that it not be a self-storage facility or warehouse facility. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're going to have a lot more discussion on that. MR.JOHNSON: I'm sure. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead. Andy? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Just a quick question. What would staffs mechanism for enforcing that be?It's the same question that the chairman had with regard to the parking. MR.JOHNSON: Well,if the buildings were constructed as proposed to be a private club and for one reason or another it didn't work out that way--and I'm sure that the applicant will want to address those concerns--a self-storage facility,warehouse facility simply isn't allowed here. To have something like that be proposed here,it's my understanding that not only would they have to do a PUD amendment to get that--to propose such a thing,but also a Growth Management Plan amendment as well. So it's quite a-- it's an--it's--so those two. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No. I understand the process. My question is,logistically,how would staff prevent it from being used that way anyway?I mean,that's--absent a search warrant,you wouldn't be able to go in and see what's going on in there,right? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I can answer that. It would be--if this goes forward, it will be adopted as an ordinance,and our Code Enforcement Board is able to enforce ordinances. So they could be cited as a code violation and shut down. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But they can't go on property without due cause and justification in the form of a search warrant. There's been AG opinions on that. So how would you suspect they can just walk into these units and inspect them as code enforcement? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Oh,I wasn't proposing that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,okay,good. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I thought you were talking about converting it to one of the commercial Page 18 of 62 November 19,2015 mini-ware--or warehouse facilities so it would be something that you would visually be able to see from the street. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But I think Andy's-- MS.ASHTON-CICKO: That's what I thought the issue was. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --question is--and,Andy,correct me if I'm wrong. I think it's more of the lines,if they don't operate it as a private club and they just pile it and fill it up with storage,how do we stop that? How do we know that's going on? How do we have right of entry to discover that and then do something about it? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that where you were going? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Exactly. That's my question. Is there--and I assume that that's one of the concerns that the adjacent property owners have,is how would that be--one thing would be changing the zoning to allow for a self-storage facility. My question is,how do you prevent that from happening anyway, you know,the owners,the club owners using it that way? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Okay. So your issue isn't related to reuse. Your question is related to how can we prevent them from going in and doing a warehouse-type use rather than what they're proposing? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right,uh-huh. MR.BELLOWS: For the record,Ray Bellows. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And there may not be an answer to that. I'm just--I'm asking the question. MR.BELLOWS: And that kind of situation would be--could happen in any type of zoning-- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. MR.BELLOWS: --any kind of situation. The idea is to have a permitting process in place. If someone wants to change a use and get an occupational license,a business license,that process requires zoning approval,and they would check the PUD document. And if the use is not listed,they would not be issued an occupational license. If someone is using an approved structure that was originally used for a use that was allowed in that zoning district for a use that is not allowed in that zoning district,it becomes a code enforcement case. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I would assume that there is some--there's some process,I would assume,for code enforcement. If there were complaints, if there was evidence that it was being used in an inappropriate way,that code enforcement could eventually gain access and figure out what's going on, if they're-- MR.BELLOWS: Yeah,I would imagine that. And it also would be the club president would also say,we have one or two unit owners who are now not operating within the stated parameters of their membership. So they could have code enforcement act on their behalf. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I think this is very difficult to control. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: To my knowledge,there is nothing that prohibits storing of material in garages or offices or homes or professional buildings or anywhere. So it just becomes a matter of enforcement for the neighbors,the people that don't like it,unless it gets to be a fire hazard,as an example. So when they go through the annual and fire inspection,maybe the inspector would discover a violation. But other than that,I don't think--that would be very tough to control, in my view. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. There will be provisions in--if it's approved,there's going to be provisions in the PUD document that limit what can be stored,right? MR.BELLOWS: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So it would be a function of how is that enforced,and I'm just raising the question as to how you would enforce that. I understand that it's going to be difficult to know what's in there if it's closed,but-- MR.BELLOWS: Yeah. And the only way currently staff can respond is through complaints. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I lived in a place up in Connecticut,and one of the Page 19 of 62 November 19, 2015 neighbors would have put that show Hoarders to shame. So it's not just a place like this. It's just anywhere, and you can't stop it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And just to make a comment.The PUD that we're reviewing today will have to have the conditions that you just alluded to, in it,or this will be the extent of it,most likely,unless the Board asks something. So if you see language here today that isn't as tight as it should be to accomplish the goal,that's what we need to do is get it on the table and discuss it today. So our recommendation,whatever it would be, would have to go with that in mind, so... And,Eric,you're on your last one,I think, aren't you? MR.JOHNSON: Yes, sir. Number 8,section--and this is more of a housekeeping,cleaning up the document. Section 8.3.2 of the PUD document shall be updated to reflect the maximum height of the berm/wall combination. It shall not exceed 11 feet as opposed to 18 feet--because that's what the original request was--as measured above the existing ground level of adjacent property. And,again,at the abutting property line of the adjacent property. So those are staffs conditions of approval. If you have any other questions,I'll be happy to answer. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. If that's the intent of that provision,why don't we just say that, that measurement's going to be from the abutting or the adjacent property line? MR.JOHNSON: Mr. Chair,Mr.Commissioner,certainly,we can add that language. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean,I think if that's the intent,that that ought to say that specifically: The ground level of the adjacent property. I think there's a lot of wiggle room in there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Did you see the new language? And do you feel the new language doesn't meet the intent of No. 8? I mean, it says 11 feet as measured from the top of the berm of--and an existing ground level of the adjacent property.And there's no reference to 18 feet any longer. So would that be considered consistent with what you're trying to say,just to--so I understand? MR.JOHNSON: Mr. Chair,I think it would be consistent. Obviously,I haven't had a chance to fully digest what the applicant proposed today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,you've had it for five minutes. MR.JOHNSON: But I'm really just trying to emphasize what the intent here is, is not to create a huge wall for anyone who lives or is on the adjacent property. Certainly,we can enter--you know, if the public--when it's time for the public to speak, if someone expresses a desire to have a taller or shorter wall,we can cross that bridge when we get to it,but just speaking,you know,on behalf staff,didn't want to have a wall that was too tall. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I understand,Eric. But what I'd like to do,though, is if you-- if your eight staff recommendations have been modified to some extent in this document that was handed out,maybe during break,or whatever,you could take a quick look so that we're not suggesting staff recommendations that have already been addressed.We don't have to repeat ourselves twice on that issue. MR.JOHNSON: Mr. Chair,I would be grateful to have the opportunity to review the document. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I know you can't do a thorough review in a few minutes,and even during break,that's pushing it,but we'll do the best we can to get through. MR.JOHNSON: That concludes my presentation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does anybody from the panel have any questions of staff at this time? We'll be talking with them throughout the day,I'm sure. I've got a few. Eric,on Page 4 of your staff report under conceptual master plan, it says--and it's involving the emergency vehicle access around the buildings. It says,modify the type of service of the stabilized sod subsurface for emergency vehicle assess. You do know--or do you know that that is not necessarily going to be sod. It could be Geotextile or some other element. And I think you are aware of it, but I just want to make sure you are. MR.JOHNSON: I would just like to make--or have the--if it would please you to have the applicant just come forward and describe what that surface would be just so we have that on the record. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. MR.HOOD: For the record,Fred Hood with Davidson. Page 20 of 62 November 19, 2015 The section that we're talking about,the stabilized subgrade for emergency access with natural surface,we're in the process of deciding what natural surface we're going to use,but there will either be a Turfstone or a Geoweb type of surface for the emergency access road. So with either of those,you'll be able to have a grass green sort of look for the surface of the emergency access road. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Eric, is that something that would meet with the consistency with your staff report? MR.JOHNSON: Not exactly. Stabilized sod to me is a pervious surface,that there are no impervious elements to it. Mr. Hood,are you suggesting that there would be some impervious elements to this area? MR.HOOD: I'm suggesting that Geoweb is pervious. I'm also suggesting that Turfstone is a pervious material. So the sod that would be on top or the grass that would be planted between the spaces that go beyond the actual stone or the Geoweb surface is pervious,yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let me go onto the next one. In your staff analysis,your--on Page 5,the last sentence to the paragraph reads,to address the concerns of overcrowding,excessive revelry,and/or outdoor noise that could adversely impact neighboring properties,the PUD document contains some of the following stipulations. I went through that,and I think they're all contained. Is there something there that you listed that isn't in the PUD document? MR.JOHNSON: Mr. Chair,I was--the reason why I used the word"some"was because I didn't want to make the mistake or be erroneous if I had omitted a full recognition, so that's really why the word "some"was used. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I just wanted to make sure I understood the reasoning. Let me--on Page 8 on your discussion of your analysis of Deviation No. 1,we get into the issue of the quantity of trees and the staggering,and that needs to be cleaned up,and I understand that that will happen. But in all that paragraph you don't say whether you're recommending approval or not, so could you tell us your intention is to recommend approval of that deviation? MR.JOHNSON: That's correct,Mr.Chair. The last sentence in that staff analysis and recommendation says, it is staffs opinion that all these components would create superior design that exceeds the minimum landscape requirements of the LDC. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.JOHNSON: When speaking with our staff member,Dan Smith,he feels that that is,in fact, true,and yes,we would recommend approval of that deviation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: On the next page,Deviation No. 3,last sentence, staff would only support the requested deviation for lawful driveway space. And my note is to explain,the applicant has offered what they believe may be the explanation. Did you have a chance to look at what they--the language they put in that handout? MR.JOHNSON: Again,Mr. Chair,that's something that--I'm not familiar with all the codes and regulations here at the county. With respect to what constitutes a lawful parking space,our development review staff would get into that at the time of SDP, Site Development Plan approval. Certainly,if there is an--if there is adequate space in front of that--in front of each driveway that's wide enough and long enough to accommodate a parked car,then so be it. If there isn't,then it's--staffs still maintaining that an off-street parking area be used. Now, if an off-street parking area is used,then staff would not be supportive of this requested deviation in that instance. But certainly between each driveway in front of the unit,that's a scenario where it would be acceptable to staff. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But the language that they tried to clean this up with seemed to indicate--it says--well, it's a long sentence, so I'll just read the language. They added,adjacent to parking areas with individual driveways in order to accommodate and maximize the required parking for each unit. What I believe that language is trying to do is minimize this application of Deviation 3 to those driveways. But could you take a look at that at your convenience today-- MR.JOHNSON: I would like to. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --before the meeting's over and let us know? Page 21 of 62 November 19,2015 MR.JOHNSON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think I'm just about finished,Eric. Just let me double-check everything. I do want to talk before--we'll go on break first,but I want to have a conversation--I know some of us will--with Dan Smith and with--John Walsh is here,our building director. I'd certainly like to talk with him,too. And with that,why don't we take a break now 15 -- 14 minutes,and come back at 10:40. (A brief recess was had.) (Mr. Eastman left the meeting room for the remainder of the day.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Everybody, if you'll please take your seats,we'll resume our meeting from the break. We left off with talking with staff over various issues on the staff report,and there were a couple of staff members here that I'd particularly like to speak to. I know some other members would as well. And the first one being John Walsh,who is our building director. And,Eric, if you could put that Principal Use 14 on the overhead. MR. WALSH: Good morning. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning,John. Thanks for attending today. You were present at an SDP review meeting in which I was there,the applicant,when we looked at the current SDP submittal in regards to the facilities that were submitted for SDP which would follow with the building permit versus the zoning discussion we had at that time,not just with you but with everybody in the room. Fire was there as well. And my concern has been, since that meeting in particular, is how do we assure through one department or another that the provision for this facility to have a recreational or private club component that Ray based his zoning opinion on be, in some way,certainty to come out like it's supposed to;meaning it's one thing to build a facility and make it available for boxes and a car,but it's another thing to go one step beyond and make it a facility that meets the private club portion of its required use for the location,because this location is not industrial,and it's not C4 or C5. And those designations do allow certain phases of limited self-storage;mini-warehouses,enclosed air conditioned,for example,I think, is a conditional use in a C4 district. What I wouldn't want to see is what we started to see on those plans. The plans were submitted,and they showed a shell building,and then you found out during the same day I was asking the applicant,how are you--how are we going to make this a club? And your--the architect,I think,responded to you that it was going to be up to the owners,and the applicant here basically said it's up to the owners. That may or may not get us where we need to be. And so I'm trying to figure out a way to assure that we get there. This language was offered today,and I think more particularly Item B here where it says indoor mezzanine recreation spaces,personal office space,and bathroom with individual units. Those are the "shall be provided"elements of this. Now,we have different levels of review. I already talked to the fire people,and I know they review strictly not necessarily by what's there other than what it's called. An assembly,I think, is what this would be called. From your building department review,from your building code,is there anything in 14B that would require them to make that a private club space? From your perspective? I mean-- MR. WALSH: Not that I'm aware of,no. I mean,there's nothing that--if you look at some of the photos-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.WALSH: --that they have,there's no building code element. It's basically what's referred to in the industry as lipstick and rouge.They can add a couple pieces of furniture,paint,and a picture. It's not a building code element. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And so you would still review this,though,not just as,I think storage and assembly,to kind of get those two components. But from your perspective, if you don't have a code that tells you how to construct assembly,assembly from you would be just an area for seating for people or-- Page 22 of 62 November 19, 2015 MR.WALSH: Right. There's different requirements. The code has a breakdown. I believe from the discussions that we've had,this is going to be a mixed use facility. It's going to have an assembly component,which is the recreational element that zoning is looking for,and also a storage component. I believe--and,again,I'm going off of memory in reading emails,that the primary occupancy is storage. That was the primary occupancy. The intent originally is to permit a shell building,and we do this in commercial projects. We also have done this in designing--designer-ready condos is another way of doing it,where they would submit a shell building. If they completed that with no buyer to finish the facility, it would get a certificate of completion.Then it would not get a certificate of occupancy,which means the shell is there,but nobody could use it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.WALSH: Then it would require another permit to come in to actually finish the space. Now,on the building side, if--some of the photos that were presented through all our discussions, most of it would be basically painting some tile and nonbuilding code related elements. So the zoning side would have to get involved on those type of reviews. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So we can't really rely on your department to enforce the private club or recreational component of this. That's something that we'd have to write language for that the zoning would then enforce so that when you reviewed it,you knew that was--the intent had been accomplished? MR.WALSH: Right. But when an applicant makes a submission for anything,a house,commercial project,whatever, it goes basically through several departments. Building is only one side of it,okay. Fire is also involved. So is planning and/or zoning. So that would be where that recreational use component would have to get caught. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.WALSH: There are paints that would trigger,there may be some fabrics that would trigger some work in our building code,but for the lack of a better phrase,there is no--you can have the same recreational use and not build anything with regards to the building code. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And that's been an issue we've been trying to-- MR. WALSH: Yeah. That's one of the bigger issues that we've been-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --tussled with for quite some time now. MR.WALSH: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Wafaa? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: How about deed restrictions or bylaws or--this,I assume, is going to be a condominium? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But we as a--we've not been able--we don't do--we can't enforce deed restrictions or bylaws. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I know you don't enforce them, but they could be covenants on the land,they could be part of the deal,and the homeowner association for Briarwood would be a party to that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,the applicant believes that their property isn't subject to some sections of the Briarwood association's documents. That's been something that came out in previous meetings, so--and they have a legal letter to that effect.I'm not sure how binding it is,but that's something that's on the table. MR. WALSH: That would also be outside of my purview. That would be a private covenant-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.WALSH: --that I have no authority of. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I had wanted to explore how far we could go with your department. I think I understand how far that is,and basically you don't have any way of enforcing the other component that's needed for this, so we'd have to go back to zoning language to make sure it's there. MR. WALSH: Yep. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Does anybody else have any questions of our zoning project director? Andy? Page 23 of 62 November 19,2015 COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'm just trying to get my arms around what you just said. And we're--your department wouldn't have any input on the finishes that would be going into it to make it something other than a storage--that's what you're saying,that there's nothing-- MR. WALSH: No. What happens is the--the intent was--or at least hasn't changed. They're going to build a shell building,and then each individual tenant is going to finish it out however they see fit,which would require another permit. Some of them will be combined,some of them wouldn't be. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. So that will be the process that we're--that's going to be used here? MR. WALSH: Yes. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. I'm sorry,then.I misunderstood. I thought that that wasn't going to be--that that's usually the process in a condominium development of some kind,but a residential one. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But the problem is,his review of the second-stage permitting,the finish-- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --may or may--he's not going to review it subject to the use that it's supposed to be. For example, if they come in and got a CC and wanted to finish the job,and the finishing of the job would have to show,as a minimum,what? MR. WALSH: Based on the pictures that were presented,a couple of couches,maybe a TV,and some paint,which-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So your department would look to see if a TV and a couch was there? MR. WALSH: There's no code requirement for it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's what I'm getting at. So from your department's perspective,on the second stage of the permitting,after the CC,before a CO,how can they--how do they convert a CC to a CO? MR. WALSH: By adding the occupancy to it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And from your department's perspective,what signifies occupancy on a plan? MR.WALSH: Something that indicates the use.You can have an open space,let's say a general purpose area. Let's say you removed all the chairs in this area,it would be an assembly use because it's all open. And based on the number of occupants of that space,you would have an assembly use because your occupant load is over 50. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So if they got the CC and came back in for a CO,as long as they showed access to that mezzanine and a rail up there to make it safe,would that be considered enough for your department to issue a CO? MR. WALSH: No,because technically it would--they could still classify that mezzanine as storage. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How do you un-classify it as storage from your department's perspective? MR. WALSH: The design professional would have to indicate what that use is going to be. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So he'd simply write on the plan future--private club use. MR. WALSH: It would basically--he'd sit there and say that the mezzanine had an assembly use and that the lower level had a storage use,or the overall space was a mixed use assembly and storage. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But they would have to show no improvements to make that happen;just the language would be enough for your department to issue the CO? MR.WALSH: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And therein lies the problem to get to the product that Ray had endorsed as a use on this property,and that's kind of what I wanted to understand. Okay. So we've got to work on zoning language. MR. WALSH: Yes. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And my understanding is they don't have to build the mezzanine to get the certificate of completion,right? They can go build it afterward? Because there's a limit; like, it's got to be at least 25 percent,and it can't be any more than 49 percent. MR.WALSH: Well,you have to watch the definition of mezzanine in our--in the building code. You can't go over,depending--there's certain circumstances,but typically it's usually one-third or up to Page 24 of 62 November 19,2015 one-half of a sprinkler building. This building is sprinkled,so they could go up to half. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Well,it--yeah, it says--they can go up to 49 percent,but it says they can go as low as a quarter. MR.WALSH: Yes,which is fine. That would-- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But they can build a mezzanine after the certificate of completion. MR.WALSH: Yep. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. MR.WALSH: Yep. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That's the only questions I've got of John. John,I appreciate your attendance here today. Thank you. MR. WALSH: Not a problem. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray,this kind of brings it back to you a little bit before we talk to Dan. You're the zoning director. Someone comes in with an SDP for this project and they show a--this facility with no mezzanine at this point because they--as John said,he wouldn't need it. Don't take that away. But this language in the PUD, indoor mezzanine,recreation spaces,personal office space,and bathroom within individual units. This language being in the PUD,would that require them to have a mezzanine at SDP,a personal office space at SDP--oh,no,bathrooms are already there. If those were,thus, required at SDP,would they be any more than notations on the plan like John said he'd accept as a building designation? MR.BELLOWS: Most Site Development Plans that I worked on have a floor plan where you would show the arrangement of those areas and what type of equipment and facilities. I think to be part of that,that would be shown and depicted on individual--or the Site Development Plan,but it would have to be still conceptual,because each individual unit owner,as they purchase and have their own architect designer amenitize the space,it's all going to be different from unit to unit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. BELLOWS: But they will show on the SDP floor plan that space used for club activities. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right,but-- MR.BELLOWS: Yeah. There's no guarantee what type of facilities,because it's going to change from unit to unit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And they--could they get an SD--what's the minimum they could put on an SDP to get it approved? Would the minimum on an SDP--which then goes to John after that and you're out of it. From a zoning perspective,would the minimum on that SDP give you the recreational component or the private club component,other than the words "private club area"? MR.BELLOWS: I believe it would just be the words. I don't think--because there's so much variation from unit to unit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then it falls back on validation of operation,which would have to be another-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I would think the answer to your question is no. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,I'm slowly-- MR.BELLOWS: In a roundabout way. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm slowly getting there,but I want to make sure it's carefully discussed so we-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: The site plan is going to show you driveway, landscaping, setbacks, location of building,turning lanes,all of the elements of a site plan. It's not going to get inside the building to tell you how the building is designed,whether it has a mezzanine or not. You know,they don't get into that type of architectural detail at the time of site planning,so you're correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Most of my questioning is rhetorical,too. So I'm trying to get Ray to express it so it might help us in our thought process of ways to solve the problem that you're expressing, especially since you're the zoning director and it's coming from you, so-- Page 25 of 62 November 19, 2015 MR.BELLOWS: And staff did provide some recommendations in the PUD document to require a certain amount of amenitized interior feature to support the concept that this is a private club and not a storage facility. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you,Ray. And next is Dan Smith. Dan Smith is our resident landscape reviewer and a number of other things on top of all that. Good morning,Dan. Thank you for being here today. You heard--or I saw you in the audience,and you actually tried to get up there for a minute.That discussion on the deviation involving the hedges and the supplemental trees,you were walking up to tell us something,and I had suggested we wait until we actually got into staff report,which is now. What were you going to suggest or talk to us about? MR. SMITH: Daniel Smith,principal planner,zoning. I think there was some confusion on the deviation. A D buffer that is required along the road right-of-way, if there's no internal parking that can be seen from the road,shrubs aren't required. So the shrub issue is only if there's exterior parking that you can actually see from the road. The whole idea is the headlights;there's no headlights going into the road or vice versa. In this case the deviation is warranted because trees are required to be maximum every 30 feet. This particular project has the trees kind of staggered, so they're going to be more than 30 feet. They're going to be in line with each other,but really they're going to be staggered,and they could be up to 40, 50 feet because some are going to be against the building and some are going to be closer to the road. So that's really what the deviation is all about. I look at that as more of an alternative design. I think it might be a more creative design,and I think that's--as opposed to having just trees like you would see at a normal commercial establishment. A lot of times they'll just put that 10-or 15-foot buffer. They'll stick it right at the edge of the property line. You'll just see a row of trees,and that's pretty much it. I think this is more of a--just an alternative that may--if I--because this is a little bit different,it may even be better than what we normally see. So that's kind of where the deviation,from staffs perspective,was a good thing, so... CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,the deviation was modifying the continuous hedge down to a partial hedge,and they were--but the concern I had was not so much whether that was good or bad. It was what does it mean. When they say"staggered,"do you have an idea of what that means so that--I mean,does it mean a hedge is going to be broken up and there will be sections 40 feet long missing every 120 feet,or-- MR. SMITH: That's correct. And,again,the hedge itself,that's not required. So they wouldn't be required to put the hedge in there to begin with. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SMITH: It was the trees that were going to be staggered that would not be every 30 feet.If you're to--and this is kind of the problem with code language. It's so specific,when you do some sort of an alternate that is still meeting that intent, it makes it real tough to--for a designer,especially a landscape architect who's trying to make a good-looking picture,a good-looking project. So,really,what's going on is--because I had the benefit of actually looking at the Site Development Plan when this was concurrent with the planned unit development,and I could see exactly what their intention was. And it was going to actually be more plant material than what normally would be required,but it was just going to be designed in a different way that our code requires. So,for lack of a better term, it's going to have more plant material than normally what's required. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Does the more plant material in your mind mean one more tree for a thousand feet? I mean,that's what I'm getting at.It could be not what we're expecting. And I'm sure that's not the intent,but I would like to make sure we have every "T"crossed and"I's" dotted in regards to the quantities that they're supposedly going to add. MR. SMITH: To make the Planning Commission,I guess,happy,maybe we could develop some drawings with some quantities that--moving forward with the staff report. That may be warranted in this particular case,because this is something that's different than I normally see in a PUD development. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think it's different for all of us. It's a whole new experience. So Page 26 of 62 November 19,2015 that's--you've answered my questions adequately. Anything else? Stan? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: One thing. Dan,I know when you build a parking lot,you have a certain number of spaces you have to put in,and you can go above and beyond that,but each individual space still had to meet code requirement for the space. When you go above and beyond landscaping,does the individual landscape elements you put in have to meet any special code requirement? MR. SMITH: No. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. That's what I thought. MR. SMITH: As far as landscape review,we look for minimum code. And if they go above and beyond that--we can make recommendations. In a lot of case--you know, in some cases trees are closer to the building than what they should be. I can make recommendations. But above and beyond what general code is, I really don't have an authority to--I can make a suggestion;that's about it. But I can't require that. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And you can say,this might be the wrong tree for this area because it's going to get real big and throw out a lot of shade-- MR. SMITH: That's correct. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: --and drop nuts on the cars and whatever. MR. SMITH: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Dan,thank you very much. MR. SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does anybody else have any questions of staff? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Fred,I'd like to--because we're going to go to audience next. And I'd rather--I want to run down the list of issues that we seem to have on the table before the public speaks so they know what we're in--what we've already kind of gotten to as far as some issues. MR.HOOD: Sure thing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There's a maximum number of units that won't exceed 148. MR. HOOD: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There's--and these are--some of these issues are ones that we haven't talked about because I was waiting till now.You're not going to have any balconies. The balconies were taken out. MR.HOOD: No balconies. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The conditional use being moved into a principal use, it's only for the principal use subject to the standards that have been reiterated here in all these pages that we have. MR.HOOD: And Exhibit B's master plan,yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And from Ray's perspective,could this any way--and let's say there's 15 of those buildings. If these buildings--the whole thing went--didn't work and the buildings were vacated,could those buildings be utilized by 15 different private clubs? Because we've moved into a principal use,and that's a concern,and I want to make sure we address it. MR.BELLOWS: I think it's conceivable that it could be unless you tighten up what type of private club, such as this automotive type of high-end personal recreational vehicle;otherwise,other private clubs would fall in under that. Now,we also had the intention of leaving as a conditional use,generally speaking,other private clubs that would have to go through a conditional use. I just want to make sure that this particular use,as listed--what is it, 14 in the-- MR.JOHNSON: Number 14. MR.BELLOWS: -- 14 is real specific to this particular application. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I mean, it's as specific as what's on the overhead. MR.BELLOWS: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And so what I'm suggesting is,because it doesn't say private clubs for Page 27 of 62 November 19,2015 automobile use or whatever you want to--luxury automobile storage,whatever you want to call it,does that mean it can be opened up to more than what we intend it to be if it was vacated? MR.BELLOWS: Well,we'd say it's consistent with Exhibit B,which helps define it somewhat. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,doesn't Exhibit B just provide a site plan with 15 or more buildings, and any one of those,then,could be separate private clubs? MR.BELLOWS: I think if that's a concern,we would tighten it up to be more specific to this. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I think it will be and I think it is,and I think we just need to make sure. Because when this was a conditional use, if it changed in the future, it would still have to go through a CU process. MR.BELLOWS: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By moving it to a principal use,we've elevated it to a by-right process a little easier than a CU process. MR.BELLOWS: Well,we still have as a conditional use the private clubs for other things that aren't this specific for this type of use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I understand. Okay. We talked about the watercraft engines and when the hours of flushing will be,and that's going to be finalized or worked out as the day goes on. We've also talked about the parking in front of units. When we hear the--when everything's solved today and when we get towards the end,we've got to talk about how that staff stipulation will or will not work. Maximum number of club members per unit is stated to be no more than 10. In the previous renditions,Fred,there was a discussion of special events. You said you were not going to have any special events. I didn't see that in this one. MR.HOOD: No special events. We can add it,but we don't want to have any special events. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And what about the number of guests? Did we have a cap on the number of guests? We have a cap on units. We have a cap on members. What about guests? MR.HOOD: We have a cap on,I believe it's number--bear with me,but we have a cap that defines how many people can be in each unit at once,and it's 10. I'll give you the code reference. It should be 6.3.7-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But,Fred, is-- MR.JOHNSON: D as in Delta. MR.HOOD: --D as in Delta. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that ten per member? MR.HOOD: No,no. Ten-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You have 10 members per--maximum for a unit. MR.HOOD: For a unit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Each can have 10 guests.That's 10 people per unit. MR.HOOD: So if you had one person come-- if you had one owner come,they can only have nine guests along with them in their unit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So maximum unit occupancy is 10? MR.HOOD: Ten,correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Maybe that's a better way to say it. MR.HOOD: That's 6.3.7.D. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wafaa? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: So where would they park? MR.HOOD: The guests? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Yeah. If I'm an owner and I invite nine and everybody else does, where are they going to park? MR.HOOD: It is the assumption of the developer that if anybody is coming onto this property with their owner,they will have to come with that owner. So it would probably be like a car-pooling situation where you grab,you know,five or six of your friends,and you jump-- Page 28 of 62 November 19, 2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ladies and gentlemen,I ask,please don't interrupt the speaker. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I don't think this is a logical or practical assumption to make. I would think you can average it out and you can say maybe the 10 guests will come in five cars or something like that. Just like when you count seating--the parking requirement for seating in a theater or a church,you make the assumption that for every two,three seats you have one car. So there needs to be a logical explanation to that problem. MR.HOOD: I understand. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. MR.HOOD: There's two ways that we can look at this. There's parking that is available at the clubhouse--the clubhouse area on the master plan, so that could be one area that they could park. We're not precluding anyone from--as you would do in a residential neighborhood,to be able to park on the shoulder of the road. We've got a 30-foot wide with pavement area. They could pull up along the side of the road, like if you were to have a UPS delivery or somebody was having a party. It's a temporary situation. It's not for the long-term parking of vehicles. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. Sony I interrupted you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,no. That's why--please,any time,Wafaa,you have questions,just let me know. I try to lead off discussion,and if we want to go off there,that's fine. Skelly Road,only for emergency access,and you were going to modify 6.7 to reflect that,but you started talking about--something about a fire access turnaround. MR.HOOD: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I'd like some clarity on that so that if you're telling us there's a cost involved to the HOA to meet a condition created by the way your development's going to operate Skelly Road,I think we need to know that. MR.HOOD: Okay. So first--there's a couple of items that we should clarify there. I'm going to put up an aerial so that we can discuss this. Okay. Currently there is a cul-de-sac at the end of Skelly Road that goes onto the developer's proposed property. What I was mentioning earlier with modifying or removing Section 6.3.7 of the PUD is if the--if we wanted to discuss removing that connection from Skelly Road onto the community commercial property,that that cul-de-sac would no longer be there. So if we would have--for purposes of fire circulation for the remainder of the Briarwood property, some sort of a hammerhead or a turnaround would have to be provided on the north side of the property,because it would no longer be on the southern community commercial property. I was just trying to make that point that if we got rid of it,that goes away. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But the project was planned to have it on that property; is that correct? MR.HOOD: That's correct. That is correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And because your plan can't accommodate it,you're telling the association they've got to pay to put it on--I mean,because you're going to be requiring property being taken out somewhere else. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: That's not-- MR.HOOD: No. What I'm saying is is that-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,why don't you--what are they saying? Karen-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No. He said before that it was the association--the Briarwood community wants it closed. MR.HOOD: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I know. That's not the issue,not whether it's closed or not. I know it's going to be--I know that's the--I know that they've already said they'll close it,but if they close it,they're required to replace the fire turnaround. They're saying they're not going to replace it on their property. And if they close it,they're going to have to put it on the Briarwood property. MR.HOOD: It would have to be--what our-- Page 29 of 62 November 19, 2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's the issue. MR.HOOD: What our contention is is if it goes away on our property--it's on our property right now for whatever reason. I don't know if it was ever supposed to be designed that way. I don't know if it was. But with this property's project going forward,if the neighbors do not want that interconnection there any longer and we cut it off at that border,then we have to provide another fire turnaround somewhere north of that border if we're not going to do it on the southern portion of ours. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: When you say"we,"you mean-- MR.HOOD: We as in--we as in the developer.If we're not going to provide it on our property, it's going to have to go somewhere if we cut it off. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you're going to provide the turnaround and pay for it? MR.HOOD: I didn't say that,no. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,who's the "we"? MR.HOOD: What I'm saying is, if that request goes forward,we as in the developer currently for this project and/or Briarwood homeowners association will have to decide where that replacement area is going to be. It's more so on the Briarwood side of the equation. We can discuss with the developer how we pay for that,how we provide that,but the land area is--what I'm trying to get at is that if we're going to provide--if we're going to cut that off,where are we going to put that turnaround? And the only logical place, if we're not going to do it on our property,which we don't have any intention of doing right now, would be to be on the north side. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Just a quick question.In my understanding,that one alternative is to leave it where it is. MR.HOOD: That's correct. We can do that. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And the developer would be okay with that. MR.HOOD: Well, leaving it as it is and as we've designed it where it goes into a T instead of a cul-de-sac now. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. MR.HOOD: That would be the option to leave it how it is right now. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. MR.HOOD: The other option is, if they want it gone,then we have to figure out what that looks like. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. And what you're saying is that that's a decision that's essentially up to the community whether they want it removed or not. MR.HOOD: That's correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: The second question I had is,is the cul-de-sac right now part of a dedicated roadway of some kind or what-- MR.HOOD: There is no easement. There is no right-of-way over that cul-de-sac on the community commercial property. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. MR.HOOD: It's just there. That's kind of what I was getting at,where I don't know if it was designed that way or if it was supposed to be that way but there's no-- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It's just there. MR.HOOD: There's no easement or right-of-way that's documented. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Could you put your site plan back on so we could--and maybe bring it up so we can take a look at that area. Okay. And now,your facility is gated,right? MR.HOOD: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Where would the gates be in that location? Were you planning to gate off Skelly Road? MR.HOOD: There will be--there will be basically what we call an evac gate that will allow emergency vehicles on the southern side of the border that would allow access to Skelly Road if the fire trucks or EMS or fire--or if police wanted to go north and/or south. Page 30 of 62 November 19,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. You have to explain to me then. So your assumption is that if someone wanted to go from your property to the development,they could get through that emergency access only lane? MR.HOOD: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.HOOD: Someone--when you say"someone,"the only someones that can come through that-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Emergency. MR.HOOD: --portion is emergency,that's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.HOOD: Anybody else is going to have to come through the Radio and/or Livingston access points. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And so if you can exit that,can you enter? MR. HOOD: Yes. If you're emergency personnel,you can exit and/or enter. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then if that's--and that looks like--I mean,that's a hammer--that's enough of a hammerhead for the fire department to work. So where is--why is there a concern over there,then? MR.HOOD: The concern that was brought to me was,we don't want a connection between the two if this is going to go forward. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But fire requires the connection; is that right? MR.HOOD: Fire is requiring the connection. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then it's not a--it's a moot point. MR.HOOD: I thought I would bring it up because it was--it was asked of me. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We talked about the order of construction phasing,and that's something that we'll have to work on depending on how the rest of the meeting goes. We corrected a square-footage calculation for 40 percent maximum. We added a condition that there be no roof use. We're going to be cleaning up the way Deviation No. 1 is written in regards to the landscape materials. There's going to be a setback--internal setback on internal drives from the pavement at 15 feet or greater,and that's subject to further discussion about staffs recommendation about a parking space. There was some added language on 10.02.03.D,which,Ray, did you get time to look at that or,Eric, during the break on how that fits or doesn't fit what it--I haven't got that section of the code with me. MR.BELLOWS: Yes. I pulled it up,and it's basically referring--it's part of the SDP language. I'd much prefer us to reference the architectural review language provisions of 5. MR.HOOD: 5.05.08? MR.REISCHL: 5.05.08. MR.BELLOWS: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Because one of the conditions was they would agree to our architectural standards,and we got out of that discussion of internal review. So I think then we need to do--is it 5.05.08? Yeah 5.05.05 is automobile stations. I keep thinking of that because it's so relevant. So 5.05.08 would be the section that would not be able to--that you'd be subject to under current standards,not as we go different in the future. MR.HOOD: I'm okay with that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Staff Recommendations 1 and 2 were--well,we've got to discuss some of the staff recommendations. Three possibly is modified;4 possibly is modified; 5 would consider it a phasing plan;and then change the hours in No. 6 from potentially 6 a.m.to 8 p.m. And that's all,obviously,up to discussion. MR.HOOD: Three,4,and 5 we need to discuss? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,the one concerning the staff recommendation concerning the depth of the--the one space outside definitely needs to be discussed. MR.HOOD: So that will be also with No. 1. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And then the last thing that I have as a note,emergency access service to be Turfstone or Geoweb pervious materials. Page 31 of 62 November 19, 2015 And those are the points that we've gleaned in addition to the changes that were in this document that were read on record so far in this discussion today. I just wanted to make you aware of it,but I also want to make the public aware of it so when they come up and talk to us,the issues that are bothering them,they can certainly express themselves knowing what issues we've been talking about, so... Anybody else have any questions of anybody before we go into public? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Ray or Eric--those members of the public that wish to speak,first of all, if you weren't sworn in when everybody stood up earlier,please let us know because we need you to be sworn in. Secondly,when we ask you to speak,you can use either microphone. You need to state your name for the record,and I'd like to know what part of Briarwood you live in,what street,what area, if you don't mind. And then you're limited to five minutes. We have some flexibility in that. We ask especially that you don't be redundant,that we focus on new issues if you can. If you agree with your previous speaker,you can simply say,I agree with the previous speaker. That carries equal weight. So with that in mind,Eric will call the speakers to come up to the podium. And Mr.Pires? Tony,are you here? Did you want any--I mean, since you represent so many people here, it might expedite things--if you wanted to speak first,you're more than welcome to.And I think he's going to take us up on that. MR.PIRES: I'm sorry? MR.JOHNSON: Mr.Chair--that's fine. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: He didn't give you a speaker slip,did he? MR.JOHNSON: That's correct. MR.PIRES: I gave it to Ray. Ray must have hidden it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,usually at the end of the speakers I ask if there's anybody else to speak,and we'll assume Tony is one of those individuals. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That was another one of those rhetorical questions,right? Does Tony want to speak first. MR.BELLOWS: He put Anthony on the speaker slip. MR.JOHNSON: He put Anthony on there. MR.PIRES: I've been disinvited from many other places,but-- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: She's copying all this down,you know? MR.PIRES: I know she is. Thank you,Mr.Chairman,members of the Planning Commission. And,Mr.Chairman, if I could have some indulgence and some consideration for some additional time on behalf of the association. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Since you represent a group,we normally do that. I just ask that you--I mean,I know you can be long-winded at times, so let's try to be succinct if we can,Tony. MR.PIRES: Be short-winded. Thank you very much. As mentioned in the correspondence that I emailed to you-all,I represent the Briarwood Property Owners Association on this particular matter,and they are opposed and it is opposed to this application. A number of the residents and owners have taken the time out of their days to be here today.And if I could ask those who are from Briarwood in opposition to this project,please stand so the Planning Commission can see. Thank you all very much. As you can see,that there is a substantial amount of opposition within the community. And I also applaud them for the patience this time and last time to the multiple hours of this hearing and also applaud the Planning Commission for taking their time in this application. Initially,I would like to reiterate--and for the record,I've submitted my prior correspondence of August 12th and 14th,which I think the staff included in your 555 pages,and also incorporate the November 16,2015,letter that I emailed to the planning commissioners and I think some staff. One other item from a perspective I think we need to put on the record. We disagree that the Page 32 of 62 November 19, 2015 applicant has even shown adequate authority to bring this application forward. I know there might be some disagreement from the County Attorney's Office. The only affidavit I have seen from the current landowner allowing this application to go forward is one dated August 19,2015. If I can put it on the visualizer. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Do you have a copy to leave with the court reporter? MR.PIRES: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.PIRES: And if you could--thank you. And I think what's important in this,if you could bring it highlighted to the yellow,that's--the current owner is Lowe's Home Centers,LLC,and the applicant does have a contract. The contract extension was included in your packet and materials;however,there's no further affidavit of authorization from Lowe's Home Center other than this. And it says it authorizes and grants permission to Premier Auto Suites of Naples,LLC,the contract purchaser,to submit the attached--the date is August 19th--attached application for amendment to PUD--PUDA as described in a certain letter including the attachments thereto,from Frederick Hood,AICP, senior planner of Davidson Engineering,dated March 2,2015. And that's the application. Now,since that time there have been a substantial number of other applications,and I think the most recent was October of--and I think the staff also received materials November of this year,and today we have some additional changes that--I think it's unfortunate that no one was made aware of those changes until the hearing today. Again,this project seems to be being asked to be heard on the fly and considered on the fly,which I think is a dis--it's really difficult for the community and the residents and the Planning Commission to evaluate. But I think initially this application should be denied on its face because there is no proper authorization from the landowner. And I'd like to ask the Planning Commission--I'm sure they want to ask guidance from their counsel on that,but-- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I ask a quick question? And your position on that is because this affidavit was dated or it references the March 2,2015,letter from Fred Hood? MR.PIRES: Correct. And it references an application attached--and it's an August 19th.And what you have in front of you is not the--any of the materials referenced in this affidavit. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. But it does say,and further to submit those items necessary to support the PUDA application as may be needed to obtain permits associated with development and zoning. MR.PIRES: Correct,but the attached application for amendment to PUDA is a PUDA. So in other words,whatever is attached to this affidavit is the PUDA application. And what we have since then are substantial revisions,and so there is a substantially revised PUDA application, is our contention. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And,Heidi,this question has been previously,I guess,asked,or I know I mentioned it to you as an issue,and you seemed resolved that this was an adequate affidavit for today proceedings. Are you still in that mindset? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I'll defer to Mr. Stone because I've let him handle this one. MS. STONE: I do believe--I do believe that this is adequate because the application for PUDA has been a continuation since that initial application that was submitted. So we consider this entire process part of the same application so we can trace it back to that initial request. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And,Tony,as you go along and we have--we answer a question or two of yours,I want to just make a clarification. I know your comment about making changes on the fly,but so far what's happened today is no different than we handle other projects where we have to modify, compromise,and stipulate throughout the hearing,and then we end up with a list of stipulations at the end of the hearing. We've been doing that for years, so... MR.PIRES: And,Mr. Chairman,I understand that. I'm aware of that. And I guess the other difficulty with that is there was a neighborhood information meeting October 12th,and between that date and today we have heard nothing from the applicant as far as receiving any revisions. And,again,that just further amplifies the--I'll guess the--not really knowing what this project is and the difficulty in trying to evaluate it Page 33 of 62 November 19,2015 and also adequately advise how to proceed. In this particular project,again,Briarwood is a well-established primarily residential community, over a thousand persons residing in 558 homes. The property that's the subject matter of this PUD amendment is designated zoned as commercial--community commercial,and it's been designated,as you-all are aware, since 1976. Storage or warehouse uses,as we've discussed many,many times,are not allowed in the community commercial areas of Briarwood PUD. We believe that what is being proposed is storage. What is being proposed is warehouse.These proposed new principal uses,which we keep changing the name--and I guess this is the definitive name now. We're going back to the private club--currently couched as private clubs and private parking garages are the exact same problematic uses as those that were previously submitted and designated as upscale storage facilities,in our opinion. An interesting enough,as stated by the applicant and the agent on August 20,2015,in the minutes of the Planning Commission that day,Page 47,Mr. Hood stated,they are--more than 60 percent of the floor area that's within these units is going to be for vehicle storage. Now,again,that becomes the principal use is storage,and we all know that that is not allowed.That's been made very clear. I have a copy of that for the record also and would like to incorporate all those minutes as part of this meeting today. The proposed new uses and increase in floor area and land area for the new uses in our opinion are not appropriate for the Briarwood PUD and should be denied. We recommend--at the end we'll recommend and ask that you recommend denial to the Board of County Commissioners. The uses belong in industrial park or business park,not in Briarwood. I was struck by the video,as that reminded me of every other storage facility I've driven through in every other industrial area of Collier County.You know,the sameness,the oneness,and that's what that reminded me of. There are storage facilities. The current Briarwood PUD has private clubs and private garages only as conditional uses. And as defined in the Land Development Code,a conditional use is a use that would not be appropriate, generally,or without restriction throughout a particular zoning district or classification but which,if controlled as to number,area, location,or relation to the neighborhood would promote the public,health,safety,welfare, morals,order,comfort,convenience,appearance,or the general welfare. By the trick of trying to make this a permitted use,they are trying to remove the protection afforded to the community that--controlled as to number,controlled as to area,controlled as to location,controlled as to relation to the neighborhood would promote the public,health,safety,welfare,morals,order,comfort, convenience,appearance,or the general welfare. None of that's been shown. None of that can be shown in this particular instance. Consistent with this approach,I've outlined in my letter in a search of the online Land Development Code,I did not find any zoning districts of the standard zoning districts where private clubs are listed as a principal use. I did find private clubs listed as conditional uses in the community facility district,the CF district,the residential tourist district,the RT,and in the Vanderbilt Beach residential tourist overlay. Those are the only areas where I found public--private clubs allowed as conditional uses,and no districts were they allowed as permitted uses. Again, if this proposed amendment is allowed,moving these uses from the conditional use category to permitted use,the new permitted uses,along with a substantial increase in floor area and land area,would no longer be controlled as to number or area as originally envisioned by having them as conditional uses at the inception of the Briarwood PUD. We've heard this discussion with regards to the maximum number of users,maximum number of owners. What's interesting is if you have--if you have 1,000-square-foot units--now,they've indicated they're only going to have 148 units,and they agreed finally,after much resistance--they refused earlier to put any maximum number in the PUD. There's emails to county staff saying that.Today they've indicated, apparently,that they've agreed to 148 maximum units. But you can have 10--it says 10 members or 10 owners. You can have multiple clubs. Each club Page 34 of 62 November 19, 2015 could have multiple members of those clubs. And when they talk about guests,again,there's no prohibition--a limitation on number of guests. And it talks about occupancy in a unit.You have outside the unit,then you have the parking issues,you have the traffic issues. What they have done in this instance is taken this use,this area,and tried to minimize its impact from the TIS perspective,trying to couch it as a private club where,in reality, it still is storage. And making it a private club still has substantial issues. Remember that these are the exact same uses. They've tried to add a recreational component,sort of, to each unit with the exact same uses as this board heard on August 20th. They were storage. My understanding also is staff was to evaluate around the country,go around the country and do an evaluation,see how these were labeled. Page 76 of 90 of the August 20th Planning Commission meeting, Chairman Strain said to Mr.Bellows,as a result of this meeting today--and this issue has become one of the most prominent--could you approach it in the same manner, look at the other locations in the country where these possibly are used and see if there's any hint of what an SIC,or standard industrial classification code--it's a way to grade uses. And then there's another one called North American Industrial Classification Systems. Between those two, somewhere in the country there must be a label put on these. Now,that label will help us understand where the thing fits,and it may help the argument on whether it fits in that corner or not,or it may help it for the developer. One way or another,we ought to look it up and see what--where this has crossed before. Mr.Bellows: Yeah,I don't see a problem with staff working with the applicant to research all of the various codes across the country,do a search online. We'll come up with something. I think that document--I have not seen it.I think it would have been invaluable to this Planning Commission in order to be able to determine what this use really is,because we still think it's a storage use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't want to forget things as you talk, so if you don't mind me interrupting. MR.PIRES: No, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray,that's a good point. I did mention that last time. Did you--or did you get together with the applicant and you guys come up with some kind of matrix showing how these are looked at in other parts of the country? MR.BELLOWS: Staff did a lot of research on it,including myself,and we've incorporated some of those features into staff recommendations,but we didn't produce a separate document. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And what I had envisioned is a reference to an SIC code or,at even the least,maybe the uses that--where these normally are found in other jurisdictions,under what kind of zoning. We didn't have anything-- MR.BELLOWS: There is no SIC code for the use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So elsewhere in the country,you checked, and nobody's found--nobody's utilized an SIC code as a comparable? MR.BELLOWS: Well,there's no SIC code for this use,so whatever is being used is a hybrid. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wafaa,did you have anything? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Tony, in your view,what's the difference between reviewing this request as a provisional use or reviewing it as a PUD amendment? It seems to me like they have been through a lot of lengthy,detailed,carefully oriented review,and there's a lot of conditions that appear to be--appear that they will be imposed on it if it's approved. So in my mind I don't see the distinction between the provisional use review and this review.Could you help me with that? MR.PIRES: We think there's a substantial difference when the provisional use,I don't think,was ever intended to apply and make the whole site what is now a former provisional use,a permitted use. And I don't believe there has been that evaluation with regards to--it's not controlled.It says,the evaluation is controlled as to number,area, location,of relation to the neighborhood would promote the public health. There's been no analysis of promoting the public health. Promote the public health, safety,welfare,morals, Page 35 of 62 November 19, 2015 order,comfort,convenience,appearance,or the general welfare. There has been no such analysis. And that analysis goes away in the permitted use category. That's one of the issues. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. MR.PIRES: Yes,sir. As I've indicated in my correspondence,we believe the applicant's merely playing a game charade,a word charade,cloaking the real uses,upscale storage facilities that was used last time, in the mantel and masquerade of words calling it now a private club and private parking garage in order to convince the staff, the Planning Commission,and the Board of County Commissioners that these uses are compatible and should be allowed as permitted uses. As further indication that the proposed new permitted uses are exactly the same as the previously up--named upscale storage facilities,the supplemental staff report for today's hearing clearly states that the PUD fmdings and rezone findings in the previous staff report,quote,are hereby restated and reincorporated herein. Now,they changed the term from upscale auto storage facilities to private clubs and garages,but the staff stated in Page 6 of 11 of your supplemental staff report for today,the PUD findings and rezone findings in the previous staff report are hereby restated and reincorporated herein. At Page 15 of the reinstated and restated and reincorporated staff report for the August 20th Planning Commission hearing under rezone fmdings, staff admits and advises vigorously that,one,the subject principal use is not well defined in both the LDC and the PUD document;two,the new principal use that is being requested with this amendment is unique;three,the principal use is not well defined and,therefore,not permitted anywhere. That has not been modified in the supplemental staff report. In addition,if the proposed amendments,in our opinion,are approved,there will be no limitations as to the number or types of private clubs. With 16 different buildings,there could be 16 different private clubs, each with one building.With 148 different units,there could be 148 different private clubs,each with one unit with no stated maximum number--and we heard that's addressed today--there could be at least 148 clubs in this area,and each club can have a substantial number of members. And a member of a club could be an LLC. That LLC,that corporation,that partnership would have members,would have owners,would have other members,and so you have this expanding base. And so,again,that gets back to the TIS. But we believe the new uses are inconsistent with the Growth Management Plan. They really are storage. Growth Management Plan Policy 5.4 states that new developments shall be compatible with and complementary to the surrounding land uses.Complementary has been defined as completing something else or making it better; serving as a complement;use of two things when each adds something to the other or helps to make the other better; going together well,working well together,and combining in such a way as to enhance or emphasize the qualities of each other or another. No such analysis has been performed on the new principal uses,the proposed revised master plan,or the intensification of coverage or square footage. Neither the application or the staff report or supplemental report provide any information or analysis as to how the requested new principal uses,the proposed revised master plan,or the intensification of coverage or square footage are complementary to the surrounding land uses. And as I mentioned before,the proposed uses we believe are industrial district uses,warehouse storage facility,much more appropriately located in a stand-alone business park district,research and technology park,or industrial district,not in a community commercial area. We previously provided--I provided it again in my package--other places. My Other Place in North Naples;Hyde Park Storage in Daytona Beach;Hyde Park Storage Suites in Cornelius,North Carolina. And from all those photographs,you can see they're pretty much industrial-like settings. And the applicant's agent has also mentioned storage facilities in Chandler,Arizona. There are two such facilitates that I found; one on Okatia(phonetic)Avenue,I guess,and one on Enterprise Street or Avenue. I attached satellite photographs of those two facilities from Map Quest as Exhibits F1 and F2.And it is clear from those two facilities neither of the two Chandler,Arizona,facilities are located in residential Page 36 of 62 November 19, 2015 communities. They're located in heavy commercial industrial-type settings. What I'd also like to make part of the record is some material involving those Chandler,Arizona, facilities. This is off a website. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to need copies for the court reporter to make them part of the record. MR.PIRES: Yes,I have copies. I'm making my separate stack for both court reporters,and also I have handouts for the Planning Commissioners that I can pass around. This is a series of documents off the website,off the Internet,regarding Chandler,Arizona. The first one,pages from September 28,2015,it's called Garage Town,Arizona. More than just a storage complex. It's storage that you own with storage ownership. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tony,I don't mean to interrupt. I want to make sure the applicant has a copy of this as well. So if--Eric,when you have an extra copy or-- MR.PIRES: I will provide the courtesy that they did not extend to me,yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. They did--after we asked,you got a copy,and I want to make sure they have a copy to be fair. MR.PIRES: I never got a copy. I--Stan Chrzanowski kindly provided me a copy,and I took photographs of it with my iPad. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So you have a copy of it? MR.PIRES: Yes,but not from the applicant.I just want to make sure. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.JOHNSON: Mr.Chair? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. MR.JOHNSON: I have one copy left. That could be divided. MR.PIRES: I have multiple copies. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: As long as--the court reporter needs to have one,Eric,and then please provide one to Fred. MR.PIRES: I already provided one to Fred,and I have one for the court reporter. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Eric,you can have mine. MR.JOHNSON: We're fine. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: This was in an email,right? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't know. MR.PIRES: No. This was not in email. And,again,Garage Town Storage Condominium ownership means--and it's the ultimate storage space. And,again,this is the example of the facility that the applicant stated was something that they were planning on doing. It's a storage facility. And also on their website,the word"club" does not show up at all in all of the materials on their website. They talk about housing their precious vehicles. And,again,that's--housing to me is storage. And, again,that is the use,and it is a use that we would submit is not allowed and should be denied. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And,Tony,I need you to start wrapping it up. MR.PIRES: Yes,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You've had a healthy 20,25 minutes. MR.PIRES: I'd like to--briefly, some of the new items that came up today. The issue with regards to the maximum occupancy load. Again,for sake of this discussion again,we--my clients oppose granting this requested amendment. It's a storage use,and it's going to be an intensive storage use,as we see it, because of the--you can have--it's going to become a storage club. I mean,you have a number of members that can apply,you have no cap on the number of clubs,and you have enforcement issues, and you have the utilization is that of a storage facility. Based upon all that--and,again,I've not had a chance,unfortunately,to really analyze what was handed out today. I know the Planning Commission had a number of questions--we'd still request--respectfully request that this application in its entirety be denied. And if I could have a moment to hand items to the court reporter and any questions you may have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We may have some questions.Wafaa? Page 37 of 62 November 19,2015 COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Question for Tony. MR.PIRES: Yes. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Do you think this proposed use is more harmful to the community than a cocktail lounge? MR.PIRES: There are a number of uses in there,the community commercial,for which may actually be amenities for that neighborhood because they would not have to leave and go on the arterial highway in order to obtain and utilize various community commercial services. So my answer is no. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: So your answer is no? MR.PIRES: That's correct. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Diane first and-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Tony,I have a question for you. I know this is in their Briarwood PUD,but I understand this property was sold from the developer many years ago to a commercial real estate entity. Is this true? MR.PIRES: I think it's been sold a couple of times. I think the original developer sold it to a group--I think,I could be wrong,but Todd Gates was involved in it. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yep. MR.PIRES: I think Todd was involved and sold it to Home--to Lowe's. That's my understanding. COMMISSIONER EBERT: To Lowe's. Okay. So he had this at one point but he decided to take this portion of the property and sell to a commercial real--is not Gates more of a commercial real estate? MR.PIRES: I believe so. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. So Gates then sold it to Lowe's? MR.PIRES: Correct. That's my understanding. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Well,I'm just trying to understand this,too. So he actually had control over this at the beginning,but he decided to-- MR.PIRES: No. The original developer--I can't recall the name. I'm not sure if it was McAlpine or-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: McAlpine,yeah. MR.PIRES: --had it,and apparently they sold it to the Gates group,and then Gates sold it to Lowe's,is my understanding. That's my fuzzy recollection. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay,okay. I was just checking on this. I thought it was Spinelli that had sold it to the Gates. MR.PIRES: I don't believe so. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions of Tony? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tony? MR.PIRES: Yes. CI(AIRMAN STRAIN: Did the applicant come back to you since our last meeting for--I know they did for a presentation. Did you guys offer any written suggestion? I know I got a letter,as everybody else--or an email,as everybody here did,that was,I think, 51 pages long. It included backup from you, stating your objections. Did you give any of that to the applicant ahead of time so they had the benefit of that for today's meeting so they could have tried maybe to meet some of those conditions? MR.PIRES: No,I did not. I provided it to staff,which was the same process by which I received documents. I did not receive any from the applicant. I received everything from staff between August 20th--or September 23 --24th and today. From September 24th to today I received nothing from the applicant. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So today's disbursement by them of the changes they've offered is not much different than your disbursement to them of the letter that you sent out to everybody? MR.PIRES: I respectfully disagree. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.PIRES: Again, I don't know if staff provided them a copy of my letter,but the only way I was Page 38 of 62 November 19,2015 receiving documents was public records request to staff,which I had to make in order to receive the documents. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But your clients have not in any time submitted a list of things that they would need to see corrected involving this use on the property because,basically,they just don't want the use; is that-- MR.PIRES: That's correct. COMMISSIONER EBERT: And then we received your letter two days ago-- MR.PIRES: Yes. COMMISSIONER EBERT: --that's correct? So nobody's--we--I mean, it wasn't in our packet either. MR.PIRES: Yeah. And recognizing I didn't receive anything from county staff until--well,the county staff received a fmal submittal November 5th or 6th,I believe,and I had to have a chance to go through the 555 pages in order to properly draft the correspondence to you-all. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Heidi? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Just to correct the record,Mr.Johnson had been providing documents to Mr.Pires on a regular basis. I think he missed one email that I sent and,therefore,we told Mr.Pires that he needed to do a formal public records request to ensure that he received all the documents. But he had been getting documents on a regular basis from Mr.Johnson. MR.PIRES: Well,I wouldn't say regular. It was-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I understand. MR. PIRES: --large gaps,and I received nothing from the applicant. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: One of those things where you may never agree,but we understand. Anybody else? If not,we'll go to the next public speaker. Thank you,Tony,for your presentation. MR.PIRES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Eric,you want to call the next public speaker. By the way,we will go on forward with public speakers until 12 o'clock. We'll take a one-hour break and come back and finish up after that and then go into debate and finish the project today. MR.JOHNSON: Okay. Jeanette Santomieri, S-a-n-t-o-m-i-e-r-i--I'm sorry--m-i-e-r-i. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think she's got the hint. MR.JOHNSON: Okay. And the next one after that would be Charles Berry, if we decide to move beyond that in this segment. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,we will. We can hear two or three people. MS. SANTOMIERI: Thank you,Eric. Thank you,Mr.Chairman,Commissioners. My name is Jeanette Santomieri. I live at 834 Cold Stream Court in a single-family home. I'm on the Architectural Review Committee and a realtor in Naples. A couple questions came up during the presentation. One was in regards to the PUD ownership of units. It states that 10 people or entities can own one unit. And my question is,what is an entity? Is Harley Davidson club an entity? If that's an entity,then it could potentially be unlimited number of people owning one unit. Can Briarwood association be an entity? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We had discussed that earlier today,and one of the items remaining for discussion further is the maximum number of club members based on units would be 10. There will be a cap on guests,so there will be no more than-- 10 will be the maximum occupancy,and there will be only 148 units. MS. SANTOMIERI: So it's just--it's people,not entities? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You can have multiple clubs buy a unit,but I believe the intent would be that you still can't have more than 10 members of that unit in the club. MS. SANTOMIERI: Thank you. At our NIM,our last NIM,we had talked a lot about how we were going to enforce issues,noise-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Bring the mike a little closer to you. Thank you. MS. SANTOMIERI: We had talked about how to enforce issues that may come up,and we were told that--you know,to call the authorities. They're going to have 24--24/7 access to their project.In a Page 39 of 62 November 19,2015 gated community,or a planned--or a--you would have a guard gate if you have 24/7 access. If it's a storage unit,you would have limited hours of access. Being that we--there's really no way to police anything behind the walls--and I'm not sure how law enforcement would even get through there if it's gated--we kind of felt that we--the burden was put on us to enforce any problems that may arise due to their project. I think everything else was--Tony handled.Thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you,Miss. Next speaker,please. MR.JOHNSON: Charles Berry,and then after that would be Kim Bennett. MR. BERRY: Mr.Chairman, Commissioners,my name is Charles Berry. I do not live in Briarwood.I am a licensed realtor in Collier County since 2001. My specialty has been finding places for people who have more cars than garages. And I wanted to address some concepts here that don't involve shrubs or dimension. Naples needs this facility. For some years I've served the car community in locating the type of facility being proposed here. There is not enough commercial space in Naples. The price of land in Naples now prohibits most commercial development. The customers or car club members are generally well-to-do individuals. They don't encourage boisterous activity or sharing of units.This concept of partnerships in units is probably specious. Naples has become very car centric. Witness one: Weekly Cruise-in at Park Shore Plaza attracts a hundred cars or more. Two,Cars on 5th,February 13th. You've all been there or you've heard it. They close off 5th. They fill it with cars. Go down there. Go shoulder to shoulder with those people,and look at the vehicles that are going to be occupants in the Premier facility. Antique Automobile Club of America is the largest auto club in the country. They will be holding a national meet in Naples March 16th to 19th which will replace the annual depot show. I give you these examples as some of the ways in which car ownership and demonstration has become much more expansive recently. Look at the Car Dealer Association. They're building a new Lincoln dealership. They're building a new Mercedes dealership. They've built a new Hyundai dealership last year, and there's another one going up at Pine Ridge/Livingston. I don't know what it is,but it sure looks like an auto showroom. Let's think about the tax implications for just a moment. Lowe's pays$63,409 annually to Collier County as tax on this 15-acre plot. My thumbnail estimate--and I can be corrected probably by almost anybody in the room--is that this project,when completed,will contribute$350,000 a year in taxes, approximately five times as much,plus impact fees,thus,a major economic benefit to the county and as a byproduct,perhaps,the avoidance of a tax increase in Briarwood. Go out the main gate from Briarwood and turn right. Almost immediately you come to Orchid Run, 22 acres,282 rental units. If you don't do this car thing,that's what you're going to have eventually at the corner of Radio and Livingston. Land values are increasing dramatically in Naples,thus increasing the density of housing that must be put on any given plot. This would be the crown jewel in that neighborhood. Another Orchid Run would not be a crown jewel. Naples needs this facility. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir. And just one correction;residential isn't allowed on that property. MR.BERRY: Pardon me? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Residential is not allowed on that property. Rental units would not be able to be there without a change to the PUD. MR.JOHNSON: Next up,Kim Bennett. After that,Brian Wagner. MS.BENNETT: Kim Bennett,for the record. I live at 642 Briarwood Boulevard. Thank you, everybody,for listening to me again today. I will try to be brief,because Tony did address most of the points that we as a community and the many people that I've spoken with hold. Page 40 of 62 November 19, 2015 I do need to add for the record that yesterday we allowed a petition for residents who couldn't make it here today,and I have over 125 signatures of residents that couldn't be here today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You want to enter that for the record? Do you have enough copies for the record? MS.BENNETT: I just brought the original straight here,but they can have it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Heidi, it's for the record. Is there a--could we take that and pass it around? I mean,just leave it on the counter for us to review at lunchtime to make sure it's we want to-- it's consistent with this application? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: You mean review it instead of submitting it as part of the record? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,no. I mean submit it as record,but I'd rather submit it as record after we've had a chance to look at it so we know it's relevant to this case. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Sure. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We've had other petitions submitted and they--after review,it turns out they weren't as relevant to the case as they should have been,and I want to make sure it's relevant to the case, so--okay. So you could leave that with our planner,and then during lunch those of us that want to take a look at it,without conversing,of course,about it. We'll just take a look at it,and then after you get back, we'll add it to the record,assuming it's what you say it is. MS.BENNETT: Thank you. I appreciate that. I just wanted to start off by saying the project itself doesn't belong where you're trying to put it. From the very beginning they have been struggling to find a name for it but,yet,even today,half the people who have spoken from your staff have continuously referred to it as storage.The word"storage"has been used more today by your staff trying to promote this private club and parking garage than the word"private club"and"parking garage." It has been consistent from day one that this has been referred to as storage. Storage doesn't belong here. The use doesn't belong here,and no matter how much perfume you put on this, it's still a storage warehouse. That's one of the main problems with it. There's a lot of development going on. I understand that. And to speak to the gentleman who doesn't live in Briarwood,we understand that your job is to make sure that the growth of Collier County is done with a great deal of thought and benefit to all the residents of Collier County.And there's no doubt that there's probably a place for this storage park, and it's probably something that would get a lot of attention for the many car owners. It just doesn't belong at that location. So I do agree with him that it could be a place for this,and you probably need to start thinking about what kind of zoning you would call that,but I don't think it belongs in that zoning at in our neighborhood. They showed you a lovely video,and in that video that they went through,they showed trees that had been aged eight years. I'm not really interested in what that project is going to look like eight years from now,because the day they fmish construction,it's going to have little,tiny saplings,not trees that have grown for eight years,masking,a little bit,a building that looks like a giant warehouse because it is,at the end of the day,a giant warehouse. The Skelly Road that they talked about,why that's there,they didn't know why that was there.Well, that's because 20 years ago when they thought of this subdivision it was planned that the people who live in that subdivision would use that access to get to our shopping centers,to get to our stores to enjoy a cup of coffee,walk and have a cocktail if there happened to be a private club there,but not a private club that encouraged private parties,flushing engines of boats,revving motorcycles,storing cars. At the end of the day,we keep going back to the same thing. It's a storage facility for cars. And to try and continuously take this square peg and try and stick it in a round hole is just not working. And every day we come here,we have the same thing over and over again. Well,what could we call it? How could we change it to turn it into a round peg? It's not. It's a square peg. It doesn't belong here. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,Miss. And if you don't mind,during the break I'll make some copies of that so the applicant can have a copy,and we'll make sure you have a copy to take back with you after we give one to the court reporter. Page 41 of 62 November 19, 2015 MS.BENNETT: Absolutely. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. With that,we really don't have time for another speaker--sir,you put your one finger up.Does that mean you've got one minute? MR. WAGNER: One minute. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,let's try it. I'll be glad to accommodate. MR.WAGNER: Thank you very much. I'm leaving out of town here for a few days. Brian Wagner, 5151 Cold Stream Lane in Briarwood. I live about in the middle of the area. Everybody's--I would ask you to turn down their request for this. It is not a commercial community--commercial development. It is a--in my mind an industrial development. They've tried to change the name,just like Kim said. It's not for the betterment of the community,which is something I was aware was going to be there,some commercial community. They've shown pictures with no A/Cs up on the roof. They don't show how close the condos are on those fly-overs. And the trees that are there are not that wide. If you look at it,they've added additional trees. So they're not showing the condos that are right there. It's going to be a noise issue. I would just thank you. I'd like to have vote--have you vote against it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. You were accurate in your time frame. Appreciate it. Okay. With that-- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: We could have three more at that rate. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,we still wouldn't finish in time,and it's going to take longer than we would want to defer lunch to. So I recommend to this board, if nobody objects,we'll break from now and come back at 1:00 after lunch and resume with public speakers. Okay. (A luncheon recess was had.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, everybody,welcome back from lunch. Before we went to lunch,we had a couple of things I wanted to follow up with. One is a review of the one item for the record to make sure it was consistent with this project and this property,and it is. It's in front of me for any members of the Planning Commission that would like to review it. Subject to any objection,I've asked the court reporter to keep a copy,and she has it.And I believe a copy's been provided to the applicant as well. And with that,we left off on--with public speakers. And,Eric, if you want to call the next speaker. MR.JOHNSON: Certainly. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If anybody's that's called is new to the room and they haven't been sworn in, please let us know so we can get you sworn in.Thank you. MR.JOHNSON: All right. Mr. Armand Pepper,and then after Mr. Pepper would be Brijitte Grasso. MR.PEPPER: Good afternoon,Commissioners. My name is Armand Pepper. I live at 856 Cold Stream Court in Briarwood. I was the first resident to buy property and build my retirement home in Briarwood 24 years ago. I have watched every home being built. It gave me great pleasure to see resident after resident move in to what is now a beautiful development. Twenty-four years ago when I viewed the plans of our area,I saw a plan for Livingston Road and loved the idea of that. Never did I ever think that our neighborhood would have an auto park abutting Briarwood. I was taken on a virtual tour of the auto park by the developer,as you all did. Do you know what I saw and what it reminded me of? Well,I'll tell you. In 1945 after the surrender of Japan,I was shipped to Japan to the Island of Honshu to the naval base at Curry Harbor. I was billeted at the office quarters. While there I saw row upon row of warehouses,all of them with garage doors, low buildings that very much looked like the auto park being proposed to you today. This auto park, if approved,would be an eyesore in our residential community. Areas such as ours, if approved,our residents will have a loud,expansive--expensive automobiles and motorcycles coming and going 24/7. It does not belong in our neighborhood. It belongs in an industrial area where their comings and goings affect no one. Page 42 of 62 November 19,2015 The greater majority of Briarwood residents do not approve the auto park. I implore the Board not to approve the project to be built in our neighborhood. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir. Next speaker,please. MR.JOHNSON: Brijitte Grasso. After her will be Janis Kiernan. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Grasso,are you not here? Ms.Kiernan,are you here? No. Let's--oh, yes,ma'am,come on up,please. You can pull that down. It will bend down.There you go. MS.KIERNAN: Hi. My name is Janis Kiernan,and I live at 925 Marble Court,and I am truly against this. To me--I looked up a lot of things,and one of the things--neighborhood commercial is to benefit our community. I don't feel it's benefitting our community. It may be benefitting the rich over on the shorelines,but not our community. I also looked up a paper,Naples Daily News,for January 13,2015,where the developer calls the place a storage area. Nothing to do with clubs. I have a picture of the My Other Place,which is a club--I mean, is a parking area, storage.The map indicates that this area is in a technical park. It's in a pink area called technical park.And here it is a year and a half later. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: If you put that on the visualizer,we could all see it better. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If you put it on the visualizer,though,we will need it for the record,so you're-- MS.KIERNAN: That's fine. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. MS.KIERNAN: I tried to take the picture there so you could see the actual My Office Space there. And then if you move to the other one,My Office,right there you can see it looks very similar to what they're proposing. Now,I also looked up Naperville and a few other places,which I gave to Eric on the library.I don't know if you maintained those documents or not. You did? MR.JOHNSON: They're in the file. MS.KIERNAN: Okay. All of them were in an industrial area. And some of the places actually had the newsletters stating that they wanted it way away from the regular population. So--I don't have them on me because there was just too much to print there. I do have on me the sheet,the zoning of where we are today. And right where--the yellow commercial that I had circled,right there,that's us that's Briarwood. If you look to the next one,you'll see Berkshire Lakes,same zoning. This is unprecedented to actually have a storage unit in these areas because now you're opening the book for anyone. Now, if you name it as a private club,the other thing I had questions for is private clubs are insured differently. They also have certain hours that they're not open. There are also accessibility issues where you want people in wheelchairs,bathrooms,et cetera. Also,in their schematic they do not have a sidewalk on Radio Road side, so they have to redo that,I would think. I didn't see it in their regular either. And the other thing that should be put in the PUB(sic),if it ever goes through, is there probably shouldn't be any car sales there or car shows because then you're enticing other cars to park. I think that's it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you very much,ma'am. MS.KIERNAN: Thank you. MR.JOHNSON: Next person is John Alcott--I'm sorry,I'm sorry,David Noble. After Mr.Noble is John Alcott. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Eric,when--those copies,would you make sure the court reporter gets those? MR.JOHNSON: Yes. Page 43 of 62 November 19, 2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.NOBLE: Good afternoon. My name is David Noble. I live in Dover Place,which abuts the proposed development. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you spell your last name for the court reporter. MR.NOBLE: N-o-b-1-e. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.NOBLE: No,thank you for taking the time and looking at this with the diligence you have. Everybody's concerned about the noise and the exposure if the project gets halfway built and then stops,what we'll be left with,which is warehousing. It has nothing to do with the residential. I only wanted to echo what everybody else has said who's against the place,but I'd also like to point out that if we include the language for the flushing of boat motors to include a time,I think that's dangerous because flushing boat motors is repairs and maintenance and,according to the documents,that must be done inside with closed doors. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir. And,Eric,before you say anything,that gentleman reminded me when he said Dover,during lunch or right at the beginning of lunch,a gentleman from Dover came up and told me he wasn't going to be able to stay but that he was in favor of the project,and he just wanted me to know that. So I relay that for the record. Next speaker? MR.JOHNSON: Next person,John Alcott. After Mr.Alcott is Bill McMaster. MR.ALCOTT: Good afternoon. Thank you for your diligence. I echo David's-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you state your name and address for the record,please. MR.ALCOTT: Yes. John Alcott,A-1-c-o-t-t. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.ALCOTT: 379 Dover Place. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.ALCOTT: I am past president of the Dover Park Condominium Association and am partially here today representing the current board. None of the members could be here today. Our association is the one that most closely abuts the projected project. Basically,you hear people say NIMBY,not in my backyard,but it is virtually our backyard. We are along the property line that abuts where the wall will be,okay. I'm here kind of like as fish and fowl today;that's because the association has asked me to represent them and the board of directors--now,not all the members of the association,but the board of directors has asked me to let you know that,obviously,they like the process that it's going through and they like the changes that are being made,but at the current time they're keeping their minds open,and currently they are okay with the project. And that's not a strong yes,but it's not a strong no either. I am of the same mindset. I always have been,when I ran the association and the person that's running it now as president,of getting all the information together and see--you know,make the decision, not make a hasty decision at the beginning or in the middle or anything like that.As I said,we're the ones that abut it. I do--would like to say that there are many people there that like the idea only because at least we have some control over it now. If it is approved,I think it's going to be scaled down quite some bit,at least we are hoping that it will be,and at least we know what we're getting into. At some future date,nobody has a crystal ball to know whether or not--what's going to come in there. And since we abut it,we also have concerns. We'll probably have more concerns at that time. But one of the things that the board wanted me to say was that we have a feeling that this type of project would be a safer project than having a strip mall,et cetera,there,only because of the traffic that would be involved right behind us to get in and out of the strip mall from the residents in Briarwood,which is fine. But at the very beginning of the project,Mr. Spinelli asked myself and,not the current president of the homeowners'subassociation in the back,but the one that was the officer at that time,to get together. Mr. Page 44 of 62 November 19, 2015 Spinelli,as the current developer,is 100 percent against it,has always been since day one when he found out about it. His information that he gave us at that time was that he was against it. He gave the reasons why. And I said,well,we're open about it right now,and we think it could be a good project as far as our little subassociation is concerned. He--we then asked other gentleman who was in law enforcement,I just asked him straight out, is it better to have something that's gated by us,or was it better to have a strip mall, something like that,as far as safety is concerned. And he said that the gated situation would be much better than having a strip mall as far as crime is concerned,possibility of crime--again,nobody has a crystal ball. Doesn't mean it's going to happen--but percentage-wise. And that was the only thing I want to say. I appreciate your listening and just to let you know, primarily,that the association board is leaning toward liking this project as opposed to something else that might go there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I have one question.You said something earlier that said you expected this to be scaled down some. What did you think that--what does that mean? MR.ALCOTT: Well, in other words,it's already been scaled down as far as--we were--one of the concerns that we had as an association was the number of units and also the buffer,the tree buffer,especially between us and them,since we're right there. And we understand a lot of that,but what I mean by scaled down is they have already scaled down. And it seems from--already with what's happening this morning and how you are questioning properly everything that the new developer wants to do,I would imagine--just imagine that there may be more concessions that would be made to maybe make it more palatable to those who do not want the project. So scaled down,I don't mean made smaller. I just mean getting more concessions from the current developer for that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you very much, sir. MR.ALCOTT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Appreciate it. Next speaker,Eric? MR.JOHNSON: Bill McMaster. After Mr.McMaster is Robert Norton. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR. McMASTER: Hello. I'm Bill McMaster. I live at 925 Marble Drive,and I've been a resident for about two-and-a-half years now. And first I want to do some clarification. The last speaker was speaking supposedly for a board,but we don't see any letter to that affect or anything like that. I'm not sure how many of the Dover Place people are in favor of it. And the people I've talked to in the condos,which are close--closer to the--whatever you call it today,are not in favor of it. So,anyway,I went back and looked at the minutes of the--of going back to the January 15th CCPC, and some points were made there that I've never seen clarified since, one of which was that the HOA for Briarwood,the architect was going to have architectural review for the Premier Auto Suites,or whatever they're called today. So did they ever--they never came to us for any architectural review. And they say they have a letter,but we've never seen it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, let me make some corrections to that. When it was brought up in January,we were under the belief,because of the planned unit development zoning,that they had to go to your facility for architectural review. Their attorney has since--one of their attorneys has since said that they don't believe they have to. They did go to your architectural review board--at least they've told us--at least once,maybe twice. They have told us there has been no written correspondence from the Architectural Review Board to them laying out any problems with the project. Whether there are or not,I mean,there's nothing in writing that we are aware of. So some of the things you said need to be clarified, like I just have, so... Page 45 of 62 November 19, 2015 MR.McMASTER: Okay,yes. I'm a member of the Architectural Review Committee for the Briarwood development. And,yes,they came to the NIM a couple of times,to the ARC and discussed the development,and we talked to them about it. We laid out our concerns and the fact that we didn't think it belonged there at all with a rather short note back to you folks,I guess. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It would have been helpful to have something in writing,yes. We have not seen anything in writing, so... MR.McMASTER: Okay. We can do that if-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's not necessary. It's kind of late now, so if you want to just plow through. MR.McMASTER: Anyway,but the name change is what bothers me lately. It's the same project. Hasn't changed a bit,but now they're trying to pigeonhole it into the zoning requirements. And it's basically a story of the tail wagging the dog,and by dog I mean the garages. It's just doesn't make--last time you were the one that referred to them and asked them to come up with some sort of single concept for the development,but all along it's been a garage concept. And to note that there's a clubhouse that now is the center of the development,that's kind of ludicrous,I think. That's about it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you very much,sir. MR.JOHNSON: Next speaker. MR.McMASTER: Oh,one other point. This is the only--I've done research,my friends have done research,and this would be the only such thing anywhere adjacent to a residential community.It just doesn't exist anywhere in the country. Tony alluded to it,but I wanted to clarify. There's none anywhere in the country. We would be the first,and I don't think we should be the precedent for such an action. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Next speaker,Eric? MR.JOHNSON: This was a name that was called previously. This represents the last card,Brijitte Grasso;Brijitte Grasso. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is Mrs. Grasso here,or Ms. Grasso here? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nope. Okay. That brings us to the end of the registered speakers. Typically we ask if there's any additional,anybody else additionally who would like to speak. I ask that you still refrain from going on too lengthy. But if--anybody here would like to speak who hasn't already spoken? Yes, sir. Come on up. Use one of the mikes. We'll get you next, sir. MR.JOHNSON: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. MR.JOHNSON: It's been brought to my attention that maybe Mr.Norton,Robert Norton,his attorney was next. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it's too late. I've put this man up. Mr.Norton can come up after this gentleman does. MR.JOHNSON: Very well. MR.HENSHALL: And I haven't been sworn. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The court reporter will take care of that. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR.HENSHALL: My name's Keith Henshall,and that's spelled H-e-n-s-h-a-1-1. I live on Marble Drive;have done for 20 years. Two points,two quick points to make. One is in favor of the applicant. I want the denial of it. Once in favor of the applicant,I've been very impressed with the work they've put into making this place look good. I think they've gone the extra mile. You probably hear a"but"coming up here. Like so many other people,I bought my house on the assumption this would be community commercial. I bought it on the assumption that community was the Briarwood community,not Naples,not Collier County,not Florida,not the Eastern Seaboard,but Briarwood. There's no commerce here whatsoever. It's unlikely to benefit the community. The units cost more than many of the community--our Page 46 of 62 November 19, 2015 community houses(sic),but it does look good. Now,my argument is this: If my next door neighborhood,by whatever means,got permission to keep a horse in his backyard, it would be of no comfort to me whatsoever that it was a good-looking horse. This is an inappropriate use of our backyard,and that's really the point I want to make. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker? Eric? MR.JOHNSON: Robert Norton. MR.NORTON: I've also not been sworn. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr.Norton? MR.NORTON: Members of the committee,excuse my poor voice. I'm here to speak in favor of this project,and I have an ulterior motive,because I'm one who has bought a unit in that development already. I've heard some people express concern about noise and revving of engines and wild parties and that sort of thing. And I suggest to you that I don't really look like a Hell's Angel. I think I'm fairly typical of the prospective owners of these condominiums for automobiles. I'm 76 years old,a retired engineering professor. I own currently eight automobiles,and I only have a few of those here in Florida. I have other homes in Massachusetts. One of my homes in Massachusetts has a seven-car garage,the other has a four-car garage. It's extremely rare in Naples to find a home that has more than a three-car garage,and quite often those are only in Port Royal. My home happens to have a two-car garage in Naples. I'd like to have some of my car collection down here to be able to use it while I'm here in the winter. And try as I might,I have not yet learned how to drive more than one car at a time. I would like to,but I've never figured out how. So in my particular case,the use of this facility will be to put my cars there to get them out of the weather and out of the sun when I'm not using them,occasionally bring one in particular over to my house and swap it for a different one to go back into this facility and drive it for a couple of days,and then reverse the process. I don't think that's going to create a nuisance. As far as loud parties at night,I rarely really am up after 9 p.m.these days. So as I said,I think I'm relatively typical of the potential owners of these. These are people who, if they have--if they're able to own multiple automobiles,they probably are not poor,and I don't think they're into drag racing either. That's really all I have to say,and I thank you very much for your attention. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir,one question. Since you're going to use this for your cars,what kind of finishes,decorating,kitchens,bathrooms,or wet bars are you going to be putting in,wide-screen TVs,lounge areas? MR.NORTON: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.NORTON: I don't even like to watch TV.The bathroom will be included,and that's a very important thing for a 76-year-old man. I wouldn't buy it without that facility. However,I don't anticipate doing much in there except polishing my cars and then taking them out for a spin. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.NORTON: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir. Is there any other speakers registered,Eric?That's the second time I've asked that,but we had someone show up late, so... MR.JOHNSON: None others. Brij itte Grasso was a no-show,and I just want to make sure that--there was a Mr.Berry. Did he speak? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. MR.JOHNSON: Yes. Very well. That's it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I asked a couple of times if there were any other speakers. I think those people have spoken,and so we will end the public participation part of the meeting and go back to Page 47 of 62 November 19, 2015 the applicant. Well,first I've got some questions of Ray. In listening to everything that occurred,Ray,I wanted to confirm some issues that--I think I might have asked you some of these on August 20th. Did you ever issue a zoning verification letter pursuant to the uses on this property? MR.BELLOWS: We issued a zoning letter for square footage information but not uses. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Were you ever asked for one? MR.BELLOWS: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Did you ever issue a comparable/compatible analysis for this use on that property in writing? MR.BELLOWS: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Have you done any--you didn't do the additional studies that we talked about last time, in writing;you've got nothing to produce here today? MR.BELLOWS: Nothing in writing because there are so many variabilities to these types of activities that it's almost impossible to really quantify through some kind of standard industrial code number. Because they can take on different concepts,some have a measured component,a drive-in, special-event type of environment. This one, it seems relatively sedate in the way they're proposing to operate. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you,Ray. By the way,the gentleman that was up here last,he mentioned how he was going to operate his facility. Would that have met the zoning code that you prescribed for this property? He said he was going to store cars there and he was not going to do any recreational component. MR. BELLOWS: Could you repeat the question? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: He said he was going to store cars there and he was not going to do any recreational components. MR.BELLOWS: Well,there's no--my understanding of the way the proposal was pitched to me and staff is that they're going to operate as a private club with this amenitized condo car facility that could have these types of options, such as TVs or pool tables or other kind of activities associated with--such as a man cave.But I don't believe there's anything in the PUD that mandates they have to do those activities. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I'm more concerned how you put this into a classification that is a commercial corner versus what you did with the Hiawassa classification which you said was 4225 because they were going to store cars there. This gentleman came up and said he was going to store cars here. That's 4225. How does it fit into that corner? MR.BELLOWS: It would not if it was just that,but he has to be a member of a club to be a member--to purchase a unit in there, so he is a club member. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So purchasing a unit,you become a club member,but there's no additional use requirement. You simply buy a unit,you're a club member,and you can store cars there. We can do that in any storage facility-- MR.BELLOWS: Our intent was,from staffs support of this concept,was that they would operate a club. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the operation of a club from your perspective is simply that all the buyers of these units,whether they buy them for storage facilities or retail components, if they join a club, it's also a private club? MR. BELLOWS: Our intent is to approve a private club with the ability to have those various forms of amenitized gathering for space within each unit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With the ability to have but not requirement to have. MR. BELLOWS: Well,we were trying to get the applicant to require a certain percentage or a certain amount of amenitized improvements in the interior so it's not just a storage facility. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But now you feel it's not necessary to do that? MR.BELLOWS: No,that's still our staffs position and recommendations in the-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's contrary to what we just started talking about. So now it cannot be like the gentleman said that he just stores cars. He's got to do-- MR. BELLOWS: Well,I just want to be clear. Page 48 of 62 November 19,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I want to be clear,too,because this is the whole crux of this issue for me. There's a lot of issues on the table here,and the only issue that I've bothered about was getting what they told you they'd give you for the use that was supposed to fit there instead an industrial park. If this was an industrial park or an RT park or anything like that,we wouldn't even be discussing this today. MR. BELLOWS: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We'd be done. But they're fitting it into a unique situation because they have a hybrid use. Your basis for that analysis is absolutely critical. If you're saying it takes no more than just--than being a storage area that's in the form of a club, that's not how I envisioned this from day one. MR.BELLOWS: Nor I,and I didn't mean to imply that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I'm a little dismayed we can't get a clearer reading on it from you, Ray,but this is-- MR.BELLOWS: It's only because it's such a hybrid use. What are you going to mandate,that they have to have--hold parties in there? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What am I going to mandate? MR.BELLOWS: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What were you looking for as zoning director? That's more what it's coming from. MR.BELLOWS: Yeah,a private club. MR.HOOD: Mr.Chairman, if I may. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, sir. MR.HOOD: I just spoke with the gentleman that just spoke,and he intends to have,like,a little personal office in his mezzanine area,so he didn't get a chance to discuss that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ladies and gentlemen,please. Let the gentleman--let him speak. MR.HOOD: I asked him specifically,because this issue did come up. And it is an issue that is relevant,because we discussed in 6.2.A.14.B that these uses that are outlined would have to be present in this use. So if he did not want to have those uses in his unit--whether he used them or not, if he didn't want to have those uses in his unit,he would not be able to do what we're proposing here. He would have to abide by what's here in the PUD and also what's in his condominium documents when the condominium is established. So,again,whether he uses his private office or not in his unit, it still will have to be there as one of the components to build these units. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well--go ahead,Andy. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well,Mark,I was just going to say that the amendment that's proposed says that the following features shall be provided. So,I mean,the language makes it mandatory that they have to have common areas,amenities generally associated with principal use including,but not limited to,a clubhouse,and then B,an indoor mezzanine,recreation spaces,pool tables,card--other games,personal office space,and bathrooms.I mean,there are things that they have to have there that if they didn't have they wouldn't be consistent with the zoning,right? MR.BELLOWS: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean,that's what you're saying? MR.BELLOWS: Yes. And I'd also like to clarify a little bit that part of this request is for private garages and a certain amount of being able to come in,get your car and drive it out like any garage is part of this request as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And one of the items on the list that Andy referred to was recreation space. And I have been asking consistently,how do we assure that recreation space is there? Well,we've heard from the building director it's out of his territory. It's in ours. And I've been looking for language for us to add to assure that happens,and I have not heard it or--heard it become available yet,and that's what I've been trying to understand from you is,what do you expect to see to desig--to acknowledge that's recreation space? If it's just a note by the architect on the plan "this is recreation space,"that can be used for anything.That doesn't give you recreation space. MR.BELLOWS: Yeah. We were hoping to get a minimum base standard from the applicant of Page 49 of 62 November 19, 2015 what commitments they're going to guarantee as a part of amenitized interior features. Unfortunately,they can't commit to too much more than what we have in the PUD document. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.HOOD: Outside of what we've proposed today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And,Fred,go ahead. I'll be a.little while yet. You might as well jump in. I've got some questions of Fred,but--so you-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I've got a couple of questions. MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: You know, it depends on the speakers of the logic that's being presented. Sometimes I think it makes sense. Sometimes I don't think it makes sense. So I just have some simple question. The original or the current PUD calls for private clubs. MR.HOOD: As a conditional use,private clubs,garages-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: As a conditional use. MR.HOOD: Right;yes, sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I am one of those,I used to practice planning many years ago,and I drafted many PUDs. And in my mind when we put a use as a conditional use as a private club,that means something like the Italian-American Club,like the Veterans Club, like places of assembly.It never crossed any of our minds that this would be a place where you can buy a place to store your cars. So that I want to understand how did we leap from private club to what are you proposing right now and if this was an interpretation that was given to you officially before you started your application by the county. That's my number one question. MR.HOOD: To answer that question,private clubs,what I have seen them as and what I've seen other people look at them as,as you described with the Italian-American Club and VFW and so forth and so on. Those are typically fraternal club organizations. They have a membership and so forth and so on. The private club that we are looking at doesn't happen to have a fraternal component to it.It is-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I can see that,but how did you make--how did you make the leap or the interpretation from here to there? MR.HOOD: That would--okay. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Because I can propose any use and I can make it a club,and the zoning director would have a tough time deciding or interpreting because it's not a conventional da,da,da, da,da. So I'm having a hard time finding out how did all of that begin. How? And what was the logic behind making the interpretation that you--what gives you a level of comfort to do all of that,spend all this money,take all this time,hire all of those consultants to get to this point? And I'm the newcomer here,so... MR.HOOD: To the level-of-comfort question you just posed,before we spent a significant amount of money and I'm--again,I don't want to drop this back on staff or to us,but we had a discussion with staff in the preapp meetings and throughout the reviews,okay. So along that timeline at some point it was decided by both the applicant and staff that this was a private club use. We came in with a conditional use as the private club and the private garages for that specific reason. I've heard a couple of people discuss that we've changed names a few times. That has been a product of several months and months of coordination between the applicant and review staff. It's changed names probably--changed the name of the use,I would say,probably three or four times maybe since we filed the conditional use application. It's always been the same private club use in our thinking and in our proposal. It's changed-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I understand,but I respectfully disagree. MR.HOOD: So to get to the point--okay.But to get to the point of how we made that leap,it was a coordinated effort between the applicant and review staff. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I understand. MR.HOOD: So I really can't give you-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I don't need anymore. MR.HOOD: Okay. Page 50 of 62 November 19, 2015 COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. The next question is,can you cite any similar development proposed in the neighborhood commercial site? You see,you have to understand that at the time that this PUD was approved--and that I had the privilege of working for the county planning department many years ago,then I went to private practice,and I created some of those PUDs. The idea was to develop a neighborhood shopping center so that you can keep a significant amount of the traffic on site. You don't get on Radio Road. You don't get on Livingston Road. You try to contain it. MR.HOOD: Correct. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: So convince me how does this use comply with the concept of a neighborhood commercial or where in the county do you find similar facility in a similar zoning site. MR.HOOD: In Collier County you're not going to find anything like what we're proposing. It has been discussed about the Garage Town in Chandler,Arizona,that this was not next to any residential areas. That's false. I have aerials. I've got the zoning sitting here,and I can show those things to you,and I can give them to you as part of the record. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Believe me,I read every single paper that was given to me. MR. HOOD: I'm not sure if you saw--if you've seen this aerial,but this aerial will show you that there--on two sides of this development there are residential homes. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: And this is where? MR. HOOD: This is Garage Town in Chandler,Arizona. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Well,maybe Collier County is a little different than Arizona? MR. HOOD: It may be. But the question that we were asked at the last hearing was to look around the country and find other examples. We have not found one that's in Collier County that is correct by zoning and by what we're trying to do. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: My last concern,and then I'll be quiet after that,I promise you. MR. HOOD: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: The increase in the square footage. MR.HOOD: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I don't fmd any justification that would be helpful to the county or the neighbors or the community at large,just like somebody is asking for more density if you're doing residential development. As a matter of fact, if you're even asking for more density in a residential development, as a developer I could contend that they want to make it affordable. But in this case you're not catering to the low-income or the moderate-income people in the county. So why is the extra square footage? If the--if the commissioners fmd it acceptable to grant your petition,then I'd like to know why are you asking for more square footage? Why couldn't you live with the constraints of the PUD? MR.HOOD: We probably could live with the 20 percent,but what we've proposed is the 148 units with the 27 percent of the square footage. So I don't really have a good answer to you to say,you know,we need this. It's more of we're requesting this to meet a certain goal that our developer has. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you very much. MR.HOOD: Thank you. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Am I crazy? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir. Anybody else? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question for you. MR.HOOD: Yes,ma'am. COMMISSIONER EBERT: It's completely different from this,whether you call it man cave or doghouse. You also have in here a clubhouse,per se. We've not spoke about this clubhouse at all.How big is it? What is there? Can you tell us anything about that? MR.HOOD: Sure. I'm getting the exhibit for you,and then we can discuss the clubhouse. MR.WERCHEK: Hi. Mike Werchek. I'm the proposed developer of the project. The clubhouse is 2,400 square feet,and it will be set up more of a gentleman's bar type place insofar as the finishing and the feel of it. I want it to feel like you're in a country club's locker room more. It will have a bar there but not a stocked bar or anything,just somewhere to basically gather bathrooms and a place Page 51 of 62 November 19,2015 for us to have our meetings,to have our general things if people want to have some type of get-togethers. If we do decide as a group--which we will as a group,have monthly meetings and monthly get-togethers,ifs just somewhere to basically get together as a group and have one central place to be,just like any other club would have or any other facility. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. So would your residents in these 148 units,if they have more than 10 people coming to their unit,could they then use the clubhouse? MR. WERCHEK: The clubhouse is for the residents. It's for everyone in the facility,basically. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. So they could take their 10 guests or what--if ifs more than that,and they can just take them to the clubhouse? MR. WERCHEK: Yes,exactly. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fred,before you go into your rebuttal,I have several questions. I heard Ray's comments on this. I need yours. MR.HOOD: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Did you ever ask for a zoning verification letter,and if you did not,why did you not? MR.HOOD: We asked for--at the time when we asked for the zoning verification letter,we asked for the specific square footage question,and I have it here, so-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've read it multiple times. MR.HOOD: We asked for whether the square footage for the private club and private garages,I believe--I'm recalling on my fuzzy memory--would that be linked to the commercial land area floor area maximum of 20 percent? That was one question. I believe the second question was,what--if this use were permitted as we're looking at it right now--and,again,this is on my fuzzy memory without looking at the document, if this use were permitted, would we--would we be beholden to that 20 percent,I think. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have it somewhere in here,and--okay. Here's what your letter--this letter is in response to zoning verification letter dated November 25th. Your zoning verification request is limited to two inquiries,and you had posed as specifically one. Please confirm the 20 percent maximum contained in the PUD is limited specifically to footprint area and/or land coverage and is not construed for purposes of this PUD as a.2 FAR;two,are parking structures or facilities subject to the floor area limitations? And it goes on with the details to that. Do you have somewhere in that letter that you referred to as referencing the uses that you were going to have on the property? MR.HOOD: No. Outside of you just reminding me--and I'm looking at it now--the private garages and private clubs being subject to the F--the floor area requirement,no. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you never followed up with a zoning verification letter to see if the uses that you verbally discussed with Ray were acceptable for this property in an analytical letter like a verification letter response? MR.HOOD: Not in letter format,no. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Did you ever ask for comparable/compatible analysis of any type, and if you did not,why not? MR.HOOD: At that time,no,we did not,and I believe for--you're talking about the comparable use determination application? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. MR.HOOD: I believe it was available at the time,but we did not look at that option. We were already in the conditional use-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Since August 20th when we suggested that as another solution to trying to figure out how to deal with this,apparently you and Ray did not get together on looking for the various sites where these occur across the United States for some comparison to those. So you still did not follow up on Page 52 of 62 November 19, 2015 the--you have nothing from the county analyzing in writing that this use you're proposing is acceptable for this property other than the staff report that we've got? MR.HOOD: Not together,no. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The additional studies we looked at,you showed us one. Is that all you found? MR.HOOD: Oh,no. We've looked at all of the ones that Mr.Pires looked at with us,but this one I specifically looked at because it had commercial zoning with--inside of its planned area development. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Did you do a matrix so we could visibly see how they all compare? MR. HOOD: Can I do one? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, did you? I mean, it would have been nice to have something today that we could have seen. MR.HOOD: No, I did not. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The zoning analysis that you would typically do for comparing zoning sections of this PUD to the zoning you're asking for,like if you were asking comparable/compatible, did you do a zoning analysis of your own to show how the uses that are allowed there fit to the uses you're asking for? MR. HOOD: We relied on our conversations with Collier County to decide whether this use would be permissible here. We didn't do an independent review of zoning outside of,you know,my client coming to my office and asking,hey,I want to put this here. Do you think that we'll be able to do that. That's--at that point we went to the county and asked those questions in the format of a preapp and an application. That all went through,through the conditional use,as you know,with understanding that this use was permissible. We left it at that area. We didn't do any additional research on that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Because the use has been such a focal point,I didn't know if there was something more substantial than we already have and we could--that could assist us in this analysis. MR.HOOD: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And that's the remaining questions I have of Fred. And I know we usually typically allow rebuttal,so if you want to take 10 minutes or so to do rebuttal,you're more than welcome to. MR.HOOD: Sure. As I was sitting here listening to,you know,a lot of the comments that were being brought up,a couple of things popped out at me,and some of them are more important than others. I just kind of wanted to clear up one of the items,though,with regard to giving information and submittals to the Briarwood community. On August 20th when we had our last CCPC hearing, if we will review the minutes from that hearing--I believe it's on Page 77 of 90--it was requested by Mr.Pires that Collier County staff forward him all submittals that we made to Collier County.That's been done. It's not that we didn't want to give him anything. It is that we sent it to the county as official submittals,and they forwarded that information along. I just wanted to make that clear and on the record. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That didn't carry any weight with me. MR.HOOD: It wasn't meant to. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I understand Tony has a need to get paperwork a lot,so I'm used to him asking for a lot of paperwork. MR.HOOD: I understand. I just wanted to make that very clear that we did what we were asked to do. I had a question about the health,safety,and welfare and morals,et cetera. From my standpoint, when PUDs are created and when the land uses inside of PUDs are created,they have to be created consistent with the health,safety,welfare,and morals,et cetera,of the PUD ordinance. When we were discussing this with staff,and now that we're here at this late date finding out what this actual use is and their acceptance of this use,I believe that the health,safety,and welfare of the community is still being at the--is still being checked at this level when we're reviewing this. We may have a difference of opinion on that,but I think that with going through this process,that is an intended side effect of us moving forward. To the issue about if additional clubs could be created in the 16 buildings,that's not our intent. If we Page 53 of 62 November 19, 2015 are asked to provide additional language,I can provide additional language in 6.2.A that will say,you know, Principal Use No. 14 will be a singular club,and we can just let that issue lie as it is, if that's okay with you-all. I just thought I would pose that. We discussed the additional Garage Town use that is in Chandler,Arizona. I wanted to just make it abundantly clear that that specific site does have residential around it. On the southern side of it, it is bordered by single-family residential and on the eastern--or the western--I'm sorry--the eastern side of it, it also has residential adjacent to it,and I believe directly to the east it has agricultural zoning to it. We discussed the entity issue,whether Harley Davidson of Naples could come in and buy a unit; absolutely. Any LLC or incorporated company or individual would have the right to come in and buy a unit. We are still limiting the occupancy capacity of each unit to 10 persons at a time. We are also limiting the number of memberships per unit to 10 currently. Looking at the fly-through--and we spent a great amount of time on figuring that out and making sure that these buildings looked a little bit more like a residential community. I just disagree with the fact that they look like industrial storage facilities. Yes,we will have to go through with the architectural review standard of the LDC and meet 5.05.08 so that they are designed commercially. But what we have done here, I believe,we have gone above and beyond what is included in 5.05.08. And I would just like to make that point. Outside of that,with noise and 24-hour access to units,we are talking about a condominium type of development. When we discuss self-storage facilities,those are rental facilities. This is a facility that each, you know,member or 10 members will own,and we will not be able to preclude someone from--well,I won't say we won't be able to preclude,but we don't anticipate precluding anyone from getting to their property that they've purchased. So the idea of placing hours of operation on an individual owned use doesn't seem appropriate here. Discussing the flushing of boat motors,we do understand that that's a hot-button issue,and we do want to work with the Briarwood residents and the Planning Commission as well as staff to provide some hours of that being appropriate and,as discussed before,I think 6 a.m.to 8 p.m. is appropriate. So I'll leave it there and answer--oh,one more thing. There was a question about the sidewalk along Radio Road. There is actually a sidewalk that is existing adjacent to our site along Radio Road,and I believe there is one on Livingston as well. So that's-- it's there.That's why it's not on our plan as proposed. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Does anybody have any final questions of the applicant or anybody at this point? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have one. Say that time again for these. I thought it was from 8 p.m. at night to six in the morning with these. MR.HOOD: I'm sorry. That's what I meant from 8 p.m.to 6 a.m.there will be no flushing. I reversed it. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay,thanks. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Just a question for Ray. Is the--in your opinion,would the proposed use,this private club and private parking garage,I mean, is that a use that you would feel is less intensive than,say,what's in No. 3,retail shops, shopping center,stores? MR.BELLOWS: Yeah. When staff reviewed this petition for the impacts and looking at developing conditions to help make the project more compatible with the residential,you know,part of the analysis looks at what kind of uses are allowed in the PUD. What is the definition of a private club?Does that meet the purpose and intent of a private club? What kind of traffic impacts result from how they propose to operate based on their application?It was staffs opinion that this was equal to or less intense than those other uses. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Was there ever a site plan or anything proposed for the shopping center? I'm assuming there was going to be a Lowe's there.That was originally the intent? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,we had--the last meeting--I don't know if you were-- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I don't think I was here. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. We had a--they did have an SDP for the Lowe's and an SDP for the Page 54 of 62 November 19,2015 shopping center,the strip center before that. It was a regular shopping center. So there's been two SDPs on this property,or at least site plans. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. And one was just a strip center and the other one had a Lowe's. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Correct. And Lowe's had the parking field facing inside toward the Dover residential portion with the back of Lowe's facing Livingston. The shopping center had the back of it facing Dover and the Briarwood with the parking field towards the south. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions? Fred,I'm going to read some issues so that when we go into deliberation on this we can at least know where you stand on these. Maximum number of units will be 148. It will be limited to a specific use of 14 as a singular club use only. There will be no balconies. Watercraft engines will be flushed only from 6 a.m.to 8 p.m.,or not flushed from 8 p.m.to 6 a.m. How's that? Does that get you there? One parking space will be required in front of each unit. Maximum number of club members based on the units will be 10. There will be no special events. The maximum occupancy per unit is 10. The order of construction phasing is--will have to be determined,and we're suggesting east to west. 278,610 square feet is the 40 percent figure,not what's in the PUD. There will be no uses added to the roof other than maintenance and roofing for the mechanical stuff up there. The quantities in Deviation No. 1 will need to be justified or stated. The setback from the pavements for the driveways in the front of each units will be greater-- 15 feet or greater,with the exception of the one that has to house a parking space. That's going to have to be addressed. Add the language on the Exhibit B in lieu of 10.02--I think it's-- .03.D; it will be 5.05.08. The emergency access service will be Turfstone or Geoweb pervious materials. And Staff Recommendations 1 and 2 are accepted,3 as modified,4 as modified, 5 added--with the added phasing plan,6 will be a change of hours from 6 a.m.to 8 p.m.,and then 7 as written,and 8 can be dropped. That's a summation and notes I made during the discussion,so the Planning Commission can talk about them as we move forward with our deliberation on it. Do you understand all those,Fred? MR.HOOD: I do. I just have a couple of proposed changes or-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Requests? MR.HOOD: --requests and questions for the Board and for Eric,as staff. With regards to Condition of Approval No. 1,with the providing one space in front of each unit.Can you just,again,Eric,for me provide the basic reasoning for providing one space in the driveway versus what we have proposed having two of the spaces inside of the unit? MR.JOHNSON: It's more of a way to ensure that there will be guest parking. So,you know, enforcement is more of a reactionary type of process than proactive,so that's the bottom line,or one of the bottom lines. MR.HOOD: So if we're looking at it from a perspective of guest parking,I just--I guess I'm trying to figure out what sort of--we're looking at a proposed use. We're looking at the potential for there to be visitor parking or even visitors coming to the site,and the justification for staffs approval would be to have one of those spaces in the driveway in front of each of those units. MR.JOHNSON: Well,actually, as point of clarification,I think that's what the chairman said that would be in front of the unit. Staffs position is that one space would be provide outside the unit,which could also be in the form Page 55 of 62 November 19, 2015 of an off-street parking area. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's fine,outside. I understand. I was--I had no problem with that. MR.HOOD: So now I guess where I'm coming from with this line of inquiry is in the areas--and I completely understand that this is on the onus of the developer and us as his consultants. We are taking this master plan that you have in front of you,and we are essentially redesigning it based on a condition of approval for parking spaces in front of the units,at least one,and those areas that we're-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Outside the units. I think he corrected me on that,and I will accept that correction. MR.HOOD: Yeah. Outside the units,and I'm assuming outside of the units is in the driveway of each of the units that have driveways that are long enough,from my perspective. So we're--for all intents and purposes,the areas--the driveway areas in front of the units that do not have the minimum depth requirement for a commercial parking space,we are being asked to create an additional parking area outside of what's already been proposed,A;and,B,I'm looking at this,and the way that we proposed it, it will be on the buyer of the unit, it will be on the developer of the community commercial property for Principal Use 14,we have already decided and said that these parking spaces can be placed inside of the garage--inside of the garage units. That is something that does happen elsewhere in Collier County when you're discussing residential and multifamily residential land uses. We set this plan up to look that way. It's a commercial use,but we set it up to work and operate and park that way, if you will,because--and if you look at,you know,those residential uses,they're--from a TIS standpoint,from a level-of-service standpoint,they are very much more intense. I understand that if we were to look at this as a self-storage facility,which we are not,that the parking would be nominal. It will be less than the two spaces per unit that we were looking at.If we were to look at this as a private club,it would be--we would be under,but the type of use that we are proposing here does not fit into any of those criteria. It looks more like a residential community from the way that we've designed it,and that's why we have asked that those parking spaces,if they're not able to be parked in the driveways in front of the units, that they would be able to be parked inside the unit. And I just--generally just don't agree with the visitor space and the driveways. I think that we can get there--I think we can get there without having that commitment in the PUD document. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If not--I'll close. Eric? MR.JOHNSON: May I say a few words? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. MR.JOHNSON: Great. Thank you for the opportunity. Earlier in the discussion my name was mentioned about whether or not I was giving Mr.Pires whatever Mr.Hood gave to me,and,you know,I tried to do just that. I'm infallible,so if and when I miss something,I apologize to Mr.Pires,but I would like to point out that the open records request process very, very appropriate and that I have been very diligent about responding to Mr.Pires and giving him what I felt was responsive to the request, so far as for me to even go into a store and buy a flash drive on my own dime and,you know,submit that to him,and without asking for reimbursement. I just wanted to say that,you know,if we were going to go forward with this type of he said she said or the way to get documents,I would say that the open records request is the best way to do it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Since this board is the one that is hearing this today and none of us had any questions in that regard,you're defending something you don't need to defend. We all are used to Tony. You're new in the county. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: He's not. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you don't have to worry about it. No one's holding you at fault for anything,at least that I know. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: We believe you. Page 56 of 62 November 19, 2015 COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We all agree that Mr.Pires knows how to request documents from the county. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have just one thing with staff,and I know,in reading this and talking with staff,that this is a unique situation. There is not other storage areas in Naples. So this was new to the staff. This was a whole new area for them,too. And I can see--because this was really approved the first time,had already gone to the Board under a conditional use. There was no one here objecting to it. Everything was fine the first time. So I understand staffs point of view here,too. What do we call this? You know,we're trying to--so I do understand that portion. I just want to let staff know that. MR.HOOD: And we greatly appreciate staff for working with us in this arduous process. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Does anybody else have any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If not,we'll close the public hearing and have discussion. I've read a lot of things into the discussion just in case anybody who would want to make a motion would want to use them. I don't know what the--I can't tell what the weight is on this board,what you-all want to do, so I'm certainly interested to find out. Mr.Assaad? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: When we were discussing the outdoor parking space,I suggested that you make the front yard setback a minimum of 20,and you suggested 23. Now,they are--the applicant is insisting or indicating they would like to go with a 15-foot front yard setback. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We don't have to agree with the applicant. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I know that. I know that. And the question about the square footage,the response was--how was it? We prefer to have more, or we would like to have what we asked for,but we don't mind what was in the PUD? Something like that? You can live with what's in the PUD? MR.HOOD: Fred Hood,for the record. We could-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. MR.HOOD: I understand. Yeah,what I did say was,when we looked at the commercial land area limitation,we would be able to--we could have dealt with the 20 percent,but we wanted the additional 7 percent moving forward for the type of units and the number of units,yes. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: All right. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Anybody? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. Just when we came up with that 23-foot ordinance, we had a problem with people parking their cars in driveways and sticking them out into sidewalks,and we even had a photo of police cars. Your average car is like--well,not average,but the longest cars you'll see are, like, 18, 19 feet long. Nobody parks their car a foot away from their garage door. They always hold it back enough to walk in between. So we went and measured a lot,and the 23-foot was a--if you want to park a car,you've got to leave 23 foot. And in my experience--you know,I've been around a long time. I've had a lot of nasty neighbors. I've seen my folks have nasty neighbors. Some people are just,you know,they're just bad neighbors. Most of the ones I've seen have been people,not entities. Entities,generally,they're fairly quiet and whatever. I would guess if you've got nasty neighbors in here, it's going to be some of the people. And I would think you could get nasty neighbors in Berkshire. I mean,I live in Lakeside right now. I've got great neighbors. We have a clubhouse. Certain times of the year they rent it out. I hear parties across the lake,you know,until 8,9, 10 o'clock.I don't really area, you know,people having fun,but you hear the music. You know,granted I don't have people revving their engines in their yards and whatever,but you're going to stop those folks like 8 o'clock at night. Page 57 of 62 November 19, 2015 My biggest concern was that you folks are a good neighbor to the people next door. And the biggest concern I had wasn't so much--it's a nice-looking project, like the gentleman said.Noise is always the worst thing you can do to your neighbors and,you know,as long as you guys are willing to hold things down and enforce your own rules, I really don't have a problem with this. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And just out of curiosity, if staff wasn't indicating a need for a parking space in front,one outside, if it was in front,what depth of a parking space were you considering? MR. BELLOWS: Twenty-three feet. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Twenty-three,okay. COMMISSIONER EBERT: So that would have to be put in there? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,additions like that would be noted as far as stipulations if this board wanted to see this move forward. MR.HOOD: Mr. Chairman,could I ask a quick question, if you would? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. MR.HOOD: With regard to the 23 feet,we're typically talking about the front of the garage to the back of curve,correct,Ray? MR.BELLOWS: Correct. MR. HOOD: Okay. So would staff consider the potential for parallel parking in front of these units for the ones that wouldn't meet the necessary depth for front loading but for side loading? MR.BELLOWS: As long as it meets all other requirements, it wouldn't be a problem. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think all we're saying is we agree with staff if--maybe it's that direction, that one space is required,in front of the unit or outside the unit. MR.HOOD: Yeah,we're just-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How you get there,it's up to staff to make sure it's consistent with the code. MR.HOOD: We're just trying to avoid the setback versus parking issue in front of the units. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: It doesn't really effect you too much when you look at the building outline except with the center units where they are protecting beyond the others. That would be the only unit that is subjected to the 15-foot setback.And the solution is to shrink the front of the unit,not the back,just the front,by 8 feet. So that doesn't cut much into your sellable space, if you will. It really a nonissue. MR. WERCHEK: We've also made these bigger-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: First of all,you've got to use the microphone. MR.WERCHEK: Sorry. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Identify yourself for the record. MR. WERCHEK: Mike Werchek,the hopefully developer of this project. We've made these units here as drive-throughs. So we can--so people could then--when they did buy a bigger unit they would not have to move cars. Again,our intent is you bring a car,you take a car. This isn't like you're going to be parking cars outside. You can't park overnight. We really don't want parking outside,period. If we do have--and if someone should happen to have a party for some reason,which I'm sure they will. You're going--everyone has parties. These are going to be fun places. We want to have fun and be good neighbors here. But our intent was that,and that's why those units are bigger because they're drive-throughs. So everyone would have four doors in that unit. They could,you know, literally pull in and never have to back a car out. And that was our intent in all of these units,of if you had a camper or you had a boat with a trailer, you wouldn't have to back out,and that's really why those are all bigger. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Do you also intend to have a management office on site? MR.WEEKS: We will have a management office on site,and then it will depend on the membership as to even what kind of amenities we want. You know,is there someone to start a car, someone to do this, someone to do that. But this will all be decided once we do--get all of our members in. And we also spoke about the phasing. I want to address that,because I think that's big. There seems to be fear of the phasing of the project.With what we currently have reservations for,I will be having to start this building,this one,this one,this,this,this,this,this,and that and do our clubhouse. Page 58 of 62 November 19, 2015 So we're going to be starting almost eight buildings on the site immediately where I have reservations for the project. So this is--I hope this isn't a fear that we're going to bust. I mean,so far our response has been overwhelming, and I do feel that activity is going to bring a lot of activity once they see the project. And I know we are unique,but I do believe we're going to be the best neighbor these guys ever had. I mean,you know,you met Mr.Norton. I mean,we're past the age of--we want to think we'party hard,but we really don't. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Didn't he say he's in the Hell's Angles Club? MR.WERCHEK: Yeah,I mean,again,I just think they're not even going to know we're there nobody. Nobody's going to know we're there. We don't even want signage on this property. I mean,we just want to be alone. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This is--well,first of all,this is only our deliberation,not your testimony, so we need to back up a little bit. Can you show us on the overhead,not the graphic--I mean,not the screen--what buildings you're talking about starting up as your first phase if this gets approved. MR. WERCHEK: Building 1,Building 2, 16, 15, 14, 12, 11,and 8,and this one,and 10. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,then you could phase it between those two vertical--those two north/south buildings,and then the first phase would be to the right, second phase would be to the left. MR.WERCHEK: Well--and that's kind of how I saw it was that we'd start this--you know,the whole east side of the project and just work-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. You come in off Skelly Road,go between those two buildings,jog to the west,go between those two north/south buildings and go down to the south by Radio Road between those two buildings. There's your first phase on the right,second phase on the left. MR. WERCHEK: You know,our intent is just to keep building all the way out. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I know what your intent is,but we're--just as a become backup we're-- MR.WERCHEK: Yeah,but that would be a minimum. I mean,this is--you know,we're going to be half the project immediately. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just think it wouldn't hurt to you say there's two phases,and if you do both of them at the same time,who cares. MR.WERCHEK: We'll be doing this in two phases. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That's what I'm kind of getting at if it gets us there. Okay. Now,with that,is there any further discussion by this board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If not is there a motion by someone to move forward? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I move we approve-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan,your mike. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Sony. I move we approve PUDA-PL20150000178,the ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners amending the Briarwood PUD with the stipulations that Mark outlined. I think there were eight and you deleted No. 8. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There were 17 of them. There were eight by staff,and No. 8 from staff was deleted, so there's 17 plus one of those 17 contains seven by staff. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the staffs recommendations were accepted as modified with the expectation of No. 8 that was dropped. And then the others would stay intact except that the outdoor parking spot still insisted on,and it will be 23 feet. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Right,good. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that's-- MR. BELLOWS: Unless they parallel park. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Parallel park,they're still going to have to be long,isn't it? MR.HOOD: No. It will have to be wide. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,width and--whatever meets the code at that point. Page 59 of 62 November 19,2015 MR.BELLOWS: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: An outdoor space that meets the code. And if it's--yeah,okay. You understand what we're getting at? MR.BELLOWS: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This has got to come--and is there a second? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I want to see if he accepts an amendment to the motion before I second it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Would you accept an amendment to limit the square footage to the original in the PUD? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: No,I wouldn't. Why do you want to do that? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: It just seems like it shows good will and compliance with the PUD, the existing PUD. It gives a level of comfort to the neighborhood, and I think the county has made--is about to make a lot of concessions to accommodate this development. I think it's a good development,and you-all are commended for your presentations. But the county seems to extend or willing to extend a lot of accommodations to make this happen,and that would be a small show of faith or just showed that they intend to comply and be good neighbors and get along. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I think they've made a lot of concessions already. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Okay. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'll second the motion the way it is. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And now discussion? Ray,what is the standard FAR for across the county,generally,for commercial? MR.BELLOWS: Well,FARs aren't-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I mean--I know,but we use them in the rural fringe,we use them in the Rural Land Stewardship Area,and I believe the number's 2.5. It's one of those rhetorical questions again. MR.BELLOWS: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If it is .25, if you take the amount of square footage that would have gone under normal conditions,we would have ended up with quite a bit more square footage,over almost a million--a lot more square footage. I'm going to run that number again. Ray,would you mind--if you take a.25 FAR times 15.99,what do you come up with? MR.BELLOWS: You said an FAR of.02? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: .25. MR.BELLOWS: Times? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,I come up with 174,000,so we're pretty close to the FAR that is-- MR.JOHNSON: I think he wants to hear the parameters of what you're saying; 15.99-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm just trying to understand how the FAR in the-- .20 in the PUD compares to what we see built out across the county. It's lower than what we normally see on a commercial project, if I'm not mistaken. That's all I was wondering. MR.BELLOWS: Yes. COMMISSIONER EBERT: So we shouldn't have a problem with it? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,it's not a problem so much as the difficulty this whole project's been, to be honest with you. Anyway,you have a motion and a second. Discussion? Does anybody have any discussion they want to add? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm going to,I'm going to reluctantly support the motion. I'm very disappointed in the way this project has come about. The lack of,let's say,confirmation from county staff to the applicant,the lack of studies that we have asked for that we haven't gotten,the zoning comparisons that we typically see or we have seen in other projects in the past that didn't appear in this one,the fact that a lot of this stuff had to come at a late date and had to be worked out where it should have all been worked out ahead of time. Page 60 of 62 November 19, 2015 I thought this was one of the best projects I had seen when it first came to the county,and I actually said that in town meetings. I've shown it as man cave project,as something that is going to end up having values of 3-, $400,000 including the vehicles and fixings inside. So I saw this as a positive thing. And how it's come out a as negative in regards to the many concerns we've had has been a complete surprise to me and one I didn't expect and one that's very disappointing. So I am going to support the motion. I don't--I wish we had gotten here in a different way. I wish things had come out a little differently and we hadn't had to go through this process to get here. But I do think it's a better use than the Lowe's or the strip center for the most affected parties,which are the people in that Dover project,because the Dover project is the one most affected by this. This property's been sitting here for 40 years,never built on for commercial. It had two SDPs,and I believe the reason it wasn't built on,it just wouldn't work in that area,so I think the developers have realized that it just isn't going to work there. So with that,I'll still favor the motion. Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6--we've got a 6-0? Yeah, 6-0 today. Thank you,Fred. It was a surprising turnaround,but we're done for today. Thank you-all. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Do we want to do consent? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,yeah. Let's talk about consent. Thank you. I suggest strongly this come back on consent,and is there a motion for it to do that. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I make a motion. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane. Second by? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Karen. All in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries. It will be coming back on consent. Thank you all. MR.HOOD: Consent date is two weeks from today? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: As fast as you can get the documentation to staff. MR.HOOD: We'll get it to you ASAP, Ray and Eric. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. As far as old business,there isn't any listed. New business? None listed. Any additional public comment? Nobody's here. And is there a motion to adjourn? Page 61 of 62 November 19, 2015 COMMISSIONER EBERT: I make a motion to adjourn. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Stan,motion made by Diane. All in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're out of here. Thank you. There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:20 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MARK STRAIN,CHAIRMAN ATTEST DWIGHT E. BROCK,CLERK These minutes approved by the Board on ,as presented or as corrected . TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE,INC., BY TERRI LEWIS,COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. Page 62 of 62 AGENDA ITEM 9-A This item has been continued from the December 3, CCPC meeting. You have received the full packet material at the December 3, 2015 CCPC meeting. DOA-P120140002309: A Resolution amending Resolution Number 95-71 (Development Order no. 95- 01), as amended, for the Pelican Marsh Development of Regional Impact ("DRI") located in Sections 25, 27, 34, 35 and 36, Township 48 South, Range 25 East and Section 31 , Township 48 South, Range 26 East in Collier County, Florida by providing for: Section One, Amendments to Development Order by adding 32 acres to the DRI; by revising Exhibit "D" and Map "H3" contained in the DRI Development Order to add 32 acres to the DRI and an access point on Livingston Road; and by reducing the reserve by 2 acres; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Conclusions of Law; and Section Four, Effect of Previously Issued Development Orders, Transmittal to Department of Economic Opportunity and Effective Date. [Companion item to Pelican Marsh PUDR-PL20140002211 ] [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, RLA, Principal Planner] 1 AGENDA ITEM 9-B This item has been continued from the December 3, CCPC meeting. You have received the full packet material at the December 3, 2015 CCPC meeting. Attached is additional information. PUDR-PL20140002211: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2002-71, the Pelican Marsh Planned Unit Development, and amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, the Collier County Land Development o C de, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 32± acres of land zoned Rural Agricultural (A) to the Pelican Marsh PUD; by amending the Planned Unit Development document and the Master Plan to add R1 district parcels for 75 single family dwelling units; by correcting a scrivener's error in the PUD Master Development Plan to Ordinance No. 2002-71 which omitted 141.6 acres east of Livingston Road; by adding an access point to Livingston Road; by providing development standards for the R1 district; by reducing the reserve by 2 acres; and by providing an effective date. The property to be added to the PUD is located in the northeast quadrant of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 2,245± acres for the entire Pelican Marsh PUD. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, RLA, Principal Planner] 3. Co er County MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARING DATE: DECEMBER 8, 2015 SUBJECT: DOA-PL20140002309, PELICAN MARSH DRI and PUDR-PL20140002211, PELICAN MARSH PUD The Pelican Marsh land use petitions were continued from the December 3, 2015 hearing date until the December 17, 2015 hearing date. During that time period, numerous Letters of Objection have been received. Attached please find copies of the Letters of Objection. END OF MEMORANDUM Page 1 of 1 DOA-PL20140002309,Pelican Marsh DRI and PUDR-PL20140002211,Pelican Marsh PUDR December 8,2015 GundlachNancy From: StrainMark Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 12:48 PM To: GundlachNancy Subject: FW: WCI Proposed Rezoning Of Property Please distribute as usual. Mark 239.252.4446 Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. Original Message From:Thomas Gradolph [mailto:mustangdent2 @aol.comj Sent: Monday, December 07,2015 12:13 PM To:StrainMark Subject:WCI Proposed Rezoning Of Property Good Morning Mr Strain, My name is Dr Tom Gradolph, I am a resident of Marsala at Tiburon,the community which is unified in it's deep and unwavering opposition to WCI's proposed plan to rezone property adjacent to our community. I am writing to you, not to comment on WCI's lack of integrity and reprehensible behavior in this matter, but to voice my concerns regarding the ramifications WCI's rezoning proposal would create.As others have so eloquently spoken about,the identity and signature of our community, is the beautiful, unspoiled natural habitat and wildlife which surrounds us.This environment was THE reason most of the residents focused upon,when purchasing their homes.Sadly, it is this unspoiled woodlands preserve and nature habitat that will be forever altered and compromised by WCI's proposed plan.To be specific, my objections to WCI's rezoning proposal center on these three main aspects: A. If WCI's rezoning plan is approved,the existing natural environment and wildlife habitat surrounding Marsala at Tiburon will be destroyed. B.The legality�or potential breach),the shiftin g/sw apprng of acreage outside of the area in question of the proposed destroyed wetlands—to satisfy Collier County requirements. Is this practice routine and historically approved? If the answer is yes, I find that extremely troubling. If the answer is no,then the precedent this rezoning would create, is equally troubling. C.Safety issues on Livingston Road created by the dramatic increase in traffic the introduction of a new road (access to the proposed community)so close to the entrance of Marsala would create. Despite the claims by WCI that they are in total compliance with all road safety requirements,the first time a serious accident occurs in this area,and it will,if these proposed plans are approved and implemented—the questions and liability raised by inevitable litigation will be far-reaching. In conclusion, I ask that you and the Collier County Planning Commission reject WCI's rezoning request based upon the concerns cited. I greatly appreciate your time and careful consideration in this matter. 1 • Best Regards, Thomas J Gradolph Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. • • • • 2 GundlachNancy From: StrainMark Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 9:49 AM To: GundlachNancy Subject: FW: WCI plan adjacent to Marsala Please distribute as necessary Masi-ki 239.252.4446 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your a-maiL address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: JeanJones95 @aol.com [mailto:Jeanjones95 @aol.com] Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 3:09 PM To: StrainMark Subject: WCI plan adjacent to Marsala Dear Chairman Strain, We own a home in the Marsala section of Tiburon on Livingston Road which is next to and South of the property that WCI is trying to develop. Unfortunately in order to develop that land, WCI will be destroying the preserve. To offer other land in place of a destroyed preserve should not be restitution for destroying the natural land and the habitat for much wild life, especially Wood Storks. A safety issue already exists for those entering and leaving Marsala Way since we do not have a dedicated entrance/exit lane as is present at other developments. To add another street so close to Marsala Way, along with the new Sienna Reserve, would compound this safety hazard. We sincerely ask for your support and strong consideration of the safety issue and the negative impact this would have on the Marsala community, as well as the negative impact of losing the woodland and nature habitat. Thank you and best regards, Samuel and Jean Jones 14468 Marsala Way Naples, FL 34109 856-478-0101 JeanJones95Cc aol.com 1 GundlachNancy From: Greg Shand <gshand @vegaconsulting.com> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 6:08 PM To: StrainMark Cc: GundlachNancy; BosiMichael; ChrzanowskiStan; HomiakKaren; StrainMark; LenbergerSteve; scott.rogers @deo.myflorida.com;jtobias @sfwmd.gov; HillerGeorgia; HenningTom; FialaDonna; RomanCharlette; stlmojoyce @gmail_com; stasi28@gmail.com; TaylorPenny; NanceTim; KJacobson @lacavajacobson.com; pdenove @arthrex.com; bobdenovel @gmail.com Subject: WCI request for variance and rezoning approval Dear Mr.Strain (et al): I became significantly alarmed this morning when I was alerted to your comments that appeared in today's Naples Daily News. In the article entitled, WCI Communities Eyes New Site in Thriving North Naples, you stated that you're "...unsure how deep the concerns go and whether there will be any organized opposition against the project."Sir, I would be astonished if even a single resident in the Marsala community is not vehemently opposed to WCI's requested variance for any number of reasons: negative environmental impact; traffic safety concerns; negative impact to property values and WCI's misrepresentation that the property would remain untouched/protected...to name just a few. I believe that our small community would be loath to accept that it is acceptable for Collier County to rezone deeded, preserved lands and jurisdictional wetlands at the whim of developers! Given the relative size of the Marsala community and the letters of disapproval that have been written,what more validation does the committee require to verify our collective opposition to this project? My wife and I spent seven (7)years searching for a small, tightly knit community in Naples where the surrounding flora and fauna would remain untouched.When we purchased our property, having already had a negative experience with an unscrupulous developer, WCI assured us that in addition to their own environmental stewardship, Collier County was unwavering in their efforts to keep deeded preserves unharmed. Now, WCI is proposing access to a landlocked 32 acre parcel through 2 acres of"deeded preserve land" as their original intent access to their 32 acre parcel (through Wilshire Lakes and Sienna Reserve) was unsuccessful. Consequently, WCI has decided to reclassify and destroy the "preserve" which will require a variance and rezoning approval from the county. In summation: WCI has owned the adjacent preserve property for some time. When the vast majority of the Marsala's residents purchased their individual properties, many questioned WCI with regard to future plans for development on adjacent lands. These questions were raised with an eye toward: 1) overcrowding, 2) burgeoning traffic issues, and 3) preservation of the beauty of any undeveloped parcels. We purchased our properties with the understanding that the "preserve area", as shown on the Marsala at Tiburon "Site Plan", would remain intact. Therefore, we are now asking Collier County to deny WCI the variance/rezoning approval they are requesting.Without question,the collective sentiment of the Marsala Community is vehemently opposed to WCI's proposed alteration of the"preserve" area. Hopefully,the voice of Marsala's residents will be heard through messages sent to the commissioners and to the Naples Daily News. WCI has defaulted on their promise of environmental stewardship! Please support the Marsala community and the environment by denying WCI's variance. Sincerely, Gregory and Kimberly Shand 14463 Marsala Way Naples, FL 34109 Gregory K.Shand 1 Chief Financial Officer Vega Consulting Solutions, Inc. Phone: (973)335-7800 Cell: (201)981-9001 Please Visit our Website at: http://www.vegaconsulting.com JP This electronic mess,age transmission contains information from the Company that may be proprietary,confidential and/or privileged.The information is intended only for the use of the individual(s)or entity named above.If you are not the intended recipient,be aware that any disclosure,copying or distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited.If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the address listed in the"From:"field. 2 GundlachNancy From: StrainMark Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 4:11 PM To: GundlachNancy Subject: FW: Proposed Rezoning of Preserve and Agricultural Land Off Livingston Road For distribution Mark. 239.252.4446 Under FLorida Law, e-maiL addresses are public records. If you do not want your a-maiL address released in response to a public records request, do not send eLectronic maiL to this entity. Instead, contact this office by teLephone or in writing. From: Ronald Salvagio [mailto:rbsalvagio @gmail.com] Sent:Thursday, December 03, 2015 4:08 PM To: StrainMark Cc: karijacobson3 @gmail.com; Augie Stasio; J. Dean Lohman; John Dinino; Linda Joyce Subject: Proposed Rezoning of Preserve and Agricultural Land Off Livingston Road To Commissioner Mark Strain, Chair Collier County Planning Commission Dear Commissioner Strain: We are writing you concerning WCI's request for a variance related to the rezoning of the land located east of Livingston Road and adjacent to our Marsala community . We live at 14479 Marsala Way in the Marsala neighborhood which will be very negatively impacted should you grant WCI's request for a variance and rezoning. We strongly object to their request. When we purchased our lot from WCI we were given a presentation and were shown a site board of Marsala, which clearly identified the area along the east side of the golf course as a designated preserve and were told that the area would remain undeveloped. This is the same land WCI is now requesting access and is attempting to purchase and develop. We understand they plan to remove most of the vegetation and are exempt from maintaining any of this virgin land as preserve or water shed areas. Every day exotic birds(included wood storks) and wildlife cross Marsala Way from the West to the East side by the preserve area to get to the wooden area soon to be taken away by WCI should you grant this variance and rezoning. There are so little of these habitats left for the birds and wildlife to survive around our community. Furthermore, the density WCI is planning will destroy most of the existing wooded area as well as create a serious traffic problem at Marsala's entrance. The probability of accidents will considerably increase as more cars and service trucks attempt u-turns at or into our entrance and block already problematic views We sincerely ask that you consider our concerns and not grant the request of WCI as they seek to severely reduce the wildlife habitat and adversely impact the safety and environment of Marsala, a community they created and made specific environmental promises to buyers in order to increase the selling prices of its homes. Thank you for your support. Very truly yours, Ronald and Patricia Salvagio Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 GundlachNancy From: StrainMark Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 3:55 PM To: GundlachNancy Subject: FW: Pelican Marsh PUD/WCI For distribution Mar-k. 239.252.4446 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: Pete Denove [mailto:Peter.Denove @Arthrex.com] Sent: Thursday,, December 03, 2015 3:48 PM To: laura.layden @naplesnews.com; StrainMark Cc: NancyGrundlach @colliergov.net; HenningTom; HillerGeorgia; NanceTim; FialaDonna; TaylorPenny Subject: FW: Pelican Marsh PUD/WCI Dear Mr Strain and Commissioners— I would also like to voice strong opposition to the rezoning that WCI is requesting for the same reasons as others. I plan to attend the meeting Dec 17 along with many of our other neighbors in Marsala and Wilshire Lakes. First and foremost, I do not believe the county should upset current wetlands for development, but as important,the County planners should not reward WCI to profit on their fraudulent and misguided representation of the Marsala development and said preserve. It is amazing to me that few seem to be discussing this.We all care about Naples. It is truly a paradise. If left to the sole motive of profiteering by WCI management,where do you think this will end up? Thanks for considering our urgent messages to you all. Pete Denove, MBA Director, Distal Extremities Product Management Arthrex, Inc. 1370 Creekside Blvd Naples, FL 34108 239-591-6947- Direct 239-253-9609- Cell From: Lisa Denove [mailto:Idenove(ame.com] Sent:Thursday, December 03, 2015 1:44 PM To: laura.laydenanaplesnews.com Cc: Linda Joyce Subject: Fwd: Pelican Marsh PUD/WCI Hi Ms. Layden, I understand you had a conversation with Greg Shand this afternoon regarding the article written today in the Business section of the NDN. In response to that article,I have sent the email below to Mr. Strain as well as to the commissioners. There is huge angst about this proposal from our community as well as from those in Wilshire Lakes. I was quite surprised to read that Mr. Strain was not aware of any resistance. Please let me know if i can be of any assistance getting our voice heard. If you want detailed information regarding the environmental issue,Linda Joyce,Marsala resident,has done extensive research into the matter. I would certainly contact her as it appears WCI is trying to get a waiver that will significantly impact the wetlands and natural habitat of several exotic species. Her work is outstanding on this issue. I have copied her on this email. I appreciate you looking into all sides of this story. Thanks!! Lisa Denove Premiere Plus Realty (239)253-9394 ldenove @me.com Begin forwarded message: From: Lisa Denove <Idenove @me.com> Subject: Pelican Marsh PUDIWCI Date: December 3, 2015 at 1:19:55 PM EST To: markstrain @colliergov.net Cc: GundlachNancy <NancyGundlach( colliergov.net>, michaelbosk colliergov.net, stanchrzanowski@colliergov.net, karenhomiakacolliergov.net, markstrainc colliergov.net, LenbergerSteve <stevelenberaerAcollieraov.net>, scott.rogersOdeo.myflorida.corn, jtobiasAsfwmd.gov, Georc iaHiller colliergov.net, TomHenningc colliergov.net, Don naFialaalcolliergov.net, charletteromanc colliergov.net, stImoioviceaamail.com, Augie Stasio <stasi28aomail.com>, PennyTaylora.colliergov.net, TimNance( colliergov.net, Kari Jacobson <KJacobson@lacavaiacobson.com>, Pete Denove <pdenoveaarthrex.com>, Bob Denove <bobdenovel(aagmail.com> Dear Mr. Strain, I was quite concerned when I read the article in the Business section of the Naples Daily News today"WCI Communities eyes new site in thriving North Naples". Two items set off alarm bells in particular. The first was your comment regarding WCI's rezoning request as "It's standard, It's no different from what we see all the time." As a resident of Collier County for 15 years, I was unaware that it was common practice for the county to rezone deeded preserved lands and jurisdictional wetlands at the request of developers. Quite the contrary, as a realtor, I have always praised Collier County's determination to keep deeded preserves intact and for its efforts to protect our wetlands. I join in the concerns raised by Linda Joyce previously expressed to you regarding the impact on the wetlands and endangered species, should the preserve be destroyed as proposed by WCI in its request to Collier County for the variance and rezoning. Second, I was quite surprised that you are"unsure how deep the concerns go and whether there will be any organized opposition against the project". I know that many,if not most of the residents of Marsala as well as the Marsala Board of Directors have expressed their opposition to this project for many reasons. (negative 2 environmental impact,traffic safety concerns and WCI's original misrepresentation when selling the lots in Marsala). In addition,prior to being a resident of Marsala, I was a resident of Wilshire Lakes for over 12 years. I can attest that many residents in that community are also against the development of this property, and have been since the days Kaye Homes tried to develop the land. Though we do not have the deep pockets that WCI has to hire a high powered legal team, I can assure you that our concerns are quite strong. We were informed last night that a representative of WCI asked for a delay in their rezoning discussion until the 17th. I hope that the Commissioners will take a long look at this project and consider all the negative implications to the community before they vote on approval. I appreciate everyone's time and consideration. Sincerely, Lisa Denove Premiere Plus Realty (239)253-9394 ldenove @me.com This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are the property of Arthrex, Inc. and/or its affiliates, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have received this message in error,please notify the sender at 239-643-5553 and delete this message immediately from your computer.Any other use,retention, dissemination forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. Finally,while Arthrex uses virus protection,the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 3 GundlachNancy From: Jonathan Mair<jmair @firmcapital.com> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 12:41 PM To: GundlachNancy Subject: WCI -Sienna Reserve and North Collier Regional Park. It has come to our attention that WCI is planning a 32 acre development consisting of 72 home sites just north and adjacent to the Marsala at Tiburon community, Sienna Reserve and North Collier Regional Park. As a home owner at 14399 Marsala Way, I strongly oppose this specific project. The following points should be noted: WCI's request for a variance to allow for 2 acres of"Deeded Preserve Land" adjacent to our community and entry road in order to have access to their land locked planned development area is unacceptable. Preserve areas are created for a reason and their elimination should not be taken lightly,and in this case, not permitted. Granting this access will create significant traffic safety issues as well. If allowed,three closely adjacent curb cuts on Livingston Road along with required deceleration lanes would cross a heavily utilized bike lane. In addition, without additional island cuts, vehicles traveling south will need to make U turns at Marsala Way street entrance in order to proceed north for entry into Sienna Reserve and this WCI planned development.Thus, compounding an already dangerous traffic situation. CCSO can substantiate that this section of Livingston Road has turned into a speedway with vehicles operating at speeds in excess of 60 miles per hour. Marsala at Tiburon residents were sold property by WCI at a premium, and with the understanding that the adjacent natural preserve as shown on WCI's Marsala's "Site Plan" would be maintained. Now this same developer is attempting to rezone the preserve area and ignore its previous sales activity commitments. I respectfully requests the support of Collier County officials and disapprove both the variance and rezoning requests by WCI regarding this planned development area. Jonathan Mair Chief Financial Officer �r Firm Capital Corporation ital Mortgage Banking • Real Estate Capital 163 Cartwright Avenue Toronto,Ontario M6A 1V5 Business: (416)635-0221 Ext 233 I Fax: (416)635-1713 E-mail:jmairAfirrncapitai.com Web Page: http:Nwww.firmcapital.com Important Notice:This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed,and may contain information that is privileged,confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and delete the message.Thank you.Firm Capital Corporation("FCC")—Disclaimer if e-mail relates to an FCC matter:Ontano Mortgage Brokerage,Lenders and Administrators Act License#10164,Administrators License#11442,Registered Broker# M08000105 1 GundlachNancy From: StrainMark Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 12:54 PM To: GundlachNancy Subject: FW: December 3, 2015 WCI Zoning request Please distribute as usual. Mark 239.252.4446 Under FLorida Law, a-maiL addresses are pubLic records. If you do not want your a-maiL address released in response to a pubLic records request, do not send eLectronic maiL to this entity. Instead, contact this office by teLephone or in writing. From: Steven Frost [mailto:sfrost @optonline.net] Sent:Thursday, December 03, 2015 12:54 PM To: StrainMark Subject: December 3, 2015 WCI Zoning request II Dear Commissioner Strain: I would like to thank you for your careful consideration of the issues concerning the December 3, 2015 WCI request for a variance and rezoning next to the Tiburon Marsala neighborhood. I live in 14475 Marsala Way and we purchased our home from WCI in mid-June 2013. One of their selling and marketing points at that time was that the preserve located next to the Marsala neighborhood was protected due to its wetlands and nature habitat and would never be developed. WCI's actions come across as hypocritical and a bit dishonest to all of the Marsala Way homeowners that they sold to. Thank you for your time,consideration and attention to this matter. Very truly yours, Steven C. Frost Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 GundlachNancy From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 1:06 PM To: SawyerMichael Cc: GundlachNancy; BellowsRay Subject: FW: Marsala Development Concern Attachments: IMG_1978.jpg; STRAIN.PDF FYI From: Paul Mortell [mailto:pmortell @ciruscontrols.com] Sent:Thursday, December 03, 2015 11:34 AM To: GundlachNancy; BosiMichael; StrainMark; HomiakKaren; ChrzanowskiStan; LenbergerSteve; scott.rogers @deo.myflorida.com;jtobias @sfwmd.gov; HillerGeorgia; HenningTom; FialaDonna; RomanCharlette; Cc: "KariJacobson3 @gmail.com;Tim Davis; stlmojoyce @gmail.com; J. Dean Lewis Lohman; Augie Stasio Subject: Marsala Development Concern Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, Please see the attached letter which voices my objection to WCI's proposed variance and rezoning scheduled for hearing tomorrow. Thank you for taking it into consideration. Also attached is a photo as I am sure not all of you have had the chance to visit the beautiful community of Marsala and I wanted you to see what it is that the WCI development will destroy. Thank you again for your time and attention to this matter. Paul Mortell CEO/Founder tats ONTROLS 7165 Boone Avenue N. Suite 190 Minneapolis,MN 55428 Direct:763-251-8942 Cell: 612-804-6095 Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 GundlachNanc From: StrainMark Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 1:06 PM To: GundlachNancy Subject: FW: WCI expansion project and request for variance and rezoning off of Livingston Rd Please distribute as usual. Mark. 239.252.4446 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: Celia Lazaro [mailto:cg1317 @yahoo.com] Sent:Thursday, December 03, 2015 12:57 PM To: StrainMark Subject: WCI expansion project and request for variance and rezoning off of Livingston Rd I am a resident of Marsala at Tiburon,community adjacent to possible project. It came to my attention this morning the article in the NAPLES NEWS about your thoughts on how deep Marsala residents concerns are. Destruction of habitats, effect on ecology,wild life are very strong concerns. There's a point where GREED has to give way to common sense and where our responsibilities as humans lie.This is a perfect example,of complete disregard to animal life and preservation of habitats. Now,safety for the existing residents is another big one.Traffic is very intense in this immediate are and another possible 74 homes(too high of a density for such acreage) will just intensify the problem. Please,do consider our reaction against such a development,do we have to use every piece of land to put houses on?enough is enough. Thank you for considering my thoughts on this project Celia Lazaro Marsala at Tiburon 14495 Marsala Way Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your o-mall address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 GundlachNancy From: Susan Hartwick<joeandsusan @me.com> Sent: Thursday, December 03,2015 1:06 PM To: FialaDonna; LenbergerSteve; GundlachNancy; NanceTim; TaylorPenny; HenningTom; HillerGeorgia; SawyerMichael Subject: WCI re-zoning/Marsala Way Community Dear All: Thank you for taking the time and your careful consideration of the issues regarding the WCI request for a variance and rezoning. My husband and I own a home at 14491 Marsala Way in the beautiful neighborhood of Marsala/Tiburon. This home was purchased to be our retirement residence which, at the time of purchase, seemed to be the perfect sanctuary. WCI represented to us, via the plat model,printed materials, and sales staff, that the "preserved" land and wetlands would never be developed. This was a large consideration that we took when making the decision to purchase our home. Our home was north of$1,000,000. If you can put yourselves in our position for a moment,you will no doubt relate to our concerns. If WCI is successful in re-zoning, besides the negative impact on traffic and the ENVIRONMENT, what kind of precedent does this set for future developers. I foresee a judicial system full of court cases. I'm sure WCI is stacked with a legal team to refute/fight any of our neighborhood's claims, but we are sincere in our fears about the impact this will have to our neighborhood. Again, thank you very much for your time, Sincerely, Susan and Joe Hartwick 1 � I GundlachNancy From: Lisa Denove<Idenove @me.com> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 1:20 PM To: StrainMark Cc: GundlachNancy; BosiMichael; ChrzanowskiStan; HomiakKaren; StrainMark; LenbergerSteve; scot rogers @deo.myflorida.com;jtobias @sfwmd.gov; HillerGeorgia; HenningTom; FialaDonna; RomanCharlette; stlmojoyce @gmail.com; Augie Stasio; TaylorPenny; NanceTim; Kari Jacobson; Pete Denove; Bob Denove Subject: Pelican Marsh PUD/WCI Dear Mr.Strain, I was quite concerned when I read the article in the Business section of the Naples Daily News today"WCI Communities eyes new site in thriving North Naples". Two items set off alarm bells in particular. The first was your comment regarding WCI's rezoning request as"It's standard, It's no different from what we see all the time." As a resident of Collier County for 15 years, I was unaware that it was common practice for the county to rezone deeded preserved lands and jurisdictional wetlands at the request of developers. Quite the contrary,as a realtor, I have always praised Collier County's determination to keep deeded preserves intact and for its efforts to protect our wetlands. I join in the concerns raised by Linda Joyce previously expressed to you regarding the impact on the wetlands and endangered species, should the preserve be destroyed as proposed by WCI in its request to Collier County for the variance and rezoning. Second, I was quite surprised that you are"unsure how deep the concerns go and whether there will be any organized opposition against the project". I know that many, if not most of the residents of Marsala as well as the Marsala Board of Directors have expressed their opposition to this project for many reasons. (negative environmental impact,traffic safety concerns and WCI's original misrepresentation when selling the lots in Marsala). In addition, prior to being a resident of Marsala, I was a resident of Wilshire Lakes for over 12 years. I can attest that many residents in that community are also against the development of this property,and have been since the days Kaye Homes tried to develop the land. Though we do not have the deep pockets that WCI has to hire a high powered legal team, I can assure you that our concerns are quite strong. We were informed last night that a representative of WCI asked for a delay in their rezoning discussion until the 17th. I hope that the Commissioners will take a long look at this project and consider all the negative implications to the community before they vote on approval. I appreciate everyone's time and consideration. Sincerely, Lisa Denove Premiere Plus Realty (239)253-9394 Idenove @me.com yS 1 1 La Cava &Jacobson, P.A. Attorneys at Law Kari K.Jacobson Telephone: (239)300-9679 Attorney at Law Facsimile: (239)734-3546 Email: kjacobson@a lacavajacobson.com Toll Free: (800)329-8600 www.LaCavalacobson,com December 2, 2015 Commissioner Mark Strain, Chair Collier County Planning Commission Dear Commissioner Strain: First I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your careful consideration of the issues before you on December 3, 2015, concerning the WCI request for a variance and rezoning. While WCI will come armed with lawyers and money, the residents of Marsala will come only with the passion of preservation of our beautiful community and the environment. My husband and I live at 14430 Marsala Way in the Marsala neighborhood which will suffer significant negative impact should you grant WCFs request for a variance and rezoning. We therefore strongly object to the same. My husband and I purchased our lot after looking for years for the perfect one to finish raising our children and staying through retirement. We settled on our lot in great part due to the representation by WCI that the land on the other side of the course from us would remain undeveloped. We also relied upon the plat and model depiction of the development in the sales office as well as the brochure depicting the community. There seems to me to be a conflict of interest for WCI to sell all of the lots in Marsala making certain representations, only to turn around and request this variance and rezoning to sell more lots. Furthermore, the deeded preserve area should be protected due to its wetlands and nature habitat. I join in the concerns raised by Linda Joyce previously expressed to you regarding the impact on the wetlands and endangered species, should the preserve be destroyed as proposed by WCI in its request to Collier County for the variance and rezoning. As you may recall, the negative impact to the wetlands is discussed by letter dated July 24, 2015 from Ana Richmond, Chief Bureau of Community Planning of the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, to Michael Bosi, Director Zoning Division Collier County Growth Management Department. Her letter states that the 31.39 acres at issue in the WCI's request contained 17.28 acres of jurisdictional wetlands that WC I proposes to impact. She stated that the applicant has not rebutted the presumption with clear and convincing evidence that the { 2590 Northbrooke Plaza Drive • Suite 307 • Naples, Florida 34119 Mr. Mark Strain December 2, 2015 Page 2 proposed change will not create additional impact to regional natural resources...". We also rely on the conclusions reached in the letter from Laura P Layman, Section Leader, South Florida Water Management District dated November 5, 2015, which stated "based upon the submitted information, sufficient mitigation has not been provided to offset the proposed direct and secondary wetland impacts..." We have truly enjoyed the natural habitat of the area and have ourselves seen coyote, families of raccoons and exotic birds. Lastly, as has previously been pointed out to you, I have a concern for the public safety based on the close proximity of the entrance proposed by WCI to the Marsala entrance, should the variance and rezoning be granted by Collier County. With the opening of Sienna Reserve just to the north on Livingston Road of Marsala, there has been significant additional traffic making a u-turn to travel back northbound to access Siena Reserve. I cannot imagine more traffic doing the same should this variance and rezoning be granted. Of course it does not escape me that everywhere you look WCI has developments going up. Certainly the denial of this request would not have any significant impact to them. However, the granting of the request would have a devastating effect on the residents of Marsala from a financial perspective, as it will lower the value of their homes, and to the wetlands and natural habitat for all generations. I humbly ask that you consider our concerns and not just grant the request of WCI as they 1 seek to continue to destroy our beautiful community. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Very truly yours, Kari K Jacobson KKJ/ww 3 La Cava &Jacobson, P.A. Attorneys at Law GundlachNancy From: BellowsRay Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 11:17 AM To: GundlachNancy Subject: FW: Pelican Marsh DRI/PUD Amendment FYI Zut Raymond V. Bellows,Zoning Manager Zoning Division -Zoning Services Section Growth Management Department—Planning & Regulation Telephone:239.252.2463; Fax: 239.252.6350 er County From: nicole Johnson [mailto:nicolej @conservancy.org] Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 11:11 AM To: Richard Yovanovich Cc: StrainMark; RomanCharlette; EbertDiane; HomiakKaren; asolis @cohenlaw.com; Diane Ebert <jodiebert @reagan.com> (jodiebert@reagan.com); ChrzanowskiStan; WafaaAssaad @colliergov.net; eastmath @collierschools.com; BellowsRay Subject: Pelican Marsh DRI/PUD Amendment Rich, In advance of tomorrow's Planning Commission meeting,the Conservancy has reviewed your application requesting amendment of the existing Pelican Marsh DRI/PUD to include 32 additional acres,accessed by a new road through lands currently classified as a Reserve, or preservation, area. While we do not believe residential development is inappropriate on this site,we are extremely concerned about your client's decision to add this property into the Pelican Marsh DRI/PUD, in a seeming attempt to avoid County-required on-site preservation of native vegetation. This site will have no internal connection to the existing Pelican Marsh DRI/PUD,and will instead function as a stand- alone development. Thus,there seems to be no legitimate rationale for inclusion of this property within Pelican Marsh. We understand that access is proposed through Pelican Marsh property. However,as your client is entitled to legally access their landlocked parcel, inclusion of the site into Pelican Marsh DRI/PUD is unnecessary. The Conservancy recommends your client reevaluate the proposed amendment and either bring this project forward as a new PUD,or identify on-site preservation consistent with the LDC. In addition,we believe that any impacts to existing Reserve(preserve)areas necessary to gain legal access to the new project should be mitigated through additional preservation. We ask that your client to consider our recommendations. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Nicole Nicole Johnson Director of Governmental Relations Conservancy of Southwest Florida 1495 Smith Preserve Way Naples, FL 34102 239-403-4220 nicolei@conservancy.org www.conservancy.org CONSERVANCY of Southwest Florida �.OUR'WATER,LAND,WILIF'LIFE.,FUTURE Protecting Southwest Florida's unique natural environment and quality of life...now and forever. Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 / Ogoks.-- 1-0 LAA-one-v-i Vnetei etalkivt- e-o. Cho � �, t /)61„, et,ti ovrtcy__ A' r j±k) SLVwY-a-- I 4-13 44/Le- • �cA9 ft-,-,g -4 per, CA-K\ "v1-0X4,4, ettf42-Al 1/14.ezt:if or.) atith- .)2-t-;nCe,4,^4). • .4- A-a-Ai-We-7j B 70 1-41.4 ro vi4 0).uot { 1 3 /19 ,„,-•- , ...1. -,A .. %1 _.:.,.. * . t— i - ' _ , .-. ..., , . . ..,,_ -,- , . •:', .„,,,,,„,..._,- ,, ,,-,,,,•-- . , • :•'-,.-, ..., .1 . - .,..-- . .•.'>.,', , I . , .;;'•-. 1 , ' I „,,,'•:, .1 ,e, , , • .-- , .. . , .. 1 1 1 , , ,-, . , . . / .. , '''''' ''' ;0* .. -..,;:,„';,,,,,f,• . ,.., ,.„.., i . ,•,4- i 1 --- -, I / i' r”...- . , . . . ' 1.. ■ t , 1 /4 / I .`„.• . / / . ...., - '''''''''.7,..,.....i.:;,',.,....,,.-....,,,...,-.,._..,.,•,-.., I I I ..• I . 1 ''■ . N 't ':' ., , •,..,,. .... ,'•'-•''-'.4....,s,.,..,,: . . . . . 1 AGENDA ITEM 9-C G 0 Ter C flinty Growth Management Department Development Review Division Memorandum To: Collier County Planning Commission From: Jeremy Frantz, Senior Planner Date: December 9,2015 Re: Architectural and Site Design Standards Ad-Hoc Committee LDC Amendment Request In 2013, the Board of County Commissioners(Board)created the Architectural and Site Design Standards Ad Hoc Committee(Ad Hoc Committee) "to review the architectural standards of the LDC," and to"aid and assist the Board in reviewing the current architectural and site design standards contained in the LDC and make recommendations for updates and revisions" (Resolution 2013-172). The Ad Hoc Committee has met regularly over the past two years reviewing the County's architectural standards, resulting in a proposal for a comprehensive Land Development Code Amendment to LDC section 5.05.08. Due to the length and complexity of this document,staff has provided the substantive changes in table format in addition to the traditional amendment request format. Please be advised, the table is intended for informational purposes and ease of review only.Additional changes such as renumbering of sections and updated cross-references have been omitted from the table. There is a companion LDC amendment request included in your packet that has been prepared by staff. It contains new or updated cross references to LDC section 5.05.08 throughout other sections of the LDC. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, arceAfrofF Jeremy Frantz jeremyfrantz@colliergov.net (239) 252-2305 Development Review Division•2800 North Horseshoe Dire•Naples,Florida 34104.239252-2400 •www.coliergov.net N 1, \ \ q / 2 % 2 1 9 » Q o « @ g « E $ § e \ o_ g « \ / \ } / § \ ■ 0 S. q — o e / 2 0 2 C 3 _ m 7 3 & , 7 , n m ul • / E. 3 \ \ K0 / } 0 \ / n 0 o - f a — k § ' - \ / ! / \ ! o = q n n E / = 4 ® R n _ ° ± 2 / - 03 03 M m i 7 - O. & CD %QE L. 0 ■\ § E = '0 o © =m .-t• (1) # o 2{ a n Er° « $ e l6 ; s $ = E �q � � , 2aa : 222 « ; ) ik 2 CD VI\ § / ƒ/ e p [f] \ - eh § 9 )2 � \ \ & % ice ) VI D n c , ` a f § 2 3 J , ■ & . , O. m » 7 l ƒ - } k c ID ƒ 2 @ , \, }� � E O. - a - § / 0 - J a _ g0" A § » o D -. j \ kk }] ) fn O. < m kI§ a ' m n • n a = ` 5 c C k .o = ` � { ; 3 \ § , Z < I \ o - , L. 0 E 00 D CO- ƒ 0 \ D * O.ro ` @ n 0J of � ƒ 0- ƒ 7 0 0 2 a) f f i ; m cl. n 0.. CL rsi } 70 VI a n o 0 ro 7 8 $ ƒ k n a) r• § - Cu N 7 0 CU 0- U, 7 el % k Del 2 Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Board of County Commissioners AUTHOR: Architectural and Site Design Standards Ad Hoc Committee The Ad Hoc Committee is comprised of members that served on the previous Ad Hoc Committee which produced the current architectural and site design standards prior to 2004 as well as other public citizens, including: James Boughton, AIA Rocco Costa, AIA *' Kathy Curatolo, CBIA Dalas Disney,AIA Bradley Schiffer, AIA Dominick Amico, P.E. AMENDMENT CYCLE: Independent Cycle S., LDC SECTION(S): 5.05.08 Architectural and Site Di "lards CHANGE AND REASON: This t .,describes proposed updates and • revisions recommended by the Architectural an•. 'te t 41 Standard . d Hoc Committee (Committee). Staff notes have been inch's-d throughout to prow +� a®ditiona ysis of Committee proposals. Architectural and si ign sta s were origin .. adopted In Ordinance 96-66.The ordinance describes that the sta s were created with g Following purpose: "C rcial d � as 'lid o high •visibility from major public I- n, th' °sign of. , ng nd site determines much of the -image and•r �. tive ''-'...0 the street rpes and character of a community. assive and/o � eric d�opments that do not contribute to, or integrate the comm in a ssitive manner can be detrimental to a Co y_;'-.nity's image 0 sense of place. " As a result,the goal of those standards was"to provide for architectural and site design treatments which will enhance the visua' earance of commercial development in Collier County." This ordinance included numerous it ustrations which were intended to visually depict the standards; however,this had the unintended consequence of architectural features frequently being designed exactly as illustrated. The first comprehensive review of the architecture and site design standards occurred in 2004. At that time, it was found that the standards created in 1996 no longer addressed the needs of the development community, design professionals, or review staff. The review resulted in changes such as: • Transferring regulations related to landscaping, parking, and fencing to the appropriate sections of the LDC to make the section more user-friendly; 1 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term • Providing for more flexibility in implementing the standards by expanding the application of the administrative approval of deviations from specific standards; • Adding new standards in place of requirements that proved to be ineffective in achieving the stated purpose and intent of the standards; • Adding new standards to respond to new development pressures that resulted in taller buildings and multi-story garages; • Proposing separate standards for specific building types; and • Making house-keeping changes to clarify existing language and eliminating discrepancies. On July 24, 2012 the Board of County Commissioners(Bo..-: « .proved a Staff request for Board direction to review LDC section 5.05.08 in its entirety he 2004 authoring committee, in order to propose amendments to the entire section. S ' • =4d these amendments would go through the normal vetting process, including the _' mittee that "fi ored the 2004 amendments to the architectural and site design standards As a result, Resolution 2013-172 established the.Collier County Arc al and Site Design Standards Ad Hoc Committee "to review the architectural s _ 'rds of the " The resolution further establishes that the Commi 's functions, per °� duties shall b "aid and assist the Board in reviewing the current ural and si_, ign standards contained in the LDC and make recommendations for updat- n 'sions." This proposed amendme ® esents the second e*"';-. v ens review of the architectural and site design standards .. -'fit meetin_ De « 20 , the Committee established several goals for th-, iew procs, includ"� � • Concentrate on a ing the hitectura = ,•ndards more user-friendly■• Reduce the numb sta ds , • Pr' « +� =fief from o �� dare :, posed only on PUDs • Focus the ap., ,iltty most appropriate areas • - ne applicability J r ma= opment projects • E ) that the stands are ed on big-box stores • Reduce costs to busin • Remove 1 engineering site design elements from the architectural standards On January 9th, 201 yot m he members present resulted in a recommendation (4-1) to eliminate architectural s : a ,w t+� entirely. However,the Committee determined the review should continue as that was the task assigned by the Board. Changes to purpose and intent(page 33): LDC section 5.05.08 A describes the purpose and intent of Collier County's architectural and site design standards. This section currently lists several design goals and describes that the standards are intended to result in "the development of a positive, progressive and attractive community image and sense of place [which] is vital to the economic health and vitality of Collier County." While the purpose and intent section does not contain any specific regulations, it provides general guidance and aids in the analysis of proposed alternative architectural designs allowed in LDC section 5.05.08 G. 2 1:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Proposed Section 5.05.08 A.5 (page 33) This section currently describes that the architectural standards are intended to be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Land Development Code, and to promote crime prevention. During their review, the Committee received public comments from the Conservancy of Southwest Florida identifying several causes of bird collisions with buildings such as substantial glass facades,the use of highly reflective glass, and upward facing lighting. The Conservancy requested additional standards in order to limit the use of glazing materials and designs which contribute to bird collisions. In response, the Committee has indicated that restricting or prohibiting reflectivetmirrored,or clear glazing would not be feasible for the following reasons: • The Florida Building Code already limits the use clear glazing and will be updated soon to become even more restrictive. r • The term "reflective" would be difficult to define'given , .11 windows are reflective to various degrees. • Regulating textures, decals, or pattern 'indows would not e,. feasible. • Mirrored glass is not used in Collier Co • Corner office glazing is too valuable to eli 1' :to or ict. • Up-lighting on buildings is -times requir- °rity. The Committee also noted that they , , dy proposed . o reduce the amount of required glazing. However, in order to acknow _a.e t ° . e--cern for collisions, the Committee has added a statement to thi • of the purpose and hilt whic es, "Additionally, the use of glazing materials an• ,hick redu bt ', . `s'0 is encouraged." The Committee relayed that adding this, tateme "� _,_ the pure. . . ntent y elp to increase awareness of the issue. Additionally, the mmitte has propos . new design treatment option to LDC section 5.05.05 D.4.w which pro an incentive for th e of bird-safe designs. Changes to appIicab lity. ,,- OVERVIEW of Proposed,Sec tion t` 08 B (pa �4) Currentl' provisions e•u h in on 5.05.08 of the LDC apply to buildings or projects in four scenar : 7 •-, 1. First, the •ards ape to all new buildings and projects within commercial, non- residential P +istric %_ s 'd Business Park zoning districts. 2. Second, the sta " •-: e ly to non-residential buildings, when located on an arterial or collector roadway rthin a certain distance of a residential zoned area. 3. Third, the standards also apply to non-residential renovations and redevelopment projects under certain circumstances. 4. Fourth, the standards apply under certain circumstances after the abandonment and discontinuance of use of a building. The Committee proposes to make changes to these scenarios as detailed below. Proposed Section 5.05.08 B.1 (page 34) 3 1:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx 1 Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term I I This section establishes the zoning districts to which the architectural standards apply. Currently, these districts include commercial zoning districts, non-residential PUD districts and non- residential components of any PUD district (i.e. Mixed Use PUDs which include more than one type of PUD district like commercial, civic, or institutional tracts), and business park districts. In order to limit the applicability of architectural standards to commercial areas only,the Committee proposes the section apply to"commercial components of PUD zoning districts,and Business Park zoning districts." Staff notes: This change means that non-residential PUD districts (like Mixed Use PUDs, research or technology park PUDs, Industr l PUDs, or community facilities PUDs) will not be required to comply with i _ 'ctural standards unless they meet the location criteria in proposed sectio t".08 B.2. This change may impact the aesthetic predictability of schoo s, or other community facilities. A Note on Assisted Living Facilities Staff brought to the Committee's attention that ALFs have historically been designated as either residential or commercial used=on a case-` Irm,• basis. 1 Whether an ALF is designated as comme „ • ' dential deter when architectural standards app " building. y,ALFs are require, to meet architectural standards if th.l ,-.t` designated as mercial, but they are not required to meet the standards i ey signatel <esidential. The proposed amendment does no impose to age tht� � s,�ss. The Commit ommended staffs-t ignated for the purposes of architecture;tandards. e Comm oted that s311Ae large ALFs can have a significant impa the c.. £ unity has -,. the size and visibility of the building, part � when w .�= ; # , ial r ,s. Additionally, depending on the set t a` •, so Fs may me de co nmercial functions, such as dining ities, skil _e serfs, or other v ities. However, it was also noted some :s may function very sim `" o a residential apartment building. Proposed Sec 5.05.08.B.2 ,;=.u g h 1 3... (page 34) Currently, compliance with the itectural standards is required for all non-residential buildings and projects that are located o w arterial or collector road. The Committee proposes that the architectural standard pl d n °rently under three scenarios: y 1) Project sites in a non-industrial zoning district that abut an arterial or collector road, including project sites separated from arterial or collector roads by up to 150 feet of ROWs or easements, and 2) Project sites in an industrial zoning district that are on an arterial road, and 3) Proposed buildings within 150 feet of the boundary of a residentially zoned district. Figure 1 provides an example of sites separated from arterial roads by Right-Of-Ways or easements. For all sites outside of an industrial zoning district on an arterial or collector roadway, the proposed change is based on the lack of visibility by the general public of an industrial building 4 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term as the structure is mainly viewed by employees. Although generally an industrial structure is utilized for production, LDC section 2.03.04 A.l.b.3 allows for 20 percent of the gross floor area to be used as retail space in Industrial Zoning Districts. Therefore, customers may visit the site to purchase goods. Many of the industrial buildings utilize this option and have incorporated show/sales rooms for clientele. Figure 1: Examples of commercial lots separated from arterial roads by Right-Of-Ways or easements. ad fill..A - a 7e, • -•:‘. '''s, limu x f q. ._ S 4 4 _.y. : }_ _ r '4 . „,„„7: P_ - �-r • �i� U iii`"` . t �.��,., 1''' � : i - 0 Il&it. t t • i , S '� Collier County Property Appraiser Aerial ; M 16;; .. d 'for $1~ h_. Y Collier County Property Appraiser Aerial Commercial separated from an Arterial Rd by. Commercial separated from an Arterial Piper Blvd. Rd by Trail Blvd. Proposed Section 5.05.08 B.2.c (page 34) Currently, architectural standards apply when a proposed building's footprint is located within 300 feet (the length of a football field) of a residential zoning district boundary. The Committee proposes a change to 150 feet is sufficient based on examples such as; 1) The football and track area of St. John Neumann High School: � In this case, a concession building/PE fitness building was required to have a primary facade and a landscape buffer to shield an overhead door that was located 300 feet away from residential property. However, the football field fronted a local street. It was argued by the applicant that the architectural features required in this case were not effective. 5 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 2) The First Baptist Academy: In this case,a field house was required to meet architectural standards because it was within 300 feet of residential property. The Committee described that the building's entrance faced an internal parking lot and the rear of the building was separated from residential property by a track and field area. The building was required to meet primary facade requirements, but not required to incorporate any treatments to the side of the building facing the residential area. In addition,the Committee relayed that landscape buffers or walls could be within the 150 feet and provide visual relief. Staff notes: Typically, when this provision has k17.:27-', rggered in the past, it has been used to ensure that buildings such as acti `. or residential projects, churches in non-commercial districts, and ustri ildings comply with architectural standards. The proposed change"may allow these.:types of buildings, which do not meet the other zoning or on criteria, to ha `fre of a negative visual impact on residential property/ ! result of the redu " to 150 feet. Additionally, since other applicability cr '. in 5.0 B.2.a-b ' oposed to change, this provision may b riggered more eq t . This change rely on landscape buffers as requir „ I C section 4. . 2 to reduce visual impacts to neighboring properties. Fo s ffi ti industri operties are required to construct a Type C buffer when " 'ac�7 ,,/ single famtkresidential zoning and a Type B buffer wizen adjacent to o types m* I'f" 'dents ing. OVERVIEW of pro , Secta ;;,05.08 B _ / ■ This section current��ovides t. when renovations or redevelopment meet the established criteria,the entire facade""" " utldi " ust compl�% ith the architectural standards. The Committee proposes to c _-, criteria , = .sed o total floor area of the building or alteration rather th.� �. �,e oft ilding" as be ", affected and to exempt portions of existing builds hich are ffec by the re . ion from complying with the architectural standards.; Additionally, Committee proposes that interior renovations to existing buildings which do n A.,,nal ffect the exte appe 'e should not be required to comply with architectural standards details r -,ding thy`changes to the exemptions section is provided below. The Committee beles tha ►e proposed change incentivizes re-use, renovation, infill development, and the i ° f s g infrastructure by reducing the number of building alterations required to comply. In ii. nonconforming and older structures, the provision is designed to maintain and increase the value of nonconforming and older structures. The Committee utilized the vested rights section of the LDC as a basis for this change. Proposed Section 5.05.08 B.3.a (page 35) Currently, when an addition, renovation, or redevelopment exceeds 50 percent of the assessed value of the existing structure(s) or 25 percent of the gross square footage of existing structure(s) the entire structure(s) and the site improvements must conform to the architectural standards. The proposed change modifies the applicability so that only the alterations must comply with the architectural standards, and only when the alteration results in an addition greater than 4,000 6 I\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term square feet of floor area. When alterations meet this criterion, only the area changed by the alteration must comply. This change is intended to meet the Committee's goal to ensure that the architectural standards are focused on big-box stores. Staff notes: The change from a percentage of the value or gross square footage to only alterations greater than 4,000 square feet of floor area could allow buildings with less than 4,0 00 square feet of existing floor area to more than double their size without requiring the existing structure or site improvements to conform to the architectural standards. The effect of:the proposed change is demonstrated in Table I 1, which includes the number of architectural reviews een October 2011 and July 2015. The table shows that under the currents standards 35 projects with alterations to existing buildings have been rep Ito meet the architectural standards. However, under the proposed stand• � " iz 14 of those projects would have been subject to architectural standards.m pro ' would no longer be required to meet architectural standa �� ± ue to the `. coon of the term "alterations"or due to the alteration • _ nder 4,000 squa 't). Table 1. Reviews for Alterations to Exi ' Budd'_ from Oc 1 1 to Jul. 2015. ': Alterations to Existing Buildings Less than or equal More (LDC section 5.05.08 B.3.a) to 4,000 sf than Total 4 000 sf Applicable Projects Addatcons, = %) 19 35 Under Existing R ovations, ,/, etc s (519 (100%) Standards R elopme renovation'i _- redevelopment projects) Applica ' ejects `` . A *OM ,, 1 � �� ° + � type 14 14 Under-�opo o 0 r of eration l (40%) (40%) S; 'rds � ire•wed standard` ri, Froj hat will no , �" 16 longer abject toenovat ;:or (46%) 5 21 Architectural ®evelopment Includes additions which (14%) (60%) Standards are proposed to be exempt when under 4,000 sq.ft. Proposed Section 5.05.I sage 35) Currently,if 50 percent of.. tlding facade wall area is renovated the entire facade and site design elements must comply wth the architectural standards. The proposed change modifies the applicability so that the entire facade must comply only when the facade improvements to buildings with greater than 20,000 square feet in floor area results in a change to more than 50 percent of any façade area. This change is intended to meet the Committee's goal to ensure that the architectural standards are focused on big-box stores. Staff notes: Few facade improvements on existing buildings that are subject to architectural standards occur on buildings with greater than 20,000 square feet in floor area.A review of 6 applications from October 2011 to July 2015, depicted in 7 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3 5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Table 2, demonstrated that only 1 building had a floor area greater than 20,000 square feet. Based on this review, it is likely that a majority offacade improvements will not require the existing facade to be improved and only the addition would be required to comply with the architectural standards. The effect of this change on building facade applicability is depicted in Table 3. Table 2. Reviews for Facade Improvements on Existing Buildings from Oct. 2011 to Jul. 2015. Less than More Facade Improvements on Existing Buildings or equal than Total (LDC section 5.05.08 B.3.b) to 20,000 20,000 sf sf Applicable Projects Under Existin Larger than 50 percen .�, 5 1 6 Standards g facade area -. (8 ° (17%) (100%) Applicable Projects Larger than 51. * %nt of 1 1 Under Pro p osed facade area fo ldings l %) (17%) Standards greater than 20,1 1�. - Projects that will no longer be subject to Lar• ®n 50 percen . 5 5 facade area for buildings less o 0 Architectural (83%) (83%) Standards than or a , .1 000 t 4 Table 3. Proptt_°= g Improvements >>a,' ;.' • Faca.; Facade and Site Design Buildin �e Alterat ements Must Comply? 20,000sgfto <50% No torI' 1 0% No 1 fit ft No 77 > 20,000 ' > 50R111, Yes Proposed Section 5.05.08 B.3 cage Currently, add a , renovatt•°h` or rede-elopments of an existing project require all existing structures and sit=',%. .rovements to conform to the current architectural standards when the cost of the project exceeds: • 50 percent of the a" ' ed value of the existing structure, or • 25 percent of the square footage of the gross area of the existing structures. The Committee proposes that only the alteration should be required to comply with architectural standards and that unaltered portions of a nonconforming building or the project site should not be required to meet architectural standards.For the purposes of this proposed change,alterations shall be any change to the external features or dimensions of a building or facade and excludes interior renovations that do not affect the external appearance of the building. The proposed change is based on the fact that if a building were never altered,there would never be a trigger for a building to comply with architectural standards. The Committee relayed that if an alteration to a building 8 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term would not increase the nonconformity, any architectural or site design issues related to the nonconforming portions of the building would not be affected and therefore should not be required to comply with architectural standards. Furthermore,this change would incentivize the renovation of older buildings. In addition, limiting the applicability to the altered façade may reduce the costs associated with the renovation of an older building. The Committee's intent is to improve the design of older buildings, by reducing restrictions, and associated costs. The Committee further stated that if the County always requires a renovation to comply with the code it won't allow for historic buildings. Staff notes:Staff recommends that this section could be kited to smaller buildings only. Proposed Section 5.05.08 B.3.d(page 35) Currently, alterations to existing buildings are req edto co ith the materials and colors standards in LDC section 5.05.08 D.12. This i s standards s saint colors and limits on exterior building materials like metal panels ar the prohibition on neon.tubing. The Committee proposes that alterations to existing buildings he required to comply •aint standards.The Committee relayed that this change would assist �• provi •a design a -novation of older buildings and may reduce the costs ociated with the .�_ on. The Committees intent is to improve the design of older bud Eby reducing fictions, and associated costs. The Committee stated further that if the County always requir enovation to comply with the code it won't allow for historic buildings. Proposed Section 5.05 t, page 35) This section current,' urren ntifie" en the a �t .I stands apply to buildings which have been abandoned or t se has b discontt . The Committee proposes the removal of this section as it is a detriment-40 rede ` pment opportunities and prevents reinvestment in existing buildings. I e:- •''•n, the " =�o w,m s d that buildings lose value due to this regulation and it will y „ 'ning _ et va , "" ext�ig structures. If the section is removed, airchit '_ T . standar• .. d on .; ••ly to as ; ed or discontinued buildings if alterations to the building are propose. _requt f �,• comply by the remaining applicability sections. This section been replaced_with a list" 'exceptions which identify when a building or project that would othe be require comply with architectural standards is exempt from complying with all or parts o , : section . a result, historic buildings (pursuant to LDC section 2.03.07 E or designated by the S •f w a or the Federal Government),buildings in a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district, and . , ocated interior to courtyards are proposed to be exempt from all architectural standards. Ro me repairs and maintenance to existing buildings, buildings with 4,000 square feet or less of floor area,the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency(CRA), and public utility ancillary systems would only be required to comply with paint color standards (This does not include the materials standards in LDC section 5.05.08 D.12). Staff notes: As a result of the "less than 4,000 sq.ft. " change, a large number of buildings may become exempt from architectural standards as a result of exemption in section B.4.c.ii. Table 4 demonstrates the total number of new projects or buildings reviewed between October 2011 and July 2015. During that time, 9 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term approximately 18 percent of the 168 buildings or projects reviewed were buildings under 4,000 square feet. Buildings such as fast food restaurants, banks,gas stations and other types of businesses are frequently less than 4,000 square feet (seen in Figure 2). These types of businesses also frequently attempt to develop according to corporate design criteria that may not comply with Collier County's current architectural standards. Based on recent approvals,staff feels these standards have helped to create attractive corporate buildings (see examples of typical corporate designs for small buildings that have been subject to Collier County's architectural standards in Figure 3). Without these standards, the buildings may have been developed according to basic corporate models. „m Additionally, while the Committee recommends e.ting the Immokalee CRA from architectural standards, it is important to,--7.Ihe CRA intends to adopt its own architectural standards at a later date Finally, removing the requirement to sir with materia dards in LDC section 5.05.08 D.12 could result in I ° use of corrugated me nels or pre- manufactured buildings as additions to buildings an would allow use of neon tubing on alterations. Table 4.Architectural Reviews for New Projects ildings. New projects/buldings Less than or More than More than (LDC section S.OS.Q8 B.4.d.ii) equal to 4,000 but less or equal to Total 4,000 sf than 20,000 sf 20,000 sf Applicable Projec der Exi>Ig 84. 54 168 Standards (18 Ax (50%0) (32%) (100%} Applicable Projects 'ropy �!6 84 54 138 Standards (50%) (32%) (82%) Projec anger 30 30 subjco Architect ands" � `" (1 (18%) 10 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Figure 2. Examples of building types which are typically less than 4,000 square feet. Buildings Constructed After Adoption of 2004 Architectural Standards „w-_ �1 : -_ , Photo credit: Google Maps Photo credit:Google Maps McDonalds = 3,678 sq ft AmSouth/Regions Bank= 3,820 sq ft Year built: 2010 Year built: 2007 4 & Photo credit:Google i - Steak `n Shake =3,400 sq ft Year built: 2005 Buildings Constructed Prior to Adoption of 2004 Architectural Standards , .4' 'INI 11-091,-.'"., 'il r -41.4:4. 7,:-. Itt Photo credit:Google Maps Photo credit: Staff Loving Hut=2,932 sq ft Cracklin' Jacks =2,400 sq ft Year built: 1984 Year built: 1975 f I 111°Fir • -4., ..,. 1.;Liii - t I Photo credit:Google Maps Kangaroo Express= 1,952 sq ft Year built: 1981 11 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term Figure 3. Examples of small building corporate designs subject to LDC section 5.05.08. M _ ten, -: r z •y s I Photo credit: Staff Photo credit: Staff Chik-Fil-A=4,071 sq ft Burger King=2,810 sq ft Year built=2006 Year built=2010 • az- ' Imo._ Oro Li Photo credit: Staff Photo credit: Staff Dunkin' Donuts =993 sq ft Taco Bell =2,111 sq ft Year built= 1997 (remodel 2011) Year built=2011 �= r pit , =_ ■ I 0 Photo credit: Staff Photo credit: Staff McDonalds=3,453 sq ft Taco Bell =2,322 sq ft Year built=2014 Year built=2014 12 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Summary of Applicability Changes: Figure 4, below, demonstrates the proposed changes to the applicability sections and design standards based on building size. The table provides a general overview and does not reflect how specific standards have been modified. Figure 5 demonstrates how the architectural standards are proposed to change for industrial buildings. The most significant changes demonstrated in Figure 5 include the elimination of architectural standards for industrial buildings on collector roads and the reduction of applicability when an industrial building is within 300 feet of 150 feet of a residentially zoned district. Figure 4: Comparison of Existing and Proposed Architectural Standards Based on Building Size Existing/Proposed Proposed/Retained Standards ]Standards Building Size Standard 4,000 sq. Less than Less than 10,000 to 20,000 to 40,000 section numbers) ft.or less (proposed 1 (New 5,000 sq. 10,000 19,999 sq. 39,999 sq. sq.ft.or Category) ft. sq.ft. ft. ft. Larger Section B-Applicability Section B-Architectural Standards Applicability _ Section B.3.a -Alterations to an existing building Section B.3.b-Facade Improvements Section D-Building Design Standards Section D.2.b-Primary Facade Design Features Section D.3.b-Wall Plane Changes Section D.4-Building Design Treatments Section F.1-Site Design Elements Section D.6-Window Standards Section D.7-Overhead Doors Section D.5-Blank Wall Areas Section D.8-Standards for Outparcels and Freestanding Buildings in PUDs Section D.10-Awning Standards Section D.11-Entryway/Customer Entrance Treatment Section D.12.b-Building Colors Section D.12.c-d-Building'M' ,rials and Neon Tubing Prohibition Section D.13-Barber poles Old Section C.3-Facade/Wall Height Transition Old Section C.3.c.iii.a-Minimum projections/recesses=4 , feet Old Section C.3.c.iii.b-Minimum projections/recesses=6 feet Old Section C.3.c.iii.c-Minimum projections/recesses=8 feet Old Section C.3.c.iii.d-Minimum projections/recesses= 10 feet Table continued on following page 4 13 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Building Size 4,000 sq. Less than Less than 10,000 to 20,000 to 40,000 Standard ft.or less 5,000 sq. 10 000 19 999 sq. 39 999 sq. sq.ft.or (New q• q• q• q• ca ft. sq.ft. ft. ft. Larger Section D.3-Variation in Massing(standards vary based on building size) Old Section C.4.a.v-Maximum facade length (and I minimum depth)=50 ft. (3 ft.) Old Section C.4.a.iv-Maximum façade length(and minimum depth)=75 ft.(4 ft.) Old Section C.4.a.iii-Maximum façade length(and minimum depth)=100 ft. (6 ft.) Section D.3.a.ii-Maximum facade length (and minimum , .• depth)=125 ft.(6 ft.) Section D.3.a.i-Maximum façade length (and minimum depth)=150 ft. (10 ft.) Section D.9-Roof Treatments Section D.9.b.i-Roof Edge and Parapet Treatments Section D.9.c-Roof Design Standards Section D.9.d.ii.b-Minimum vertical distance of mansard roofs=6 ft. Section D.9.d.ii.a-Minimum vertical distance of mansard roofs=8 ft. Sections E&F-Standards for specific Uses and Site Design Standards Section E-Design Standards for Specific Uses Section F-Site Design Standards Figure 5: Comparison of Existing and Proposed Applicability for Industrial Buildings Proposed Changes to Applicability and Design Standards for Industrial Buildings Standard Current Standard Proposed Standard Section B-Applicability When located in Industrial zoning Section 6.2.b Architectural standards apply when On arterial or collector road district and when located on an located: arterial road Section B.2.c-Architectural standards apply when Within 300 feet from residentially Within 150 feet from residentially building footprint is: zoned district zoned district Section E.6-Design Standards for Warehousing/Distribution Buildings Primary facades and façades facing Section E.6.c-Variation in massing required on Primary façades and facades facing residential zoning districts within façades: residential districts 150 of the property line Section E.7-Design Standards for Industrial/Factory Buildings Section E.7.b.i-Windows must cover a minimum of: 25%of the façade area 20%of the façade area Primary facades and facades facing Section E.7.c-Variation in massing required on Primary facades and facades facing residential zoning districts within façades: residential districts 150 of the property line 14 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Changes to building design standards: The following common terms are used throughout the description of the proposed amendment: Design Feature = Primary façade design features in proposed LDC section 5.05.08 D.2. Design Treatment = Façade design treatments applicable to all façades in proposed LDC section 5.05.08 D. Design Element = Site design elements in proposed LDC section 5.05.08 F.1. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.1 (page 36) Currently, the heading of this section includes the require , .t all facades must be designed with consistent architectural style, detail, and trim featur is statement has been relocated in its entirety to subsection 5.05.08 D.1.a. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.1.a (page 36) Currently, this section requires that all exter a�Lies on building .ted on outparcels, and freestanding buildings within a unified plan o elopment must adher~ requirements of this section. This language is repetitive of existing pr•.* +ns in p ' osed LDC °a '•n 5.05.08 D.8.b.i - additional standards for outparcel and freestan. , A gs within a I- i' and common ownership developments. As a resu tatement is . ed to be deleted. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.1.b (page Currently,this section requires that Build , or pr located 40e intersection of two or more arterial or collector ro include to fe ch are°ntended to emphasize their location as gatewa ransttrpointscom The section includes several examples of such de eatures as corn ers, corner entrances, or other such features. The Committee proposes - -letin� l is list of exam ples to provide additional flexibility when designing ;n f .nd tra Old S: 5.05.08 gage` -W Currentl �'is section req s that ary facades on the ground floor have features along 50 percent of horizontal lea ..The ittee proposes to delete this section from the text. The Committee relayed that this re ".ement Mound elsewhere in the design features elements and is therefore redun Proposed Section 5.0 . I. a' sage 37) This section requires a of two design features on primary facades. The current list of potential design features includes five potential options. The Committee is proposing changes to the existing options and the addition of five options as detailed in the following sections. Proposed Section 5..05.08 D.2.b.i (page 37) Currently, this option requires a minimum of 30 percent of the primary facade area consisting of window and glazed door openings. The Committee proposes the minimum is amended to 25 percent and further clarifies that the standard is to be applied to the exterior primary facadet area and not any facades in interior courtyards. The Committee determined that with the other design standards to choose from the 30 percent standard is excessive for buildings of all sizes. 15 1:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Furthermore, the Committee proposes to add a provision in LDC section 5.05.08 D.2.b.i.a which allows for up to 50 percent of the window area to be substituted with trellises or latticework. This option also outlines the planting area and opacity requirements required to qualify the trellis or latticework as a primary façade element. The planting and opacity requirements are based on LDC section 5.03.02 regarding planting requirements for fences and walls. This feature is proposed because it allows an alternative to the glazing requirement. Further,this alternative is currently an option that is allowed and is utilized by buildings within PUDs. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.ii (page 37) Currently, this option requires that a minimum of 20 perce , '"e recessed covered entrance is devoted to windows and glazed door openings. The props° ange is to reduce the percentage to 15 percent. The Committee determined that with 'r design standards to choose from, requiring 20 percent in this standard is excessive for.b ings of ali sizes. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.iii (page 37) The Committee proposes the addition of a n ��° -sign feature option .llows for a covered entrance with a minimum horizontal dimension . teen feed a minim ,rea of 200 square feet. Additionally,this section requir- ,glazing on a i o`15 percent of` _.rimary façade area. This standard was added to ally mm ore varia. ong options for primary façades. Staff notes: This option was origi '•lly • a "mon "_ _ tal covered entrance"by the Committee. The te_rm "monu , '.i 1"was used to inspke This option exceeds the dig ablisheR . cover ,m...ices i x'15.08 D.2.b.ii by 100 percent and.: then consider,.1.7 :' 'e ittee to be the minimum dimension ne •ry to cis''e a monumental" entrmce. When staff indicated monumental is . bjective term, the mittee clarified that the minimum dam •eterm ' • �d ` °�r 'th the dard. However, in the Committee's j ,rm r.k r aumen • .8 r ved at the request of the County rney's 0 0 r cri and to . e confusion over what qualifies as 4 umental." . Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.2 " (page Currently, this option states tha permanent covered walkway or arcade must be 8 feet wide and the total length mu ,measure ercent of the length of the associated façade. The Committee proposes to reduce the required length to 40 percent of the length of the associated façade because the prior percentage was "'t given the number of other façade requirements and is based on the experience of applying e 60 percent standard to projects. Additionally, this design feature would require a minimum of 15 percent glazing on the primary façade. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.v (page 37) Another new design standard option is proposed to include awnings over window or doors as a design feature. This section allows applicants to utilize awnings both over windows and in a creative style where they may be placed in locations absent of windows.Additionally,this section requires glazing on a minimum of 15 percent of the primary facade area. 16 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term Staff notes: Examples of the use of awnings over ornamental design features can be seen in Figure 6 below. Figure 6: Examples of awnings over ornamental design features. . woof 4 11116' a Photo credit: Google Maps -� Photo credit: Staff Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.vi (page 37) Currently, this option requires a porte-cochere have a minimum horizontal dimension of 18 feet and 20 percent of the primary façade area must be devoted to windows or glazed door openings. The Committee proposes to reduce the minimum glazing requirement to 15 percent. They determined that the 20 percent glazing requirement combined with one of the other design elements`is excessive in application on a single primary façade. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.vii (page 37) Currently, this option requires that if a tower element is utilized there must also be 20 percent of the façade dedicated to windows and glazed door openings. The Committee proposes to reduce this standard to 15 percent to be consistent with the window and glazing requirements in the accompanying options. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.viii (page 38) The Committee is proposing to add another design feature option that allows trellis or latticework covering a minimum of 15 percent of the primary façade. This option also outlines the planting area and opacity requirements required for the trellis or latticework to qualify as a primary façade element. The planting and opacity requirements are based on LDC section 5.03.02 regarding planting requirements for fences and walls. This feature is proposed because it allows an alternative to the glazing requirement.Further,this alternative is currently an option that is allowed and is utilized by buildings within PUDs. 17 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.ix (page 38) The Committee is proposing to add the option of an entry plaza of 200 square feet that includes seating and is connected to the primary facade. A minimum of 15 percent glazing is also required by this section. The Committee relayed that this element adds a welcoming feature to the primary facade and is the only one that gives credit for seating. Staff notes: This primary façade design feature could also qualms as one of the two required site design elements found in proposed section 5.05.08 F.1.a. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.x (page 38) The Committee is proposing to add an elevated entry t• options for primary facade design features. The elevated entry would be required to be 4' 'arc eet in area, 16 inches above the primary finished floor of the building, and to be a. ent o connected to the building face. Additionally, this design feature would require a. urn of 15 p pt glazing on the primary facade. The Committee relayed that this feat . Id allow for grand -attires to be recognized as an option for credit. Staff notes: Similar to the sts�.now regardt ."r ?r section 5.05 t, D.2.b.iii, this option was originally ti r `elevated `fig$�; >en" n"tal entry. "Again, the term "monumental" was remove. E e,, uest oft ® .unty Attorney's Office for clarity and to remove confusion , r qualifies as'" onumental. " Proposed Section _.,9,,5r .05 (page 3 f The Committee is pro, Ong to nn entry : : as a =_ `"�-sign feature. This option would require the courtyard" - contigu. with the bu ng entry an.`connected to the primary facade. It must also have a courtyard ace •` least 650 " re feet consisting of any combination of hard or softscape walkwa a .� d edge.decorative fencing, or a minimum low 4 foot w, wall(s) t . . s de �$ feature �o <, req a minimum of 15 percent glazing on the prima �:�ade. The ( o itrelayed that this c nge provides increased design flexibility and incorpo > language fro •uir ements. Old Section 5'•_ 8 C.3 -Fac wall h'.- t transition elements (page 38) LDC section 5.05. C.3 currently provides for facade/wall height transition elements. The intent of these standards =to ensure.fat buildings relate in mass and size to the adjacent built environment and sire a section currently applies to all buildings that are at least twice the height of any builds t in 150 feet. These transitional elements can include wall plane changes,roofs,canopies,colonnades,balconies with minimum depths for projections and recesses in coordination with the building size. The Committee is proposing tos eliminate this section of the code as the requirements for canopies, porte-cocheres, and other design elements would provide for transitional elements. Staff notes: This section provides a gradual visual relief from buildings of different heights in close proximity to one another. The proposed change will allow buildings twice the height of buildings within 150 feet which may create buildings that appear 18 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3 5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term out of scale with surrounding uses. The intended effect of the current section is demonstrated in Figure 7. Figure 7: Illustration depicting facade/wall height transitions AV Et 1 � Pr.P 1111111101." dist■ 411111111111. 7. s F" i �A y� {t Jam} k ,( y— "`3}/ y� r�}c/l�a`3f/� /1�/�' y. ez Y1.41.0rf�' TI'i o"✓ rrig.156.4/ L fr? r(// /6, /..'/it _. 4441,64 e OM: N5-71T ure Image credit: Staff OVERVIEW of Section 5.05.08 D.3— Variation in dssing(page 39) This section requires variation in building massing J rder to avoid a single, large, dominant building mass. These variations are required to be integral to the structure and not merely for cosmetic effect. The Committee has revised the following sections with the view that the massing requirements are best suited for larger big box stores in order to help break up the bulk of the structure and make the building more visually appealing. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.3.a.ii (page 39) Currently, this section requires buildings between 20,000 and 39,999 square feet to have projections and recesses with a depth of Beet. The Committee proposes to reduce the depth to 6 feet. It was determined that an 8 foot projection or recess was severe for smaller buildings. The Committee determined that lowering this standard would not be detrimental because this is a requirement in excess of the primary facade requirements for all buildings subject to architectural standards. Proposed Sections 5.05.08 D.3.a.iii-v (page 39) Currently,these three sections establish standards for variation in massing for buildings with up to 19,999 square feet in gross building area. The Committee proposes to eliminate the projection and recess requirements for buildings less than 20,000 square feet. The Committee determined that smaller buildings generally already include these features. Staff notes:Removing these sections means that variation in massing will no longer apply to buildings such as Walgreens, CVS, and other medium sized buildings which are commonly under 20,000 square feet. While smaller buildings could 19 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term voluntarily include these features, the proposed change would allow buildings to have flat walls and a single dominant mass. Some examples of buildings which are typically smaller than 20,000 square feet are shown in Figure 8. Figure 8: Exam Iles of buildin:s under 20,000 s i uare feet. - . 1 1 rlf� rw Photo credit: Staff Retail C —Na•les BI = 15,000 sq ft Li Olittvr,Isi,1�., 1 i � 6 I f z Photo credit:Google Maps Retail Center—Tamiami Trail = 17,990 s• ft Changes to building design treatments: Old Section 5.05.08 C.5.a—Project standards (page 40) The building design treatments currently begin with section 5.05.08 C.5 and is currently titled "project standards,"however, subsection C.5.a more accurately describes submittal requirements. This section is proposed to be relocated in its entirety to proposed section 5.05.08 C and has been re-titled "submittal requirements." Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.4 (page 40) This section is proposed to be reorganized and renumbered and as a result will be re-titled "Building design treatments." The proposed description regarding this section has been relocated from old section 5.05.08 C.8.a in its entirety. As a result, this proposed section requires that building design treatments (which are listed in sections 5.05.08 D.4.a-v) "must be an integral part of the building's design..." and, "must not consist solely of applied graphics or paint." 20 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15 docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.4.t(page 41) This section is proposed to be revised to correct a scrivener's error and to clarify that solar shading devices may count as building design treatments when they extend a minimum of 50 percent of the length of the building façade and not when they cover or shade 50 percent of the building. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.4.u (page 41) Currently,this section provides translucent glazing as a menu option for building design treatments if it exceeds the minimum required glazing. The Committee is proposing to decrease the requirement from 15 to 10 percent beyond the minimum glazing requirement. The Committee determined 15 percent beyond the code requirement is too high- d therefore it was excessive as an additional option. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.4.v (page 41) Currently, this section provides glass block as a m •ti option `�building design treatments if it exceeds the minimum required glazing by 15 p- . The Com re-iterated the purpose of the architectural and site design standards is 0" _ulate the "look' +' .uildings not the actual construction techniques. The Committee pro.., - to decrease the re. "� ent from 15 to 10 percent beyond the minimum glazing requirem he Co .the deter s-d 15 percent was excessive as an additional opti " ,,to 7 Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.4.w (pag The Committee proposes adding this new u1 ct +-sign tre;1 hr� t to provide an incentive for the use of bird-safe glazing m erials. This ding • `b treatm :�� +ption could be utilized if the optional design feature . ection 5 08 D - osenid at least 85 percent of all exterior glazing on = st th stories of Mt . g aces one of four potential bird- safe glazing techni . This t ' ent wa ded to ad ess public comments from the Conservancy of Southw = lortda' •uesting the m•dition of standards to reduce bird mortalities due to builchlt Changes other desk iter • Old Seca .05.08 C.5 ie des, lements (page 42) Currently, z `°� section 5 05.- .5 •�•' t standards includes building design standards and site design eleme he Commi =` •ropossto move the site design element section to Proposed LDC section 5. F— Site II ,n Standards. It was determined that it made the most sense to keep all of the site . •n ele E ¢ together. This will help make the architectural section more user friendly for the a. •n c discussion regarding section 5.05.08 F below. Proposed Section 5.05 08 D.5 5 (page 42) The Committee proposes to relocate the blank wall areas provision from the old section 5.05.08 C.8.b to this section to improve readability of the building design treatment standards. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.6.a-b (page 42) This section currently states that windows must not be false or applied. The Committee proposes to allow for false windows, however, false windows shall not be included in the required glazing for primary facades. Furt her,the Committee proposes to allow for spandrel panels in curtain wall assemblies to be included in the minimum glazing requirement for primary facades. The 21 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Committee relayed that even though spandrel glass does not function as regular glass,it looks like glass and should be allowed to count toward minimum glazing requirements. Public comments regarding this section supported the Committee's change to allow spandrel panels to count toward minimum glazing requirements. Staff notes: Examples of false windows and spandrel panels are demonstrated in Figure 9. Figure 9: Examples of False Windows and Spandrel Panels. 1 ,l IV '''' l' Photo credit: Google Maps False Windows (example from City of Naples) 1111 -j i.-- ' k,pm....-------- _ ie f ail _ L__ ......n.i.a_v. t 3 l guts `r �..1- ' -'1-.:- togs= Photo credit:www.obe.com Spandrel Panels Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.7 (page 42) This section currently allows overhead doors on primary façades only when sufficient screening is proposed. The Committee proposes to revise this section for clarity, to provide a maximum screen wall height of 6 feet, and to allow an exception from screening requirements for overhead glass doors with a minimum of 75 percent transparent glazing except when used on loading docks or receiving areas (transparent defined: allowing light to pass through so that object behind can be distinctly seen).In some instances,like restaurants and fire stations,buildings utilize transparent 22 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term glazing on overhead doors as amenities but this section requires screening for all overhead doors. Providing an exemption from screening requirements in these cases would codify existing interpretations of this section and would allow the use of glass overhead doors except in the case of self-storage buildings. Old Section 5.05.08 C.8.a (page 43) The Committee proposes to relocate this section to proposed section 5.05.08 D.4. Old Section 5.05.08 C.8.b (page 43) The Committee proposes to relocate this section to proposed se ion 5.05.08 D.5. Proposed Sections 5.05.08 D.8.a-b (page 43) These sections establish additional standards for out. freestanding buildings within a PUD and common ownership developments in • : fac ,. tandards and other design standards. Changes to these sections clarify and cross-referetiovto other LDC sections. Additionally, the Committee received public '1-8,-,,,,,,, ents regarding the requirement in this section that all facades must meet the primary facade . a stand. , for outparcels and freestanding buildings within a PUD. Specificall it was request." - Committee co r reducing the number of required primary facade m freestanding • g in a PUD, howev r, no action was taken by the Committee. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D 8.c (page 4 �. Currently,this section ,, . sign stan• , •s for 'ng b i r ings which require common design elements thr �'4 •ut the . The C•• ece comments from the public which indicated that this sec'° • .requires t"all fre. •ing buildings must provide for vehicular and pedestrian interconnect .etwe- adjacent o m:.reels or freestanding sites and the primary structure." l�' lrb •mment • s • is re, ement addresses traffic issues, not aesthetic criteria e � addres ,. other o •- LDC.Moreover, it was argued that PUDs generally acc- ..dwa �' •sterior to �- JD which serves as interconnection. Instead, it was argued that this ad• • • .1 re• • -anent increases impervious areas and stormwater treatment requirements.- 0 and creates ar lity is or individual landowners granting easements between outparcels. As-a sult,the Co ittee recommended eliminating this requirement. WC Proposed Section 5.08 D.8 • •>ge 44) This section includes additional options which can be used to meet the primary facade design feature requirements fo outparcels and freestanding buildings within a PUD and common ownership developments. The Committee proposes to revise this section for clarity and to remove the provision in section 5.05.08 D.8.d.ii which allows trellis or latticework plant coverage area to count as window area. Since the Committee proposes to allow this as a design treatment on any building in proposed section 5.05.08 D.2.b, it is not necessary here. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.9.b.i(page 44) This section currently requires buildings larger than 5,000 square feet in gross area must have two roof-edge or parapet line changes. The Committee proposes to change this standard to buildings larger than 10,000 square feet. The Committee's consensus was that this does not provide 23 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is-current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term architectural benefit for smaller buildings and on many smaller buildings begins to look forced. This change works in conjunction with the change to massing standards, which are proposed to apply to buildings of 20,000 square feet and greater,to provide relief for smaller buildings. Staff notes: The intended effect of requiring roof-edge or parapet line changes is depicted in Figure 10. Figure 10: Illustration depicting roof-edge or parapet line changes. U --`� WC"e X � t vIE I 4,2 ICI IN 2 1,411 — i s —. rs- i[ t r Image credit: Staff Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.9.c.i (page 44 This section currently states that the average' s t parapets must not exceed 15 percent of the height of the supporting wall. The Committee proposes to change this standard to 20 percent. This change will allow for larger parapets. Staff notes:Figure 11 provides an example of a parapet. 24 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Figure 11: Parapet example in elevation view. } Parapet t A r .b1.spy t tee, y ✓$r. a ^-- -- . tow LEFT ELEVATION Photo credit:Recent Si application Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.10.b.ii (page 45) Currently, awnings must be located above windows or doors. The Committee proposes to also allow awnings over "other ornamental design.feature e Committee relays the awnings will be an extension of a decorative feature. Staff notes: Examples of the use of awnings over ornamental design features can be seen in Figure 6 above. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.11.b.ii;(page 45) Currently, this section states the front entry on single-tenant buildings must be set back from a drive or parking area by a minimum distance of 15 feet. The Committee is proposing to reduce this distance to 10 feet. It was determined that the current distance is difficult to comply for properties with larger buildings located on smaller properties. This requirement makes parking difficult on the project,as they must lose parking spaces in order to comply. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D. 1.c.ii (page 46) Currently, this section states that multiple-tenant buildings and developments must provide a shaded outdoor community space. The Committee proposes that a single community space could be broken up into multiple small spaces, each with a minimum area of 75 square feet, as long as the total area of all shaded outdoor community spaces meets the existing standard. Proposed Section 5.05.08 D.11.c.iii (page 46) Currently, the front entries of multiple-tenant buildings and developments are also required to provide a 15 foot setback from a drive or parking area. The Committee proposes to change this distance to 10 feet. It was determined that the current distance is difficult to comply for properties 25 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text ctrikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term with larger buildings located on smaller properties. This requirement makes parking difficult on the project, as they must use potential parking spaces for landscaping in order to comply. Changes to design standards for specific building uses: Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.2.c (page 47) Currently this section states that windows on self-storage buildings must not be false or applied and that if the window openings are into the storage area,translucent materials must be used. This section has been amended to allow for the use of false or applied windows consistent with the Committee's proposed changes to LDC section 5.05.08 D.6. The Committee found that this section has been interpreted too narrowly in the past to apply only to windows on the doors of individual storage units within the self-storage building. The Committee proposes amending this section to require translucent material for windows used on either the storage unit doors or on any corridors used to access the storage units as seen in Figure 12 below. Instead,windows which would provide visibility of individual storage unit doors would be required to use translucent material. Figure 12. Example of Self-Storage Buildin _,• Windows Providing View to Storage Unit Doors. fr .4*-- 1 arrytertl-","7-,--,..41.-..--;ii. ' oilir rr'n 11 nil ,,, � *I e 17 111, i I ,__ ,_ , - , ,_ Photo credit:oda.us.com Old Section 5.05.08 D.3.c (page 48) Currently, this section states that areas like management and business offices, check-out areas, restrooms, customer service areas, and food service areas within mercantile buildings that can be accommodated within a space with a ceiling height of 16 feet or less must be designed and built within a single story envelope and must be located along the building edge that fronts the public right-of-way. The Committee proposes to delete this section as it dictates the internal workings of the building and exceeds the intent of the architectural standards. Additionally, there are other requirements in the proposed standards that control the design of big box stores. Staff notes: As stated in the discussion of the Committee's initial goals, it is the intent of the Committee to apply standards to big-box stores only and this standard applies to big box stores. 26 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.5.b.i.b) (page 49) Currently, this section states that covered walkways or arcades on a hotel/motel must be constructed with columns at least 12 inches wide. The Committee proposes to delete this specification. The Committee determined that there is no need for column massing on an open canopy and it will allow for more design flexibility. Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.6.c (page 49) Currently, this section states that variation in massing on wa.rehousing/distribution buildings applies to primary facades and facades facing residential dis ts. The Committee proposes to limit this applicability to"facades facing residential zo +' ' within 150 feet of the property line."The Committee proposes this ning s change to ensure that the Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.5.b.i.b) (page 49) Currently, this section states that covered walkways or arcades on a hotel/motel must be constructed with columns at least 12 inches wide. The Committee proposes to delete this specification. The Committee determined that there is no need for column massing on an open canopy and it will allow for more design flexibility. Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.6.c (page 49) Currently, this section states that variation in massing on warehousing/distribution buildings applies to primary facades and facades facing residential districts. The Committee proposes to limit this applicability to"facades facing residential zoning �' within 150 feet of the property line."The Committee proposes this change to ensure that licability standards in this section are consistent with the proposed applicability standard ;,,a : Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.7.a (page 50) Currently,this section identifies that all archi « standards a :. industrial/factory buildings,with the exceptions listed in subsect 05.08 E.7 b-£This : •n has been modified to identify that the standards listed in the 1 +wing ►sections a tther exceptions, modifications, or additions to architectural standar• r + accurately re the subsections that follow. �° Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.7.b a e 5 Currently,this section requi es facades f : �'ng a �+r colle streets to have two or more of the design features lister �: s 5.05.0. 7.b t - The mittee proposes to remove collector streets from,:.'' rom . ' sec z._ o ensur .. applicability standards in this section are consistent with the p , �*red app .' .wbility stag. s in sectio 5.05.08 B.2. The title "Building facades" has been remo from i .1 existing s °etion b, and the remainder of this section has been reorg *r clarity. Proposed Section 5.04 .7 b.t l ' e 51) Currentl ction 5.05.0 °" b.i p des standards that replace the facade standards in proposed section 5.6-5.1,� D.2 for ins '...1/fac buildings. Section E.7.b.i provides that windows at a minimum of , .percent of the;„ cade a are an option fora design feature on industrial and factory buildings, e Commi is proposing to reduce this percentage to 20 percent. They determined that the zing s .lards in proposed section 5.05.08 D.2.b have been reduced therefore this reduction :ill • + l•e consistency with the proposed reduction in required glazing throughout the architectti : a Bards. Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.7.c (page 51) Currently, the requirement for variation in massing on industrial/factory buildings only applies to primary facades and facades facing residential districts. The Committee is proposing to change this to read"facades facing residential zoning districts located within 150 feet of the property line." The Committee proposes this change to ensure that the applicability standards in this section are consistent with the proposed applicability standards in section 5.05.08 B.2. 27 I\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Staff notes:Aerial and streetview examples of an industrial building within 150 feet of residential property are depicted in Figure 13. Figure 13:An example of an industrial building within 150 feet of residential property. ' ° K. Vise , : ,r_ ,, lot - 07,,0,., ''\**: t. ' 44** m , 17 sr: . - ` `-.t z C • -. N, f,.. 1!..4,4:44,. 1 P' - (.4,, .4). it . ,� .1_, r I._ Collier County Property Appraiser Aerial j " Y r y i Pkr Y m �! a •@ 1•i _ -,y lir = r',• y; N r t p i �: _... a+ .fie.. A r* Tk Photo credit: Staff Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.7.d.i (page 51) Currently, primary facades on industrial and factory buildings are required to include a minimum of two of the seventeen building design treatments listed. The Committee proposes to eliminate 28 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term the reference to the total number of options available. The Committee determined the total number of options listed is inaccurate, may change again in the future, and removing the reference to the total number adds clarity to the section. Proposed Section 5.05.08 E.7.d.ii (page 5.1) Currently this section states that industrial and factory buildings are required to provide at least one of the four listed site design elements. The Committee proposes to eliminate the reference to the total number of options available. The Committee determined the total number of options may change in the future and removing the reference to the total number adds clarity to the section. Changes to site design standards: Proposed Section 5.05.08 F.1. (page 53) The Committee proposes to relocate the site design eta ;from the existing location in old section 5.05.08 C.5.c since these standards are relat:• t site de r Proposed Section 5.05.0.8 F.1.a (page 53) Currently, this site design option allows for se of decorative lan• planting areas and areas for shaded seating. The Committee proposeremove term"sha•� ="from this option. It was noted that it is difficult to define the term wever, one ._A ittee member disagreed noting that if seating is pt shading sh• _ also be provided. Proposed Section 5.05.08 F.1.d(page Currently, this site design ■aion allows i r site es. T _ •mmittee proposes to add the option of water featur � �; fountai= • .o this his . ition will allow for a water feature on the site recognize d as an � 'ra � ° sign element. The addition of fountains will give t� i®.licant - e site de ~ ements to choose from. Currently the menu only has four options an• _`�- app l' t must cho _ two. The Committee recognizes the menu list is limited .akes it �° = ojectst incorporate the required two options. The addition.• � � ign�e o is w1 a applicants to select options that are better suited to their:site rather tha ing a element si .ecause it is included on the list of site design options'", Proposed Se 5.05.08 F.2 b {page Currently, thissectn applies requirements for landscaping in vehicular use areas found in LDC section 4.05.04 (which ° y only to projects requesting 120 percent of minimum parking if at least 80 spaces are r uir ' • all projects subject to architectural standards regardless of the minimum number of splis means that any project requesting 120 percent of minimum required parking must dev 2() percent of the vehicular use areas to landscaping, pursuant to LDC section 4.06.03 B.1. The Committee determined the current language punished smaller parking lots by requiring much more landscaping. For example, an applicant that is required to provide 10 parking spaces but that is requesting to provide 12 parking spaces would meet the 120 percent threshold and would be required to provide twice as much landscaping, whereas required landscaping would not increase for an applicant required to provide 80 parking spaces that is requesting 15 additional spaces. This additional landscaping then becomes difficult to fit on the site. The proposed change to simply cite 29 1\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term section 4.05.04 C for maximum parking requirements would make this standard consistent with LDC section 4.05.04C and will only apply to projects with at least 80 required parking spaces where an increase of 120 percent of the required parking spaces is requested. Proposed section 5.05.08 F.2.b.i i (page 54) Currently, this section provides parking design standards for projects which limit the amount of off-street parking that can be located between the primary façade and the abutting street. The Committee proposes to eliminate these standards. The Committee relayed that the requirement to provide parking in the rear of the building can cause safety concerns related to delivery and service vehicles and that the public is not aware that additional parking is provided in the rear of the building. Staff notes: This change will likely result in a l i,: iss of parking in front of the building. For interior lots, 20 percent more •'r king cou located in front of the building and for corner lots, 50 percent : °% parking cou located in front of the building. Old Section 5.05.08 E.2.c (page 54) Currently,this section requires an e 1 number of .~« tt •thway conne ' and vehicular connections. Additionally, this sec tes that w a aisles lead to main entrances, a walkway must be provided on at least one" ' The Come -e proposes to remove this section. The Committee indicated that pedestr"a� con vity is add sed in other codes such as the Americans with Disabtlttie Act(ADA), g g~ Flori.. "` essibil _ ode, and other sections of the noo LDC. The Committee '" ed publimme: .ting t : standard is more stringent than ADA requirements and t` . k Iditional°ed a pa . a can sometimes cause drainage issues when destgntn_ ite. Staf LL his chi® �" € + ` wer pMestrian pathway connections on sites :e s ' a e accsto arse ollor roadways. Propose ction 5.05 08 P.4,e (pa Currently, ection requi : mini five foot wide building perimeter path connecting all entrances an. ��' (excluding emergency its) of a building and along the full length of the row of parking space "karking is proposed along the building façade within 15 feet of a building wall. The Committee pro";. s to ch 4111 the name of"building perimeter path"to "building pedestrian pathway," and to eliminate_tl uirement to provide a pedestrian pathway that interconnects all entrances and exits. The ee relayed that this change will decrease the impervious area on sites and will make it easier .r smaller buildings to comply. The Committee indicated that smaller buildings often struggle to fit all of their site design elements, parking, and sidewalks on site. Proposed Section 5.05.08 F.3.g.i (page 55) Currently,this section requires pedestrian pathways to provide intermittent shaded areas every 50 linear feet of the walkway. The Committee determined this requirement becomes difficult to fit if the pathway is located in front of a building. They also suggested that because parking lot regulations require an island with a tree every 10 parking spaces this requirement is not necessary for parking lots. Finally, it was noted that mature trees have canopy spans of 30 feet meaning a 30 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term tree every 50 linear feet would actually have tree canopies overlapping after maturity. As a result, the Committee has proposed limiting this to "required pathways" and increasing the requirement for intermittent shaded areas to every 100 feet. Staff notes: The requirement for trees providing shading for pedestrian pathways is intended for pathways that are not adjacent to or near parking areas and therefore not covered by any required landscaping for parking lots. This condition occurs when pathways are provided away from parking areas and connecting buildings, recreational uses, and other functions,particularly on larger sites where these pathways distances can be lengthy. Proposed Section 5.05.08 F.3.g.ii (page 55) Currently, this section requires site amenities on site ` a , it plans that enhance safety and convenience and promote walking or bicycling like bike racks, Viking fountains, and benches. The Committee proposes to eliminate this sec he Comma-K - reported this change will eliminate redundancy with other sections oft . DC. 6414 A Staff notes: While bike racks are require• # other s " 'ons of the ` drinking fountains are not addressed - ewhere and nches is opti•a n LDC section 5.05.08.As a result, �- ests that ks may be remove• om this section to eliminate redundancy," at the of ®menities should remain or additional amenities added. �� m Proposed Section 5.05 W ' •age 55) , Currently, •this • sect' requires visual and a. c 11111 w ,of service function areas to be screened and fully fined fr. adjacent = perties. The Committee determined acoustic impacts are impossible ly co ;gin, and pro li - removing the requirement to screen acoustic impacts. Propo _�± "'ection 5.0 . ,6.b (pine 56) Currently,-this section requires dri ough facilities be a minimum of 1,000 square feet. The Committee proposing to el' ate t m 'nimum square footage requirement. They determined that no minims square foot. °w_shoul• -' required if all other site plan requirements are met. There were no-6 -'ved situat = where a smaller square footage building would be an issue. During the discussi T ._"' e Co ee member noted the drive through portion of a facility should only be allowed in co •tion. th •the primary use and not an accessory use and that removing the minimum square fo• (requirement would allow for a small "kiosk" type drive-through (Figure 14) as an outparcel. Additionally,the Committee proposes to amend the standard for additional drive-through facilities in multi-tenant buildings. Currently,this section allows an additional drive-through for each tenant and an additional drive through for each tenant with a minimum of 5,000 square feet. The Committee proposes to change the section to allow for one drive-through facility for each building and an additional drive-through for each tenant with a minimum of 1,500 square feet of floor area. This changes provides for an unlimited number of drive-through facilities for each building with tenants that meet the required floor area. 31 1:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term Figure 14: Example drive-through kiosk in Cape Coral. '111 Photo credit: Google Maps Proposed Section 5.05.08 F.7.e (page 56) Currently, this section specifies that foreground spaces such as building ent "" ces, plazas, and seating areas must utilize local lighting that defines the space without glare. The Committee proposes to eliminate the words "without glare." They determined glare is covered by 5.05.08 F.7.b in shielding standards for lighting. Proposed Section 5.05.08 F.8 (page 57) Currently, this section cross references section 4.06.02 D. for water management area design standards. The Committee is proposing to adevin buffer areas"to the description for clarity and coordination of the title since 4.06.02 D. is the Buffers section of the LDC. No changes to alternative architectural review: Existing Section 5.05.08 G (page 57) The Committee voted not to change any provisions related to Deviations and Alternate Design Compliance. The section is renumbered to reflect changes in prior sections. Changes to exceptions for PUDs: Old Section 5.05.08 G (page 57) This section currently provides an exception for Planned Unit Developments. This section is proposed to be deleted by the County Attorney's Office because it already exists elsewhere in the LDC. DSAC-LDR RECOMMENDATION: The subcommittee approved the amendment unanimously with recommended changes to improve clarity and to address window standards for self-storage buildings and drive-through facility standards. These changes were incorporated into the amendment by the Architectural and Site Design Standards Ad Hoc Committee. DSAC RECOMMENDATION: No changes, approved unanimously. 32 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: There are no anticipated fiscal or operational impacts associated with this amendment. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Staff has provided a companion amendment with proposed changes to other sections of the LDC in order to add new or updated cross-references to LDC section 5.05.08 to increase awareness of the architectural standards. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: An underlying concept expressed as a basis for the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) is Attainment of High Quality Urban Design. This concept provides the tional nexus for the existing Architectural requirements of the Land Development Code (t , but is not a mandate for any specific code requirement. Any amendments to the exists itectural code would not be found inconsistent with the GMP. OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: On Septe I4th,2015,th hitectural and Site Design Standards Ad-Hoc Subcommittee unanimously,.'proved (5-0) this aft amendment to be forwarded to other advisory boards and t •ard of County Co i sioners for review. Additional changes were approved by the Comm on November 16th, 2 5. Amend the LDC as follows: 1 5.05.08 Architectural and Site Design to 2 A. Purpose and Intent. = t 3 1. The pur• these stan• cis is to - ent eh ting development criteria in 4 order � • -fit, enhance an. !ban fabric of Collier County with 5 an a•;x ant variety_f archite deve ent of a positive, progressive 6 and att e community image sense of place is vital to the economic 7 health and vi lity 11 -r Count 8 2. A • . the r at are arearesent in the architecture of Collier County 9 = but are ,imited t 10 a. ' m -nts of Mediterranean design employing sloped barrel tile roofs, 11 arc; °- and o; 12 b. Old Flo' a des with wide verandas, metal roofs and lap siding; 13 =: Modern -motional; and 14 • :.. Various itional historic references to Colonial, Bermuda and Island 15 orms. 16 3. Builds sign ributes to the uniqueness of the project area and the Collier 17 County at with predominant materials, design features, color range and 18 spatial rela ips tailored specifically to the site and its context. 19 4. While architectural embellishments are not discouraged, emphasis on scale, 20 massing, form-function relationships, and relationship of the building or buildings 21 to the site and surrounding context is strongly encouraged. Recognition of the 22 environment and climate present in Collier County must be evident in the 23 architecture. Gratuitous decoration applied to the building is strongly 24 discouraged. 25 5. These standards and guidelines are intended to result in a comprehensive plan 26 for building design and site development consistent with the goals, policies and 27 objectives of the Collier County Growth Management Plan ("GMP") and the 28 purpose and intent of the Land Development Code ("LDC"). These regulations 33 1:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 are intended to promote the use of crime prevention through site design 2 principals, including visibility-site lines for law enforcement as well as the general 3 public. Additionally, the use of glazing materials and designs which reduces bird 4 collisions is encouraged. 5 6. To maintain and enhance the attractiveness of the streetscape and the existing 6 architectural design of the community, all buildings must have architectural 7 features and patterns that provide visual interest from the perspective of the 8 pedestrian, reduce building mass, recognize local character, and respond to site 9 conditions. Façades must be designed to reduce the mass/scale and uniform 10 monolithic appearance of large unadorned walls. Facades must provide, through 11 the use of detail and scale, visual interest that is consistent with the community's 12 identity and character. Articulation is accomplished by varying the building's 13 mass, in height and width, so that it appears to be divided into distinct elements 14 and details. 15 B. Applicability. The provisions of section 5.05.08 apply: 16 1. To all new buildings and projects submitted on or after November 10, 2004 in the 17 zoning districts set out below. At the,applicant's request, projects submitted 18 •�_ _19 compliance with the requirements of section 5.05.08 as they were set forth in the 20 November 10, 2004. 21 a. Commercial zoning districts. 22 b. Non residential PUD districts, and non residential components of any 23 PUD district. 24 c. Business pafk districts. 25 B. Applicability. The provisions of LDC section 5.05.08 shaft apply to the zoning districts, 26 locations, and to existing buildings as established below. 27 1. Buildings and prbiects within the following zoning districts: 28 a. Commercial zoning districtsand commercial components of PUD zoning 29 districts. 30 b. Business park zoning districts. 31 2. To non residential buildings and projects submitted on or after November 10, 32 � as, _ - - - .e•e• - - 33 - - - - - -- - -- , -- -34 the Traffic Circulation Element of the GMP, or 35 b. A proposed building's footprint would be located within 300 feet of the 36 boundary of a residentially zoned district. 37 2. Non-residential buildings and projects in any zoning district when at least one of 38 the following conditions exists. For the purposes of this section, arterial and 39 collector roads are identified in the Traffic Circulation Element of the GMP. 40 a. The protect site is abutting an arterial or collector road and is located in 41 a non-industrial zoning district. This shall include project sites separated 42 from an arterial or collector road by up to 150 feet of right-of-ways or 43 easements. 44 b. The project site is located on an arterial road and is located in an 45 industrial zoning district. 46 c. A proposed building's footprint would be located within 150 feet of the 47 boundary of a residentially zoned district. 48 3. To all renovations and redevelopment, including applicable additions of a building 49 - - - , - --- •- - - - - - - - - -- - -- •- 50 34 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term l a. Any addition or renovation of an existing building or project including 2 -- - - - - - - - -3 . _ _. __ . ... _ - - - - _ •- - • - _ _ 4 building or site such that in the case of: 5 i. A building facade renovation where such addition, renovation, or 6 -.- - __ •-• - _--_ _• __ __. - .- - - - - _7 facade, that entire facade must comply with the standards of 8 9 ii. An addition or renovation to, or redevelopment of, an existing 10 e. e •- - e e , . •- _ -_ _e - ...• - - - .e-, - 11 -_- - _ . •-• - _--_ _e _- -- _ - _ .- _ •- 12 13 footage of the gross area of the existing structures, the existing 14 building(s) and the site improvements must conform with the 15 standards of Section 5.05.08 16 iii. Upon repainting an existing buildingythe colors to be applied must 17 -- - '- '_ — - - - -- - 18 3. Alterations to an existing building which is subject to Lnp,,section 5.05.08 B.1 or 19 B.2 above shall comply with this section when one or more of the following 20 alterations occurs. For the purposes of this section, an alteration shall be any 21 change to the external features or dimensions of a building or facade. Interior 22 renovations to an existing building that do not affect the external appearance of 23 the building are excluded. 5 . 24 a. Where an alteration results in an addition(s) greater than 4,000 square 25 feet of floor area, the area changed by the alteration shall comply. 26 b. Where facade improvements to buildings with greater than 20,000 27 Square feet of floor area results in a change to more than 50 percent of 28 any facade area, the entire facade shall comply. 29 c. Nonconforming buildings shall not be enlarged or altered in a way 30 which,,,increases the nonconformity. All alterations to nonconforming 31 buildings shall be consistent with this section and shall be reviewed for 32 '�' compliance by the County Manager or designee; however, unaltered 33 portions of the nonconforming building will not be required to comply. 34 d. Upon repainting the exterior of an existing building or fence, the exterior 35 building colors shall comply with the standards identified in LDC section 36 5.05.08 D.112.b. 37 4. Atilandonment or discontinuance of use. 38 - - - - - " - -- -- - - . 39 40 ere the use of a structure, building or project ceases for any 41 - , _ - - - _ _ - ...-• -- - - - --- - -- 42 premises, for a period in excess of one year, the provisions of 43 Section 5.05.08 apply before re occupancy. Compliance with this 44 Section may require structural alterations. 45 ii. The site design standards of this Section apply where the use of a 46 47 action impedes accecs to the premises for a period of more than 48 180 consecutive days. 49 4. Exceptions. 50 a. An historic site, structure, building, district, or property that is designated 51 historic by the Board of County Commissioners pursuant to LDC section 35 l:\2015LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 2.03.07 E or is designated historic by the State of Florida or the Federal 2 Government. 3 b. Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district. 4 c. Facades located interior to courtyards provided the facades are not 5 visible from any public property (e.g. street, right-of-way, sidewalk, 6 alley), interior drive, parking lot or adjacent private property. 7 d. The following shall be exempt from the standards of LDC section 5.05.08, 8 but shall comply with the exterior building color standards identified in 9 LDC section 5.05.08 D.12.b. 10 i. Routine repairs and maintenance of an existing building. 11 ii. Buildings with 4,000 square feet or less of floor area. 12 iii. Immokalee Community Redevelopment Area as defined in Collier 13 County Ordinance 2000-42. 14 iv. Public utility ancillary systems provided that a building shall 15 not have any wall planes exceeding 35 feet in length, excluding 16 storage tanks, or have an actual building height greater than 17 eighteen (18) feet, excluding storage tanks and communications 18 equipment. See LDC section 4.06.05.B.4 for screening 19 requirements of fences and walls surrounding public utility 20 ancillary systems. 21 5. Public utility ancillary syctems in Collier County arc not required to meet the 22 - - e. - - - -- - 23 - -- - - - 24 -- 25 _ - -- - - - .. - _. _ - - - - 26 - -- - - - - 27 _ - - - _- ._ - _ - -• - - ' -"-28 5.05.08.C.3 and 5.05.08. D.1. 29 C. Submittal requirements. An applicant smell submit architectural drawings with the site 30 development plan or site improvement plan according to LDC section 10.02.03 and the 31 Administrative Code Chapter 4.A.to comply with LDC section 5.05.08. Architectural 32 drawings must be signed and sealed by a.licensed Architect who is responsible for 33 preparing the drawings, and who is registered in the state of Florida as set forth in F.S. 34 Chapter 481. 35 CD. Building design standards. 36 1. itluilding gfagades. The following standards apply to all buildings that are subject 37 to LDC section 5.05.08, except as noted. All façades of a building must be 38 39 a. All facades of a building must be designed with consistent architectural 40 style, detail and trim features. 41 a. In case of buildings located on outparccls, and freestanding buildings 42 • ' - - - - - - - •_. , - _ - --- - -- - - 43 -••-- - - - - - - - - - - - - 45 "" - - - -- - - - - - -' - - -- .. _ _ _ - - - •_. 46 for additional design standards). 47 b. For additional design standards, see LDC section 5.05.08 D.8. Outparcels 48 and freestanding buildings within a PUD or unified plan of development. 49 bc. Buildings or projects located at the intersection of two or more arterial or 50 collector roads shall include design features, such as corner towers, 36 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term 1 -- -- -• -•-- , - - -- --• -- - - , to emphasize their location as 2 gateways and transition points within the community. 3 2. Primary facade standards. 4 a. Building entrance. Buildings located along a public or private street must 5 be designed with the main entrance clearly defined, and with convenient 6 access from both parking and the street. 7 b. Ground floor. Primary facades on the ground floor must have features 8 - 9 - --- -- - - - -- - -----; - - - - - -; - ---,10 other similar design elements. 11 ob. Design features. The design of primary facades must include, at a 12 minimum, two of the following design features. For mixed use 13 development projects within C-1 through C-3 zoning districts, see LDC 14 section 4.02.38 1.1.d for additional options. 15 i. Glazing covering a minimum of 3025 percent of the exterior 16 primary facade area,consisting of window and glazed door 17 openings. 18 a) Alternative. Trellis or latticework on the primary facade 19 used as a support for climbing plants"maay count for up to 20 50 percent of the window area on primary facades. The 21 planting area shall be an irrigated bed 3 feet in depth and a 22 minimum width of the trellis with 3 gallon vines at 3 feet on 23 center at time of installation and climbing plants shall 24 achieve 80 percent opacity_on the trellis within one year. 25 ii. Projected or recessed co ered entrance public entry providing a 26 minimum horizontal dimension of eight feet and a minimum area 27 of 100 square feet. In addition, minimum of 2015 percent of the 28 primary facade area must be devoted to windows and glazed door 29 openings. 30 Cover`edentrance with a minimum horizontal dimension of sixteen 31 f r g a :; um area of 200 s.uare feet. In addition a 32 "' Minimum of 15 percent of the primary facade area must be 33 devoted,to window and/or glazed door openings. 34 iiiiv. Covered walkway, or arcade (excluding canvas type) constructed 35 with columns at least 12 inches wide, attached to the building, or 36 located no more than 12 feet from the building. The structure must 37 be permanent and its design must relate to the principal structure. 38 The minimum width must be eight feet, with a total length 39 measuring 6040 percent of the length of the associated facade. In 40 addition, a minimum of 15 percent of the primary facade area 41 must be devoted to window and/or glazed door openings. 42 v. Awnings located over doors, windows, or other ornamental 43 design features projecting a minimum of 2 feet from the facade 44 wall and totaling a minimum of 40 percent of the facade length in 45 width. In addition, a minimum of 15 percent of the primary facade 46 area must be devoted to window and/or glazed door openings. 47 ivi. Porte-cochere with a minimum horizontal dimension of 18 feet. In 48 addition, a minimum of 2015 percent of the primary facade area 49 must be devoted to windows and glazed door openings. 50 vii. A tower element such as but not limited to a clock or bell tower 51 element. In addition, a minimum of 2015 percent of the primary 37 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term 1 façade area must be devoted to windows and glazed door 2 openings. 3 viii. Trellis or latticework covering a minimum of 15 percent of the 4 primary facade and used as a support for climbing plants. The 5 planting area shall be an irrigated bed 3 feet in depth and a 6 minimum width of the trellis with 3 gallon vines at 3 feet on center 7 at time of installation and climbing plants shall achieve 80 percent 8 opacity on the trellis within one year. This provision shall not be 9 utilized with the alternative design feature identified in LDC section 10 5.05.08 D.2.b.i.a. 11 ix. Entry plaza to the building of a minimum 200 square feet in area 12 that includes seating. In addition,_a minimum of 15 percent of the 13 primary facade area must be devoted to window and/or glazed 14 door openings. 15 x. Elevated entry a minimum of 16 inches in elevation above the 16 primary finished floor of.the building adjacent or connected to the 17 building face with a minimum of 400 square feet in area. The area 18 calculation may include interior and exterior spaces of raised 19 surface with not more than 50 percent of interior area. In addition, 20 a minimum of 15 percent of the primary facade area must be 21 devoted to window and/or glazed door openings. 22 xi. Entry courtyard contiguous with the building entry connected to 23 the primaryIacade consistii�"of a defined space with a minimum 24 area of 650 square feet. The courtyard may be any combination of 25 hard or softe.G ape with walkways and defined hard edge, 26 ro, �oecorative fencing, or a minimum low ft. wall(s). In addition, a 27 minimum of 15 percent of the primary facade area must be 28 devoted to window and/or glazed door openings. 29 --- ' - - . 30 a. Purpose. The intent of this section is to ensure that the proposed 31 32 -. • - • _ �,yy 33 b. Applicability.''Transitional massing elements must be provided on 34 35 -- - . . --- 36 building, 37 c. Design standards. 38 i. Transitional massing elements can be no more than 100 percent 39 tailor than the average height of the adjacent buildings, but no 40 4g,- more than 30 feet, and no less than ten feet above the existing 41 grade. 42 ii. Transitional massing elements must be incorporated for a 43 minimum of 60% of the length of the façade, which is in part or 44 whole within the 150 feet of an existing building. 45 iii. Transitional mating elements include, but are not limited to, wall 46 - - _ - - -- -- -- _ -- - --' -- -- _ - •- 47 '• - - - - - - _- _ - -- -• - - - _-_ _ 48 projections and recesses relative to the building size, and must 38 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term 1 a) For buildings 10,000 square feet or larger in gross building 2 ar a, projections and recesses must have a minimum 3 depth of ten feet 4 b) For buildings between 20,000 and 39,999 square feet in 5 gross building area, projections and recesses must have a 6 minimum won+h ref eigh+feet 7 c) For buildings between 10,00.0 and 19,999 square feet in 8 gross building area, projections and recesses must have a 9 minimum depth of six feet. 10 - - e_ - - - • ••• - -- - -- - - - 11 - - "- -• - - - - _ -. . . - . 12 depth of four feet. 13 43. Variation in massing. A single, large, dominant building mass must be avoided. 14 Changes in mass must be related to entrances,the integral structure and the 15 organization of interior spaces and activities, and not merely for cosmetic effect. 16 False fronts or parapets create insubstantial appearance and are discouraged. 17 All façades, excluding courtyard area, shall be designed to employ the design 18 treatments listed below. 19 a. Projections and recesses. 20 i. For buildings 40,000 square feet or larger in gross building 21 areofloor area, a maximum length, or uninterrupted curve of any 22 façade, at any point, mustb ��150 linear feet. Projections and 23 recesses must have a minimum depth of ten feet within the 150 24 linear feet limitatin. .. 25 ii. For building between 20,000 and 39,999 square feet in 26 gross t ea ifloor area,a maximum length, or uninterrupted 27 curve of any facade, at any point, must be 125 linear feet. 28 Projections and recesses must have. a minimum depth of eight six 29 feet within the 125 linear feet limitation. 30 iii. For buildings between 10,000 and 19,099 square feet in grow, 31 - - =, - - - - - - - -- 32 33 ��' - .. . . _ _-_ • _ 34 feet limitation. 35 iv. For buildings between 5,000 and 9,099 square feet in gross 36 - - - - -- - 37 facade, at any point, must be 75 linear feet. Projections and•38 - - - _ .. . . - - - ' - -- . . _ .-- 39 40 v. buildings less than 5,000 square feet in gross building area, a 41 � - - - - - - - -- - ---", - - 42 point, must be 50 linear feet. Projections and recesses must have 43 a minimum depth of three feet, and a minimum total width of 20 44 percent of the facade length. 39 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text ctrikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term •rtgaiv 'II -40.11"41lettt‘ 1 2 Illustration 5.05.08 C.4.a. 1 D.3.a— Measurement of projections and recesses 3 b. Wall plane changes. 4 i. Buildings subject to the projections or recesses depths required 5 by LDC section 5.05.08.E-4D_3.a must not have a single wall 6 plane exceeding 60 percent of each facade. 7 ii. If a building has a projection or recess of 40 feet or more, each is 8 considered a separate facade, and must meet the above 9 requirements for wall plane changes in LDC section 5.05.08 10 D.3.b.i. 11 12 Illustration 5.05.08 C.I.b. 1D.3.b— Wall plane percentages 13 44. Project Standards. 14 a. An applicant must submit architectural drawings and a site development 15 plan or site improvement plan according to LDC section 10.02.03 and the 40 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 Administrative Code to comply with LDC section 5.05.08. Architectural 2 3 responsible for preparing the drawings, and who is registered in the state 4 e - -- - - - • • . - 5 b. Building design treatments. The design treatments in the following 6 standards must be an integral part of the building's design and 7 integrated into the overall architectural style. These treatments must not 8 consist solely of applied graphics or paint. Each building facade must 9 have at least four of the following building design treatments: 10 1a. Canopies, porticos, or porte-cocheres, integrated with the building's 11 massing and style, 12 lib. Overhangs, minimum of three feet, 13 +++c. Colonnades or arcades, a minimum of eight feet clear in width, 14 +vd. Sculptured artwork, 15 ve. Cornice minimum two feet high With 12 inch rojection, 16 vif. Peaked or curved roof forms, 17 vi+g. Arches with a minimum 12-inch recess depth, 18 vH4h. Display windows, 19 +xi. Ornamental and structural architectural details, otherthan cornices, which 20 are integrated into the building struct a and overall design, 21 xl. Clock or bell tower, or other sum ro• eatment (i.e. dormers, 22 belvederes, and cupolas), P,N y 23 x4k. Projected and covered entry, with minimum dimension of eight feet and 24 the minimum area,of 100 square feet,_m: 25 ci11. Emphasized building base, minimum of three feet high, with a minimum 26 projection from the of two irtd ' 27 x+++m „Additional roof articulation above the minimum standards, 28 xivn 'Curved walls, 29 xvo. Columns, 30 xvip. Pilasters, or , 31 iig Metal or tile of°`material. 32 4i4r. .ressed or exposed structural elements. 33 xixs. .nal glazing at a minimum of 15 ep rcent%beyond the code 34 min in requirement. 35 xxt. Solar shading devises-devices (excluding awnings) that cover extend a 36 minimum of 50 percent%of the length of the building facade. 37 Mxiu. Translucent glazing at a minimum of 15%10 percent beyond the code 38 ■11, minimumlazing requirement. 39 xxilv. Gass block at a minimum of 15%10 percent beyond the code minimum 40 glazing requirement. 41 w. If the optional design feature in LDC Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.i is chosen 42 and 85 percent of all exterior glazing within the first three stories of the 43 building have any of the following: 44 i. Low reflectance, opaque glazing materials (may include spandrel 45 glass with less than 15 percent reflectance); 46 ii. Glass with visual patterns consisting of opaque points or patterns 47 etched into or applied to the exterior of interior surfaces with frit, 48 frost, or film for single pane or IGU. A maximum of 2 inch spacing 49 between horizontal elements and 4 inch maximum space between 50 vertical elements, with a minimum line or dot diameter thickness of 51 1/8 inch: 41 l:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx 1 Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 iii. Glass with continuous etch or continuous frit on interior surface, 2 single pane, or IGU; or 3 iv. External screens. 4 c. Site design elements. All projects must have at a minimum two of the 5 following: 6 i. Decorative landscape planters or planting areas, a minimum of 7 five feet wide, and ar as for shaded s ating consisting of a 8 minimum of 100 square feet; 9 • - - - -- - - --- -- - - - - - - 10 building perimeter walkway. This treatment must-eenstitute a 11 minimum of 60 percent of walkway area; 12 iii. Two accent or specimen trees, above the minimum landscape 13 code requirements, for every 100 feet of the front facade and a 14 •• - - - _ _ _ •- - _ -_ - _ .. . . - . .- - 15 of 18 feet at planting; or 16 iv. Site sculptures. 17 5. Blank wall areas on buildings with primary facades. -nk, opaque wall areas 18 must not exceed 10 feet in the vertical direction or 20 f- the horizontal 19 direction of any primary facade. Facades connected to a ary facade shall 20 be a minimum of 33 percent of the attached facades. Contr• • expansion 21 joints are considered blank wall area unless used as a decorate , pattern and 22 spaced at intervals 120 sou re feet per panel or less. The relief and reveal work 23 must be a minimum depth o eh, and a minimum width of 11/2 inch and may 24 be of a color that contrasts wi color of the wall. 25 6. Window standards. 26 a. - e= - - False or applied windows are 27 allowed b, hall not •- i eluded in the glazing required for primary 28 facades 29 b. Spandrel pa s in curta ■ wall assemblies are allowed and but may 30 I be d in the inimum glazing required for primary facades. 31 7. Overhead do iiti�,. 32 a. faquire ` ,eening ®. = -, see ••- -e e- a-_ -e e• •- e ••_• 33 facades, unless sufficien creening is proposed. Adequate screening 34 shall be provided for overhead doors located on primary facades. 35 Sufficient screening is defined as a screening wall, with a minimum height 36 of 6 feet measured from the centerline of the adjacent roadway98 37 e- --• - _ - --__ ___ •-•e • , or a landscape buffer achieving 75 38 percent opacity within one year. The placement and the length of these 39 screening devices must block the view of the overhead doors from the 40 street, 41 i. Exception. Overhead doors utilizing framed transparent glass 42 panels covering a minimum of 75 percent of the door area shall be 43 allowed on primary facades without the screening required in 44 LDC section 5.05.08 D.7.a., except when used on loading docks 45 or receiving areas. 46 b. Facades with overhead doors facing one another. Overhead doors 47 facing one another may be treated as interior space, provided that: 48 i. tThe buildings meet all other requirements of LDC Ssection 49 5.05.08. of this code,• and 50 ii. tThe distance between the doors facing one another is no greater 51 than 50 feet; and 42 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 iii. tThe view of tie-all overhead doors is properly screened from the 2 street. 3 8. Detail features. 4 a. The dcsign cicments in the following standards must be an integral part 5 - '- -- - -' -- - - - - - - '- - - - - "- - -6 - - --•-- - - -- - - - --- - - - - -- ' . 7 e _ - -- - - ---_ -- -- 8 vertical direction or 20 feet in the horizontal direction of any primary 9 ----"• - --- -- -"- "- - - - - ----- - -- -10 minimum of 33 percent of the attached facades. Control and expansion 11 joints are considered blank wall area- cress used as a decorative pattern 12 -•- ---"- - • -• '- - -- - - e-•- _ - . :-e • - 13 14 •- 15 watt 16 88. Additional standards for Qoutparcels and freestanding buildings within a 17 PUD -•- -- •• - - - •-• - or unified plan of development. See 18 LDC section 2.03.06 G for additional design criteria in Residential Mixed Use 19 Neighborhood Center PUDs. 20 a. Purpose and intent. To provide unified architectural design and site 21 planning for all on-site structures, and to provide for safedand convenient 22 vehicular and pedestrian access and movement within the site. 23 b. Façades standards All façades must meet the requirements of LDC 24 section 5.05.08 C.5. Project standards.l:1.4. Building design treatments. 25 i. Primary facades. All exterior fad of freestanding structures, 26 including structures located locatedvan ouTillarcels, are considered 27 primary facades and must meet4he requirements of this section 28 with respect to the architectural design treatment for primary 29 façades — in LDC section 5.05.08 C.2.D.2., except for those 30 facades considered secondary façades. 31 ii. Secondary facades. One facade of a freestanding structure, 32 including structures located on outparcels, that is internal to the 33 site and that does not abut or face public or private streets 34 adjacent to the development. Outparcels and freestanding 35 buildings are allowed one secondary façade. 36 c. Design standards. The design for freestanding buildings must employ 37 architectural, site and landscaping design elements integrated with, and 38 common to those used on the primary structure and its site. These 39 common design elements must include-colors, building materials, and 40 landscaping associated with the main structure. All freestanding 41 - - - - -- - - - - --42 43 c+..�re, 44 d. Primary façade standards. The following design features are in is an 45 additional to the list of requirement options which can be used to meet the 46 requirement in LDC section 5.05.08 GD.2. Primary façade standards: 47 i. Walls expanding the design features of the building, not less than 48 7 feet high, creating a courtyard not less than 12 feet from the 49 building and length of no less than 60 percent of the length of the 50 associated facade. The courtyard may be gated and able to be 51 secured from exterior public access. Grilled openings are allowed 43 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term 1 if courtyard is landscaped. Opening depths or wall terminations 2 must be a minimum of 12 inches deep. If the courtyard contains 3 service or utility equipment, the height and design must prevent 4 view from the exterior. Courtyard walls are not to be considered 5 fences. 6 ii. Trellis or latticework used as a support for climbing plants may 7 count as window area equal to the plant coverage area. 8 449. Roof treatments. 9 a. Purpose and intent. Variations in rooflines are used to add interest and 10 reduce massing of large buildings. Roof height and features must be in 11 scale with the building's mass, and shall complement the character of 12 surrounding buildings and neighborhoods, Roofing materials must be 13 constructed of durable, high-quality material in order to enhance the 14 appearance and attractiveness of the community. The following standards 15 identify appropriate roof treatments and features. 16 b. Roof edge and parapet treatment. 17 i. For buildings largor then 5,000 with a floor area that is larger 18 than 10,000 square feet,in gross building area a minimum of two 19 roof-edge or parapet line changes are required for all primary 20 facades. Each vertical change from the dominant roof condition 21 must be a minimum of ten portent of building height, but no less 22 than three feet. At least oOne such change must be located 23 on a--primary facades One with one additional roof change must 24 be-provided-for every 100 linear feet of the facade length. 25 ii. Roofs, other than mansard roofs,with the slope ratio of 3:12 or 26 higher are exempt frorthe above requirements for vertical 27 change for the facade-'that are less than 200 feet. One roof edge, 28 or parapet line change must be provided for every 200 linear feet 29 of the façade length. 30 c. Roby *esign standards. Roofs must meet the following requirements: 31 i. en parapets are used, the average height of such parapets 32 must not exceed 4420 percent of the height of the supporting wall, 33 - i14,1 with exception of the parapets used to screen mechanical 34 equipment, Parapets used to screen mechanical equipment must 35 be no less than the maximum height of the equipment. The height 36 of parapets shall not, at any point, exceed one-third the height of 37 th!isupporting wall. 38 4 1,n . When a flat roof is screened with a parapet wall or mansard roof 39 '44 at any façade, a parapet or mansard roof treatment must extend 40 along the remaining façades. 41 iii. When sloped roofs are used, the massing and height must be in 42 proportion with the height of its supporting walls. Sloped roofs 43 must meet the following requirements: 44 a) Sloped roofs that are higher than its supporting walls must 45 feature elements that create articulation and reduce the 46 massing of the roof. This includes: clearstory windows, 47 cupolas, dormers, vertical changes, or additional 48 complementary colors to the color of the roof. 49 b) The color(s) of a sloped roof must complement the color(s) 50 of the façades. 44 l:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Tum"nuom�gw new�mmueadded Bold text indicates a defined term l d. Prohibited roof types and materials. The following roof types and roof 2 materials are prohibited: 3 Asphalt shingles, except laminated, 320-pound, 30-year 4 architectural grade asphalt shingles or better. 5 Mansard roofs and canupieo, unless they meet the following 6 standards: 7 a) Minimum vertical distance of 8 feet is required for buildings 8 larger than 20,000 square feet, 9 b) Minimum vertical distance of 6 feet is required for buildings 10 of up to 20.000 square feet of gross-floor area. and 11 c) The roof angle shall not be less than 25 degrees, and not 12 greater than 70 degr 13 iii. Awnings used as a mansa 14 4-1-10 Awning standards. These standards a 15 attached to a building or structure 16 a. Mansard awnings, which are those awnings that span 90 percent, or 17 more, of a façade |engt 18 between façades, must 19 5.05.08. C this Code. 20 b. All other awnings, which a 21 of a façade length, 22 façades, 23 The 24 the || 25 exceed size limitations and the ofhwkon standards of 26 LDC Ssections 5.06.00 ,9.03.00 9 0 and 10.02.06 Signs of 27 28 The location of awrings must relate to the window and door 29 , openings, or other ornamental design features. 30 c. AutOmob4sales parking lot awnings. Shade awnings may be erected in 31 SA: automobile tales parking lots subject to the following requirements and 32 // standards: 33 1. Shade 34 4irr„ anY public or private street. 35 ii. Single shade awning structures must not exceed an area sufficient 36 to provide cover to 20 automobiles or 3,240 square feet, 37 whichever is greater. 38 The minimum separation between shade awning structures must 39 4100 reel. 40 i colored shade awnings and the use of black or gray, 41 ��florancent, primary and/or secondary colors are prohibited. Earth 42 tone colors are encouraged. 43 1-211. Entryway/customer entrance treatment. Please see LDC section 5.05.08 F.1. for 44 additional site design elements. 45 a. Purpose and intent. Entryway design elements are intended to give 46 protection from the sun and adverse weather conditions. These elements 47 must be integrated into a comprehensive design style for the project. 48 b. Single-tenant buildings and developments. Single-tenant buildings shall 49 have clearly defined, highly visible, customer entrances. The customer 50 entrance shall meet the following standards: 45 |:oo1oLoo Amendment oyoleoosLoCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3 nonooArchitectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 i. An outdoor patio area must be provided adjacent to the customer 2 entrance, with a minimum of 200 square feet in area. The patio 3 area must incorporate the following: 4 a) Benches or other seating components. 5 b) Decorative landscape planters or wing walls which 6 incorporate landscaped areas, and 7 c) Structural or vegetative shading. 8 ii. Front entry must be set back from a drive or a parking area by a 9 minimum distance of 45 10 feet. 10 c. Multiple-tenant buildings and developments. Multiple-tenant buildings and 11 developments must meet the following standards: 12 i. Anchor tenants must provide clearly defined, highly visible 13 customer entrances. 14 ii. Shaded outdoor community space must be provided at a 15 minimum ratio of one percent of the total grocc floor area of all 16 on-site buildings. The community space shall be a minimum 17 area of 75 square feet and located off, or adjacent to, the main 18 circulation path of the complex and must incorporate benches or 19 other seating components, and 20 iii. Front entries shall be setback from a drive or a;parking area by a 21 minimum of 45 10 feet. 22 1.312. Materials and colors. 23 a. Purpose and intent. Exterior building colors and materials contribute 24 significantly to thvisual impact of buildings on the community. The 25 colors and materials must be well designed and integrated into a 26 comprehensive design style for the project. 27 b. Exterior building colors. ., 28 I. The use of color, ,aerials or finish paint above level 8 saturation 29 (chroma) or belowirghtness below level 3 on the Collier County 30 Architectural Color Charts is limited to no more than 10 percent of 31 W: or the total roof area. 32 The use of naturally occurring materials are permissible, such as 33 marble, granite, and slate and the following man-made materials: 34 ilver unpainted metal roofs. 35 iii. e use of florescent colors is prohibited. 36 ing materials (excluding roofs). The following building finish 37 materials are limited to no more than 33 percent of the façade area: 38 i. Corrugated, or metal panels, and 39 �p�,;r Smooth concrete block. 40 d. Nei- bing. The use of neon or neon type tubing is prohibited on the 41 exterior and the roof of a building. 42 4413. Barber PRoles. All traditional size (not more than 54 inches in height and not 43 more than 6 inches in diameter) and style barber poles which contain any 44 illuminated moving or rotating part may be permitted if the following and all other 45 applicable requirements are met: 46 a. The barber pole is attached to the exterior wall of an establishment 47 providing the services of a licensed barber: 48 b. Each such establishment (barbershop, salon, etc.) is limited to only one 49 barber pole: 50 c. No barber pole may move or rotate except when the establishment is 51 open and providing the services of a licensed barber: and 46 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text ctrikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term i 1 d. All barber poles that arm illuminated, whether or not they rotate, shall 2 obtain require a building permit. I 3 E. Design gstandards for specific building uses. 4 1. Standardized design buildings must meet the provisions of this Code. 5 2. Self-storage buildings. Self-storage buildings are subject to all of the applicable 6 provisions of this section with the following exceptions and additions: 7 a. Overhead doors. Overhead doors cannot be located on the primary 8 façade of self-storage buildings. 9 b. Screen walls. When a wall is proposed to screen the facility, it must be 10 constructed of material similar and complementary to the primary building 11 material and architecture. Long expanse of wall surface shall be broken 12 into sections no longer than 50 feet, and designed to avoid monotony by 13 use of architectural elements such as pillars. 14 c. Window standards. -- - - --- - . If the window 15 openings are into the storage aaunits or corridors used to access the 16 storage units, translucent ial must be used. 17 d. Single-story self-storage ngs. LDC gsection 5.05.08 GD.2. Primary 18 façade standards can be laced with the following two options: 19 i. Option 1. 20 a) A minimum of 20,percent of the primary facade area must 21 be glazed; and + 22 b) A covered public entry with a minimum roof area of 80 23 "°u i�et and no dimension less than eight feet, or a 24 covered walkway at least feet wide with a total length 25 measuring no less than • cent of the length of the 26 faca - or r mmm 27 ii. Option 2. If the projec�desig corporates a screen wall around 28 the perimeter of the self-storage facility, the following standards 29 apply: 30 a) Architecturally treated, eight-foot high, screen wall is 31 required to screen the facility, and 32 b) The roof slope for the buildings is a minimum of 4:12 ratio 4 t 33 for double slopes, and 3:12 ratio for single slope, and 34 c) A landscape buffer at least 7 feet wide is required on each 35 side of the wall. 36 iii. In the case that none of the above options are met, then 37 LDC Ssection 5.05.08 GD.2. Primary façades standards must be 38 m t. 39 e. ti-story self-storage buildings. The requirements of LDC section 40 5.05.08 CD.2. Primary facade standards can be replaced with the 41 following standards: 42 i. Option 1. 43 a) A minimum of 20 percent of the primary façade area must 44 be glazed; and 45 b) A covered public entry with a minimum roof area of 80 46 square feet and no dimension less than eight feet, or a 47 covered walkway at least six feet wide with a total length 48 measuring no less than 60 percent of the length of the 49 facade-; and 50 c) Requirements of LDC Ssection 5.05.08 C.8. D.5. Blank 51 wall area apply to all facades;i and 47 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text ctrikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term 1 d) Foundation planting areas must be a minimum 15 percent 2 of the ground level building area-, or 3 ii. Option 2. If project design incorporates a screen wall around the 4 perimeter of the self-storage facility. The following standards 5 apply: 6 a) Architecturally treated, eight feet high screen wall is 7 required to screen the ground floor of the facility, and 8 b) Landscape buffer, minimum 7 feet wide is required on 9 each side of the wall;; and 10 c) Primary facades above the ground level must include 11 glazing, covering at a minimum 20 percent of the facade 12 area;; and 13 d) Requirements of LDC S ection 5.05.08 C7B7bD.5.a. Blank 14 wall area applies tBall facades; and 15 e) Foundation planting areas must be a minimum 15 percent 16 of the ground level building area. 17 iii. In the case that none of the above options are met, then 18 LDC Ssection 5.05.08 GD.2. Primary facades standards must be 19 met. 20 3. Mercantile. 21 a. Applicability. tandards listed in LDC Ssection 5.05.087 are applicable 22 with the folio _°• eptions and additions. 23 b. Large Rretail S- c;-s. The purpose of this section is to break up the 24 monolithic appearance of large retail structures and present a more 25 human scale of architecture to the public road right-of-way view. Because 26 these buildings house a variety,of,functions that can accommodate u-a 27 variety of spatial types,they mat be designed to express these functions 28 in a manner that has th= «: arance of a group of buildings of varying 29 scale and size. 30 c. All areas with the building that can be accommodated within a space with , 31 •,..7 a ceiling height of 16 fact or less must be designed and built within a 32 -33 34 _ _ _ _ _ - _ - -.._. .- - - - - - -. - 35 building along the building edge or edges that front the public right of 36 way. Those areas must include, but are not limited to: 37 i. The management and businec office. 38 +i. Check out area. 39 111. Rost rooms. 40 iv. Customer service area. 41 v. Food service areas. 42 8c. Windows and entrances. When more than two retailers with separate 43 exterior customer entrances are located within the principal building, the 44 following standards apply: 45 i. The first floor of the primary facades must utilize transparent 46 windows and doors for no less than 30 percent of the horizontal 47 length of the building facade. 48 ii. Primary building entrances must be clearly defined and connected 49 with a sheltering element such as a roof canopy or arcade. 50 4. Facilities with fuel pumps. 48 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 a. In addition to the requirements of LDC section 5.05.05 Facilities with fuel 2 pumps, all standards established in this section are applicable. 3 5. Hotel/motel. 4 a. Applicability. All standards of LDC Ssection 5.05.08.-are applicable with 5 the following exceptions. 6 b. Design features. LDC Ssection 5.05.08 GD.2. Primary facade standards- 7 Design features can be replaced as follows: 8 i. The design of the primary facades must include windows and 9 other glazed openings covering at least 20 percent of the primary 10 facade area, and one of the following design features: 11 a) Projected, or recessed, covered public entry providing a 12 minimum horizontal dimension of eight feet, and a 13 minimum area of 100 square feet, or 14 b) Covered walkway or arcade (excluding canvas 15 type) -- - - -- - - - 16 wide, that is attached to theing, or located no more 17 than 12 feet from the building. The structure must be 18 permanent and its design must relate to the principal 19 structure. The minimum width shall be eight feet, with a 20 total length measuring 60 percent of the length of the 21 associated facade. 22 ii. For buildings located 200 feet or more from the street right-of-way, 23 the projected or recessed entrY and covered walkway or arcade, 24 required by the above�LDC section 5.05.081DE.5.b.i., can be 25 located on any facade. �0,, 26 6. Warehousing/distribution. 27 a. Applicability. All standards listed in LD Ssection 5.05.08-are applicable 28 kept for the following: , 29 b. Primary facade standards.The requirements of LDC 30 5.05.08 GD.2. Primary facade standards are replaced with the following 31 standards. Facades fronting on arterial or collector streets must have two 32 or more of the following design features: 33 i. Windows at a minimum of ten percent of the facade area. 34 ii. Projected or recessed covered public entry providing a minimum 35 of eight feet by eight feet cover. 36 iii. Foundation planting consisting of trees and shrubs. The total 37 length of the planting area must be a minimum of 25 percent of 38 the-facade length and be distributed along the facade to reduce 39 the blank wall area. The depth of the planting area must be a 40 Minimum of ten feet. The plant material shall be as required by 41 LDC Ssection 4.06.05 of this Code. 42 iv. Masonry, concrete or tilt-up construction. 43 v. Building height of 40 feet or less and the building street setback of 44 200 feet or more. 45 c. Variation in massing. The requirements of LDC Ssection 5.05.08 C:4-D.3. 46 Variation in massing applies only to primary facades and to facades 47 facing residential zoning districts within 150 feet of the property line. 48 d. Building design treatments. The requirements of LDC Ssection 49 5.05.08 C-6-GD.4. Building design treatments are modified as follows: 50 i. Primary facades must include a minimum of two of the building 51 design treatments listed under this section. 49 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 e. Site design elements. The requirements of LDC§ion 2 5.05.08 C.5. F_1. Site design elements are modified to require, at a 3 minimum, one of the four listed site design elements. 4 f. Detail features. The requirements of LDC§ion 5 5.05.08 C&D.5. Detail features Blank wall areas are replaced with the 6 following standards: 7 i. Blank wall areas. Blank, opaque wall areas must not exceed 15 8 feet in vertical direction or 50 feet in horizontal direction of any 9 primary facade or any facade facing a residential district. 10 ii. For facades connected to a primary facade, this must apply to a 11 minimum of 25 percent of the attached facade measured from the 12 connection point. 13 iii. Control and expansion joints within this area constitute blank wall 14 area unless used as a decorative pattern and spaced at intervals 15 of ten feet or less. Relief and reveal work depth must be a 16 minimum of 1/2 inch and may be different than the color of the wall. 17 g. Roof treatments. The requirements of LDC gsection 5.05.08 C.10.D.9. 18 Roof treatments are replaced with the following standards: 19 i. If parapets are used, the end of,the parapet must wrap corners for 20 a minimum distance of 25 percent of the length of the facade, 21 measured from the corner. 22 ii. The facades;facing arterial or collector road and facades facing 23 residential district must have variations from the dominant roof 24 condition. The roof edge and parapets must have a minimum of 25 one vertical change for every 150 lineal feet of the facade length. 26 The vertical Change must be a minimum of ten percent of the 27 0 building height, but no less than three feet. 28 i. All rooftop-mounted equipment including air conditioning units, 29 vents,etc., must be shielded from view with parapets, louver 30 '4 screens, or similar equipment screens. 31 Materials and cola. The requirements of LDC gsection 32 5.08 C.13.D.12. Materials and colors are applicable with exception 33 1 104, of - bsectio, 5.05.08 D.12.c. Exterior building materials, which is 34 rep - d withhte following standards: 35 i. Primary recedes. The use of ribbed, corrugated, and reflective 36 metal panels is limited to a maximum of 33 percent of the facade 37 area. 38 ii. Facades attached to a primary facade. The use of ribbed, 39 coritigated, and reflective metal panels is limited to no 40 more then-than 33 percent of the wall area for the 25 percent of the 41 overall wall length of the facades attached to a primary facade, 42 measured from the corners. 43 i. Special Height Requirements. All buildings over 30 feet in height, 44 measured from the first finished floor to the roof eave, that are located 45 within 300 feet from the arterial or collector street right-of-way, must 46 comply with LDC gsection 5.05.08 C.1.D.3. Variation in Mmassing, 47 and Section 5.05.08 C-&D.5. Detail features Blank wall areas are 48 applicable to all building facades. 49 7. Industrial/factory buildings. 50 a. Applicability. All standards listed in LDC gsection 5.05.08-are applicable 51 with the following exceptions, modifications, and additions. 50 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 b. Building façades. 2 ib. Primary facade Sstandards. The requirements of LDC section 3 5.05.08 GD.2. Primary façade standards are replaced with the following 4 standards. Façades fronting on arterial or collector streets must have two 5 or more of the following design features: 6 a}i. Windows at a minimum of 2520 percent of the façade area. 7 la-}ii. Projected or recessed covered public entry providing a minimum 8 of eight feet by eight feet cover, and a minimum of 15 percent of 9 the wall area devoted to windows. 10 s}iii. The total length of the planting area must be at least 33 percent of 11 the façade length and be distributed along the façade to reduce 12 the blank wall area. The depth of the planting area must be a 13 minimum of ten feet. The plant material must be as required by 14 LDC gsection 4.06.05. 15 d}iv. Masonry, concrete or tilt-up construction, and 15 percent of the 16 wall area allocated to Windows. 17 e}v. Building height of 40 feet or less, with a building street setback of 18 200 feet or more. 19 ++c. Variation in Mmassing. The requireme s of LDC gsection 20 5.05.08 C-47D.3. Variation in sassing ±+lies only to the primary façades 21 and to façades facing residentialfziinq districts located within 150 feet of 22 the property line. 23 iiid. Project Sstandards. 24 a}i_ The requirements of LDC Ssection 5.05.08 CD.4. Building 25 design treatments are modified to require industrial/factory 26 buildings to provide, at the primary facades only, a minimum of 27 two of the 17 building design treatments listed under this section. 28 ii. The requirements of LDC Ssection 5.05.08 C.5.d.F_1. Site design 29 elements are modified to require at least one of the four listed site 30 54 de elements. 31 Detail%features. Tie requirements of LDC Ssection 32 , .,,,„' , 5.08 D.S. n + t roc Blank wall areas are replaced with the 33 following standards: r; 34 i. y,�,Blank, opaque wall areas must not exceed 15 feet in vertical 35 direction or 50 feet in horizontal direction of any primary facade 36 '!, and any facade facing a residential district. 37 ,,;a ii. For facades connected to a primary facade, the blank wall 38 standards applies to a minimum of 25 percent of the attached 39 faade, measured from the connection point. 40 iii. ,,'Control and expansion joints within the facade area constitute 41 ; blank wall area unless used as a decorative pattern, and must be 42 spaced at intervals of ten feet or less. Relief and reveal work 43 depth must be a minimum of 1/2 inch and may be different than the 44 color of the wall. 45 df. Roof Ttreatments. The requirements of LDC Ssection 5.05.08 C.10.D.9. 46 Roof treatments are replaced with the following standards: 47 i. If parapets are used, the end of the parapet must wrap corners for 48 a minimum distance of 25 percent of the length of the facade, 49 measured from the corner. 50 ii. Facades facing arterial or collector roads and facades facing 51 residential districts must have vertical changes from the dominant 51 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 roof condition. The roof edge and parapets must have a minimum 2 of one vertical change for every 150 lineal feet of the facade 3 length. The vertical change shall be a minimum of ten percent of 4 the building height, but no less than three feet. 5 iii. All rooftop-mounted equipment including air conditioning units, 6 vents, etc., must be shielded from view with parapets, louver 7 screens, or similar equipment screens. 8 eg. Materials and Gcolors. The requirements of LDC section 9 5.05.08 C.13.D.12. Materials and colors are applicable with the exception 10 of gsubsection 5.05.08 C.13.D.12.c. Exterior building materials, which is 11 replaced with the following standard: 12 i. Primary facades. The use of ribbed, corrugated, and reflective 13 metal panels is limited to a maximum of 33 percent of the facade 14 area. 15 ii. Facades attached to a primary facade. For 25 percent of the 16 overall wall length of facades attached to a primary facade, 17 measured from the corners, the use of ribbed, corrugated, and 18 reflective metal panels is limited to no more then 33 percent of the 19 wall area. 20 #h. Special Hheight Rrequirements. All buildings over 30 feet in height 21 measured from the first finished floor to the roof eave that are located 22 within 300 feet from the arterial or collector street right-of-way must meet 23 the Section 5.05.08 C.11.D.3. Variation in Massing, and LDC Ssection 24 5.05.08 G..&D.5. tail features Blank wall areas are applicable to all 25 building facades. 26 8. Parking structures. All standards listed in LDC Ssection 5.05.08.-are applicable 27 unless otherwise specified below. 28 a. Primary facades. The requirements of LDC gsection 5.05.08 GD.2. 29 Primary facade standards are replaced with the following standards: 30 i. All exposed façades of any parking structure above the second 31 floor-are considered primary facades. 32 �k r. A minimum of 60 percent of the area of any primary facade of a 33 ( '4,, parking structure or covered parking facility must incorporate at 34 least two of the following: 35 a) Transparent windows, with clear or lightly tinted glass, 36 '1' here pedestrian oriented businesses are located along 37 the facade of the parking structure, 38 `"" b) Display windows, 39 Decorative grill work or similar detailing which provides 40 ' - texture and screens the parking structure openings, 41 d) Art or architectural treatment such as sculpture, mosaic, 42 glass block, opaque art glass, relief work or similar 43 features, or 44 e) Vertical trellis or plant material screening the openings. 45 b. Building foundation planting. The perimeter of a parking structure at grade 46 must meet the building foundation planting requirements of LDC Ssection 47 4.06.05. of this Code. 48 c. Massing standards. The requirements of LDC Ssection 5.05.08 C-4D.3. 49 Variation in massing are applicable, with the following exception: 50 i. If the ramps and inclines are on an exposed facade and they 51 exceed the maximum length or uninterrupted curve, a projection 52 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term 1 or recess must occur at the start and end but not required at the 2 ramp/incline. 3 d. Wall Pplane Gchanges. The requirements of LDC Ssection 4 5.05.08 G4D_3.b. are applicable with the following exception: 5 i. If the ramps and inclines are on an exposed facade and they 6 exceed the maximum horizontal length, a wall plane projection or 7 recess must occur at the start and end but not required at the 8 ramp/incline. 9 e. Detail features. The facade area within 42 inches above each floor/deck 10 shall not be open more than 50 percent, except at openings for vehicle or 11 pedestrian access. 12 9. Outside play structures. 13 a. Maximum coverage. Outside play structures must not cover more than 50 14 percent of the facade area. 15 b. Location. No portion of any play structure, located between the front 16 building line and any adjacent right-of-way, May exceed a height of 12 17 feet as measured from existing ground elevation, In all other cases, no 18 portion of any play structure may exceed a maximum height of 16 feet as 19 measured from existing ground elevation. 20 c. Colors. Play structures must be limited to earth tone colors, with a 21 maximum of three colors. 22 €F. Site 13design Sstandards. Compliance with the standards set forth in this section must 23 be demonstrated by submittal of architectural drawings and a site development plan in 24 accordance with the Administrative Code and LDC section 10.02.03. 25 1. Site design elements. Please seeLDCsection 4.06.00 Landscaping, Buffering, 26 and Vegetation for landscaping standardsa€nd section 5.05.08 D.11. for 27 entryway/customer entrance treatment requirements. All projects must have, at a 28 minimum, one of the following: 29 a. Decorative landscape planters or planting areas, a minimum of five feet 30 wide, and areas for seating consisting of a minimum of 100 square feet; 31 D, Integration of specialty pavers, tile, or stamped or decorative concrete 32 along the building perimeter walkway. This treatment must constitute a 33 minimum of 60 percent of walkway area; 34 c. Two accent or specimen trees above the minimum landscape code 35 requirements for every 100 feet of the front facade, and a minimum of two 36 for the rest of the project, with a minimum height of 18 feet at planting; or 37 d. Site sculptures and/or water features including fountains. 38 42. Off:strreet parking design. As provided for in LDC section 4.05.00, and subject 39 to the following provisions: 40 a. Purpose and intent. Commercial buildings and projects, including their 41 outparcels shall be designed to provide safe, convenient, and efficient 42 access for pedestrians and vehicles. Parking shall be designed in a 43 consistent and coordinated manner for the entire site. The parking area 44 shall be integrated and designed so as to enhance the visual appearance 45 of the community. 46 b. Design standards. Parking, utilizing the same degree of angle, shall be 47 developed throughout the site to provide efficient and safe traffic and 48 pedestrian circulation. A single bay of parking provided along the 49 perimeter of the site may vary in design in order to maximize the number 50 of spaces provided on-site. The mixture of one-way and two-way parking 51 aisles, or different degrees of angled parking within any parking area is 53 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term 1 prohibited, except as noted above, or where individual parking areas are 2 physically separated from one another by a continuous landscape buffer, 3 a minimum five feet in width with limited access. Landscape buffers for 4 these locations shall use landscape material other than grass for 5 separation of parking areas. 6 i. Maximum parking. See LDC section 4.05.04 C for general parking 7 space requirements. Parking in excel✓ by 20 percent of the 8 minimum parking requirements shall provide additional 9 landscaping as described in section '1.05.011 of this Code. 10 H. Parking for projects. Projects shall be designed to adhere to the 11 following standards: 12 a) Interior lots. No more than 50 percent of the off street 13 parking for the entire commercial building or project shall 14 be located between any Primary façade of the commercial 15 building or project and the abutting street or navigable 16 waterway. 17 b) Corner lots. No more than 80 percent of the off street 18 -- - - _- - 19 be located between any primary facade of the commercial 20 building or project and the abutting ctrodt or navigable 22 -- - - -r - -- - =- 23 23. Pedestrian pathways. 24 a. Purpose and intenTo t, '+e safe opportunities for alternative modes of 25 transportation by connect . 3 existing and future pedestrian and 26 bicycle pathways within the co and to provide safe passage from the 27 public right-of-way to the building or Prniect which includes the area 28 between the parking areas and the building perimeter walk, and between 29 alternative modes of transportation. The on-site pedestrian system must 30 pro'",„-„,adequate directness, continuity, street and drive aisle crossings, I 31 vlsibl- _ _= est and security as defined by the standards in this Section. '10b. "�a��� estrian access standards.'�Pathways and crosswalks must be 32 b a��, , 33 provided as to separate pedestrian traffic from vehicular traffic while 34 traveling from the parking sp ace to building entries and from building 35 entries to outparcels and to pathways along adjacent roadways. 36 Pedestrians will only share pavement with vehicular traffic in marked 37 crosswalks. 38 - -- - - 39 - -- -- - --- - ' - - - - - e - - _ - _-- -40 entrance to a project. Drive aisles I ading to main entrances must have at 41 least a walkway on one side of the drive isle. 42 dc. Minimum dimensions. Pedestrian pathways must be a minimum of five 43 feet wide. 44 ed. Materials. Pedestrian pathways must be consistent with the provisions of 45 Section 4.5 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Accessibility 46 Guidelines. Materials may include specialty pavers, concrete, colored 47 concrete, or stamped pattern concrete. 48 fe. Building pedestrian pathway. perimeter path. A minimum five feet wide 49 building perimeter path is required as specified below: 50 i. A continuous building perimeter path interconnecting all public 51 entrances and exits of a building is required. For the purposes of 54 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 this section, employee, service or delivery entrances, 2 or€emergency "exits-only" are excluded. 3 ii. If parking area is proposed along the building facade within 15 feet 4 from a building wall, a building perimeter path the pedestrian 5 pathway shall must be provided along the full length of the row of 6 parking spaces facing the building. 7 gf. Pedestrian crosswalks. Standard crosswalks must be installed at stop- 8 controlled-crossings. Uncontrolled crossings must be high visibility 9 longitudinal lines as shown in the Florida Department of Transportation 10 Roadway and Traffic Design Standards. 11 14g. Shade and site amenities. See LDC section 4.06.00 Landscaping, 12 Buffering, and Vegetation for additional',requirements. 13 i. Required 42gedestrian pathways must provide intermittent shaded 14 areas when the walkway exceeds 53100 linear feet in length at a 15 minimum ratio of one shade canopy tree per every 53100 linear 16 feet of walkway. The required shade trees must be located no 17 more than ten feet from edge of the sidewalk. 18 ii. Development plans must include site amenities that enhance 19 _ - - - -- - - - - - 20 alternative m ans of transportation. Site amenities may include 21 bike racks(as required by Section 4.05.08 of this Code), drinking 22 .. "r - - - 23 34. Service function areas and facilities. Service function areas include, but are not 24 limited to: loading areas and docks, outdoor storage, vehicle storage excluding 25 car display areas, trash collection areas,trash compaction and recycling areas, 26 roof top equipment, utility meters, antennas mechanical and any other outdoor 27 equipment and building services supporting the main use or operation of the 28 property. See LDC section 4.02.1 Design Standards for Outdoor Storage for 29 additional requirements. 30 a. Purpose and intent To diminish the visual and acoustic impacts of 31 service functions that may detract from, or have a negative impact on, the 32 rounding� roperties-;a the overall community image. 33 ' b. Buffering anicreening standards. Service function areas must be 34 located and screened so that the visual aedl-acoustic impacts of these 35 functions are fully contained and screened from adjacent properties, 36 including public and private streets. 37 c. Screening material and design standards. Screening materials, colors 38 and design must be consistent with design treatment of the primary 39 facades of the building or project and the landscape plan. 40 d. Trash enclosures. For the location, size, and design standards for trash 41 enclosures, see LDC section 5.03.04 Dumpsters and Recycling. 42 e. Loading areas and docks. Vehicle loading areas must be screened from 43 streets and adjacent residential districts. Screening must consist of wing 44 walls, shrubs, trees, berms, or combination thereof. 45 f. Conduits, meters and vents and other equipment attached to the building 46 or protruding from the roof must be screened or painted to match 47 surrounding building surfaces. Conduits and meters cannot be located on 48 the primary facade of the building. 49 g. All rooftop mechanical equipment protruding from the roof must be 50 screened from public view by integrating it into a building and roof design. 55 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 h. Outdoor vending machines must be located so that they are not visible 2 from adjacent properties and streets. 3 45. Fencing standards. For restrictions on fence material, fence height, and design, 4 see LDC Ssection 5.03.02 Fences and Walls. 5 56. Drive-through facilities standards. See LDC section 4.05.09 Stacking Lane 6 Requirements for additional requirements. 7 a. Drive-through facilities location and buffering standards. Drive-through 8 facilities must be secondary in emphasis and priority given to any other 9 access and circulation functions. Such facilities must be located at side or 10 rear locations that do not interrupt direct pedestrian access and avoid 11 potential pedestrian/vehicle conflict. 12 i. If site constraints limit the location of the drive through facility to 13 the area between the right-of-way and associated building, the 14 vegetation required by a Type"B"landscape buffer must be 15 installed within the buffer width required for the project and 16 maintained along the entire length of tte drive-through lane and 17 adjacent right-of-way. In addition to the vegetative buffer 18 referenced above,a permanent, covered, porte-cochere or similar 19 structure, (canvas awning and canopies are excluded), must be 20 installed extending the width drive-through with the roof 21 covering the service wind w = _ uch structure shall be an integral 22 part of the design of the Wilding. 23 b. Required floor area. One drive-through facility is permitted per tenant for 24 each building. Buildings must be a minimum of 1,000 square feet. For 25 multi-tenant buildings, an additional drive-through is allowed for each 26 tenant with a minimum of 5-0, 00-1x500 square feet of gro.s floor area. 27 Drive-through facilities may have multiple drive lanes. 28 57. Lighting. See LDC sections 4.05.02-,0 and 6.06.03 for additional requirements. 29 a. Purpose and intent. All building sites and projects, including outparcels, 30 shalt he designed to providesafe, convenient, and efficient lighting for 31 pedestrians and vehicles. Lighting must be designed in a consistent and 32 coordinated manner for the entire site. The lighting and lighting fixtures 33 Must be integrated and designed so as to enhance the visual impact of 34 the project on the community and blend with the landscape. 35 b. Shielding standards. Lighting must be designed so as to prevent direct 36 glare, light spillage and hazardous interference with automotive and 37 pedestrian traffic on adjoining streets and all adjacent properties. Light 38 sources must be concealed or shielded. 39 c. Height standards. Lighting fixtures within the parking lot must be a 40 maximum of 25 feet in height, and 15 feet in height for the non-vehicular 41 pedestrian areas. 42 d. Design standards. Lighting must be used to provide safety while 43 accenting key architectural elements and to emphasize landscape 44 features. Light fixtures must complement the design of the project. This 45 can be accomplished through style, material or color. 46 e. Illumination. Background spaces, such as parking lots, shall be 47 illuminated as unobtrusively as possible to meet the functional needs of 48 safe circulation and of protecting people and property. Foreground 49 spaces, including building entrances and plaza seating areas, must utilize 50 local lighting that defines the space without glare. 56 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added Bold text indicates a defined term 1 78. Water management areas in buffer areas. For design standards for water 2 management areas in buffer areas, including location and the required amenities, 3 see LDC section 4.06.02 D. of this Code. 4 G. Deviations and Aalternate Gcompliance. The following alternative compliance process is 5 established to allow deviations from the requirements of this section as approved by the 6 County Manager or designee. 7 8 C. Exccptions. 9 1. Exceptions to the provisions of this Code may be granted by the e Board of County 10 __ ... _ - _ •• _ - '- -' - - - - - 11 - -12 _ - 13 _---•-_ _ ••-- -- - - - -- -- - - - • - - _ - -- - - -- -- -14 - - - - - - - - 15 -- - --- _ ••-- - _ 16 - " - '" - - - - - -- =- -- -- - •- 17 - - 18 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 4116 OF 1, , 4Iry f 57 1:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\3-5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards UPDATED FINAL COMMITTEE DRAFT 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Bold text indicates a defined term LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Growth Management Department Staff AUTHOR: Growth Management Department Staff and the Architectural and Site Design Standards Ad Hoc Subcommittee which consists of the following individuals: James Boughton, AIA Rocco Costa,AIA Kathy Curatolo, CBIA Dalas Disney, AIA Bradley Schiffer, AIA Dominick Amico,P.E. DIVISION: Growth Management Department 4-4 ""°.; -- AMENDMENT CYCLE: Independent Cycle ; " n° LDC SECTION(S): 2.03.06 Planned Unit Deve lent b'mm;''cts 2.03.07 Ov- oning Distr . 4.02.12 Destrds for Outdoor Storage 4.02.16 Design lani ,tor Development in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redeye! t Area 4 esign St. 9.rds for opmentin the Golden Gate ntown a to t4 ,_ Overlay District(GGDCCO) 12.38 Spetific Desi : ~ria for Mixed Use Development within C-1 thr th C-3 Zontot. Districts 4 05 D'"` A tandardsK trig ~ 'egwrements .09 Stack Lae irements 4.1 Buffer Requirements 4.06.1 b4Landsi ' g Requirements for Vehicular Use Areas and Rights- :c1~f--Way 4.06.05 General Landscaping Requirements ..06.02 gnewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements 16 03 " eetlights 10 for Mixed Use Projects within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area CHANGE: 1. The proposed amendment updates existing cross-references to LDC section 5.05.08 in the following LDC sections: a. 2.03.06 d. 4.02.38 b. 4.02.16 e. 4.06.03 c. 4.02.37 f. 10.02.15 1 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\4-Cross-References to section 5.05.08 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Bold text indicates a defined term 2. The proposed amendment adds new cross-references to LDC section 5.05.08 in the following LDC sections: a. 2.03.06 g. 4.06.02 b. 4.02.12 h. 4.06.03 c. 4.02.38 i. 4.06.05 d. 4.05.02 j. 6.06.02 e. 4.05.04 k. 6.06.03 f. 4.05.09 3. In LDC section 2.03.07 G, the proposed amendment ves references to LDC section_:---.441rAtilir- 119t, 5.05.08. REASON: 1. Several cross-references to LDC section 18 exist must be updated to reflect changes proposed by the Architectural , , to Design Stan Ad Hoc Subcommittee (Committee). •2. During the Committee's review of LDC :, the Com recommended better coordination of site : '�1 standards "*1:911_111i er architectural requirements with standards located in other •f the LDC, a,: d also received public comments supporting additional cross-ref" n 4s a resin a eral cross-references have been added throughout the LDC to rove -ness • ated provisions or additional standards for projects "which are subs t to ar oral st rds. These added.f=.�; s-referei are fo - -i ation p `�•ses only and do not affect the applicability o architectural standards LDC section 5.05.08. 3. T Cott has e• • • pt dings or projects • Immokalee from all architectural rds As result, a dment removes references to LDC section 5. 08 from the f de '•ns available in the Immokalee Urban Area Overlay to be consistent with the ittee' W proposed applicability. Please see the p d amen nt drafted by the Architectural and Site Design Standards Ad Hoc Subcommitte o more in ation. FISCAL & OPERAT IPACTS: There are no anticipated fiscal or operational impacts associated with the follows- `mendment. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC section 5.05.08 Architectural and Site Design Standards GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: There are no anticipated growth management plan impacts associated with the following amendment. OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: 2 1:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\4-Cross References to section 5.05.08 12-....-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Bold text indicates a defined term Prepared by Jeremy Frantz, Senior Planner, 9/16/15 Amend the LDC as follows: 1 2.03.06 Planned Unit Development Districts 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 3 G. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Center PUD Design Criteria. 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 5 3. Pedestrian Pathways. For projects subject to architectural design standards, see 6 LDC section 5.05.08 F. for related provisions. 7 * * * * * * * * * . * * * * 8 6. Building Foundation Plantings. 9 a. Building foundation plantings s;:!---1:11'-'4 ,' .uired per LDC section 10 4.06.05 BC.4., of-the-Code exc -s fo : The building regardless of 11 its size, shall provide the e• � p '�lent of 10 •°" nt of its ground level floor 12 area, in building found- i anting area. A N jnuous building 13 foundation planting wi• not required per LDC tion 4.06.05 BC.5.a. 14 of the Code. However, the ndation plantings sh "" located within 21 15 feet of the building edge i a form • -� dscaped _, yards and 16 seating area landscaping. For •, -° ubiect to architectural design 17 standards, see, sections 5.0' E.-F. for related provisions. 18 7. Building Architectura 19 * * * * * * * * * * * 20 b. The following arc tural • >. are in ition to the list of required 21 ---•• •f=- yes ld n LD section 5.05.08 GD.2.-ef 22 --- k +I� 23 * * * s • * * * * * * * * 24 9. Parkin. ®•uireme;—it, . Mixed u = Projects have the opportunity to provide a 25 variety of pau g • •ns.to resident and patrons and remove parking areas as 26 ,--I poi d., m a1 ent ed-use projects reduce vehicular trips, 27 := • 1.-e,r the num,"0' •f king spaces, by utilizing pedestrian- 28 orente• ty In a •ucing th- ance between residential and commercial 29 "- uses. 30 * * * * * * * * * * * 31 e. Parking v uctures.For projects subject to architectural standards, see 32 LDC sec 5.05.08 E. for related provisions. 33 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 34 10. Service '-as. F• •roiects subject to architectural standards, see LDC section 35 5.05.08 F., . ed provisions. 36 # # # # # # # # # # # # 37 38 2.03.07 Overlay Zoning Districts 39 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 40 G. Immokalee Urban Overlay District. To create the Immokalee Urban Overlay District with 41 distinct subdistricts for the purpose of establishing development criteria suitable for the 42 unique land use needs of the Immokalee Community. The boundaries of the Immokalee 43 Urban Overlay District are delineated on the maps below. 44 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 3 I:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\4-Cross-References to section 5.05.08 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term 1 7. Interim Deviations: Property owners within the Immokalee Urban Overlay District 2 may request deviations from specific dimensional requirements as described in 3 this section. A deviation request may be reviewed administratively or by the 4 Planning Commission depending upon its scope. This section addresses the 5 permissible deviations, limitations thereon, and the review process. 6 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 7 e. Applicability- List of Development Standards Eligible for Deviation 8 Requests. Property owners shall be eligible to seek a deviation from the 9 dimensional requirements of the following Code provisions, unless 10 otherwise noted. 11 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 12 xviii. 5.05.08 C Architectural and Site Design Standards, Building 13 .- -. ■- . .. :-- --- --• - - - . - 14 15 .' .e • •- - - - - - _ • '" - - 16 non dimensional provisions of this section arc also allowed ac 17 - - - 18 xx. 5.05.08 E Architectural and Site Design Standards, Site Design 19 Standards, limited to subsections 1.b; 2; 3; 4; 5 and 7. Deviations 20 _ .._. --_ 21 as substantial deviations.. Note: Nothing in LDC Section 5.05.08, 22 A _• _ - •- -- - - -- -___•-- - 23 prohibit the use of murals on exterior walls of commercial 24 - -- _ _ . - •. - , - - 26 27 textor the purple of advertising any business or commercial 28 NU,G;,' actwit . 29 **ail.5.0644 Development Standards for Signs in Nonresidential 30 '*'''''bistricts, lined to subsection F. 31 32 # 40 ,,„ # # # ' # #" # # # # # # 33 34 4.02.12 Design Standards T. utdoor Storage 35 A. All permitted or conditional uses allowing for outdoor storage, including but not limited to 36 storage of manufactured products, raw or finished materials, or vehicles other than 37 vehicle intended for sale or resale, shall be required to screen such storage areas with a 38 fence, or equivalent landscaping or combination thereof, not less than seven (7) feet in 39 height above ground level. Said fence or wall shall be opaque in design and made of 40 masonry, wood, or other materials approved by the County Manager or designee. For 41 projects subject to architectural design standards, see LDC section 5.05.08 F. for related 42 provisions. 43 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 44 45 4.02.16 Design Standards for Development in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment 46 Area 47 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 48 D. Building Types and Architectural Standards 49 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 l:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\4-Cross-References to section 5.05.08 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Bold text indicates a defined term 1 3. General Architectural Standards. 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 3 f. Deviations from exterior building color. Applicants within the Bayshore 4 Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment District boundaries may 5 request a deviation from the exterior building color requirements of LDC 6 section 5.05.08 OD. A deviation request shall be subject to the 7 procedures established in LDC section 5.05.08 gG and shall be subject to 8 the following criteria: 9 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10 h. Awning: 11 i. For awnings spanning less than 5 percent of a facade, an 12 applicant may request a de from the color restriction 13 identified in section 5.05.08 . , �D.10.c.iv. These deviation 14 requests shall be subjec %.the procedures established in section 15 5.05.08 gG. following followinirkeieview and approval by the CRA 16 Advisory Board to a consistenc'<- " CRA goals and 17 objectives and community character. 18 # # # # # # # # # # # 19 = 20 4.02.37 Design Standards for Devel••ment in the ,-n G�Downtown C Commercial 21 Overlay District (GGDCCO) =�� 22 A. Development criteria. The fo , 4 .-ndards sh. m •ply to all uses in this overlay 23 district. Where specific develo. ntmm criteria and sta •- ds also exist in the Golden Gate 24 Area Master Plan, or the Future d Use ent or t-- rowth Management Plan, 25 these standards , . •ersede less sr "° qu nt or reir place additional 26 requirements E_ -,;, m --nt. g m 27 * * * * 4 * * «` * * * * 28 15. Project atandards. " `-ddition to ._m�site design elements described in section 29 5.05.08 e'er .1. - _: , al �'�� ects shall provide: 30 Two . a en tr- . above the minimum landscape code 31 :quire)7::-71-7, ,s, for e "(00 144'=r feet along both the front and rear 32 facades, at a minimum height of 18 feet at planting, except that projects 33 =. wigs tage : g Golden Gate Parkway shall only be required to 34 provi•= he planting along the rear facade. 35 Decorative landscape planters or planting areas, a minimum of 5 feet 36 wide, and" eas for shaded seating consisting of a minimum of 100 37 square feet. 38 # # # ";# # # # # # # # # # 39 40 4.02.38 Specific Design Cam ria for Mixed Use Development within C-1 through C-3 Zoning 41 Districts 42 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 43 C. Commercial Mixed Use Design Criteria. Projects utilizing the Commercial Mixed Use 44 option within a C-1, C-2, or C-3 Zoning District shall comply with the following standards 45 and criteria. 46 4. The project shall provide street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane 47 interconnections with adjacent properties, where possible and practicable. For 48 projects subject to architectural design standards, see LDC section 5.05.08. F. for 49 related provisions. 5 l:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\4-Cross-References to section 5.05.08 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Bold text indicates a defined term 1 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 3 I. Building Architectural Standards. 4 1. The Mixed Use Projects shall include architectural features that provide visually 5 interesting building design at a scale appropriate for pedestrian and automobile. 6 a. Building facades shall be designed to reduce the mass and scale of the 7 building, by providing arcades, windows, entry features, and other design 8 treatments in compliance with section 5.05.08 of the LDC except as 9 follows; 10 b. Covered pathways and arcades shall beonstructed with columns a 11 minimum width of 12 inches, if masonry 10 inches wide, if 12 constructed of finished steel produ lr 13 c. For buildings 3 stories or more - M ian scale at the street level shall 14 be maintained by incorporation" "w -ga• . -ariations such as massing, 15 texture, color or material on primary f. •es between the first and 16 subsequent stories. ,, 17 d. The following architect aions are in addition to the list of required 18 design treatments featur�"tdentified in subsectio ' 5.08 GD.2. of the 19 Cede: u" P. 20 i. Open ade or covereraj� y'with a minim " „ pth of 8 feet 21 and -....14(47,-- inimum len, .0 percent of the fa ade. 22 ii. A buil g t.;4-?': s or proje ,of the first floor with minimum 23 depth of e "'-.:-.&:•tal mini .:,length of 60 percent of the 24 facade le 25 it °rchitectura ments -s balconies and bay windows with a 26 um de �i ,f 3 .'64"`1,- ��°.t co r a minimum of 30 percent 27 of agade above the first floor.(Storm shutters, hurricane 28 shu , screen ° "osures or any other comparable feature, if 29 apples as part of tructure, must also comply with the 30 • um .. ). 31 # o # ��" # *pp, -- ,,' # # # # # 32 33 4.05.02 Design Standards 34 * * * * * * * * * * * 35 D. Parking lots shall be so; "`.hted, ifs ted, as to shield streets and all adjacent properties ■ 36 from di --,,,•1 •lare, exces - light, and hazardous interference with automotive and 37 pedestria ° ic. For p * is subiect to architectural design standards, see LDC 38 section 5.05.08 F. for releted provisions. 39 # # # ' # # # # # # # # 40 41 4.05.04 Parking Space Requirements 42 A. Requirements for off-street parking for uses not specifically mentioned in this section 43 shall be the same as for the use most similar to the one sought, or as otherwise 44 determined by the County Manager or designee pursuant to 4.05.04 of this LDC it. being 45 the intent of this LDC to require all uses to provide off-street parking, unless specific 46 provision is made to the contrary. For projects subject to architectural design standards, 47 see LDC section 5.05.08 F. for related provisions. 48 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 49 6 l:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\4-Cross-References to section 5.05.08 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Bold text indicates a defined term 1 4.05.09 Stacking Lane Requirements 2 3 Where stacking is required, the amount listed does not include the first vehicle being serviced. A 4 minimum of five (5) spaces shall be provided preceding the first menu board or order station, for 5 restaurants with drive-in windows. For all other stacking uses, stacking starts ten (10) feet 6 behind the middle of the pickup window) and is computed at twenty (20)feet per vehicle (turns 7 are computed at twenty-two (22) feet per vehicle, measured at the outside of the driveway). 8 Stacking for one (1) lane may be reduced if the reduction is added to the other lane(s). For 9 projects subject to architectural design standards, see LDC section 5.05.08 F. for related 10 provisions. 11 # # # # # # # # # # # # 12 13 4.06.02 Buffer Requirements 14 _ ._ 15 A. Applicability of buffer requirements. The b�ering and screening shown in table 2.4 16 below shall be required under this secti• ' c shall apply toa . ew development. 17 Existing landscaping which does not ' with the provision this section shall be 18 brought into conformity to the maximu rent possible when: the- hicular use area is 19 altered or expanded (except for restnpin is/drive,the building square footage is 20 changed, or there has been - •iscontinuan use ftir a period of 1 year or more and a 21 request for an occupational ` -=- to resume .s is made. For protects subject to 22 architectural design standard °= C section 08. for related provisions. 23 ...W 24 Subdivisions or Developments all be , !' -red fora protection of property owners 25 from •land uses �e�jced pursuan o this - -• 4.06. Buffers shall not inhibit 26 pedestrian cir- ,••°� �aa, -en adjacent co - ,d u s. Buffers shall be installed 27 during const •n as foil : and in a ce wi n section 4.06.00: 28 # # # # 1, # # # # # # # 29 30 4.06.03 La. -s Requtt : '� =y cuar - - Areas and Rights-of-Way m * 3321 B. �t ndards for = . aping Vehicul- Areas. For projects subiect to architectural 33 n standards " LLDC' on 5.05.08 F. for related provisions. 34 * * 35 9. .. . w -: - : Required landscaping for buildings 36 over 20,000 square feet shall be pursuant to LDC section 5.05.08. 37 The wing re• ,` -ments will be counted toward the required greenspace and 38 open a re!' -ments of this Chapter of this Code. 39 a. T =-. ' icular use areas must be a minimum of 14 to 16 feet height 40 wit ' -to eight-foot spread and a three-to four-inch caliper and must 41 have a clear trunk area to a height of six feet. 42 b. The first row of landscape islands located closest to the building front 43 and sides must be landscaped with trees, palms, shrubs and 44 groundcovers and must have a clear trunk area to a height of seven feet. 45 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 46 47 4.06.05 General Landscaping Requirements 48 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 7 1:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\4-Cross-References to section 5.05.08 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Bold text indicates a defined term 1 B. Landscaping requirements for industrial and commercial development. For projects 2 subject to architectural design standards, see LDC section 5.05.08 F. for related 3 provisions. 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 5 C. Building foundation plantings. All commercial buildings, residential buildings with 3 or 6 more units, and retail and office uses in industrial buildings shall provide building 7 foundation plantings in the amount set forth in table 4.06.05.C. and illustration 4.06.05.C. 8 These planting areas shall be located adjacent to building entrance(s), primary facades, 9 and/or along façades facing a street. For projects subject to architectural design 10 standards, see LDC sections 5.05.08 E.-F. for related pr.•visions. 11 # # # # # # # # #-, # # # # 12 r„s 13 6.06.02 Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirem- 14 :_ 15 A. All developments must construct sidewal •i e lanes, pathways, as described 16 below. For proiects subject to architect .icin standar. e LDC section 5.05.08 17 F. for related provisions. 18 # # # # # # # # # # A # # 19 20 6.06.03 Streetlights 21 * * * * * * * . * * .* * 22 B. At the entry/exit of any reside ti commercial . _._. lopment approved through a SDP, 23 SDPA, or PPL located on a pu• c• •r or arterial treet, the following additional 24 standards shall apply. For prole r ublect tchitecte •esign standards, see LDC 25 section 5.05.08 .1,---. ated •rov •ns 26 -h: 27 # # # ## "= # # # # # 28 29 10.02.15 Requirements fgaMixedi._ m;,- 'rojects in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle 30 Redevelopment 31 * * : * * * * * * 32 B. Deviatio ;, 33 * r■ * * .: * * * * * * * * 34 2. List of Development Stdards Eligible for Administrative Deviation Requests. 35 Ps shall be li ible to vik an administrative deviation from the following LDC 36 • •_isions: 37 a. �Front Se k. 38 T e deviation requests shall be subject to the process and 39 • • edures of LDC sections 5.05.08- G.1.-2. and the submittal 40 _ quirements established in the Administrative Code, except that 41 < in order to be eligible for an administrative deviation the site shall 42 meet at least one of the following conditions or circumstances: 43 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 44 b. Architectural and Site Design Standards. These deviation requests shall 45 be subject to the process and procedures of LDC sections 5.05.08. _. 46 1.-2. and 5. and the submittal requirements established in the 47 Administrative Code. 48 c. Landscape and Buffer Requirements. The alternative plans requesting 49 approval for deviation from landscaping and buffer requirements shall be 8 l:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\4-Cross-References to section 5.05.08 12-9-15.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Text ctrikethrough is current text to be deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term subject to the process and procedures of LDC section 5.0.5.08.. 2 and the submittal requirements established in the Administrative Code. 3 Further, the applicant must additionally provide a minimum of 110 4 percent of the open space requirement for mixed use projects in addition 5 to other conditions that the County Manager or designee deems 6 necessary. 7 # # # # # # # # # # # # # N 9 l:\2015 LDC Amendment Cycle\2015 LDCA Cycle 2\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\12-17-15\4-Cross-References to section 5.05.08 12-9-15.docx O . u 52 `>, O a) D EO.,0 o ° C C O .0 E b 0 a,, a v o .s a c 'b U v 2 2 W ° E o p 0 0 c G g F0 a E . s 5 >a c c 8 7 §" g� o v, E a5 c. 2 o c• v w ° E ° a > E O pp y a c . E .N II ) H L N � P 1 c y 40 c E ° o o o c _ F N oo'fl ' w c t c 6 M c g V . v 'a' O c V la ° r y „ E E E , N b„ y. Q � E °v C E O i . y v w E E c7 03 ON O -° E 7 b.tto w w. O 0^ C N + 08 52 g y ,9 mg v' on G a on > g c M N ° u a O ^y E r N .,?, e t '3▪ C E =C , a C >k 4 ii E w V'' i 0 o G, LO-' o y U° E •E o 1 0 lo r o " 0 • a ° � E 3 Y °' .: . =• o E o 7 > 7> d a c ▪c g o an a = o A E u � ° o ? v ° � o o =t) . g ......, a U O O . >+ N O R ' 5 N C,C ' •O ,D ' a o ya y u O o og ° 0 a x o Q o c b c —• w d0,, K3 <3 O c v o • ` c o d a c � ' 3 � Ub d °° °`CA O �w > ❑ 0 v c W e •S o - 0 w y o y o 2 b*• 7 .kg Q :c ` O v o 2 ° ° o u 0 .8 _ 2,, 3 � o ay - . O o liliHim" CE Q b o f ° ”' a) 'l N v x C a 3 ' a c ° b • v U V A b E. 2 o ° � o, c ncn2 o Et — 5 5 v • s • m a Ca a ,°a `° o P• 8 o d 0 ° a.0 ° 8 A : • o a ° a o . cA E c E a O E y � � � C ° _5 C , o E 'o -o ` A • rn 0. E c°i ° v o y o .5 09 on `a o . ° 3 ° U 1 O 13 a) . E O. E o 00 r a+ ,b O C = ,a o w . . o C 0 12 g (, r g w o Q 5, g o 2 w y o . o as E O ,k--t : . b op, 0 Q r? T o s on ' : fi ° o c 0 > a o E c y >6 b '. t . ab0 ' 2 . C ' g U g • o 'o a ' ° 3 a ° ` aono °a. 0 o w o ti o .6 o E E 0v• E c `6' c °n A e N > >no o- •o co wn 4 v ,a a - .: 0.-z, 2 e c ° a E v a 2 O L U OC O ) 3 N O ° U C O c C 'O • ) N E y aE °•� n. y N o E v p T ,o m..o o ti o o `. 5 i c- . y 7 w .4.-a. ❑ E s o I va , p on g a v 8. ° o v' ' v',go 65 � $ o y g ti 0 .- 8g -0 w 'a 3 - '5 o . w C o 0 . . o 0,° 0 "' ° oc 0.0 '5 —' 00 '22 E ° o 8 ' 1 p • b i vOi 'O E t� 'C.9 W „ � .S1 w t = ° 8 N i O 1 on C 2 '8 " N bn 6 O $ t T O . E o o ° w 7' ay O v y E w = c ' . 3 y c a h 5.. w °>. .4, 555 . 5 ° ° G 'o -o E y M 4 2 ° o ' .0 .E v a s - v o > i ` Ey . ) a o .E 0 y gE a b o . ) ) v ) 0 (Do >• , • > .'= 6 a ° o•E N v o E p o a - a) -o o v te o o . a% E E 5 5 ¢ 01-o 8.-0 .oC Fw . 0 ° o o E1, 5 7 C C C .ay i $ Z,a 20 E n w 3 3 y ay '7 U eg N o C ti m W • y E O o •-' ° 2 d g ° o i °c 8.F •C n E c C e v 79' e q C y ' a a ° ° ° N .1O c `p 0 0 N °Y O y y >G, `a) O aA bn'y E G-5. O 3) C U aO'ray 5 N G vi R Ca E, V O E E O E E O c'' 3, cv ° w2O - 0 YC y «O+ 4 pp '° 40•g v3 = ° ) oia C a ) -13 o0 y O 3 . F, N V) o ° UG OWClWf� CG O Si N l v. un 5.0 y . y F U d d 3 F o 0 y . 0,B F 0 0.°1 o. nom. - o o0n o y uw 3 , v 0.c y aA c n o o. P at ° •c g a's ai c c s eU y E ' ff U O'a ` t * l i b y V'o o .8 -8 -A ° a y p d ° r 4 o°° c ii T o ti 3 te r A Y c' y oN-ogU v 2.v4 C r m w 5 v a W t4:3 p 5 0 0 C:) d �• c.&I 0 >,-a O 0.' C ..i 0 y o, 0p0 ; > VC y o y1 0 d ° 7 Vv.-.-2 2 'o o iO� B 3 0 ° - ,t °' ° � ° o oat.ti 3 2 2-ern o ' ' 0. y o 1.,,,>, a�i °� c °�, v `� °�� 0 g .c' O w v y y a`o v 5 d a 4 .°a 4a) O'9 y .. 0 ° a.4 L y E ti a aN, N O ,2,= 0 3 ,is ° `_U b p....� - 3 d E .a . ° 4 w w v y g3 E A °.3 0) y C y y w a c) ' § c 3 o a.'a p�n C r '�v'O m y . q,- b a.) g a t a n 5 0 0 3 Q P. .s o o NO nfr y '3 y E °. s • 3 ° E .o ` ' EOcd E S' E [SR-8 � .� o u-0 b :: .;e° o c 'my °v E c s c pai4 a C 8qv 8'° 0 E 2v ° 5 ai 0 0 '° C C° P Ev !VI" b a . d ° o- o w'°.lc � oN ° 5a ° o y a '- en eU J oo y� : e or . . � -P.o .. °$ o c q o _ y. g r w ' d y a ° o m ° a d o; c 3'O B .3 N 0 -x ,'" o ) oa, E yoa ° c I � a� E3 o Ba v ,,� ° E 3 . ° v ` 'Sc c N Sto q cx, `x y-g L ai op =U° a o „ � . ao w Q E of a z y en 0 c 0 a)o ^ 0 E - ° vi E d p p .^ h u cb° as rw > ELy E 'c c- ° . x- ° a :8 ,c.> y o ° � A•- o n ° ay �,`$ o m y C a e° o 44 73 .c A ao ° e g =E ~5,- o. i -c -5 ° ° N a a ' t 7 e � ai � ° ° 5 n� c 0) 0 0 . S o . AF ° �= d � p .- o y ono 00..v.-02.9.-0� b ^� y ❑ 7 C'C 0 1-.....,..7 p ° 14g4.5 y1 .1 "Q.� of C E y o N .2 o ° ° is .0 N 4§ a� .fl E E t o ° . ° ' a, o E0 . ^ E. cA «,0 ° a CC'o.5 E ° 1 5v�:_. E fray.~ r,' yy a. 03ti ° o a v - ° on 00:g Dot, a enEoo c'.', Q.t 'L '� ` ° U '., ' .o a "E 0 "� c on .E i yb >, ° 0 .E t obi v m o U0oU! 30? E '� ° 8. Q y v c ca.vg ° ° °a $ ru '� ,O 1!: IIi t 4H1 .+.IU1 0 y p z c 0w,'fibc °-= ob . 4 $ u o va 0 y y N C4 • '- ce ° N d N N N m .) O . o O d 'id". � P. .c c o m e N� U 0 r U °d Y_° c Y ilfi'' . E 3 o7, o, cccm °2ON-ca c -o o ..* �U N N N n°mLN * y ,,r,.b' h. L N N .-. >. to '" O 0 N N t a-: p''O •C c a) LCI "L O ..a O O.O NN ¢ 0 G 0.50)22(.9 . . - E =-0E •* i = to N O O N N tl0/'y00 a Q,n(30-EL-N..~ c0'. n '� O O O .i o . -.00 . o � °a 61cc � ccccCA c E 8 L y O N > O t6 NJ N N. ° -0 L 0 N O 0-.c _ .- O xFc .1ornU n° 0)x o co•a0 , O 0.= 1.1.6 x U 0 .-0 � b • 'occE ° n'° P ° w 2 L.5 g a 0 N to Z v* co 2).-4 i ' y C c N y Y C'0 O c N U N O ❑ 0'O u y O to c r U L7 C N O 'b M.E .8 t 0 N C N N N.0 E to U N. N3 Lei -0 N g N w N °x N-c -.-• O N c 122 c Z N L N 0* a 2 0 0 O m C aE t - L N E 0 N'y •• c c o 0 0 U 5 w t yoc- ? nc = .- N aEa mo o =D� Nm ❑ o ti on r. .E o 0c $ ° cl) v * 9 � yw' > N°rc* 3c `off? � o!a0'uy9� N ! N o 7 L . 0 7 O C N L C cC c Q 0,113.= c'O @,O g a >� N a N Ty N'c 6 , � O O O £ N co- a " O.0 E 0 C .e'7 8 to 0 C C E .5E Q m * t >+a O d Y N.00 • N E N x -2 N m N N 20 0 06N 0 w A ca vE > y O'C E $B N to N y C N _ J :11 0.-P C ` � ° .a` c 0 i- 0 N _C C O N U 7 d w L O O L o i 0 vi .0 v.. �� a N O c 7 m* 3 00 - UO Om C. 00 ,- 0M 1, O=�� cam - ° � CC o HN -43,...E.5 3c h .5 . " N a c'0 ac a)n. c > on (. 0 o-o- o E '2„to o d p O R 2 J N N N fi =L N 7- ° �' O. cocLmZ � a N* F�o.vrn0aS�Saawrn- x c. , ° coiico E O d � W Qu - Nl6 LL.x ui x V O U < F m - w 4.),a n a o_ Q 'fl i ti 3 7 nts L• 'It b N C oy0i G ..,G C O d Z ,e of io 7 v A Yp Y o'a_ v U i w R A �', O s..---' \ N m u • O v a a'O W pOp= s - v ,� _ Y bA y R --= L Ri .- E C 0. O O O O8• O L up. • Q O '•- ' ., m T A U E >V OT �T R N O h r ^„°1 4 i 5 ,", u i''4 N O 8 T N v c a `b.- 1,* ...Ler�4t1 4' }a� ` '�a ocy o O 3w.=T, ' • {, .. v a A v R v a Z; A L,,'T >,E K o if N W'b ° y 'O id b sue. Ti a"7 C M• Fo, O to ° oE ° o � .42,04 '3 E— E „ _ +ate '- • O ti _ ,,' y o = 3y U Q' O H v 0. 11 ! • + ,, !!i1! d1 y ( 'i f . a 0.i Bv A V = ~ - d y N 9 y N , c C OO _ , � ' ' 'ffi E- Q fi aw „ Y y G Q,6,3 'F.,; ' 'IA P, CC N CS ti d cC'O 1 O ,, O R P ti0 bD'O . 'fib o d 4,g c�Tt 3 .1.) ,:91 ` ' ,i E � , ; c E v ° o a b4 0 D o e oe E¢.� o N o o .r ! ° z OH I' O I, v O — ,E N v E Jy 4 .1: „g. M A . oo o y�a t .. v., aF c, - E d C - ° 4,5 e ., y 2 U o U 0 y W <O b w .a W -, d R5 O a9. i . i . . C C g- N N N U C O N C w O G N C.6 _ m' d'O p N hY08_ 00E.v. O .Oi2 7 0-O L O= N N U owto O" w N a y N v . N O Y)y ° O N V y w CO t.d. 80 d y N 0 'O C 2t5 � y 2F- N � p'o'fl N • 3p ON V F'd jy p N t y O N y 2 8 '7c0 CY22"U VCyOr NU N a N N o w e y-O N w o C'O N O 2 N a 0 O , C D N d O t, g. N N O ( N 4) O'C O E g L N R ,Op C O L- O V O t C N N C� C C N O vi O-OO N N..0 O O` N X N d d 2 - N w NNW N a N d o i d o °' 4 O N v 01 8d. 3 °'6 4 . u o o c o 2 . PS 3 5 2 . m C m ::: 28 ,1`).S id r Lti 1 , "i , C r40- 0 0 N y N a••' 0 0 y ? 22' y 1r°j i��. N t y �'p C 12-vg v b F.,S G g f0. b aI'Z:� g Q• .} O�" V V" b N cod t9 ,9, c-cen 't, g ,=..5 .. z, °p4o c4 c g w 0 $ 5 en 2 5 a m u z t C 41u t°'- ,� 5° . .° Rx � g h " §�yoveq � c 0 as E� o •o .4 dr 0.x o,r .� H : E 6 .... -o�«» . C 0� 0 - z •2 �" 3 m ads 0 1.-94 y : U ..F y - o tl t., ,„ C t,...-3.. .. >,c`d $ y aE 'J 0 8 -2 O p i . ,a i 2� Ea'281 �v ° s c r Eouo U � Oc O,. w C 3 O p tO " V O • � N r U o O g y . 0.42 a 'O 7 6 S t pj v S .LC y fig -w-- 0 °N pu Tw • L � u o y '°LE 2 2 i a o T oo _.'v � % d ° o aN = o c g'-' ,H.2,-) sc a a b v O oin c co b 0oo �-0uh • dd ; 2°oa d0 5r � cd.e 6 u ipW �•o O NI 1 ai 4' 5 co aU °i' _ _ � 5•y a ■ �c oSra `. v c � ttwr �11 . y yob cy t> o c p 0 0 o C d u I . i4I,Z v i v F N .r 0 § 4 g 3 0 i ' cd cd €,. . . `g' Q $r '3,- , 5 k 0 v 7 cd .., as rIO - Ca ,°„F" c 5 5 u y `. -"X-'� S�', on°� = .W - .O ,« cd N .i ., 5 t o «4 0 cd... G b '. N °yy r-+` -ap O ca 72 ci F.Jr• .o '0 [ s ° a•o ,_: y W^. any..'7# o :' �0 °'80 x-g a, a A C 1, ._-. m chi•. w vi ?" o 1,' ao. o Uw w 1 C.� 7 U WS . A 0 b a.. O 0 P 'r 0 C 0'›.F a).,r0 • Cy ....- O O y iii x: ° ?.. o• C_ C p N a c 0.4 t > 5 C p�cC�d `Q— 03.c O O G td .00...0.6g v bD V ,105 C 3 N D ���i°, p N y'� a m c N ,L, T.a ,-� "0 0 iD 2 c a5i . . gg o �d on ..-,7), ;1: U V y Q THO t S E U O 0 - O V b➢ d iii.E-2 2 F o y 7 `g• O ° °= E E a,"c C C O " ; ti O C.4. d 1 tE • h tD O p-` v b klEYv � ° mom � ° °`� v,° d.A O - c.a °mod 3 'o i o m°o ten' No d d y• R E y N y °• ,� '1 ° 0, 4.-.2% 0 0 0 ,, cd 0 to 0 O O S .. z d C d vi o°. ^, Q ,r.. '� 7 y C ,A Q+ N • t C, , 7 ti v,y 4,,O O t0 y ‘' ...,� .,.O y E d p 7. v0, 0 E tp o h :' d x O l N n .'5 cDd'b O O O ° ° '� t '— '-' `h'e `2 F ti ti y O .5 .-.,cd Y y , § O O h 'i z w '.y a' g 0 3 '' ° I � - ... y' � 5 „ m o m ° N �° ,4 °> � v ° ` O ai -0 . ° tt fi i 4 ti O ", � � y O, *'b O b t K,, ,_ C'� [ O £ N ` 4 r 4 3 vii O O-1.8 0 C , d U,r 2 N O C ti E cC ❑ G w T'N K •. O'w `. a0i $ y a'O 5 , m.o z 0 ., m d 5 k u G a> > a E O'a o o ' .... ... �' O o r O ▪ aci.o o 0 m d O O 4 , _ !— O O rz Q o O o 0. 111111! C, O d r VS'7+Y O Oti O O m O t b O' `u 4 CQ 'C v !V O obi d t3 Gy o I i N' y 'C �,y o .y m v'b c h y 4 0 a'o y L) o o .a , , a E o o .y ° o „3 s c E ?:, o o ° a " off', of °`i„o r.:11:5 O ❑ o - YE .01.E O 5 ,,, ., Z. k>.' '-,'Z' zori.r a a K v o o o a o ,,Q u i e v to,°3 m t v o s r -. _ . .. C 'eJ e°nr . d huH c aE e v,� ..'"cf) O ,• 9 ,9 .c?. , a • S- 4 • emu_: •'' - 4" lir d m- o _ = - U O LL O O ii j co o «, N w 2 -52 : ',121" ,-272- 8 N 0•. y _ 7 N y 281.2@° c t 5 C + V m p C U p, N N U E y .3 (O 6 �� N J m L N N m O _Ed m N i ) cDO N y 0) '0 , o n N V m ,e!I') N O, O N Y O w O O N O cv W N O N V O r- .--9,- 853-228E.-. 8 O mp d M o m N - O C O C C ` U �'O .§ ,%'a O-0 N 7 r L O.L.• N 1.Y) 7 C m X Qui .... � ma� � C) o s UYO E QNp m ., N � U • s z l ° a b y ° m ti ° b o —� h ro go ti m o 0 U > o 0 0 c o 'ooZt '.� q 0s , o° \ \ O y' ao „ a a x o 0 0 �, W O o 3 11-148 E C N y O ° G m Z y O y Oo y •4 ^ Ego s�d^ �`� W ,k i= 'z' ,?-g. ter. o �`'- a`,i E z v Q -o [ o 1.-,,, r o y d C I n V I A o1, tl b o Y m o c o '� � � z a o'r,y � � v, co coo °' co o, � i c y ,,,,,,, 00,z, ''' ''° - c voS s v 0 r voo•a t' c E v p C�A �O N °' H,v p,.... � � � O 5 y W 8 d !fi^ 'E E E . N v �. a b0 L O fi-D v[E ,,EEj� c v m z' `t.'''''-a° % o N I.' v,1 a c, f ice ,' Li„.4 O co -y.� m :� y a s a e ° w 6 a 0 0 0 0 4.2E fl ! U O'D U O v `�' � ,-Oa 1 Lt, 00 C N N EwAi ,3�' obi tl .fi T y O O tz FA b � ❑ k;O� `� a N' M es o+ - >' a�i ' v y O O U d U 3 3° a I a • ■ N N I N y 4° 6 g-12. ° 2 E o C tO U w E N c s N c O micomm g N E d;� "''-'3' = w 8 8 700 !O N 1"_ .,3 a do c °N A E w H y �� g 1Oi:llhI. ' 'v-.c•rtec y°0 3•'' �. '.. y J 3 e s,�. -.cr..7�c 8. . '—c -' v " ... ^ oiio; ji m elz g . iono r O 6 N n v❑ U O N " SpNoA 'sU �' vi y p ' 7 0 • o 0 m• a N) ° «. 74 o o t•a °wo ° y , o . O z N C O o dl b y aw ° o o o tLe� gO v E Gw2z -2. 5 a�w `�• .n w U E o 1 o" as N O N..eF N o S A ' p py g-E2E8. fl E c $ y1_0 v y 0 o '- ❑❑ f oE ° ° O o Y y eo� C U c ,° 0 y 0 rb'b 60.6 >,°o o - > ° o ov °ti =v? a O d v .! °O o O V fiQ a o0 0 O o ° o s b., h Q n O c N O pp o0'C i Q of F S2 c'')1 d O 'O r PQ\ h O U d S P . p. O . y 0 P v -F": O F O a O ,N ,N ti' c O lUo Y O p^O y d '3' '' o N a O c ° `kl „RI ',1"4 rn O i y °.o U y C Q ti h. � ys ° u ° mo oa .— d d L -.�fi O p'E v.b:p oho O W o U ao -o '4'. ; It i o y�'" w�' °''13 Ps w z, ,sgsmr. 7 v �� ° � M.,C O 1 y d:i k y,l . '2S Q i V hN h h C� b z 4, O O O .- 'D '6'8,3'- 5 d .,C. O i. bA 7 X i a'd N ti O O�y Y .~ Cm W � t� 64 ao ,c s `� � v o Ad� c o m ". g s" ..te tU b *r 4-'71-1.2 o d o t'd Zq x ag ? Mo� � ,z� o Q y s ` � Y , q ° co y . r u� te a Y6 o , a 1 ` n ° �,orb r y ,, ,,,,„ ,,,, .. • 1.-. i • 111 li il... I: . .,..:.,, ...:: ...!: ... : : : ,,,,, ,,,, ,. $$,$ , „,,,, , .._ , d 12 .0f cy O c Y(I'. y. t> so,v, E 2 O Iva A.«o -m «5 , N m 2 m 3 a EU cm c c y E Q o 4 W s , m w-C O c . 1 O j o A m) m ,y,O _, C_cz U0U c >oyR', Y� � y 8 Lv C r y N o V .6 a8:12 §.2 d a = C C c6 C E g c ,aE s cy 2 $ 0 m O 3 W= �a N tuU E 0 N . O pda 2 U cO Q C `1 z-TP08 . .j'O =Vy • y L 0 o f N cc a20 a s 7 p d y j c L UN N N O N 7 y 7=. _ ? O t N l0 d N N p L o C- U N d y 6 N c E m y=_wN O w * 000 w-5 c- c E O E E cGAO ui _w . a s 0 y UDau ._ _ d �I v V V p O Cr i [O .00 Ci p, O O L. 0„ O. Q,7 en .7: N O pl.?... ;01(9 y 1I ^N NN ... .... N II Y c I,I, N LI. II ,..: l II r.. II �C pj i l '5 F F .. u L a - 4 O O O O C6 - G S Q i� u�. -. 4 I xp [7:1 V1 O-.2 Egand111111', S a II _ t..rr '::- ti ' m II oN iv jc, 0 ON ` ❑ U w n 1 x d • N :•.y Y:x 'i 4: N y L'G o M . '4 O Vi Fs 5 Cl 0 II O 'a v 7'O . 4O 5 _ o NOS V C" bA N a0 I iJ / s= 7 V " cl V N Q w O G w O O - r,..- i 8-' _4 3 i ' I o a ° [ p C7 • N o s ,' o o" 8 o 0. at Er88 c7 �OO �- B o0 '�7 Pi M Y .- M N . 3 N ly .. y U .On o U M .D 4p Or Q E "' 1 -0 ❑ rj{ oD . o `o 0 o .to $ c w m • at n m I ot - r Q d °• o 4 v N 1 m o ' c v I C ek co ` II w c =0 m = m f- a ['III m C :1 ' 'i a E _N a v a ro f o- o 4.4 Y C o m c n u n n c E £ `m o E c E I E « IN `o E 0 "� „ c i E E �n « " 2 N E v E E E 2g.q g c c E c £ £ C - a LL m w v N ■ ■ N >s r L c o E u . M S O c c c c V. tO VO .10 _ m 613 a+ w a0+ 0 of C c H d U D u H c N .0 N W W S t H C E a c w H m v w w v Q .. u m r u —5 M a c 9 , o N N a., ` 0 - ?;w . d 0- n W A 0 'a0 W 1 V 'Z c -F2 _ _ O 7 t. -d o o m c E „ W 0 v o ", 2 E E E E N 5. . g;o A m ,,, E m y m m u m v c `o v 0 c 0 'c •c 'c c E V £ a E.J m § g m 7,227 Z, . .- -. W, mm' cv a o Nfo E E w , G ° ii 6 u. E mv_ o -°c `u3 . 3 c mm E a _ E > � qn .q n X02,°.1 z oa 8 r ¢ LL a3 , « ;goQ 1L v m rri m m 1 vtasar V Q N 11 a , m N 3 0 m N S . , 4 ti U U U V u 0 U 0 V 0 N G , "O a, a, ri m a - (0 n vi m c .`I c c c c c v c v c v ni n m U) 0, 0i 0i,, p 7 mrEm oo0LL000O 0" o g o 0 0 £ « £ o E2 u 2 u o o2 ,o •• c "C " " = " c " G C C 3 C > E g J o Z o lF C C C 11 o yd, ',0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o_ - o 0 , 0.E o N N N N v ' E ' E E E N E o y o t o 0 o H bD o N N v Y v ai ; v vi tii 11 0 m w v U 0 N v v 0 w 4, -2 ,, v v —O c v m v d d N w °o W FL H Li H H A' m N N A' Y a O O O O O E O E O E H v .v . .n d N NO a O " 2p E b N -0 4 b O H.E O 17 22 o `. 5 c G°G ° 3 ouy 2brq -� y,c 'O U 7 b 0) � - 5 °rb s Nd dPO x N w a O G ▪ H d ¢4 O O P 3 '41 l O 3 S w'L v 2 w .ao - a U y b y F' s, 0 bq ca O td N k" � 4 LL " C y U 0 5):0.4'6 O.. y o CO N.,p 2)-01 >., O 2 y O2 7g Q7F" H ?„, a W H © O.y O f V ,8 3 L �1 N J O W Ly '. 0 7� O y Vl 0 N E w 2,.!:54:i. 43'8 .E ,� V]a: o E W.N 2 t o 2 U 00 0 3 m aT C 5 n C C 'B — N 5 C N ^� L E. ° ` 3 W w 3 W 'II vc ;: hv �0 w v -8 t- m = > h U 0 - G "0 N m v W V '. t W � r to 5R O..s W H W V . H W N w _ C m V O m O 0 a 3 'O c 2 r-C m C O W 'C O. ..0 0 ., C m 0 w m i v .0 m N J 0 .p ' O m 4; O Vi O 0 ' O w q 0 H 2•g H O2cN T Q R = W L C O o N E E 8) ti C C 3 � i v -o P 'o a t L c o gm v .y O o •E V- y N c to 9 — O c m CO- 'O U.. O 1-.. Vl « L R . A N N N W t 0 .! \ W •.4 N F N s.-O O m y _ "a w N V W N O0 • A .t' N u h C V ,+ 7,N V 9 o U 7 A . � v? - 0 m, 0, m 2 O y 7 A , = N N 0 ., U L r V L 'n g F. G- . . O a ¢ t ° w ° * m y .U o" a H1 N n. TS m c _ y N 8EaS w d o 0 L v _N M E E y y 'fl 'O C N W 3 v a Si -0 o Y « m 3 E N " G S c= E v W ' S o E I ▪ LL L o ti Oa W ' a o 0 ,L9 R O` . a • o W c ". t' N « W g A m .D U ' O N 0•• p ! � O v O 9 c t' m 0 b 7 Y W ^ M Y W W W C .2 q k m 2 • N .'- O C w a- A g o > ° t c C w E .....;' E 1 LQ°°S - o a A -o -0 c -i m E ` C L c 3 8 O C• m m m W d w C m C E • u c 0 0 00 H m N m ' V O g n 5 O .3 C £ a_ H o L g - o 1 i N CO 'N 0 h h h r i 42 o m c a C m c .. IC w .. Q a..0 .w O �� O O L O jai O 9 O a « U 2 ?) O e �" ., " m .8 m N O. o, 0 uWi vWi b0 'al ° .kii N a� N N 22 O a � 5,, a y O .•H410., . C x o N - n m. I W. d C N 0) -c,= .. -.- E�t °0 N 0) N O'.V)• C.c 0) m O 7'O N V E co t N._ N a O O V L N O $r N >O `"O m O N C CE 0)Q mE C N Q'^3'� c Nm vi 0 -0w"gVoo'° . m £ m N 09 - 2 N N 7 U O C O t N O Er mEc UN-0 To DE > O8Erm0owm = . 00-0" _. ✓ 0N•omQa-. sU E xi Cl)• U y o n ,s as F ❑ O y Nw U a°n c° :2 3 8.g ,,, a E c- :b c 6% ,2 o 8> aci to=o J ?b c ° 3 $ 3 o r>:. E ■ F -� c v ° o a o. a inn ° v.+:". 0�y °`c a i c oaa no p ° T O '+ c ` o b.() o oq , y y a c w c o o 'b ° `�,� w E ai a�i o ff H y b o a _° ` o 1 v ° a 1., o F. �o c. a °c.E a . ` ° E ` ° a).?nE ya .s E i c ° P 5 a a) O 0.U w .' O ' • O N N N O w ° p N Q.a a i ' O O 0 v, a) O 2 d c O N 8.' O N� V y Q ti 7 C a) N 0 O O. F ' F NL a)i ° O �5C N N • 00 m_0 > § as E ' p, 2 !A O c w";' i = Q N '73 E p }O. N " O0.7 o f c 3 E o c , E = ° 8...2 cr c 8 2 a c aE a.) c c E L _ L o- 7.1 .o o . 0 o o ti Ci § � Ovi 0. cU O u� Ci y V-2 c4 y N L y N v°i G 0 00 0./ a.LF W U y o o .9 0= 00 N� y 0 0 o ''8 S c 2 o. o a°i v c a ° „`7 ° E tO E � :: n3 e Q .1 � ° mg . °' E '' E5a o c � p* 0 o a oL p Ou1IIIIll .� v @_ w N r� • + O U 01 Q1 m++ m.— a^ C Q b '2. N 0. • co o N mom s '° cm dai 0 o a_ 0 o U o p,a Q m " (1 N fY c �� � o, I III n w m m- w C * a o L ° O) m 3 C E acO E yc V er a aEN ° N c a) o •�a er * _ C N N io `y ' N N'S Tt r C — � 0 0 a' V— O� :cu__o °-c�°U m mo 0* m, U m1° m m'20 N 3 0 o to. a-o E a)'v �d Q y n a c U @N o 00 � a� �� - , °c aa a a 3 , c 0 c,-,,,1 `ti'+ y Q a c r�LE , . as t, yd m.m.� m'5 cc `.,1 t amo � ac l s :19 or Z muma O 0� c a ' o N LN q) m 8'O m N�•c@ N a�cmo>Y a In y .z Z''' ai p * y Y � � @ � ° Ea° ` ° Fc`° 3-Q -aLc M 1 � o a t�� c u0_ or � a m m L-12 I ii w @r c6 NUc a) i -*lo�° >dy co oioEm Qsm iNUi aa m� m� mrn * !m� >aac w 3w°o m z o,C Im c. IL i.",i y N a'] 2 m U d aI O 4 h El". O)m N a) N CO ,L ftt oo �0 Z Z. O QQQ CO N g O T. A 01 u c o °� c aai .4 b o a F ° v °' N N w ° " o c.o > •0 o-°. a cn,z� oN $ba as w .b'd c y _ ° t al; = N € RS V a) me 5 4 ` O ti.� Is . M y +^d , ,O. 3 N R N�_w E .r wa 0? O s.2 C` w w0 Fa .N• G ° °' N A ,aL °r _ L _ O = C F 9 F me o V N^. N N c 3 T w a,D A aV O N .74 o w i- n E o -o w'O liii êib. o en E II .a E.E) 04= y va on2 o I -° ° a o w U o o o cs_ a) _ Z Al°a b m j o 8 H ° i aU � m to flUey v`'L: ^c 404' .4 t e V d 0 cv aci o Or) Ji a H E Q 12 • N ON v N aV O"0 w rn cw _;mm c c c m .-0 c c>oE c g j c o d 0 d X O 0 . • Y C O a3 C y 3 aCE o R rer a. N O 0 N E s' E' a) U co M W C a) ,_ O N@ EM a) p E O.c g C C1 a C O N N c Q d E.L§ C O ..c C N E N O a N F @ N (D E . > o - ` e N to 17.1 Y y C O N °a �� o ty w 0 1 U • a) iB N > A 7 n o �c 3 ai w g . y acC LL L D1 O_2 O a> c � c am@t° oc3 QMm� 0N o3�V aN- O U m °I 8 a v ' md cN=wmO C w � dn Eolo wa�.. alOp � as0 o o7 � wy, (.1• E HEQ UN- o � ,1,30 E2N C E a C N•S'7 M Q 'c ( o 7 `N E N a VoR o 7E`owov m i.xE0,• DO wC C p c N_ S C U'O E vi O XNy�o Era.7). o o "a 3 S o y 5 i N Y OD 2 N tC �L�!'! C yr .48`.---O 'C y C S L1 y N .� d ,h G'Q V bD _N E bA b• w t i t N p Y O N 35� Ytic 'o � twv 5 o u o $ 9 ��., g i y15V.0°14 t.ocr v • ^ a 5 > V 5 �` L "fi"p Z O 'tf �' O C b Tl C • c. " .? O O Q U ' 3 ❑ C " O ,o 2 u r ' fi x o 3 d m U >'. 5 y o " > .� ? O 7,5 mom' a 0 $ 3 y_ `2 g w F y m C w o1 Z.1 m d z d O oO ) 0 N • '.� D «+ bD CL > V w •+ O O•.A�� �x d y O , „,_9. O V g"13, 'Zt G E ti '� N O'G d 3 Qa v y'? , O - 2 ,1 P, 271 m --• " v� h y fi ? F a c.3 - o o d E n " on c u >t v o! m 2 v D $ � 6 fi : � � � ° E � Sv- w ":1,^ «. -.7. d .g b— '%' �o � a w o -°v o° c y a U ,o E .a. ,..,;21 7 C fi S +� fi tl k N " ao oyhfid a 'oE" ' " E "'5 w � F o o S ys 3F .°ri' " " a • " m 3: '- $ 3 ai a on� w .- G 'G ^ d 0 w d O O _,i C .�y i` 0 T N G. O 7 -� O d ' fi S O V 7 w 5 OA C m V ti'3 N p z E ,` u 8 U O.5 pNp'V. 0 O i O_2_ w z - C p A v cC G fi y O E y C' b. c0 g O a w &., '[4.. ,' "..Z"--.., 8 " C 5uw m � ors�« "� " v cs "" E c ° - d m `1`8`"t" �' 0 o v w .d t o tuo� a '6*,,, s Lill o 4t,1-).:L2 � �.d d '.,°J' fi U � p ai w a Ao " c 1IØ oy �/] .� w a on C 1O2 0 L w SE _ Ea �a c 7 m U G A - E - . ,--0,.4 v ma m _m# m E a o a 7 a y E 0 O 7 Y O N . O F N w -}— N N v8 E o mao mam y�4., ,??.; m m c5 a m 7 aai m•° 2gg=E U 0 m C . m 2 � m ' wg O m a O m N m ma > 082 m 2 mE-0 meE ° o m- o o ik8 `03 '---4. • -•> o N rnE 7oRE (gco o o�o um o nE §a 0- 0 a „vo ” .0 > O .t-. C d a ai a c C C 0 m 4) d O E@0 07 : C N y U m 0 L .Lm.. C N fl- 7 m 8 G) 0 E 2 w0 CA � � 7-.E. 1)-1;; ("01 vn°ia� mma`1m > mm mo 2 = c EL E.,,•:' (42:.5-0-.` --- ma giE � Eo c o E c _ E 7 w m a m V m E -c m u ayccovopol mLNcNO` aai� o -,T, ' ymo8,oOgLai .�'�"o 000 v� Eo > -`E §E'immyEtmvm� mE2000Emo ! yaaaimv o '211"1 «~ $w2rnrnymc;°_v �"a� E � m -07o c� mE'� � oa a �� N � c yaodE §� a-ci co m ,� _mow ! Es g i i 7 cut m o u� E y a 7 d 4 2 c a °� 7 t 0 � m E a w _ y N L c 7 I E y a O > C N m c+L-. m 1 N > g C 7 L rL. 0 a E a 2 7 c 0 m r 401 a n j o> c o1._ 7c 0 EEm �a�. d m o v a000La1E �caaonE3v° 'Um-od m o- moocoo�� Em � wE�� Eomm� E � mwEom Um � vv._� - IV fi a E t 0 E o 0 +4 .S 6 C°1:8:'� � �a °�O?2:1H:21:(9-2:::;":: U:b oy`y o UhII'Ill!i �fl p u .^ Z a p o_oy cc p o m o�E Y d-°2 °_ rn a E O' o E Q E -D zc' C N m rn> ac)c o.3 °-o a °Q hQO bc�o c c h o.�°A��o�.'3 y G=nc a s y W h�O!wU'C G�`W�O v°wo a`o0 Q E 30 °° 1 ff �L F a ❑^ V aoo oa°=o ° °E ,324 o0 N C bO 0 ~ Ox N U N b0 .'G 0 ti N b t Y t.r g 0a ° ' -E w h O Or ca y .. N o v o m� c ', to.. ).E a � r A a0 c -. o_ E g 8 o ^•c. E 3 I ca on N m a 7^c h3 c cncr'3 8 a 2 E to o v 3 a y c C 2 i O,'tg4 -Fn'F w 00 E h y F q w7 i N o - � o y 1" E c c c§i i b y o c $a - c' a ` Eg; F o o mv n 0 > � a wa o� °' a a oaf ° c ° rq °roi°,,,,-o 4414-g a ° c ca0y wo ° °° p E Pt o 0 0 0.m Y ax o O § _ c '' , o o ff „4a y ibA 1 .E E <4;',00 C�� o~ ' z- 0 goo 3T =--- ' .-. 'ti >o � o i ti in r w y ce v t o o E.w i At tt o o v U E c m a' -' y a F 5 3 o - ' �C o w E c� v km o .o.r c � w :am wi o a Ew4nc wi0 o 0 ° wo Va E4 o U g o a F v u a F a 0. 2 a a NN ' a "� .,:.,., N OI c MC o -a CD M o 7 0 7 O -° N L O O , 1 .91 _ N a C O N E O' N N L` O D U 6 U E45 ° 15 O 7 O O UI 05 L _ NN U O E C c E Y N O 0 C N .LL°r °5ccE O E a L N-! . c C L 0L O c 8N O O dNE`7 maa o3oF oaE N., p oa rR c2 ,786 .- c ° o oQ aow 6Ea TL0 � m C . „, ,, ,,,..so...,6cmw 0c Nm >ac .4.4= m-F,o cc5 Occ EA Em a a ay@c w >.cLac moeoc: ROCc a ; pEo w ymc3 c�o c-OCUN >ac m 222 :5 a ()aEg N U N 2 �c w E "m° OCC3 _ L- _ C a II N L 0 0 E 0 a c U m t m m a$ it C c N N E N -a`n £ ° o > c a E o a 0 O ° � aO p . E d yu - > N w N v o � � c m _ c o _: � na � co N L w 0 w cu O N cm O_ N cENmS` - E3a [DEF.. � o Dd .7 °E ZEc ° cc" o "'" 5a)J❑ W� woFg�n' 7�- mc_ E«- 8 _=tco o3 ` m: • x 0 0 O b 8 O U N w t N tc�tl 0> c * �'U O O .' 0 Y O •O 5 5 O. E,S g g N h O w O 5 0 O i O ot N N ❑ 4 O Y U i � '7 9 N =w y t,, y 8 O s N w o E N U' U 0-o 43 aE ° v t 0 fi t G 0 b b U 0 C H i d . s N .0 b O tiy O CL 5 1 L1 ti Y g 2 r� 0 s c 0sv d ai .5)..'S :' a 0 o qc-., 0_tom N y to" g A h d N' o E 74 E ,8'o o """es ° 6 E T0= a c 0 °' z . w d ''51 - o Ew' b Joe _ O ai "O � S 3 N O gtii 7,--.5-.2.1 ,g brE p-0 O 8 M, y C p C CO i N b N L .a'« y w > 4 i T y E O Li . .0 w O O j O O 5 ai O O 5 ,c2. O s i to ti C p D N. 0 0 V 'B .2 6 8.-.2. O O O 0 0 T 4 yN 7:s g 5 Q �s c n � a.1t l a3 T??4,� N cad 0 0 cO N T 0 O .N.. 4 O y R.1.: cl O N OV Qb,,3 d L' _, .' •T"N O \S M O:3_,5 0 i3 J U N N ',A,U h R 2 3 y a 1 y i I, F .o ° ..c CO ou '- o s ° � Nay °oE r r 50OF y ° °Is Q.z�.-� E t o0ao,�.-0 0 y CI o v C'4' i °� 0 3 u E ti c k aNi "b c d v E r o �3 u o v w o an on= m t'. 'i' s' Q cy_o C O Q O &�� r ' o *o 0 W e• E y n _ v a F, `, V -.b v u u w Fc =.5 5 v i v °a V E w o. m ^ . o U 0. c V 0 C .17 cb CO 2 a 3 ° E .a o oa� E o E g o a c 2o Y 0.5 0 s w-0 N.c - y c d 1:1 W W- = o . d waQo „; a �-o OE0 o-c-0 oEu).S«aoo ''; O o0 > c 0o3ooy > > m-om= E` >-a V.i; cwv v' )-5-6w _,2 0 c g � „, o t ai cw-2i VE f0 2 c - , y3t00 ° o oh -03 m` 20 8 E LOr cU al5 �''c o 0 >N N 0 N 0I! N V N E N C N U N -O V 73 G Ec 3 °� EEo L ° `.v m44omacoos...?�m to c x 0 E GJ W c O ...r.” c f0 L I- rn 3 U ii ..,.._z-: .QQ} Yj ,{ . t \\\ r C• S rbCl E L y • it: OC N E w °" IIIIIIIIIIIi111111111111!Illgilill!iiiijiillliiitglii ' I ilL a b iE N " o U o� p - o O c3.b U N O.is g o i- o 'O v y Gy .E t,.N E ° r3 € _ ,, '61 e3 C 03PiT. 2 O\."-i E a E E °` t3': g O • 3 "O D 14 U O w N fl N b 1 C1 3 N d p T U -5 :-, 0 E .0 0 y N ' 1iWT1 ok ca o. �E 0 d d E 2m 0 � � m�� O E $ E• ` E. a1 a�j m a @ a a y - I ° aOM c c w n o 116' .a § g- F-0- y w n m 3n� .c 00 m°0>.— a� E " - a)04 a. N E aLL 7 0mo. U a E > c a wE m mmc c . L O _° y A ancm gy my ° od y E m 011=31: LL ovrn E m©. N c 1Y n m n yaa i N rn %O D m'O C v 8 o m8 'alE e 9 S c2Ua7N N O z7;N u 8 w : CN U n O ` �cn mi 1 i.. — Eom � mm N"N N C >U Y liir O O F ' r N N w m rz a)O � L O N ` O N dtEc C ° O N m 0airc ��.O£ L r �_ D ya ° ° E c rn i E'15'oO ma an'E C C a - yrw >r'o ai £ O °- narlS mcui � N g m a) � T omR'El)U a1 nE noma ° �-O � y ?dA p, y_oN 3 N v ` tcvma as sI °acw oEE" o;X I., K msO1 m 7 m a >q, 8aa2mti' a -� � lE�� •ESod Eg C m m. y sN EmowLL'40� ��wE2S,Ew4/ m —a 0 m N X nmL`o E ° c,En ag-g . . EI °c C m aOLi° �rnE —� n ` f0�c2 caoyy m a m X C co3:?tcNv75".5 QmE @U 2. °Q ° �2 ESg n= cotA C E n `'O U courn L `,, E °1c'oca ~_ mo ° m« 43mc° E °o E ,c728o a� o° . 0 . o_c caV m 0-0 0 m a)-00, 0 0 y-c 7 2.r dit n 3 m -aa? po n ° n ac ni m o >>2 y E c >'a m o t0. U C y O c cM 0 F w 0 > T II 3 a z m o s• 5 .w s y g s o 3 C y O ry a1 c ,O Q^ 4.. U • y O t ti O 5 p & ,,a..m 0.w 2 O C O m O'E C .1)7=> 3yE• �, F,-Cs' 1 > o �7 e, o v E• c o-o o o^ _ ._.4 o y o h T .B s . k O o a y vw i y O O _ II U,O 4^.� y " ti•o y C r Y'a > e i, y C oU Q y —y. U b ?ii g H J E_, V s E— =« n y a ti A S N 7 .# „N O a+ ." s . o U 1 T D G y te °i .- z°o 7. n a v �.4 d p a p- o >,. y [ � o has i U o c ? .co � tiOp E E U tl U= >t' ° .-, o O 2I' 4 l)U a o - i O— U E a ' ti r, U,) o d ts —U ." F O ,tz O N R Es- . gcj.�2 y UaUC. R W� o a y o o � o F-. U 2 r w h U ° 0 h o 0 . . . • • uE • ID N a,_i o Co N E E ++ CC N : F C 00 N GI 0 C * C hi m ▪o S o aCi 5'eocoi d £b eoA c jy 'a O ,r'L„ YO a y O y a `a a y'� .. U 'b v1 O a bd 7 - a �'£. E.� a tU " a C C`7 a) E y -i , '�' e N m a '�y �; a Y C U H g U p > b > " 3 as o av a J av $ �id 2 o 6 1 Ld e -6,-4 �. Ilfg °o WV baa . «:vim 2wr8 `o Cza N`6 'a " $ 0. 8• p Uc '°.vi c 5 is a o o n y b y i' U � O.� �8 O- O y i� O� �a 7 Pn.4 3 g O � )bw° u° .2 .c w U Bb vb °� 8 51. E. a o . - I g� w A . 0, O .3.s .= o 0 ∎1 Mo F U b- a v 0o �w a ° 3 o o g 1 �Uc og'vc b02P y� - ° os y P.a,C ' y'O g o 2 L` a ^ 'A ` ° c a a 174570i4 2 c a v , a to U U et E C U ')-0 Uy U C b `c a+ a.. 8 V 4 U E • F. y pc a _ V oa- g $ v qg-a c U 0o j ,"��n Ii � baE 41111 y °N L 3 :..'O U 8 bA �t �m0 S E -0 — U O F q a N 5 `tl aF � ° o a � ° X111 ma v ° ° cai °c'a ,t .,.,0 o'o ! HVPQ 'a a 2 - ° o lilt ' F r F n.a v win :r Y + °) E0.2) * Rv« m Ea m °P v � c�° rn rnE �as z c!(0 j c * c"c m, d N,3 C @ 'O 7 C Tp • pl'7 0,C* L C £ C E_ L £ `0 `3 r p X `6 7 m w L w O i . ,■, •140 -,1, N— w 'O p E O E U f� °r a fill- o L "a y m ° E N m y . om > Y • C C C C R N U I N O C > p , C•c E a O �La ON NEN� V `6 L * 2 7 O it (u � C Cc g N uio2 8- @•2 C ONd a EJN F'- E0 E o� o o a)TI m.N• v N o c � > a v> rn.€_ � � 2 ov £ `°2E @ £ oU t N vui u `� O C U C a O N o N C f6 o Oo 6 O EY O m a'`- _ C O , £ md �c t E 0@ co O N C0 um o c_ioc N N U c?—� a6 o 8 £LE ° � £ oyco nm c � o � L 0ia . > rn ° oc -o `a -°� * -5vIg £° i £ o pN L0 m z � � E � 8- TO Eu- c wzx `o e =y � c m =moo L Fi £ o n '00 O `2 I I- E �rn 70 £a `po o'ggti,* n vasrnyo• a.) Q o cc C m9 ° N U N rn 37 i Ir L `6 v1 * 'Cr ■ E—\\ \\\ \/}/ \k)}\\ \\% f � j {) G \ a\ ) c2 - 0 0 \ \ EA j (\\ , / // \0 \ tco\ \ : § % >s ° E £2 ) 0 .. 0 \\ U 8 /. �*\$\ 97'egg \ \\\ )kea 1111!1111111111i1111111111111 • (. ` m §) « E -/ — _ ,fƒ §)/{ =t{ m ! . 822 / _ £-- TEm ,= &] _ k §)- — qfe{ 6:1. E07.2/ \/{ ® $ 2- . 82°_-_/ ` ° 9rwr/)k ° § °2s4)= =-0 �) *\ , 6 : mw2wE.so, owEwc , `_ , _ m = ' o� 8E.EE 22/- ` 0 omO£«ko=mmo 7378# §7) 3 § k } 0 2 0 300 a a ° h v = aw L E N ' - o U ,- i = :',42 ,o E 2.a U l' - '0:2A8. 0 0 oc v, = a o a w °c o i cr - �a r.7 il v ,i. oq L ~ u 5 O 0-0 N V U• E C . v E O p w O ° -o,_• G1 v O G 'c' 3 0. .T+ ,.- ' v 7 o, = cl ouo c E aaci n E °• mow E ti o � ° � 9 °6.,,,:, i bA Eli- v °0.. § C R C 3 = o 0 ao E °- a a " 0 v ^ v '', 2 ,1 .7.3 v a ti ;' o ° a E o n 0 o A v C a. 0 0 LC 15,. 6' g 3 aE c '" �l o o v.E ai ° -a - - . g d 6i y w �., o a ry? o ° % W �° q �:= q � 3v� sa d a o 2 o E v v o 0 0 > oh t 3 0-0 � „ u `aa. o y aJ—°v 3 bA p of oL 33voed of M. "t3 c N E a 0 C a 2-2 :1! 0. a3 m m 2 o it �' a d 24 V) a O o as N� C N.o) ��'i - in' {G 3 C >C_ � N �s.•�kr cm 1172!1347E3=+,6 Lr L ?r� E � d 3-a O 7 �p 3 a N N E O N N A C f6l N wwEQ. � 3 0� wrO � `� ow,c.-aEnc2co ° =2.2 -a c a � a C a N F L N . ,_ a 4.0 3 .L. C p N U 0 . 2 7 C-0,-, c C 9..8. N O l6 o E E = 0 ° 'o C a E N °-o o1 NH RS E °s N B O O N .1:22 m N N O OO O C Y NFL y'E_ O O � (Ln � C (‘32.1-U. a N _ N 0 O N N L..0 9�m o N E o w 'Na (0 9 C 0 O-NI C a)- 4, 1 atddo `ON = (6.oL- mo -a-0,-� E ■`_jo n �-O '° '- o0 '65-(3F- oymE3 (13 () 30Via, ' cou°'imcE Iii!U!I!fl SC m (0 >=4°- ~ O w N a N O ._ O C U S l0 L C o^ ,o Y 2 y 5‘.44,,,.,q E U r y 00 Q U o O aou2.02 N N .8 E E v H � o N -6 c �bo U I�q b �qqO O l g 5 N N N y y 0 .-tom O m 2 -,-. '-' " .0 i C U ',5-a an C . a w .. n a� E � , L' i a N O � 3 N 3 � IT.§ aki� 33 E >,8 o g ,. O E O bA N/A, „4 v a ° 'es � a w.-'e c2a'. 3 •Eb3cmv° o m•v a) c S E C g c'ray •° 4'as 0.4 o � mv § g ti L g . J w o ° ., �° aU.y >w . ,, ,.E `d o > ,, >_ a 2 o U ° °°^s ,, o - c To' y > y = E 5c� E • C G 0 g V O.0 V'T 2 - .0 aq-°° y O N p.0 v,E U E cE d J h 'Ji. Q C :2---J m 0 UaJ . P+). O"5 0 d7� — E o 0. N t Y O N m m N T' .42.15 . N20,15 as „ oQ 3m�a 6° roE "5 @ i 0>N O c V O Q N E .0 —N N 8 .0 N 1 '.-t N C w ? O N', U G 6 'O U 15 ,N N O 02O > O O .O MLs N3 > E b 7 � E mm0g2 -oUacpa -°-o 8-6)N p)N C d E U-° E a y--c. • L t m . > ON O C 0 N U.c i a 0 N 0 0 .. N._ O _... O0 OE 0 0.6 • _ @ N I N N y `E y to ° f t ° $ o > C''o0 c 'Q0 ° �02 0 m3E_oaOm. ., .? L N > 06 a N AlIuIltlltIlllI flDuiH 22'1E2 m� t 2 m _UUuIh m m.m A `a t o `1N4to N N j o. 15 C LN. a m O O C 6 a L c° el O.0 C N N O c O o. ` C X O ? y ° C N N D NN a a ° m Qy J v m N 7 a m N N N 6 .E.fl. UC N O N a E O o N F o . 0 c , +- 5 m of EM ` mm> m0° > bb— ovmaL m ood mCeNO NNEE — n>._-5.. n. L.LEvno, o t m O g •Q CI y y N N yo E )) N ° H o ° N 2 cy ,s' 3 E 3a U 4 0.,-• T C ca u ca Fe-"'O U L .7 G ❑ . p, v o y E a0 cc v o $w b c" ,� " 3 0 y Q GQ p C g a v 00 00 an g . c b 0 o a U o•o p 10 C A ,cq ate+-0 N Y c to O O N 'O G,O E W § 0) h a chi y w' o ¢ ¢ ¢! v 2 0 o a E 0 0 111: 0 0 rUyn y 'O 'O 7 d oo C v O U O d E a O p N -0 E U c, O HO lift cp a ILi LI ' , tifi-. ., , ,....., ,_ r C F t'l �te U cc' s a yo `m gi fl c 2 • �o nc aci• w ° = R m o • g = _ _a ■ a • • m — m 80 a m .o 0 y 0 0 C 4: G1 . N N o C EE.N O c6 N 0) i C ,H 0 a'y Lri, Tcoi car Eomc om E U O NI O . N j o c V ~ N N C ii I3 t 2 3 fOA N p 0 t� y•N .-: ■ N 0 0 .c •C 0 aNV"O'O.'G.. O > 0Nd a� �NU� �L N N L o N N C c6 N o V 5 N Off— C C t N a7 ,c O J.c.c m.,,,,...'0 N N YO C N i-,3, Z O N w a._ N f0.0 'O N w C m U G d 7 y_w °�0-0 vi "O-O N'O X a c N ._ mace co co col N cd C 5. ,a C _'O Va. N p c U-F UR O O i C 7 Qb ,. ° s .• V 1/4 a GC h a y G4'a � U U N O N T C > N N N t . N w N O) c Q 7 Lm N y s - - • = 3 '6.ayy E 328 m' E.00▪ a.cga0E b 3 c 2 e .v 5 U c ' 2 '118 c : 3 me caN= Q E a y c,E " E m E y o o . • d N b 4 - v 4" aw vO G i a 5 -. v E e v U v E `° y Q 0'a o •O c°e-, c v a o U .ca+'O V U i OU F. 00 N ›...c E O N c ae > O F. B. 5 a 0, ,,, ,e 'b N'U6 7 N�" w.. � Ep-yr ::. V.-__-_, o 8 an ai 0 ,O I! !yh�- E� =,. u o T a y 3 4 c a 8 .. -,,,, a. . ;----; •m L V "O O d o N ox 0. v W O O w U iN a5 C w JiLL . d U d ° pr 1Ec ° A •sa0 ° " a d•O U) y a) s. .1 .y Q 1s g48s- £ r mN Ta_ ~_ ,,� -2324 ,9, ;)•m eo ma . apE7 C a on N : N 2 N O G > c 3 w wQYia N 2. O C g°La O ri p-0 Z•73 O Of yW N N 2 a"O NN O N w N w OI W O"O N N a) O 7 W Y p 0 p ° OaOfa C C Oa C p 0.5 a7 M ON @ cN C a7 C aOf ( . N « E•G O N v'1p ai V 0O y ...5155E„,_ ° , m a ~ m N N a7 y U d 8 9 A N Y L A O N c vy c U . 9 no£ 7 d ° m c ° Bo C 3 a c E O U N Va N ` y w O.c °wcOOw E rn � E d N C N E LN c o mw E o as. N � aC�° W E9 g ❑o Em Ha"a!a A W> A �a ;y mEU ._ cu u a1 C c N viva C NN o - a) CI IS (5 -2-.-:--O N "L.. N O 3-p O Q � y � E 0 c � 1 � � W �Ell w U� C U �C ° N to _ N c o O En N > > , NQw_ ,,, ,,,811 y-_ aa'NF. °•aE`a '00 °-J0o N'D 'V'�aMU aO"OpNQCd CU L•OU 0i a)v Tot ..9. %) 83, (,,_.-,4 C O,8 N y p C cY W C` ° N C N O.L.. f`6 O �n w c "' y C b O C y d N C w F-.d'OO, R ? y 0 A R an C"O ai U p a i ° "O D C d O > 4� �` N d L (p c ° mDYEOm' Z`pfcor° S' gemFi� ° at uib ,a�a2p"°�c a;•OEA �i-2 mc`mF,` E = gggpt G c C N m _. a7 N"O N., U'C N a) E L O O.'p C O m-°«N N ° O O N a7 c °•O T O''« 7 E a ,, f0 ; wr=f NEaci2�c d� Er3liia°221.:g igf, 8,3,8i5, 2ycaic�m�.E>..ma°�e � aai fornEEgga' EEEcin maw aci N N E0 ma dw c o Nw E`o as. w v, mw NtnO 2�'m as n$Ow as m N n E c c o c c R ca� am °a ,Dce g° S2 y` 6�mo Lm3ca� minHmELLwmvi - ❑� Easa> vaHmaa-.5 w w°sO�c-,1�.F"O t0a:7-1'11, O O O Es H _m � c 0 N as Q C 11 8 + y'4°k%WV i !III N C Q NO R R R O 0 o qfp ,= R N O O LC C C C 9 C'O OLQ- fl4 T N A O Lv C eR R N *O L . E o+ N T 0 a �E�A A syC C-o w b-0 F N o y- Q oiv . ..-- - ? t ..- . g• 't . . '" 8 t, ,- t, '74 '4=1 0 ',P., - 2= 2 CT 1 Ta. `e, 0 3 :wi_ _ , co . . t.., ./' - .., - 1 ,,. 2 W , E 7, g?i, 1.1.•;lir.*;'''''/Wi'2 1":: q o. O 0 cs Zt «::' rc; `,°-; Q• c.) t6 =3 t f I ,9,,, • E % -. t.,-- — - E ;;', cf.)j12 -'4 i t f g ;.- el ., & 111 iif Dill .F. ' III ,1, 8 0 t •-• , w .- , 4 ' 1 ,-C ' 1 -„r I /— "' 5 i I) illi • 21 `-, i ir --J lt- -8 g' P 0%4 Z 11(\4 P- b.0 c -1.'''. ' ILL • 6'6- 04 •Iiiiiii g-.5 = 1 1 c t.., i i e% ,. u. ,....., 1 li 0 H z) I.2 -- --''''... lif..-.2■111 4) E 8 c.1 , ''''I '1 , . o .,- I a a Q u , , 01:1 C ,, Q 4 ',''' O"." 8 liDs = c„. 0 - ,, L 4r. i- , 171' C/ .g. 5 Zi V.. LI 1111 ,cz? 0 E 2 g i P z 2 e F-■ ;T" TY - F cm 0 w 4) t a a.) c...z a,f, a)-e 15 1 .446 -15) .,_ ,2va. §:50 e e3f,)=-.F- 7. 2i.) ig.P'--. a ._ t 2 §= . 8 -.4(2 * 8:ce ,..„ '"50210. -E2 4E- i „,"§ 70' . 00±12... cuw,Iltgg L-26 -ai ). ca2 2,__cou'orp+- a.8,4 (-) 0E_E' io2,,2 0 " CD C_c _.- cis ....,. ,x, a).0 . -5-2 30 -- 73_. ,42 w ar -r.c.. 0-• c-41 ,T,-0--c— 8 . --ct23 .-Dtt. 15) .8 .7= To ?_- Tv-...,20--cG9-51-670 2 oal CD o.)::: c.comS) '- alE. '- '- ' ww cuw (T.)-6,,.. 63 )ii 13. o E t)2 1 152 2 ED.'-5as 19- g 49 1-4S.- g iS II' f.) Li)c,' 67) 0w E'D g_ccT) E cin-c...§ 2.8 <ggEEE-Erc iii.c 3* O E 2 -° co 0 -2 -as c'ew.5 -0 ,„ „, co a) CD-■-• COV COE' C'' .c cri c6 0 a, c 0 . < ca 3 TA ai . • • 4 - 7„ g.}32',% 5`") g W "a 0 G) E - O• 0's , -Tao ' E `23_>,&'F., 0) v= 2 ' "' "- 08- E'E' 80cgo_— . 0— „ w <0.0 0,c ac cp 0,42w 2 co cs= — .) _cad, - cn00 gc-csC04-'E' CL) ,(2-aai0-00Ca..--2 'il) a) °---2.2E-C S'- iiceicE.,2 2_1:a 59 „,-2E— . a 1— E0 EnE.-,5.. 01,1 (1) c....,8 go. ,.. -,,, (tE8,3 ,T05FicETAD---azu' 23m-acDt) .” .2.850xu .. EilD ,a2crauc-2,,Sg.g..c0._2"-00.2.r°a1„_8„_e_c5)* LillEE2S)_EEn..f.. 3o_m a) = E E........c cu.c co 721945; -2€ i.i12.;-: o• 0 0- ca- tY E -a o).9. E 2 r, '5 g ._, 2 0 dl,, E o 3 c c" E °• ° c O U L�1 Obi g U X T t0 y III ° E o o E a° N P. • O A w °) a�. a a G U O E h N U O E v a 072 y U U O.D O b P'J C p !. j O 7 b b U bD� •p O•y E � ,O 111 p 3 8 c v E o 000. w o O w V:'te E" >, - o L 4. 1 o w o C O :O C C NV U p • y▪ E w + O ,5...1-117:: 0 ,_ -_-. - .„,.• .ci E :" V _, a Eb , y fj 6 .0 U d O a it4, E o C N C T _a= '8 co N 0)N C N 'N d N y+ 7 N a A co"N N N y p N N U N C f0 w ` x - ,a)(4?,,,,-5,,,,L'C . O R N @ @ y N cO y s rLCffN , O a a « C N N'O gh p c �'O� LN O N "m — C O•p "R _ > U U .E C C BOU £UN N O L U a O N L_O fA C. O N 6 c N .-L6 . E�L * i+ m2 mU p L • N= fO« O L N O D.O Y"d O N O b 6 • 8N U ar ° mEo aa a O p N U N 3 N-c O O ' O p o Ea tiaa y0 C y l6 OU ' C p_C D O L o ' +? arn p y 6=O@ s m XCmo ' . 0• ....,12„_0 C 0 7"- - V oo mw ioiF au N y Eo o� n mEn_ fra) fc� c . ..- 00 00.c� 3 yN O L c o w O p-o•o C rn> R O> 6 O fn O c N G O T .F., ,w4,--T O= 3 * Lii lo, il- fl c m w !IH.N a C c c + and>Ooo �r� N •- L' C C c+ c C 9 ! E N 9, @ « 7 L N f6 N C I 2 � N N C N* a C L C C fT o _ f ° 0 D 0. N O N.O N N N �I E V O w o N 0 O g b y 0 0 O C g E L + 0 aU N O N p r N N p §L-o C L C N � * l p01 N , E- c C 5+S _ 2- N .C5 O O * 0 03 c . y c C D �' FE N N i10 -CL a` co)W > = ya213.-cw3 « :d * _N l N y 0F N E O_ .L GI N o > o f: cinG�bc) p TcLL *N C fD ° b a # aaoNyO L L :_ .p•O N o_ _ coAO._oQm r� aww Z56E Z d o. d a _ �vi .0 E aa)i °A 3 o P.,8 m� c E `O C�1 'O y a-g y N c o o 8 0v 3 0 Ev E n 2 • o a u L. ai.g w O u'5 E s a C N �j t3 - N 70'0 p. T -0'O n c 7 2 O 2 0_ 2. y f.. N N. y VI A U A O 2 F O c'p .0 O a °bv ° 0 : 3„ 00 x.2.8 y� Nysy� z BA `o A o Htaen aopo 71 cd; c O V y >,;„2 O o O,1-) ttl a+O F' N 3.O N N yy N ett O E•p O L c 0 c E F v py O b o 2 Cb -o$° a � a,58 >w '91).g.? EEo >'Eo0 on.cT—�x 2•a 0 E o do•Ea a 5 '5,5 y ;? o pL o'> -p $ y cc0 ° b.ti ° 0 5 c p y a. 7. y b 7 a� aoi 3 _ '3 s''S auv w U c y y o s p o o a.5 0 u w R .,5 F o 7 y ` y'y Y ° v'� 3 z”, aci t a v c .? ayi 5.o c c: 3 _ o O' °c° o a h b �' 3u Y . y 5 y 3 c b fl „; '�' 9 O.... c C '�• d G 'E 3 t,,.: O O >,O O h >, w . 7 - G p M O fi ''' >w o o L.g'o-e g 5 3 i° y a -8 b E g a= 0 o 3° t a d 0U o.4 c, ..) 8-,41,2 .,2..0E+ c w O y L I a) aO C N a) AN 0 C C N pi)(8_ ,T,..-s_,....2 cocNOEpN -o 0.Q lTm N 0. c Fot,B C i E ! .. C* N �N O N y I Cy= N c It +. -0 N.. .0 0 _c a) c.. ap ca `° 0EO� omm2. EMEo E— X a 2 - ,rn'D c > > N . a c N. N p N O 0 0i 8 E ° E � c _ a°sa m Eo'Emom ,,- E8E isL _ nLmm' � o ow o* to 0E2 aF 5S o tL a) O -0 O - .� o O N Q N N moo* _ _ * a* t= 0 ° 5 ErEEE* p N N -a co 0 N.�U.L. 0 C .=d L"O (6 N 0 Q._ * * in* cn0 o 5 a)* u c 0) N a) * * o* N cu N w O O N 7 r GI •0 0 O C O N ° v a CI) N a) C Y N•. w°�� o— 1E tam d a > as y ce c)) .2 as 8-c_15.. 0 8 E ` o o g c c 70-°a�* M � L O) * _co V. i E * o CO-o ° Q.� N L E m as n ca as of C c* ow N N m w.o 4 a) E o a- o y m L Y N a N 'E LF N E a 0C C r O O j O .O 0 - c N p as O 'Q N .tO N a) UU N N E m* O c aE 62) 0mr-20 7, :t2465 C C E* rj * O O- * N &�N * N 0 3 O G A C 0 0 8 N' d O 8 0 N R C O co N- 8 -8 C as cc SE - o- cE u 'w c052x c Ny E d�N @E°''c o= Ema-o1�3Eo mE O ac I u o aEc c E L - N 0 7 0 L C o O O ` N - d m.'fn m N O O N a * o o). 0 0 E E o.=a N as m as 5 0.5 0 o u- N as c* N* L � O C N 0 V - "O N Oa3 a 0 c p Cl 0 N C 0 L.2 72 2-0 in* tqa as 3 as* ci * � * c C p, fa 'N N N p* (-i * * * ` C A V) Cl) 0 UJI I N C ..VG � O • V L O 8- y bA 0. O O 'e b b O d e 8' 3 ip• ,, 0.0744 i O• 0 O O a'1 N V O 0 0 3 L m 3 ; Q b c o �.5 ' c.) a 0- 2 o .- N w = "c/a) O C V g581-g•5 U• i F l o s Iflil o s • 5 o ti'. o .?o TA P. ' C ao ► ' ° ° O " Q y U i ig O tV OO +.v, cd E..,.D p• •O C q,� V h Q El; O O C Ow' 2 V �,'O w C V Ob LC R U.7 3 . — bA dbN 7_��� f 1^ 1` {■ N em,P O V y y„O o ids, �' ° 3 `o o . _' c w w m y O o 5 O' he c7 C ,p Yag 4 5 g Q•pp 8,0• tion3S m.o ai N >, N V O 0 ad y .,• R'O r U y h C Vy S y h a O C O.Up h y y G ,U Z Y C U � �O M y b v ^y b "Cy ! Ll .0 O d co H cCW O O C 8 • O .CC `�K '''1 C y E Et>:.2 N 1 U U n Om'" v : N v C i e O v p IF al 'Zt .. . �m �cp Q 0 y U N 3 73 0 O Nil!'1 + co i N N O lc6 _ O N U W 7 8 sm m O� E ))•yw+ D:�!Z„w OuE p d a % 5,O V d -0 y to C N y O fb y . I'S' 2 ' Q g.§rN N N y yL 1^p- y U Erg: d O.0 ca 2 H av o cO U'5 : ti :52! C!Lo N��p�L a-.�p bA O C 3 `41 *' c N b pp• ob A t p p y 0 0 o E LL 0 U .....:-- (iil' 0. EEh, c p U it o — o ate s�. • o g o r' A U' c 4 w 3C? • O O OU .5if ,y�t of tU.'" t� 'yes '" iflfl M a w b.c o17 Ilco N O -c O N a 4. 'fin @ L0)N A L o C O L:d a a) :'5 x O W =A CL 0 d "5.91 &m^r phi is C 742 N . N 2*42 "N - k @NN it * # 0 * • -p _ *,w w Ia Q Q 4) C C O 0) o c L d U c o 0) Cl) 7 o O) —217:62 Co O O) T C Cl) m'cN E c a) o rnnm,� c.cF' E c'e) a) a . me 0,...---S-0,” c�° o ns o N O N d C * -O STS �' 3 o c U) p y- C O V) JL1J11iII•`V L O Cy,t. m m m w C 0 3 O_w o w* .a k ox >FJ0 E 0. S'a`o* O) c k • 0. U 0) m k x x k 1, * f0 k a hñ ■ Rif 11 74-4 11 r " igo 0.,g, 0 . ' °. u .'ya g i m 'b ° V' � i co E aa r.i W le 0"4 o ° o r�° ,,w U a ki v 12 11111 p 0 ° � °p U.� V' a oo,1m ,, a { �;U a w c a2 y c _ 3v °1 v 'L d i N N o a d p VO a d O L ' °a N ! -y am— y °" rnb E� o F c'c w y 0 orn .§.Sd 6 L c Q w LLN N o a«a.c >o �C a Zm2 v ma c 7, �rny�'L • ma.5� C O �C— com Q .c"- 3 ""-N O 0- °r•sC * _ vO E c o a _aQ� D_fn �i 'g Ny q� O Z`� C a *o '- �T x n a *N 7 C c w L 5.O z _n E �0 c°o a d W E w , lc ,,,,,-No a O E o 0 to 0 l0 E—mg.-215 _,.,y E yw OC N 5 y ipnc c -O'(ii ° m c N > �w o o @ .� �N� n cly d yo a dco0c 3 p ° � c E °� y OE a ,N (0 N p a N rN c y UI N 01 c)0 v o�m, odao c2f6c w a c y fn oc `ow* }.'omE 0 pc L O a 0 � ° � o 'goia,La n�y1•3am mEo v > 2QUSE o o yEo 541ai o Z �cyY°ay�w I a m1 Oypa� �2o�'n-. E2ic3in° a ° E aFN ia m< ' m al V7 a xii r ,v, , .a e o y 0 W O g ,V ` 30 x°' 2pl8leu;snpul _ o E ''a a o c E N.� �'• . 2pI leulsnpul g „-. r v 41/* - - ' awoH j5 "' r ❑ i 6. r ` t 4V O C O,e O b.y jun 'ill/awoH�S H it, o W I s*�„, V I x N ii► E o#c ii 44 a w �o aai'E 4. ...,, "i 3 N. G b r; a6 a A vj UHF e. m c m c Q-v E 0 • p Y o d-p 200..y Ew 0u = v °� (.0F- �ouim E. EE U O d T y O a O O. f N V W b � O E w E c r {o Vi I; co ui E 0LEN ott--- mE W 6 0 7 N a) C a "Odor w F yU4 ioao-o.a z ca 'PS a. F P I y C U N bq� N C > C O W a O 0 N O S) N y N «+ y iC O U C c3;b O w d w ° � :; v ap ie:b ObA G .0 Q N o• 2 y 3 0 C O O N O a O w p O C O• � oGn api� ap 0 y � Eai 5 oEE F O O .� !�. ❑ '' „�; ''0 ° •- it N c UvOb ° �Fs � UUx i III 0 0.O a. *V a�?`0 * #G.� ▪ O° c C T N O N l JIJI �pwp C* ( N a • N ) C * (I)is'00 a N O O]* up °° `- Oayi a) o .y. o y V L 7 C'O 0 O 'n m w cy co !11IiiHuIDl yE 'w 1II1 0.0 C C>N�, N O 0 3'7 l6 J�"O ` l0 O 0 N � y Q y o 0 C � � c moo> moE� o e `� R m o =1 @°a ��o �dc (�aoc0iyw o `ooyE* O� C y l0 N � O•._0.f..)N C O 0 0 Op a'C O aaU * •y V)N V V (a_J # 0 4+ N Uj '0 0) .4 0 O.�1O M w g � V T N 3 L L,§p,! 'kcal-379g bu viz 6.0!i gg g 3 .8 " 47 ° A N° T�8c�p� 7 o y° ) ° -° c a ' a- ,3 , ' NU 01° S U. .4....4 S • g c o•3 a RE(-8 `x a.o o 2N y $ 1,,, `i-",,,11.: g.,1 .'h O p a, L— Y V p Cg c N "r� 7 b2- T I, ) U 40 E'O T 2 t g 0. E O. ,2 0. yE - OO one. 1:' N . ' • - a U° a�, o a F'c" blD 29NwE N N 5 Tf^ _ N NN V V p V 0 §Li N to' °ga G w N ad : L. ,y go pct ! ,. N N x U aN =F C L G7.° b 'C.Eo. EOVg . .-w t ..L `Fco g p x o.S ; a " a > NU s' OF ¢, c1 E s 4a2 r1 U a§i .9' � c g a 4.2'15. >. i O 4 0 p ,,, o Q. O : y 0". .°> V .. 'C ! G.° � 0 GL0 4 1* y 3E a� ° o, � V� •p i a � Ex / L L.N V S a N CC E y y V'E O g a9 gE °W O J ° �� 2 N . c 3 a i °..5c ,,, 3 , r - ,,, - ,9-0 gS W 9 " o " a o,.a' 0 .,.0 -6 . y G N(1C C C vi V ! N N O N W q U P � v • C�' '.E O GAO .. ., y= .._kl 2g . - 0-0 il6 ii eu en'1 � et/ ' 0Rs • . E c w 6TL �n4,; 7 E� ' o o N? ;E' o c �' fl � '',- No U xi a b , fl C i.V7 i .. " .'-,5.5-. a " 3 $ �V v E a, v a E 0. u L 3 • U E aco. ti T' L ` 0 • .y c Q Dou «o m-0":: c;a "` C 8 2 6 e o N N - niti a� N " O( ~.ge 2 '6i q. c R (0 ,fa_t + p G O N va - .ctooLa ° .4 -, 7 a 2o` --y o da mrn� ' 8 Ec 0a nw- p � c cmc0x ' oy o� mN+ aaa y . -°• _ , ' O O n w• oo y � ` �' s0 6 N C+ N ._ OE p_o Y 1 0 `Q _a°gym O o . . t0 1111** , O fL w a0 _ E .0 =- c -)° o - m a n a` m � d d �w+ p; m� aa m+ = • •+ C' N c.. 81° a N Hn� 6o •w s c? N y T` U w OgW0mu �CC d pi �, y O_RtdL E cUOO F C�W : 7 . . f07`�N ol > < O _ a C ` C CUE> 2 C .- O V 1:1 1' ly L NC�L T O 8m w w L 0 Ol•, a3� 9 oc 9 0 O)a O @ o•N 4)d O`a d fT 0 �anN rn ° ncv2 y01 7 2 8 §- C ,y 0 a N d!o w- orE: N C aN C L L LO X U N l0)6 O o c0 a+ •0 m'O N = a N O 7 a O! U I N 6 L> O Ol° O. 4 .- Oy C N L r CN > E {ul 0 . . 06:62. yN0c E .� �'0 f0E nN N C�C C m` COp+ y«C _ " g d C� a8.-E-0 N N p0gN O d O7 r O O a a E .y� N 0).8„, N 0)o >„.01-Z`N N X .v am m 3 N � n p VO 8 a) N > E E m m N w °+ 5 m r o a<n a « J N N C a Oow+ a cVI + ti bD N y � '�G N O 'a. O U' A ii O z 0 b 0 C N 9 N .0 0 E r O G N y O s V y O U ° � N 0.N R la O £ 5 C V 6 N N c a'o 1111 s oft O t7 7 p• N # 0.8-ailg 5A� ky ° d O ..;,,z, o° b91 Ed a.wU A° S 14H 'e oe n „ � a, v c^ ��� r N s x50 V.Y c o 40,011w AMMO a 2 :2 11,4%i p 3 ate ° 0120 ° ova tiod :: d'b s7 , " 0.v so VI I/ U U m m 9 a U 2 U C c 0 �o a 'lkitdi11t11L1t11141tdi11id: .:. . 1 N N U) a« , n #7.r N T N L, i6 0_ F! ala)l N ml* xo0a°i , % 3 c5 h ❑�'5.E cd.� -._4, 0 ,-,0 T'� �i t3 y a U _ .. 3 H �c Vl t tIi, i pp h O bD T O '43-32 1'7 O u t R. N Q a 4a bARe R. fi y1Hi c c a e � y 7 I.5 y . Ii i` K 0 P. .5 O R W G > ?.as C� fi aYoa� a•b h�FI8.=O °Uu .o $ y '�. o irk ai�c„'o> °' abi `R.5 2 =y y v v :. o 0 0 0 0.,'d �' o a 5 U 11 .tea o e,o' ° g"C, y � o 3 U �lb° g 6— - ;..-i4 : o o o i H .i .,'; EA a� .= o•d N•�` -. s. awl g ri G $ y G O1 Ol V N = R ,7=- -..h.)=1 cd (�V_,..Nr' Cy ate+ %T C'� 5 PI,h.O°.S[' .t,,-....,-«7 N YO.°0 c2w �` .ZO i PA ts � `"' op is• ro N too :b d g V C 3.� �" �IIV) T C c O C o o a ',.a.• t > ° sy 8 ° $ S'� 8 oo fi fi 5 ° � a8oI13NoR� ce °std v a i W ��a o °� a m 3 v 75 0 d s R G 5 r dDp ✓� .CIO p P° O V° o z'; -. a. a-7C a...'p,pp +' [ O >, _ U .4 b - K - N fi R ° hiP ✓ N'3 N 'O C. ri ,�7,7�r N ..... C y 1 o��i U R i kE', 3 abi.='fix a en t°. c' 2 rg� a. m ❑v .1;',0,;,„„,:,;0„„;„i,,,, yv m fiti i fi w c_ Y1 �S 3 o m eo�� v fi `3 4 fi o T o hiolr + .S,E.b a. c M fi a cab b " ° oo o o o m U E U ^�� a a_11104.3 fl U H v c w R A _ _ . 0. = 9 k.::,:,2 . 0 m .a,° w 2 7,v d n * L -O c o - -o 1.-G._7=1, �°k`��am m oo >.`moEo °• • aam� � 10 mc� II, a- c > coo°f EE_ cGcI �1o� a> 9 Eu, fat 3a�ar n Q. 7 7,= p_V N ,„QdCNogNN_La.a 3 ..L..* yOC >^ L > NLUp L lij rn . a� E E N N >i N Z C L iff 012 12 a °' °d c c °a � '"c rnaay-' c w w C c mom y5 „9 w ° c m gi ° N' m c S3 @ a a N c m ° g c LE� mR °o m N m o E g £ XCc0 =3N °b r o xo a a m m= gN NCN Eccea_w w c --6 O'i dd� 3,EmL-LacU -o0a .wE0 0'O ouivi ci 'O° � m N c a` i � @0 ° t „_ 0a„ _, 5 0 7 `£ ›,, .m ' ° aua ` N m�` .r � N ° 0I- -0 g mm -oa�Ym a c CD'mccda- d m C L > L Y Y N O E ,_O u y ., 8aOl°lm - N o c-g L)* o•fn,J m � o.C 0 - N� a' ;a a X 9 7 Z C E d RLd N 4 a. 0.. a.yyN p' O Q 0. U N N N N = L a-°C .j .60 Ea co ry d,ail * of .2:10 v.8 O E_, C'� O T E o y' 3c 0 0 E 0 0"� m4 o O N c c y d o 'Es'._ >,',-,' n o y Y a o n. g y O v aci c c s V E f N O q 0 w C E i +".. c C : O bA O ' 4.',2 0 p Co N W 7 O WT y CFti y A >, cd . c' O U �`l z.3 y w -.w �� G. " aq c `m o . E ..c w 'ts Est y E 0 � O O O E 0 N O o „J. , :` 0. � p a CC 2 111 o U.� Q QO...%1 .w.5 — G 0,O y o _ V E w io.Q +. U 0 Y 0 �F 40 0 Ev .. 0. N O h N C, 7 N^'C ,� '� Z O [ C 0. E c 7 ENS ° '0 iQ 0.A 5 U c U N o.0 3 fl I d c o L „ o ,,- E 3 E Ow y m "Y E E E 0 0° ' c 0 -9.c 0 ❑ m r ° 0 cF U v` o v as E 0 0 u 3 ; . o "m -5 c _ b40 �.N•E 1'i N U may, M o Q �p az a E E 0 oaoe m 0ti ,c4 E2❑ c y c E to a N.g J e� k 0 ' At' 3U ` UwA �U 0 0� a, 162! ia, p o c c R. R+; "�O Cl N U O 0 �" 7 to t. N 0 d ro mom:: y c o Ew c. O 7 NL � F c � a1 "O m m N N c 6.6 m2d > 5mc: caE mcF , y EN ciT, NNfOm�yc0@� s .>iEmo oyy - m =ddcm -- of >', c6 s nm >-. -: N9 . o `0. _ o— 1'43 ?) oo,EE'- mE. .wE� m' asyy -.oaa � • 000Nc;=.2E (p. LUC Ica. ccm+ d 7 a1 N " a/ E � a) 6 � 0 7 I �o d'.L.of o ° c + • 4")-6 ° '•228003060c S] A co v) c-o 2.5g N O O O U O c N N a) (n a) cii g-° 00 % Vl O G)N "O 8 ` �, m- 1-1288 m N > + "OI J � T m T.c C a) N@ 122w-88 >)'O >) C1 2)> N�0 •-."- + 2 C G 7@ L ›L N 8— N N R o • m N V O,O O w a) N c N O V C Y a1 r N 01> N_ N 0,1-D-,N.0 E N y N N C +L-, O1 c 2 O IC N a3 + 'W).2.52 + w s 0 - N T E N'L"' d a7 C> N E N O C E"O a)-'0 2 a)C L �W U NRo o`ornd `z.ccono 20 °� m.. w2.muiwN...` c�in :82 m � asd o LC gvo i- o O O O N'O C C+-% E O L N a) N N_'«U-. c O�r 7 E E E a) N C U C ."O.O + U8- O3.O- c'c N O n..N O N O C c � 1040p_EO.O N O 8-2 o7 N me Ew cc- vooc E 00o -EE"- ocEn E coEn2E d d0oa> c ---. 0°7.1-8cE criNC cocacccaEEoO:g 0E- °c @ --= EE+ N a) O U j 0 N o c o E a V a1 w nom N f0 N _ N w o 0 0 U O a7 C O 2 c y N -_ L C Y N L O-N V m O D 3 ,3>U > E E 112 °•22802020 ,40 ._ 03 E fl-c 0 aaoi 0 0 o $+ co N a1-o .. 9 J •°°'O 2 8 w mao o� Nw 5- v 0 3 y,5 ff ❑ N" A .2 w = E.Y a "g.5,F 3 ..,on U.: 8 E 8'o E .. = Q 4:3 Lci E ?-2 0,, v v 13 °loOJ cao 5 . tg U ao ` m w j't$ c� i c b v , o' ao : o-5 w t4 8v : g aE ,I ?Y c o . ,9 w =' o gT) ai o a � °o w - 0 w � 3 � ob E e E G c ` y , 'O C 7 oz 8.7. 03 o C bD C' = a b � gw � ti gc 7 � o 3 w u° 8 1 ..� H p o C Q a= C «. . ° > .§ %48.27.i V O v C N O c . c o�w o o v w Y n ` y L l' � =0 3 . _w O U y__ a C 6 v.0 N 'bb a C O L O N SE c 1 U• .sC o U ` o 00 0 ci. $.o ..> o '' x'30 2" v E o -o v c w o 0_o 1 0-3 > 0.01 o 4:41,g.',7, y° '« .w g a v o yH,a 9 k >, T s. Cb y . a E .,7 o � c C oi °O ...579:5272. t O o o d te . ca $ d U w n N 4. c U:_ o 'n U a,ti o c c 100 q ,� Nw� a,m 05 .0 0 O O O O O U aol E N of HI N a1 C OIL O > as C 1] a) y a3 a N Y C c C O L 7 C tl/ w w N a5 O E O_ a 7 co O.0 O Y as w C O G a .0 LL w C _0'5 L w w ` E awi Y�d N O- c N 0 01�1 m O o y c cLi as c_co m ``�° `° c o�a m.+C.la m E'� awi • aka _ _ __ OOO as * w—N N mas U« a3O c0j Lw @ (602r.�«c—, c ea Al al3 °I-. S. rna Co-0- 8owbnww • m�� aci E« E oz E —� al« a� ns c m o 3 E a o c o a mow o o a_v= c w w � caomEo« E ds" - u°� aENaa� m� wa EmsaN w. 61 c N w ore coi r: > `OI C M O N w w �w C6 N w m N o �.>_ d o o m y C E 3 • w ` o O E 3o E = o ° � wN.E c w ai - ca co - 2 o z • afaEoOw'c 00Cw � a2c £oLa w ,0-0 �a0 (13 O- .. aa2 c o cprncN m m w o w w n a N rni O w N w w ` C c. N-a_o.E V "- - U O k 5 a a .0 c 000 -L a 022-00 .2UCR �L aswE wa 7? >wLnLLawfow Nw00�• w L 3 OIL S Q c > J 03 • o w w o« ` c 0 2 0 5 E co R O J :� rnDcrn.o�t y°yy, c �a citi�afOnym rnawi�� y• w a-00— .0030m J l` as wow w n aL C O la o O O G N N a3 O E O N « asn« 0 as �coE. = ww � Ewnn� as�a ELLw2w o w _ ui m`a P. 00 0 Q a O as E. al > o E•S oO N-I oil V N O U O C O a. C O U 7) L E- . C U U . L I if a C C N C k cd U � U U o w LL T N C D F 0 O C N op U O ti O O CO O d V O h C 17 V 1-3 CI O pQ v: F U CV U O u toc q . '°<4 ' crs r 0 Q • 0 0 0 d C M 76 L O O d w L a O L 7 L Q U W > C C o Q a+ s X Q F W