The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Agenda 03/03/2016 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA MARCH 3, 2016 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 2016, 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 9D, 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 -February 4,2016 6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA 1 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS Note: This item has been continued from the February 4, 2016 CCPC meeting and requested by staff to be further continued from the February 18, 2016 CCPC meeting to the March 3, 2016 CCPC meeting: A. PUDZ-PL20150000204: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for the project to be known as the Abaco Club RPUD, to allow construction of a maximum of 104 residential dwelling units on property located at the southwest corner of Immokalee Road and Woodcrest Drive in Section 26, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 15.9 +/- acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Daniel J. Smith,AICP,Principal Planner] B. PL20140001311: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2006-50, the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD), as amended, by reducing the allowable square footage in the Industrial Commercial District by 70,000 square feet for a total of 550,000 square feet of gross floor area of industrial/commerce uses; by amending the Business District to add permitted uses from the Industrial and the General Commercial C-4 zoning districts; by amending the Business District to increase the allowable square footage of floor area from 150,000 square feet to 200,000 square feet of office uses and from 40,000 to 60,000 square feet of retail uses; by amending the business district to allow group housing east of Goodlette Frank Road at the southeast quadrant of Goodlette Frank Road to increase the zoned height to 75 feet and actual height to 85 feet; by amending the business district to allow a hotel at the southeast corner of Goodlette Frank Road and Immokalee Road to reduce the building setback from Immokalee Road to 350 feet; and by adding a sign deviation regarding the location of directory signage; and revising the master plan to depict the sign deviation for the CPUD property located in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 106 acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator:Nancy Gundlach,AICP,RLA,Principal Planner] C. RZ-PL20150000901: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a general commercial with a Goodland Zoning Overlay (C-4-GZO) zoning district to a Village Residential with a Goodland Zoning Overlay(VR-GZO)zoning district for the project known as Goodland Rezone located in Block"Y", Goodland Isles subdivision in Section 18, Township 52 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 1.70± acres; providing for repeal of Resolution No. 93-549, a conditional use for boat storage and sales and by providing an effective date. [Daniel J. Smith,AICP, Coordinator] Note: This item has been continued from the December 17, 2015 CCPC meeting and continued from the February 4,2016 CCPC meeting: D. 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 2 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 February 4,2016 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples,Florida,February 4,2016 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, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain Wafaa F.Assaad Stan Chrzanowski Diane Ebert Karen Homiak(Absent for roll call) Charlene Roman Andrew Solis(Absent for roll call) ALSO PRESENT: Mike Bosi,Planning and Zoning Manager Heidi Ashton-Cicko,Managing Assistant County Attorney Tom Eastman, School District Representative Page 1 of 49 February 4, 2016 PROCEEDINGS CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning,everyone.Welcome to the--sorry. It's been confusing here this morning--Thursday,February 4th 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. Roll call by the secretary. And before we do,Mr. Solis may have had a conflict today, so he may or may not be able to make it. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Good morning. Mr. Eastman? MR.EASTMAN: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr.Chrzanowski? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Solis is not here. Ms.Ebert is here. Commissioner Strain? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ms.Homiak is absent. Mr.Assaad? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: And,Ms.Roman? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Addenda to the agenda: A couple of things.I'd like to add under new business a discussion for recommendation to staff for an LDC amendment concerning luxury vehicle storage. That will be a discussion item. That will be 11A. Does anybody have any concerns with that? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The other item for consideration is the Abaco meeting(sic),which is 9A. It's been continued from our January 7th meeting,which was previously continued,and it's on the south side of Immokalee Road. There's another request for continuance that probably needs some discussion. And I think Mr.Anderson is here. Bruce,because of some of the issues involving this particular piece of property,instead of continuing for a date certain,I wonder if you might want to continue indefinitely until all the T's are crossed and I's are dotted. MR.ANDERSON: Respectfully, sir,no. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. County Attorney,Heidi Ashton,part of the need for Abaco is density acquired from a piece of property owned by the county. I don't recall the deed for that piece of property being transferred yet. It's pursuant to a settlement agreement. Can you tell us if they can proceed with the zoning for the density on that property owned by the county without having the deed transferred? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Well,clearly the Board of County Commissioners can't consider it unless the deed is recorded. And my recommendation would be that you might want to continue it and see if some of the issues can be resolved before you hear it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. From my last understanding--and I think maybe you had looked at it,too--I didn't see the deed on Tuesday's agenda,did you? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: No, it's not on Tuesday's agenda. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there another board hearing between the 18th for the Board,from Tuesday,which I don't believe there'd be because Tuesday is the--what is the date on Tuesday? I haven't got a calendar in front of me. Page 2 of 49 February 4, 2016 MS.ASHTON-CICKO: The next board hearings are February 9th,and then February 23rd. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. So there wouldn't be an opportunity for that deed to be signed between now and the 18th,which is where Bruce wants to continued to,which means he still wouldn't,then, have a deed for the property that he's using the density from to help the density he needs on the remaining piece. Bruce,did you-- MR.ANDERSON: Well, sir-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm trying to offer you a solution. MR.ANDERSON: Sure. No,I appreciate that. In my view,this is no different than if my client had this property under contract from a private party. There is an obligation under a court order to convey the property back to the owner,a Mrs. Wagner,and that obligation exists independently of any zoning issues. And we are--have the approval of the county to include this land in the application,and I believe Ms.Ashton-Cicko's comments stated that it would merely be an impediment if we didn't have it disposed of when we went to the Board of County Commissioners. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And Wafaa,did you want to-- MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Well,let me just clarify that,okay,because the request to have the deed transferred included one issue that was not addressed in the stipulated final judgment and is a discretionary issue for the record,and that is their request to release the mineral rights. (Commissioner Homiak and Commissioner Solis entered the boardroom.) MS.ASHTON-CICKO: So it's possible that the deed could go forward without that,you know, deed--that release of mineral rights,but I'd need to follow up with staff and-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And,Bruce,the difference here is it is a stipulated agreement through the courts. And my concern is that the taxpayers paid three quarter million dollars for the property, 125,000 or so in legal fees for your side,and then another whatever for their own. So the taxpayers have got nearly a million dollars wrapped up in this. And the stipulated agreement simply says, upon request within a 10-year period,your client,or not your client,but the owners of the property,can retain--can,by deed,receive the property back. I mean,we've paid nearly a million dollars,and you get the property back, and you get the density from the property. I don't see how that is a contractual relationship in a pure sense compared to a settlement from the courts. And the terms of the transfer of that deed have not been all worked out yet,and those are issues that are certainly involving water management,access,other things that need to be worked out. How this board can weigh in on a zoning matter of that nature without knowing all those details and how it comes together,I don't see it the same as a simple contractual relationship as a seller and buyer. MR.ANDERSON: Well,I can assure you that we have been working feverishly to resolve the issues related to the county retaining an easement over the drainage pond. And,you know,how much the county paid or didn't pay,that's a matter of history. That was part of the agreement,part of the bargain 10 years ago that these were the circumstances under which the county was going to take title to the property with that understanding. And I wasn't a party to that,but I assume that that was factored into the price. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And as far as the county taking--or your client getting the property back, do you recall from the stipulated agreement--I think you just said it was 10 years,right? I know that's right, so you can-- MR.ANDERSON: Eleven,actually. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, 11 years. You said 10 years from the time-- MR.ANDERSON: Ten and a half. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ten and a half? MR.ANDERSON: To be precise,yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How did you come to 10 and a half? MR.ANDERSON: This is dated September 14,2005. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. When did you ask for the property back? December-- September 9, Page 3 of 49 February 4, 2016 2015. So you waited nine years,360 days out of a 10-year commitment to ask for the property,and now we're supposed to rush it through on a quick turnaround because of some time frame you've self-imposed on yourself. I'm not thinking that's in the best interest of the taxpayers. MR.ANDERSON: It was not my client-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well-- MR.ANDERSON: --who gave the notice or entered into the agreement. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not inclined--I,personally,don't see the need for the rush. All the T's need to be crossed and the I's need to be dotted properly. And that's all I'm suggesting.You may want to, rather than come back here every two weeks,ask for an indefinite continuance,and then we'll go from there whenever you get all these matters resolved. But that's up to you. And, Mr.Assaad, I'm sorry. You had your hand up earlier. Did you have something you wanted to-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Is there a requirement that you have to own the property or hold a deed before you apply? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Not--no,there is not,but in this case there's a stipulated agreement that specifies that. That's the difference. There's not a--the courts-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: As long as they have the concern-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: You have to speak into your mike. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: It's right here. I mean,how much can--thank you. As long as they have the consent of the owner of record to apply for the zoning change, I think that's all that we need for our review. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,the other--the problem is that the consent from the owner of record is based on the transfer consistent with the settlement agreement. The rights of us as owners of the property have to be guaranteed through the conversion from an ownership of the property to an easement holder. The details of that easement would have to provide for"hold harmless"and other non-liability issues for the county,because we're still going to use that pond for drainage. That's the issues that haven't been worked out. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So--and,Bruce,do you still want a two-week,or you want an indefinite? MR.ANDERSON: Sir,I would respectfully request two weeks so we can continue the hard work that is ongoing to resolve these matters. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I'm just giving you a heads-up. In two weeks--if you want to come before this board with a package in two weeks for this property,I would think that the conditions and needs to protect the taxpayers from any change in ownership of that property will have to be straightened out by then and,also,I'll need the County Attorney's opinion regarding whether or not the density can be used pursuant to that settlement agreement in an action in front of us prior to the deed actually being transferred. So with those two comments,that's the--is there a motion to continue this until the December--February 18th meeting? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Could I ask a question? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: What's the worst that could happen? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Two things: The settlement--this 5.3-acre pond, if you remember the case when it came before us before,they reduced it down to a 3.73-acre pond,and they were going to use it. Well, that reduces the ability for the county to use its capacity as it would need for that pond,potentially,number one. It reduces the land size that we paid for,number two. The third is the easement. If we have an easement and it's not structured as though we have the same rights as though we were owners--for example,say you have an accident on Immokalee Road and the oil spills and gasoline and materials have to run off into the catch basins and end up in lake,and it's owned by--and the maintenance is the responsibility by the HOA. And the HOA gets up one morning, look out Page 4 of 49 February 4, 2016 their windows and sees dead plants and dead fish floating in the water. I want to make sure the county taxpayers don't have a liability to address that because,as owners of the property,we would only address it to the extent of our ownership needs. When you're dealing with third parties who come and inherit it afterwards,I think that would be a concern to be protected from. So that's part of the concerns I have. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And Bruce is going to answer those when you come back? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm going to ask him, so... COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Good luck. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. MR.ANDERSON: Well,I don't know that I would concede necessarily that all those issues are appropriately in need to be addressed in two weeks.I don't want to argue about what the judge's order means. That's a discussion that Heidi and I will most certainly have--have had and will continue to have,and there's a meeting scheduled this afternoon to work on these issues. So we're working very hard to resolve these. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I agree with you,I've attended some of those--in fact,I think I've attended all the meetings,and the only part that I'm asking about today is--really, it's a technicality of when that zoning density can be utilized pursuant to the settlement agreement,and that's what we'll ask the County Attorney's Office to confirm by next meeting,and then we'll go from there. MR.ANDERSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any further questions from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is there a motion to continue to February 18th? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: So moved. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So moved by Charlette, seconded by Diane. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 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. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0. MR.ANDERSON: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And also let the record note that Mr. Solis is here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: And me,too. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,and Karen,too. I forgot. You just kind of snuck in. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yeah. No parking for us. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,they didn't cone it this time. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Are we still on the agenda,or we moved away from the agenda? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. We're still on the agenda. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Then I would like to add the discussion about the continuance of applications, in general. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: How many times could petitioners continue? Is there an additional fee?Is there--are there limitations? Can they continue to come here and ask two weeks after two weeks after two weeks? That's a discussion that I would like to have. Page 5 of 49 February 4, 2016 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I'm--Mr.Bosi,between you and Ms.Ashton,would you be prepared to answer that today,or do we need to discuss that at another--when you've had time to prepare for it? MR.BOSI: Mike Bosi,Planning Zoning Director. We'd probably be able to answer some high-level questions,but down into the specifics of the detail,we may be cautious in terms of wanting to address too specifically as to some of the limitations. Maybe I'll defer to Heidi in terms of her comments. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,what we can do is keep it on--we'll put it on the agenda as requested, and then if it--if we can't get enough answers today,we can just follow up at the next meeting. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Doesn't need to be today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: It's just an item that I would like to have a discussion on. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Got it. MR.ANDERSON: Just, if you would,please. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Bruce? MR.ANDERSON: One clarification. Staff requested this continuance,and we agreed to it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I understand,yes. I know. I've got the email from staff. MR.ANDERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I was just offering you to go on an indefinite in case it would help you so you wouldn't have to show up here every two weeks until it's resolved,but that's fine. Okay. Planning Commission absences. The next meeting is for February 18th. Does anybody know if they're not going to make it here on February 18th? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We'll have a quorum. Approval of minutes. The January 7th meeting minutes were sent to us by email. Does anybody have any-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --corrections? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made by Ms.Homiak, seconded by Stan. Discussion? (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: (Abstains.) COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I abstain. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The motion carries 6-0 with one abstention. Now,on BCC report and recaps,did you have anything? That's normally done by Ray,Mike. Did you have anything you wanted to do as a BCC report? MR. BOSI: None prepared,Chair. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I have no chairman's report. There's no consent agenda. ***We've just continued Item 9A, so we'll move right into Item 9B. This is also a continued item from the December 17th meeting. It's a legislative issue regarding changes to the Land Development Code which is the architectural standards in our LDC,Ordinance 04-41,mostly in Sections 4.02,4.06,6.06,et cetera. Page 6 of 49 February 4, 2016 So with that,we will move right into the discussion. And Jeremy has done a fabulous job in getting us this information,as complicated as it is, in as most concise form possible. Most recently he had sent out a comparison after last meeting compared to the Dover-Kohl study. The Dover-Kohl study has been something that was initiated years ago by the Board of County Commissioners,was an independent outside consultant who wrote up--did a study,a very in-depth study with a lot of stakeholders throughout the county and a lot of involved meetings,to come back and write up some standards that--guidelines on how the community could,characteristically,evolve. Many of those have been used to implement policies,objectives--and objectives in our GMP and language in our LDC. The last meeting that this was discussed at,this Architectural Standard Committee information,we asked the staff to go back and compare the Dover-Kohl characterizations to the changes in the architectural code proposed by the Architectural Review Committee. They came back with another I think it's 17-page analysis of the many sections of Dover-Kohl that would have been impacted or at least discussed the same issues,and that was distributed to us just recently. What I'd like to do is go through the architectural standards from the 11-by-17 spreadsheets page by page--there are 41 pages--and at the same time as we go through them,where those standards are affected or discussed in the Dover-Kohl analysis that Jeremy did,for him to point that out,and then we will have that mutual discussion of both items at the same time to help move us through this. I also would like to request that this board convene until 12 o'clock today, and then we'll finish up to whatever extent we can by 12 and then reconvene on this issue at our next meeting. Staying on this all day long is a pretty tedious task,and I think three hours is ample time, unless somebody has objection to that. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No,I don't. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You don't? We might even be able to get through it in that amount of time. But just as a cautionary note, I -- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: May I? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: A lot of the stuff that the committee suggest--recommended and it ended up being here,the draft that we're looking at, is very subjective. It is very subjective. And those are very well-qualified architects. They know what they're doing. They worked all the detail with stuff--with staff So I don't know,how could we have a meaningful discussion about subjective items. It's not quantitative. It's not--it's a matter of aesthetics. It's a matter of architectural principles. It's a matter of design preferences. So I don't see the need for a lengthy discussion on this item unless there is some special item that Jeremy or the committee would like to bring to our attention. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I've got 41 pages of point-to-point comments to make,and I intend to walk through every paragraph of all 41 pages. So we're here as the land--the land planning organization for the county. We are tasked with reviewing GMP and LDC amendments. And,honestly,this one will have a major impact on the character of our community,especially when a lot of the standards are being reduced to only apply to larger buildings when now they apply to all buildings. So I think all that needs to be openly discussed by this panel. And my intention was to walk through it unless there is a majority wishing not to. (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We'll start on Page 1 of the spreadsheet,and it's--it's just,more or less,a narrative that starts the discussion.There are some points in there,Jeremy,two of them--a couple of them I wanted to ask you about. The panel recommended to eliminate the architectural standards entirely on a 4-1 vote.And as we went through this,they made a lot of changes,but did that--was it made from the presumption that we shouldn't even have architectural standards to begin with? Is that something that you can comment on? MR. FRANTZ: You're asking,the changes that were suggested,were they made in the context of there should not be any architectural standards at all, so this is what we think in the context? Page 7 of 49 February 4, 2016 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.FRANTZ: I couldn't answer that entirely,but there was,you know,pretty lengthy discussions about the individual provisions and,you know, it was,from our perspective,taken seriously about if this is a standard that we have,what does it need to look like. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The other item I noticed on that front page was that the architectural panel believed that these standards had the unintended consequence of architectural features frequently being designed exactly as illustrated. There are a lot of options within the program.But even if it was designed as illustrated,was there something that was felt to be wrong with that,could you sense? MR.FRANTZ: I don't think that I could answer that question. I can clarify that there weren't any illustrations that were removed in this particular amendment. That's a reference to the previous set of--or previous amendment that went through. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,there's--as we get into the second page,I'll always defer to the rest of the panel first. Does anybody on the panel have any questions from Page 2? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,the first item,which is your purpose and intent,basically added a new line,and I don't--and that was just about bird collisions at the request of one of the environmental groups. I think that's not a problem. I think it's harmless, so I don't see a--I don't have an objection to it,and if the Board doesn't weigh in any differently,then I think that can be the assumption for that one. Under the applicability section,now that's a little more intense. They're actually rewriting the section to remove certain standards on whether or not the type of road that they're on applies to the architectural review. Can you explain what starts as B on Page 2 and goes through and finishes on Page 3 in regards to the changes? MR.FRANTZ: Sure. So the existing language--just to make sure everybody in the room or watching is on the same page,we've got the proposed language on the very far left-hand side,the existing language with any strike-throughs shown in the middle column,and the explanation on the right-hand side. So in the new--in the new language on the left-hand side,the applicability is initially set out by various zoning districts. The changes--the substantive changes to that section include the removal of non-residential PUD districts. So that includes districts like mixed-use PUDs,research or technology park PUDs, industrial PUDs,or community facility PUDs. So,you know,the types of uses that you see there might be schools,churches,community facilities. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But it did--in number two,they didn't take them out in the sense completely.They allowed nonresidential buildings and projects to be applicable to the standards,but there were some changes to the times and concurrences in which they were applied. MR. FRANTZ: Yeah,that's correct. And,you know,my previous explanation is for that very first section in B.1. In B.2 it does capture some nonresidential buildings,specifically when those project sites are abutting an arterial or collector road or when the project site is separated from an arterial or collector road by 150 feet. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And on B it says,the project site is located on an arterial road and is located in an industrial zoning district. So if you have a collector road going through an industrial zoning district, they don't have to have the architectural standards apply; is that correct? MR.FRANTZ: Yes. And,actually,I should correct my previous statement. The--this section comes into play when a project site is abutting an arterial or collector road and is located in a nonindustrial zoning district. B is for when it is in an industrial zoning district, and in that case it is only when the project is on an arterial road. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: As far as examples of collector roads,we have a couple of urbanized or industrial districts,J&C Boulevard,Trade Winds,Prospect,Enterprise,do you know if those are collector or arterial roads? MR. FRANTZ: I have a map of the traffic element. I don't know that we could see it,but I could try Page 8 of 49 February 4, 2016 to put it on the visualizer. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,Mike's here. If he--Mike, if you know that answer,come on up. If I see you don't come up,I know you don't want to answer the question. Okay. MR. SAWYER: For the record,Mike Sawyer,Transportation Planning. I never want to not come up and talk to you guys. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,we're used to seeing you under a different hat, so... MR. SAWYER: Exactly. As far as,you know,the road classifications,we really should go off of the map that we've got in the GMP. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SAWYER: So,quite honestly,I think I would rather,you know,just rely on that because that is the language that's being proposed. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. As far as the map,then, it's the map that we're going to--that hopefully Jeremy's going to show us? MR. SAWYER: Yeah. We can put that on the visualizer. It--you know,we don't have a lot of detail with this. So keep in mind what we're looking at are really just the major urban corridors as far as the collectors and arterials. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,then,the interior to those parks wouldn't apply not because of not being arterials roads. It doesn't look like they're considered collector roads either; is that correct? MR. SAWYER: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then what would be the disadvantage of having B applied to arterials and collector roads as well,just--I mean,why would we need to separate A and B out? MR. SAWYER: That's probably a question that would have to be asked of the committee. I don't see that there would need to be a difference if we're going to do them on both those types of corridors. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Because all those roads you're showing there are pretty well-traveled roads. If they're all collector roads,I don't know what would be the downside of leaving--basically leaving the language as it was previously presented and not even making this change to this section,B.1 and 2. Just leaving it like it was, so... COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah,I have a tendency to agree with you on that,because those are highly visible roads all the way through. I would think that we would want architectural standards there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I would agree,and I like the catching of all the nonresidential,because some of those nonresidential structures can be quite large,and I don't see the downside for them being reviewed, so... Okay. By the way, if anybody wants to comment in the audience,just raise your hand,and we'll recognize you. You can come up and comment. Okay. Then-- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Someone's raising-- MS. OLSON: I have comments on the bird. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Come on up and use the microphone,and please identify yourself for the record. MS. OLSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And,by the way,Heidi,this is legislative, so I didn't swear in or do disclosures; is that appropriate? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: That's appropriate. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. MS. OLSON: For the record,my name is April Olson. I'm here on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida and over 6,500 members. You briefly mentioned the bird collision section. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We accepted it. MS.OLSON: Okay. All right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Maybe you can--what is that? You can snatch success from the jaws of--there's some saying like that. Page 9 of 49 February 4, 2016 MS.OLSON: But you hadn't voted, so-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're already good with that. I think we already passed that one by,and no one had a negative comment. MS.OLSON: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Just so long as you understand it's encouraged. It's not required. MS.OLSON: Correct,correct. Thank you. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Okay. Well,then,as far as items on Page 2 and 3,B1 and 2,from my perspective,I'm going to recommend not to change the language. We'll have to see where the Board wants to go. Do any of you have any issues? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that the consensus of this board? Does anybody object to leaving the old language on that particular--that particular item? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We'll move on then. Page 3 --well,that's the Item C. That's the same thing. That's part of the same issue involving the distance. So basically we moved on to Page 5,which should be Item 3,and that is part of the same discussion except it's referring to alterations to an existing building. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Chair. I have a question before we go on to Page 5. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Page 4,are we embracing the 150-foot boundary? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I would--I had assumed that Page 4 would read--would be left as we previously discussed for Item 2. We wouldn't add--we wouldn't utilize the C. It was carried over as a continuation of 2. So 2A, B,and C,from my perspective,aren't necessary to change,and my thought will be to leave 2 the way it is. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that means C would not be part of that. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: That's what I wanted to clarify. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That would,then,take us down to Page 5 and the alterations to existing buildings. And,Jeremy,I know you lived this issue,these issues,for--God,for months now, so to get a clarification on each one of these like you just previously did would be helpful, so would you reiterate how this one--what change this one really affects. I know we can read it,but it's written like traffic engineers know their reports. It's a little ambiguous to some of us. MR.FRANTZ: Okay. And before I begin,I'd also like to point out this provision is also mentioned in that comparison with the Dover-Kohl report,so during your discussion we can bring that up as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.FRANTZ: So this section is related to alterations,and it identifies that when an alteration is greater than 4,000 square feet,the alteration itself,that that area that's changed is what must comply with the architectural standards.The portion of the building that is not altered does not need to comply. That's in 3A. If you want me to go through the rest of this,I can do that now as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well-- MR.FRANTZ: So in 3 -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I can tell you--and it would be Page 6. Why don't we finish all of 3. So it would be 3A,B,and C and D. MR.FRANTZ: Okay. So in 3B,then it's discussing facade improvements specifically,and here the change is that the facade improvements are required to comply only when the building is greater than 20,000 Page 10 of 49 February 4, 2016 square feet and results in a change to more than 50 percent of the facade area.That 50 percent of the facade area is from the existing language,so the only change here is the 20,000-square-feet addition. In 3C,nonconforming buildings shall not be altered--enlarged or altered in a way that increases the nonconformity. So the--this is similar to 3A where the altered portion of a nonconforming building is required to comply with the architectural standards but the remainder of the building is not. And in D, it relates to the repainting of a building and simply identifies that when a building is painted it shall comply with the color standards,which are located in 5.05.08.D.12.B. The change here is that previously,upon repainting,they were required to comply with both materials and colors. And we can skip to that section if you'd like. Essentially,the materials that it talks about are corrugated--corrugated metal sheeting and-- MS.CILEK: Metal panels. MR.FRANTZ: Excuse me? MS.CILEK: Metal panels. MR.FRANTZ: Thank you. Metal panels. MS.CILEK: And smooth concrete. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.FRANTZ: Yeah. And also neon tubing. I'm sorry,I forgot. So that brings you up to D. If you want,I can take you through the Dover-Kohl analysis as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,I would. And why don't we go back to A, start with the Dover-Kohl there,and then walk through each one. It won't take but a few minutes. I have a couple comments, and the others may have as well. So if we go back to 3A,this one involves from--a concern that I think one of the things is if they do something to the interior and it doesn't affect the external appearance of the building, it should be excluded. That part of it I don't have a problem with. And I'm just wondering,we could modify the existing language to indicate that issue,that if you're doing something on the interior,why would you be obligated to change the exterior? And I think that would be a reasonable expectation in the way these things are done. And I noticed that the committee's goal was to ensure that architectural standards are focused on big-box stores,according to the column in the right on Page 5. And,again,I didn't know or I didn't see that their architectural standards should only be limited to big-box stores. The fact that we apply it to all the stores in all sizes,to me, is an advantage to Collier County. And if you want to put a box up,that's what Lee County's for,and that's what Dade and Broward are for,but I didn't see that necessarily useful to Collier County. So the 3A,as proposed,I don't see why that would be reasonable to put into Collier County. So out of 3A,or the prelude--or the preamble to 3 and then 3A itself,I would suggest we take the old language and modify it so that if there are interior changes that don't affect the exterior appearance,then they don't trigger that percentage change needed to bring the whole thing up to--the exterior up to standard. At least that would be my recommendation on that one. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I agree. I agree.Absolutely. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Charlene? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yeah. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah. I agree,too. And one other point that I'd like to make is when I read through this,I saw this as a cost-saving measure for the developer or the person--the owner,because if they were putting on an addition or they wanted to make an improvement,if they have a large project,then it would trigger the whole building having to be brought up to code,and maybe that building is so old that it would be very cost prohibited. So I saw this more as a cost-saving measure for that owner/developer so that if they did decide to improve the building and--by an addition or one portion,that they didn't trigger all the requirements of having to bring the entire project up to code and--just a point,but I track with what you're saying,because I thought that architectural standards is what makes--are what make Collier County different. And why we would want to limit it to big-box stores only,I think,would be shortsighted. Page 11 of 49 February 4, 2016 COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I agree. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else?Agreed. Okay. COMMISSIONER EBERT: No,I agree. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So it looks like the consensus is that 3.A and--3 and 3.A should remain as they are written with the exception of adding some language to exclude the internal improvements from having impacts on the external. MR.FRANTZ: Okay. And we can bring any suggested changes back to you. To go back to the Dover-Kohl analysis,really,you-all have spoken a little bit to that first section that we'll go to. So on Page 3 of the handout from today,the committee change labeled CC3 addresses that issue of excluding some smaller building from the standards. And so the finding here is that the changes to 3.A and B do not advance the plans'recommendations to coordinate architectural and site design standards throughout the community regardless of building size. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that's pursuant to the recommendations of Dover-Kohl? MR.FRANTZ: Correct. And if you'd like me to read the explanation of the recommendation as well,I can do that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't need it. I think--unless somebody here wants it,I think we can expedite and move forward on that. So on the next page of the table,which would be where B starts,B is similar to A in the sense B was trying to relegate it to 20,000 square foot or larger buildings,and I think the consensus from this panel is that we don't need to make that change. So on Page 6,B would not be effective. We'd stay with little I. MR.FRANTZ: Okay. And I'd just like to point out one more section in the Dover-Kohl analysis that's related to this section as well. I actually skipped to 3. So this will be on the first page,the committee change labeled CC 1. It's actually Page 2, sorry. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep. MR.FRANTZ: And here it's a little--a little more complicated. So the recommendation is to encourage the transformation of communities. As communities age--and sometimes commercial developments can become,you know,kind of blighted. And so there's kind of two separate recommendations here. One is to require that projects meet the architectural standards,you know,throughout the life of the project,and so when they come in for changes that they're brought up to the current standards. At the same time,that recommendation to encourage the transformation of those--of those projects is,you know, in line with these kinds of changes that would facilitate updates to buildings. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So we'll move on to Page 7,which is Items C and D of No. 3. And we're back. And in C we're talking about nonconforming buildings,and they've changed the value there. In the discussion on the right-hand column,they talk about some concerns; 50 percent of the assessed value--how they regulate it--and 25 percent of the square footage of the gross area,and that seemed to be part of the reasoning in changing some of the language. Instead,what if we increased the impact to this gross area of the existing structures from 25 to 50 feet as an alternative to wiping out that section altogether and putting in the new language? And part of the reason I'm concerned is one thing that Collier County lacks,and it's something that staff--or at some point we need to really consider implementing a code for our infill and redevelopment sections of our county. We take these old--we take these architectural standards,which are primarily mostly thought of as for new structures,and we're trying to fit too much into what would be considered redevelopment and infill. And if we had a separate code to encourage and enhance redevelopment and infill that would be more flexible for those buildings that have restrictions on them that are inconsistent with today's code,that might be the way to resolve some of the concerns from the architectural folks who are frustrated with our code when it applies to older buildings,and it's just a suggestion. Page 12 of 49 February 4, 2016 I don't know if the committee has considered a redevelopment or infill code,but it might be something to look at because,as you may realize from our Land Development Code and our site planning, we have site conditions that have changed over time and from our older codes to our newer code,and it's making a lot of those infill sites practically unbuildable. And that,I think,could be looked at from a refreshed code specifically focused on those kind of issues. I don't see that in here because it wasn't asked for,but that might be a suggestion that could be passed on to the Board of County Commissioners to consider. A prime example is the trouble and the confusion over RaceTrac right now. That's an infill parcel. That parcel may have had a different way to look at it and have different scenarios applied to it if we had a code that was more written around those kind of strip zoning up and down 41 that's been there for--well,that piece was there since--zoned commercial since the 1960s. It is hard to fit today's code into some of those parcels effectively and today's standards to those. So I strongly suggest that maybe that's something that the county as a whole ought to consider writing as an infill and redevelopment code. We're maturing, so--I'm not. They are. Next--so as far as C goes,nonconforming buildings should not be enlarged or altered in any way which increases the nonconformity. I'm suggesting that we leave the existing language,consider a percentage increase,and this would still be subject to external,not internal,because internal would be independent now. It wouldn't carry any weight to the external. Does that work with most of you? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Are you saying to leave it as is? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Leave it as is but consider changing the percentage and making sure that there's no conflict with the way that's written and the interior versus exterior improvements. And Brad's coming up. See,now, Brad, in all the days you were on this panel,now is when we could really have used you on this panel. MR. SCHIFFER: Okay. Well,I would probably disagree with you on this one. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SCHIFFER: The concern we had,especially when we went through the recession,there was a lot of vacant buildings that could not be improved,added,or upgraded because it would trigger the fact that you'd have to build a whole building. So the intent of this is that if it's nonconforming,it exists. As long as you don't increase that nonconformity,you can maintain the existing building. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then how does the current language not accomplish that? MR. SCHIFFER: Well,because it has--I mean,what's magic about 50 percent? What's magic about 25 percent? These are numbers picked out of the air back then. And if you--and you'd think the realtors would be the ones in here,you know,making this pitch. But,you know,why diminish the value of that existing building or make every piece of parcel in Collier have a negative liability because it doesn't meet the code? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,let's take an example,the Rex building on the East Trail. That's sat vacant for 10, 11, 12 years because of--no one could utilize it the way it was developed,and it was bigger than our code currently allowed for one use,and there was all kinds of problems with it.A group finally went in there,and they came in for a series of deviations to the architectural standards,as well as others,to get that building online. How would--did you see any of--are you familiar--first of all,are you familiar with that project? MR. SCHIFFER: I am, and what you said is true is they had to come and get deviations; otherwise, they couldn't use the existing building. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR. SCHIFFER: The prior people that looked at that realized with the code that there's a negative situation here because it doesn't meet the current architectural standards. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So if we took out Paragraph C,they wouldn't have had to come in and ask for deviations. They could have just moved into the building and operated it? Page 13 of 49 February 4, 2016 MR. SCHIFFER: I'm not that close with that project,but if--you mean take out the current C and put this C in? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. No. Say we--yeah. Say we put your C in and took out the current C. MR. SCHIFFER: Right. Then based upon what they were doing to the existing building,they probably could have just theoretically moved straight into it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that's where my concern has come from is I saw an advantage to--that is an old building,and it was pretty run down. To go in and require it to be fixed up to some extent,with the ability to get deviations that were reasonable--and their architect came in,he got reasonable requests put forth. He mitigated those with additional enhancements on the site. On a case-by-case basis,until we have an infill code that addresses it more thoroughly,that seemed to be a pretty good way of accomplishing a better outcome on basically what was at one time a derelict building. MR. SCHIFFER: But remember,as architects,we would like to read the code and design the buildings to the code,not base what we're doing on deviations or variances. So why don't we try to get a code that allows people to do what's fair? And in this case it's fair to the owner of the existing building. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,it might be fair to the owner of the existing building,but it doesn't accomplish the goal of upgrading the neighborhood.Basically,you've got that same 12-or 15-year-old building sitting there like it always looked,which was pretty dilapidated. They'd put a fresh coat of paint on it and say,okay,we're moving in. After that amount of time and the changes in our code,there's nothing wrong with requiring it to be upgraded. MR. SCHIFFER: But what if it wasn't dilapidated? What if it was an interesting an old building that was built--you know,and it just doesn't conform to the current code? Why would you want to--I mean, we'll never have historic buildings if we have to keep upgrading. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,there was--well,first of all,that's not considered an historic building. MR. SCHIFFER: I wouldn't think so. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well,no,but,I mean,I think he's got a point that--this particular building aside, in general, if there's an existing building, it's an older building,that's still been in use, it's not been dilapidated,maybe it's a historic building or something,then for a new owner to come in and use it,to make them have to comply,I agree with--I agree that it puts a negative-- MR. SCHIFFER: Value. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: --value on it because there's automatically this requirement to upgrade to the standards. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that's not the part I was going towards. The Rex building was vacant for 11 or 12 years. It wasn't a new owner coming in and changing the use from what was in operation.It wasn't used for 11 or 12 years. It was vacant. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And so there's a difference when a building sits vacant for that long versus someone who throws out one tenant and puts another in. I wasn't aiming for that--to catch that. I was more concerned that if a building has been vacant for that amount of time and we have an opportunity to improve its appearance,why wouldn't we want to do that? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: But then that's a time issue. Because whether or not there's one tenant besides--or another tenant,you're just talking about a matter of time between the tenants is what I'm saying. If it's a nonconforming building and it can be used as it is,I mean,I just see that it puts a negative value on the building for someone to come in and use it the way it is. If it's nonconforming,it's nonconforming. If they're not going to make it more nonconforming by doing something to it,then I don't-- it seems to me that it's going to lower the value. MR. SCHIFFER: And,Mark,you're kind of proving the point because you state where someone had to come in and get deviations to use it. That means people who were looking at it prior with their architects Page 14 of 49 February 4, 2016 are saying,wait,you touch this building,you've got a lot of money to bring this up to code by these standards. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. That could have been one of the reasons that it sat vacant for so long. MR. SCHIFFER: You know,Collier had this vacant building recovery task force group. It was a bunch of people who volunteered to look at--in the recession,and that was the big problem is how to back off the regulations because these vacant buildings couldn't be used. The guy wanting to do something to his little shopping center had to bring the whole shopping--or his little strip up.He's got parking problems. He's got all kinds of landscape issues he didn't have before when he was just happily living with his 1960 building. So anyway... CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I mean,I understand what you're saying,and I mean,I'll certainly not buck the trend on this one if the rest of the panel wants to make the change. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: So-- MR. SCHIFFER: And let me--for comfort,the language comes from--and Heidi can verify--the vested rights section of the code,which is a section of the Land Development Code that gives people, if they own something,the rights to use it. And that's essentially--the language is cribbed from that section saying if you have a legal nonconformity you can continue it so long as you never make it a greater nonconformity. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Karen? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: So-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then Charlette. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: --I noticed in the community character plan there was a lot of--through this charette,a lot of the pictures there that people--the public didn't like were taken in East Naples. For instance,Towne Centere. And now,so--and that,over time,has changed,and it looks better. MR. SCHIFFER: Yes. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: So that wouldn't have to happen with this. They could just keep the old--keep putting the old crappy awnings up and no change? So it would still be something people don't like? MR. SCHIFFER: There are strip centers. I mean,we--Pavilion in North Naples is being renovated. It looks great. I mean,there's no crappiness to it just because it's a strip center. But be careful of the Community Character Plan,too,because--and we,honestly-- it wasn't presented. We never weighed it in the hearings that we were having--it has things like zero setbacks. In other words,what they would want to do in your case is put the building on the front property line. Well, there's so much stuff in that plan to go through and kind of play with it against these things,it isn't really fair. Because if you did what the Community Character Plan said,there would be an awful lot of changes to what we're doing here. If you'd like, send us back to make architectural standards that match that plan. That plan,while it was adopted for recommendation,I believe,right-- MS.CILEK: Accepted. MR. SCHIFFER: --you know,a lot of people didn't like it,especially,you know,Naples Park where it was tried to be applied. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Although,there are--a lot of the recommendations are applied to this--to the county now. MR. SCHIFFER: I don't think there's as many as you would--you know, if I was a betting man, there's a lot less than-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Well,the interconnection. There's a lot of things at the end of that plan I was reading that they're still-- MR. SCHIFFER: Some of that's-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: You've been using it. MR. SCI-IIFFER: But it's based on a totally different community,a totally different,you know, urban development and urban geometry. But,anyway. I'm just fighting for C. Page 15 of 49 February 4,2016 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Charlette? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah,I think that there's got to be some way where we come closer together on this,because I don't think the goal should be to simply not continue the nonconformity. And I think it's--like Karen said,how do we actually update the buildings,and how do we encourage that so that we lift everything forward in the community? Aside from historical buildings that are declared historical and actually registered,that's a whole different thing. But I think that we have to fmd a way to encourage updates to buildings that have existed for many years as nonconformities. MR. SCHIFFER: Well,I think-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Caroline may have to contribute--did you have something you wanted to add? MS.CILEK: Yes,just for the record,we--the community did provide an exception for historical sites,so we have covered that issue. And then staff would be happy to work together and--or with the committee to look at these two sections and see if we can fmd a balance. Perhaps if we seriously increase the percentages,all of those underneath that percentage would fall under C. So only if you're doing a massive overhaul to a building would you actually have to come up to current standards. But we'd be happy to work with the committee and try to fmd a balance. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: What I would look for is where the owner/developer could do part of a plaza that, let's say,was a nonconformity in our community without having to trigger the whole thing all at once. And I think this would allow some updates without everything having to be updated.That's just my personal thought. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Brad? MR. SCHIFFER: Yeah. Charlette,the point is making them as historical wasn't--historical buildings are something separate. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah, separate. Yeah. I thought Andy kind of mixed it in there, though. MR. SCHIFFER: We'll never get an historical building if--you know,as an architect,we remodel buildings,so we pull off stucco and curtain wall,and we pull off brown tile. That was another phase. Then we pull off wood siding,and then we fmd the beautiful,old building in there. So leave the beautiful,old building alone if he's not hurting anybody. This is not an issue of blight. I mean,blight's a totally different subject. But,you know,there's nothing wrong with a nonconforming legal building. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,you know,Caroline hit on a good idea. When we finish walking through this,there's going to be some that we may not have agreement on or we may be split on and you'll hear conversation. I'd rather send as much as possible to the Board with a consensus. So where we've expressed concerns,rather than say no and go to the Board with that issue saying no,would you guys mind taking the time,when we finish with this,whether it's today or next week-- MR. SCHIFFER: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --and re-meet,consider our concerns,and take a look at compromises that we all could go to the Board on the same page?Because if we could keep this on a consent issue for the Board,we're all on the same--on the same page, it really helps the process a lot. And would that be something you guys could do? MR. SCHIFFER: Mark,we met for two years once a month at least,maybe more. I mean,we're not going to walk away from it. And I think if you spend a second looking at something,we would certainly like to come back with why we chose to do some of these things. I mean,some of these are disappearing fast,and there were good reasons for them to be put in. Some of the reasons came from the people in the industry. You know,the thing about the industrial park,well,why in the bowels of an industrial park are we applying the architectural standards? Just because it's a busy road? It's a busy road for the people in the industrial park. They're all in there,you know,acting industrial. They don't care about fancy facades on things. Page 16 of 49 February 4, 2016 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well--and that probably goes to the crux of maybe some concerns that I have,and that's the overall character of our community. Whether you drive on a road--main road or not,the character of Collier County is an upgrade to most counties that I've ever been in. And I've traveled--as you know,I drive;I don't fly. And in all the communities I've driven through, we have an exceptional community here,and I would hate to see it reduced for the benefit of someone saying, "I don't want to spend the money on a facade." MR. SCHIFFER: But again-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Maybe we can fix it,but not quite that extreme. MR. SCHIFFER: It's only the industrial park,which is industrial activities. Why are they worried about some of these-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: What about the economics of all of that? MR. SCHIFFER: Right. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I mean,if you have a low-rent district,an area of town where the trades need the reasonable rent to occupy and do business and you keep adding all of those items,you have to upgrade,you have to renovate,you have your nonconforming,you have to do this and that. And then it's not going to happen because the owner of the building is going to say,I cannot spend so many dollars unless I get the return on my money. So that building is going to get demolished eventually,after 20 years or something when everybody gives up,and you're going to have an eyesore in the community for a long time because it's sitting vacant. So would you rather have an ugly vacant building or an ugly occupied building? That's the question in my mind,as long as the health issues and the occupancy rules are complied with. But if you push it too much to beautification and renovation and,of course,Collier County will look much nicer,and I'm all for that,but there has to be a limit where the economics come into it because you're looking at a commercial building. It's not the house that I can build my own house and spend as much money. It's for my own enjoyment. This is an income-producing business for somebody. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I can tell you as a licensed general contractor in this state,and especially this county and one who had numerous businesses here,you get a higher price for everything you do in this county,which means you can pay a higher rent,which means you can have a better building. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: If you are in the right location. If you are in the right location. You take the hot spot in town, like,any--pick up a hot spot in town,and if you renovate,you get the higher rent. But if you go to the more modest part of the county,you cannot be expected to do the same type of improvements and spend the same amount of money that you spend over there because you're not going to get the rents. So it's not going to happen. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mike? MR.BOSI: Yeah. And this comment doesn't--I don't think helps this--make this an easier discussion,but it does give a much better context to it,because the cost of the actions associated with all these architectural proposed changes or requirements is really what was the heart of some of the motivation that was original direction to the this Board of County Commissioners in reaction,you know,to the economic downturn and trying to spur some more activity and some of the costs--the cost occurrences that were associated with that current code. But on the same venue,the character of our community is of high importance to a majority of our population. So it's that individual balancing act that tries to get--that this whole discussion is about. I think, Wafaa,you had mentioned,this is--this is subjective determinations,and how much do you weigh the community character and the protection of the visual environment versus the recognition for the need for reinvestment and for investment moving forward? So it's a very difficult decision,and it's that constant balancing act. And I have to say that it's probably one of the more difficult discussions the Planning Commission's going to engage in because of the individual subjectivity towards how you make that individual balance. So it is very difficult. But I think with Brad's acknowledgment that if we can find these issues and maybe have the architectural committee meet again and kind of see if there's a potential closer area for compromise,hopefully that could bring us more towards agreement. Page 17 of 49 February 4, 2016 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: From your experience over at GMD,are we in an economic downturn right now? MR.BOSI: Oh,by no--we are on the upswing of the economic cycle,which we know that economic cycles have downswings and upswings. We are most certainly on the upswing of economic activity. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Based on the popularity of Collier County and its national and international status,do you see this county not being in the top ranking of popular communities? I mean,there's been some studies done which were in the top 10 of some of the most sought-after sites in the county(sic). I think the opposite's happening to Collier County. Incentivizing more probably is not as necessary as controlling what's going on. So that's the part that I'm looking at. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I would just follow up on what Mr.Assaad was saying,that--and I think the Pavilion may be a good example of this,and I'm assuming that part of the motivation to redo the facades of the Pavilion was the market in that area drove it. There was the Mercato,there was the other shopping center on the other side of Vanderbilt,and the market drove the developer or the owner to redo the facade because he needed to to stay with the market. So I don't think we can force this. And allowing the nonconformities to continue because it's a nonconforming use is consistent with all the other parts of the Land Development Code that say as long as you've got--your use is nonconforming and you're not going to increase it,you're not going to change it somehow,that you can continue using that. I mean,I think those are--and that's probably a discussion for the County Attorney's Office,too,that there are property rights involved in that. And I don't think that,in a way, legislating that just because you--you know,you haven't used the building or,you know, it's been there a certain amount of time that you can't continue to use it the way it is. I think the market ultimately takes care of a lot of those issues. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You do realize that it only was triggered upon a value expenditure,a value of cost analysis? Kind of like FEMA does if you're in--if you have a structure that's not built to standards and it's 50 percent or more destroyed,you've got to rebuild the whole thing to the new standards. Here we've got a similar kind of operation,a certain percentage of value if it's--if it's renovated to a certain percentage,then the percentage triggers the nonconformity to be brought into compliance and not otherwise. MR. SCHIFFER: Or 25 percent increase in area. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR. SCHIFFER: And as an architect,I mean,we have 50 percent in FEMA code and-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Brad,could you get in to the microphone a little more,please. MR. SCHIFFER: Whatever that means. We could-- COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Speak up. MR. SCHIFFER: As someone from the--that uses the building code,you know I'm on the Building Commission,that 50 percent is a disaster to try to figure out what 50 percent is. I mean, it's an important part of FEMA.It's--it does have sections of the existing building code. So that just really doesn't mean anything as to--you know,the nonconformity of an existing building,what does 50 percent improvement mean? I'm coming to that site with cash of a value,and now I've got to upgrade an old building. Well,maybe I'll go to another site. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I think the--this one we're kind of split on based on the input that I've heard,at least. Maybe this is one,when the committee takes a look at all of our review of this,they'll take a closer look at this one as far as finding some solution, if there's one out there. Thanks,Brad. MR. SCHIFFER: And we'll come back on the 150 feet. I mean-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,all of them that we're finding a problem with,I would love for you guys to come back and say,well,there's another way to look at this. And if that turns out to be a compromise that we can be on a more similar page and it avoids a long,prolonged discussion at the board level because everybody is satisfied and the Board reads it and feels it was competent--you know,it was adequately looked at,then that may just resolve a lot of issues, so... Page 18 of 49 February 4, 2016 MR. SCHIFFER: Right,Rocco? This is the chairman. He'll nod and let us know. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,that takes us to D. D is purely an issue about repainting the exterior. I didn't see a problem with the change. Did anybody else? COMMISSIONER EBERT: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So I think that D would be--we'd accept the committee's position on D. That's on Page 7,by the way. MS. CILEK: Mark? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. MS.CILEK: Jeremy and I were reviewing it yesterday and--oh,Caroline Cilek,for the record. And we noted that materials includes a prohibit--like,a limitation on certain materials to be used,and then also a prohibition on neon tubing. And staff would like to take a look at that neon tubing and perhaps pull it out of materials and perhaps make it its own section. We could work with the committee on it,but we didn't know if we should wrap it in with materials,because it's kind of its own issue. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Don't have that already addressed in the sign code? MS.CILEK: Well, it's for signs, and this would be neon tubing on just the exterior of the building-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I mean,yeah,bring it when we come back-- MS.CILEK: Perfect. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --for final review,that would work. On Page 7,we get into No.4,and No. 4 goes on through Page--yeah,to Page 9. Well,9 is your visual. So Page 7 and 8. Jeremy,would you walk us through 4 on Pages 7 and 8. MR.FRANTZ: Sure. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that also was an item that you commented on in Dover-Kohl as well. MR.FRANTZ: Correct. So in 4, it identifies exceptions from the architectural standards. And in 4A,B,and C,these items are exempt from the standards in general. So that includes historic sites,structures or--buildings,districts,or property. And,of course,that's sites that are actually designated historic. Rural agricultural A zoning district,and facades located interior to courtyards. So this would be a facade that is not seen from the right-of-way. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.FRANTZ: In D it identifies some items that are exempt from the standards but do need to comply with the color standards,and so that includes routine repairs and maintenance,buildings that are less than--that are 4,000 square feet or less,the Immokalee CRA area,the community redevelopment area,and public utility ancillary systems. So if we want to look at the Dover-Kohl study as well,this will begin on Page 2 and the change that's labeled CC2. This falls under that same recommendation that talks about updating buildings throughout the life of the building and at the same time encouraging redevelopment and encouraging the transformation of some of those areas. So,again,this is a proposal that does not advance the concept of bringing buildings up to current standards but does advance the idea of transforming community--buildings and projects to the extent that these projects would be exempt from complying with the standards. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Jeremy,on d.ii on Page 8,that's the piece that bothered me with this whole section. I mean,the rest of it I thought was a good change,but d.ii,why would we want to except buildings with 4,000 square feet or less of floor area? What was the reasoning behind that? MR.FRANTZ: The committee was focused on applying architectural standards to big-box stores. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.FRANTZ: And this particular provision that you point out is also identified in the Dover-Kohl analysis. This would be on Page 3 in the coordinated design of streets and building section. This is the change labeled CC4,and in this case. The plan calls for the coordination of buildings in general in the community and doesn't specify a building size or that certain buildings should be exempt from the standards,and so in that way we found that to be--to not advance that recommendation. Page 19 of 49 February 4, 2016 COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah,I agree with you,Mr.Chair. I had that circled on my sheet. On the examples that are in our packet,these are good examples where the code works, and it shows that the code can work with corporate operations as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I think that whole Number 4 and all of its subnotes work except for d.ii. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yep. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that's the only piece of it that I found concerning. If there's no other comment-- MR. FRANTZ: I think just to add,again,Caroline and I are looking at this section. In 4.B,the rural agricultural zoning district,there may need to be some clarification on that point as well but,again,we could bring that back to you if necessary. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MS. CILEK: With regards to the rural ag in the urbanized area of the county,coastal urban area, excuse me. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's right. I remember you and I spoke about that,yeah. Okay. Well, then-- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: --just have some more clarification on what the intent was behind this 4.d.ii? I mean,there's--it seems like there's a--a huge gap between a 4,000-square-foot building and a big box. What--there's--it seems that there would be more than just that distinction. Is it that a 4,000-square-foot building is such a small size that make--requiring the consistency with the architectural standards would somehow make it burdensome,or what exactly-- MR.FRANTZ: I think the committee can answer that. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. MR.COSTA: For the record, Rocco Costa,chairman of the Ad Hoc Architectural Committee. What we had proposed was everything with 4,000 square feet. And most of these building that are corporate designed are already designed and already have the color scheme,and most of the color schemes that we've noticed from these buildings are within our limitations of the standards currently. There's--and,again,we were going back to the big box to the original code that was way back,that we're trying to limit the costs and the effects to the developers and move it back towards the big buildings where we felt that we needed a little bit more restriction to keep in with the character. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But you took it a step further. It says,the following shall be exempt from the standards of LDC Section 5.05.08. So you're not focusing on the colors. You're saying entire exemption from 5.05.08. That's,I think,where my concern was. The colors don't bother me too much. We ran into that with Chili's over at 951 and Davis and places like that. Their national branding,they use certain colors,and they were fine. But I was concerned the way this was trying to exempt them from everything in 5.05.08,which I believe was your intent,but that's the piece of it that triggered my concern over ii. MR.COSTA: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It wasn't the color as much as-- MR. COSTA: The 4,000 square foot,it was difficult to apply a lot of these standards to those buildings because the footprint is such a small element that you have two roof changes and you have to have, you know,so much glazing that it becomes too much for these little buildings,and it just makes those buildings too awkward,in a sense,that they--there's just so much going on with those buildings that it didn't make sense. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. Well,that was really the question I had is why the 4,000. Why not 2,000 or 5,000 or 6,000? And I guess that's the answer is that that's about the tipping point where the standards make something-- MR.COSTA: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: --really unusable,unworkable. Page 20 of 49 February 4, 2016 MR. COSTA: Correct. Most 4,000-square-foot buildings have so many different functions going on in there that there's a great deal of articulation already on those buildings. When you get into the large big box,larger square footage,there's not so much. It's typically a warehouse. So we were trying to,in one sense,reduce some of those requirements that didn't make sense and help alleviate some of the concerns with the cost for the developers. But the 4,000 is just a small building,a small footprint.It's tough to--there's so much going on with the articulation that it didn't make sense. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That makes sense to me. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before you leave, if the 4,000 or smaller were more of a magnified concern with your group,why don't we look at suggesting that certain of our standards shouldn't apply to 4,000 or lower because of the impracticality as you're alluding to,such as the differences in roof styles or the ins and outs,instead of just trashing the whole section? Because I would hate to see us get a square box pizza drive-through with a flat roof and a facade around it and,you know,a parapet,and that's it. And that can happen. And I think that's the concern,not so much that you would not do it right,but there are those that take advantage of any tweak in our language that misses anything. And we've seen that happen time and time again,and it's very frustrating. That's the concern I have. So would it be--could your committee look at this and more specifically for those things that might be difficult to do with a 4,000-foot(sic)building instead of just taking them all out? MR.COSTA: We certainly could. I don't know how many of the committee members are probably left,but we'll--you know,we can always go back and take a look at it,certainly. MS. CILEK: And we'd be happy to coordinate that. In looking into the future sections of this provision,we can see what the committee's already recommended to remove for requirements for building that are 4,000,because there are those suggestions already in here as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I mean, if we had a list that we understood,and for your--your reasoning is sound. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just trying to figure out a way not to just blanket wipe everything out and end up with something,an eyesore that we never anticipated,because there are some architects that may not be as good as your group is. MR.COSTA: Correct. And that's the tipping point where we've--why we initially had voted not to and then went through the code to review it.But,again,you know,from our standpoint,there's a lot of large buildings that are following the current code that, in my opinion,are terrible anyway,because it's just a shopping list. And it's just a matter of the developer or the contractor,architect that are doing those projects, and it doesn't become a design and a service. It's more or less a shopping list. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Can we take a break? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. I was going to just suggest a break. I know,Caroline,you had a time need,too,so we'll take a break until 10:30 and come back and resume,and we'll quit at no later than 12 o'clock. MS.CILEK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. (A brief recess was had.) MR.BOSI: Mr. Chair,you have a live mike. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, everybody. Welcome back from the break. Before we went on break,we finished up with Item 4A,B, C,D. We left a question about one item there that the committee will take a second look at after we finish our discussions on this overall process. Page 9 are the visuals,which we've already--applicable to one we just discussed. Page 10 is a beginning of a chart that continues on Page 11,and on Page 11 we get into the submittal requirements and changes to 5.05.08.C,which is at the bottom of the page. And,Jeremy,we have--as far as C goes,there's no issue with Dover-Kohl,and I didn't--I mean, it's just a clarification. I didn't have much concern about it. Does anybody on the panel? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the changes in C aren't objectionable. We'll just keep moving Page 21 of 49 February 4, 2016 then to--let's do D. It starts on Page 11 and goes to Page 13 and 14. Wow,we'll just take a section at a time. It's several pages. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I've got 12 on D. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,D.1 and 2 are on Page 12. So let's just take D.1 for now. We'll go to D.1,then D.2. D.1 is--D.1 is on Page 12,and it's A through C. MR.FRANTZ: Okay. So this is where your actual building standards start in the architectural code. In D.1,it identifies when the primary facades elements are required,and I'll just go through it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,before we go through it,let's first see if we have any issues in D.1,A through C. Does anybody on the committee have any concerns or questions about D.1,A through C? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't fmd anything.That,to me,was more of a clarification,and I didn't see any issues there either,so we could save some time. And if there's no questions on D1,we'd move to D.2. D.2 starts on Page 2 and continues on Page 13 and 14 and--well,let's just take it through Page 13. MR.FRANTZ: Okay. So,in general,the primary facade standards,these are the specific elements that they are required to choose from for the primary facade. And so,again,I can walk through the individual elements. That might be helpful. In general,in the primary facade elements,there is a glazing requirement associated with each of the--with each of the requirements,with the exception of one. The first standard begins on Page 13 in D.2.b.i,and this is just a general--and,again,before I get into this,there are a number of standards listed here. As identified in D.2.b,each building is only required to select two of these standards. So it's kind of a menu list of items that they will apply to the building. So with that said,the initial standard is for glazing covering a minimum of 25 percent of the primary facade. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,Jeremy,before you walk through all the standards,because they go on for several pages,why don't we just see if there's any questions from the group. And it would be through Page 16 to the top of Page 17. And,basically, it's a laundry list of standards that can be used. And I don't know if anybody has any concerns about them,and did staff have any specific clarifications on them? MR.FRANTZ: There are a couple of items in the Dover-Kohl report that we can-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,I saw those. Okay. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I had a question,Mr.Chair. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,ma'am. COMMISSIONER EBERT: What page? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: On Page 13,b.i,on the glazing. And,Jeremy,I had discussed this with you,that in the notes regarding it,we talked about it being an alternative for the PUDs;that's currently an option. And I had discussed with you,roughly,how frequently is the option used with PUDs these days. MR.FRANTZ: And,you know,I don't have a specific number of how frequently that occurs,but all I know is that it is used regularly. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. Because I don't remember trellis and plants being suggested since I've been on the Board,but-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I don't know if we'd see it at the PUD stage. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: You'd probably see it at the site development. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,when they submit. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: But it said PUDs here;that's what prompted my question. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,it means that PUDs are included in it,but it's regulated to the PUDs,I believe,but it's not something I think we'd see necessarily in the language that we see at this level,at the zoning level. MR.FRANTZ: Further along in the standards there's a section with standards specific to PUDs.And this is an option that's been--that exists for PUDs now,and so it's--the addition of this alternative here is just applying that to other zoning districts. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And the option,though, is utilized at the time of SDP,not zoning,right? Page 22 of 49 February 4, 2016 MR.FRANTZ: Yeah,I believe so. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That's,I think,the clarification that Charlette was looking for. Well,that-- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Mark? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Stan. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Jeremy,what's the rule on the opacity of glass,black glass and whatever? MR. FRANTZ: So there's a standard regarding false or applied windows;however, in speaking with the architect,my understanding is that as long as it is actually a window,there's no standard relating to,you know,a heavily tinted window. So as long as it is,in fact,a window,then it is a window. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But how about opaque glass? MR.FRANTZ: Oh,I'm sorry. Opaque? Maybe rephrase the question. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. There was a building that had some mechanical features behind the windows and you didn't see it in the daytime,because,you know,the tinted glass you don't see through,but at night when the building was lit up,all you saw was all this mechanical stuff behind it. And I'm thinking,you know,at night,you know,who really cares? In the daytime you care that it's a window. You know, it gives a certain look to it. I always wondered why they didn't like opaque glass. MR.FRANTZ: That sounds like-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to be saved,Jamie. MR.FRANTZ: Yeah,the committee might answer that better. MR.COSTA: The use of opaque glass was prohibited within the original standard. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Right. MR.COSTA: So we weren't allowed to use opaque glass in those situations where we had glazing up high above a ceiling line. We couldn't paint it black. We weren't--it was against the original standard, so that's why it was tinted. But we would--we would--that's one of the questions and why we had brought into using opaque or spandrel glass is in those instances where we needed the glass,but it was looking through a structure that didn't make sense that that opaque glass is glazing,and it would be acceptable then. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: So the new standards will allow opaque glass? MR.COSTA: Correct,correct. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Would--assuming those rules would get adopted and they become the code for the county,would the development,like Coastland Mall,survive these type of design features? MR.COSTA: I think that would be-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Did somebody--did somebody--did we think about what is the ultimate effect of that? You're thinking about the Sports Authority,the Toys Are Us,the ugly buildings that are located right in the middle of,you know,the intersection,but when you get into big shopping centers,the Pavilion is a good example,Coastland Mall, if it was in the county,all of the new shopping centers that are coming up, Walmart,stuff like that,can they survive this type of scrutiny-- MS.CILEK: Well-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: --or are you going to get somebody here with 200 pages of deviations? MR. SCHIFFER: And I think that's why it's important that the vested rights section be written properly. First of all,they would be a PUD,and they probably-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: So the answer is no? MR. SCHIFFER: I think they probably would. I think if we looked at the Pavilion permit,the work they're doing now went through the architectural review,so the answer is that the changes they made,you know,enhanced. If there was a nonconformity,it wasn't expanded. So it's very important that existing buildings do survive,as you put it. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Caroline? Page 23 of 49 February 4, 2016 MS.CILEK: Really,Brad said it well. Those projects are coming through under the existing LDC 5.05.08 section. So,you know, speaking to projects looking to enhance their facades,you know,they're working within the existing conditions and the existing deviations and alternative design procedures already. MR.FRANTZ: And I could also add that in the primary facades features that they're able to select from,the committee's proposal adds additional choices,and so there's some additional flexibility with this proposal. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I don't know if the rest of the committee--the primary facades standards that have been suggested, I don't have any,really,questions or concerns about them other than what--you explained them,and I'm satisfied. Is anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,that will take us to Page 17,which is the transition elements and variation in massing. And,Jamie,I think on Page 17 and Page 18 until you get to 19,you don't have a side-by-side comparison because the first couple pages are basically all struck through. And I believe what that does is takes out the variations required for the different sizes of buildings involved and reduces it to buildings of just the larger size that the committee was aiming for,which is the big box. This says 20,000 to 40,000. MR.FRANTZ: In this particular section,I think the best way to explain it will be to look at the picture on 18,on Page 18. So all of this strikethrough language in old Section C.3,it was intended--or the existing language is intended to--when there is a larger building next to a smaller building within 150 feet, that there would be some elements on--especially on the first floor,that would affect the scale of the building so that it's--the scale at the pedestrian level of a large building is aligned with the scale of a smaller building nearby. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I--do you know why this was thought not to be needed anymore?Before we get to No.3,but we've crossed out--there's been--No.3 on Page 17 and 18 have entirely been crossed out and the top of Page 19,then No.3 is rewritten on Page 19,and it compares to the old No.4,but basically what it did is remove the prior section completely. MR.FRANTZ: Right. The justification that's provided in the narrative indicates that the transition elements that you see on Page 18 would be provided through the regular primary facade standards that are selected,and so they would have that same effect. That's the committee's justification. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So a primary facade on a taller building,how does that reflect massing of a scale compared to the buildings next to it? MR.FRANTZ: Well,I think that it's-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to be saved again. MR.COSTA: For this instance,the transitional elements,the county doesn't have a great height variation except for a couple locations. So those transitions are typically picked up when buildings go in side by side. Even if it's a separate project, separate architect,there's only so much you can do with a transitional element. So those elements within those building heights are being picked up normally instead of having to be addressed or be asked to do it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,a couple comments.First of all,I don't know if you've been keeping track of what's happening at the Triangle,the intersection of U.S.41 and Davis,but the Board,I think they--I think they accepted,or not accepted,but suggested that the style they like is one that shows 12-and 18-story buildings potentially going there,which is a height change that we don't normally see in Collier County. I'm not saying it's bad or good. I'm just suggesting I think as we build out,the value of going up is probably going to be more sought after than the value of sprawling out because we're running out of that sprawled-out area. So I think height is going to become more of a prominent issue in the urban area,which is why removing the requirement for transitioning is a little concerning. Your comment is,well,we do it anyway. Then,if that's the case,why would we need to remove it since you're already doing it and it's not hurting anything? I'd rather see,for those that are not as capable as you and those on the committee,at least have some standards to adhere to. Page 24 of 49 February 4, 2016 MR.COSTA: Correct. And the transitional elements,though,when you get into the buildings, you're typically picking those design elements and treating the building with,you know,floor elements. When you get into a 12-story, 18-story building trying to address it and pick up a transitional element on a one-or two-story building, it truly doesn't make sense because of the scale. It's difficult to pick up those elements that you find in a one-or two-story building and incorporate it into an 18-story or 12-story building. You're still trying to create a pedestrian space within those taller elements,but placing a 12-inch band because the building adjacent to you is doing that,if we can address it with an aesthetic with window banding or treatments in that respect,then--and those are the elements that we're picking up in the other elements of the building code. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If those are the types of concerns in the transition,I wonder if those could be more focused on rather than the massing issue.The massing is what bothers--bothered me the most. And we had a gentleman who was an architect on this panel who was really big on massing at one time,and he insisted on PUDs coming through be limited because of their massing and things like that,and I thought that was a good idea,and we saw that happen,and the product,I think,was better. Again, it's similar to that concern we had with the 4,000 square feet and just eliminating everything. Maybe those pieces that are more exceptionable in transitioning that are problematic,we focus on those and not doing away with the massing part of transition in a sense that we've got to have some breakup of the buildings.Instead of multiple monoliths going straight up in the air,there's got to be some stepping in between them. I saw that as a more of a value than anything else out of this piece. MR.COSTA: We can certainly look at it. I'm opposite of Brad. I like big block buildings,and articulation is--I view it differently. So we can, of course,certainly go back and take a look at--and see what we can do. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are you from an urban area,big city? MR.COSTA: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No? I have spent some time in New York City,and one of the things that I never liked about there was the blocks of buildings going up footprint after footprint after footprint.And I'm so glad we haven't followed that,but I understand your points. While you're there,on Page 19 there were some other changes in No.4 that now become No.3. But one of the most prominent,and I'm trying to understand the reasoning behind it, is you took the words "building area"and simply crossed them out and made them "floor area." What was the thought behind that? Oh,Jeremy. Okay. MR.FRANTZ: That change was actually recommended by staff. Floor area is a defined term that we use frequently. Building area is not. And so if there is a question about what the building area is,the staff would default to the floor area.And so it made sense to just change this to floor area and, I think,in all the other cases where building area comes up as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,that change--I mean,I didn't know if it was good or bad. I don't see any problem with it. I think it's probably sound reasoning. On that change they also recommended a reduction in depth of projections. I didn't see a problem with that either. But as we got into the balance of it,and it continues over on Page 20,you basically struck everything out for the smaller buildings because I know you don't like to do that stuff for smaller buildings. And I,myself,have a concern over that. I didn't see the need to strike that,but that goes back to your concern over sticking to just big boxes as application. By the way, some of the big boxes,when they come through with their PUDs,like Walmart did in Immokalee,they rewrite their standards to more or less fit their corporate image as they've had. So that has been utilized as a tool to already circumvent some of these requirements. But,regardless,I'm--some of the changes are good. Some I'm--I'm not too comfortable with,but--Charlette? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah,I agree. I think we need to safeguard the variations in massing, particularly as we move forward with redevelopment of some projects that are adjacent to newer projects and to safeguard that for the visual appeal. And also,going back to the 4,000-square-foot building,I agree that that should also apply. Page 25 of 49 February 4, 2016 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any comments? I think, lacking any other comments, maybe the committee could look at this as being more specific in the transition elements that are of a concern, and I don't think the size of the buildings are something that we think necessitated only being in a larger building. I think we need to look at it for other sizes,too. So that's something else maybe you guys could chew on a little bit and consider our concerns? MR. COSTA: Yep. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. That takes us through Page 19 to the top of--bottom of Page 20. Well,that's still--that's your building design. Yeah, starting on Page 20 we have,on the bottom,building design treatments,and it continues with a No. 5,project standards. That's something--I didn't see an issue with deleting that section. I don't know if anybody does. Caroline? MS.CILEK: I believe we relocated this provision to earlier. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. So we're deleting it from this area and putting it somewhere else, right. So that would take us to Page 21,No.4.These are the design treatments, and they go on for several pages. Page 21,that's a continuation of some of the design changes we have. They've added--they've added some modifications to it and optional design features. Anybody have any issues, let's say,through the middle of Page 22 to where other design criteria are? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't have any concerns over the changes that are being recommended. Nobody else does, so I think we can move on to Page 22 at the bottom. It's titled "other design criteria,"and that section has been dropped because it's been moved,I believe,right? MR.FRANTZ: Correct,yeah. The site design elements have been moved to what's now Section F. So we will see these again. We could cover them at that time,if you'd like. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,that would be better,since moving them from there is not much of an issue. We get to Page 23,we go with No. 5 and No. 6.No. 6 was discussed in your Dover-Kohl analysis. No. 5 is something--some new language. Anybody have any concerns with 5 or 6? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This is on Page 23. I didn't have any. COMMISSIONER EBERT: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,okay. Let's move to Page 24. This one is on overhead doors. I know this one's come into play numerous times,because I've heard discussions of it in processes that have gone through. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Can I ask? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,sir. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Can we go back to 23? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Item 6A. Why are false windows not counted for as part of the glazing requirement? MR.FRANTZ: I might actually have to defer to the committee. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now,we did remove the amount of--we reduced the amount of glazing required,I believe, from some percentage down to 15 or something like that. Go ahead, sir. MR.DISNEY: Dalas Disney,for your records. We talked long and hard about spandrel glass. Some of us feel that it should be included in calculations and others feel not. In evenings with lights on you can tell the difference between a vision panel and a spandrel panel. In Page 26 of 49 February 4, 2016 the daytime with certain types of glass you're not able to do that. It was a consensus as a part of the committee that we would--we would allow it. Previously it was disallowed,if I remember correctly. And you just don't put spandrel glass in. Well,we're to a point where spandrel glass can be utilized,but we want vision glass in buildings and, therefore,the spandrel would not be counted towards the applicable minimum requirements. I hope that answers your question. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: So if the function of the building or the use of the building is mainly storage or some type where it doesn't require lighting,they just need the wall space. Are we're going to make him put 25 percent in windows or glazing? MR.DISNEY: We have in the past,and I believe-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Doesn't that defeat-- MR.DISNEY: --when we get to that-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Doesn't that defeat the functionality of the building? MR. DISNEY: Yes. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Because you need the wall space,you need the display area,you need the controlled lighting. I mean-- MR.DISNEY: I'm perfectly happy if you would--if you would say that spandrel glass would be allowed as a part of it. I am a proponent of it. Others have not been. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: All I'm saying is that it all has to do with the function and the use of the buildings. MR. DISNEY: Yes. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Certain uses,like art galleries,as an example,they control the lighting. They don't want to have too many windows. They need the wall space. And to function as an art gallery,you need a solid wall with a lot of controlled environment. You don't need windows or skylights, so... MR.FRANTZ: I'd just like to jump in and clarify. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Okay. MR.FRANTZ: In this section there are two different standards that apply for windows. Spandrel panels would be counted under the proposed change towards the minimum required. It's only false or applied windows that would not count towards the minimum. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And the reason probably for the spandrels is,it's part of, like,a curtain wall system where you can't fit standard windows within the curtain wall,and so you've got to have the spandrel included as part of that. That's reasonable. MR. SCHIFFER: And it's only allowed in a curtain wall according to that. And, Stan,that's the situation that you were describing is where they could see the mechanical stuff, because they didn't have spandrel glass there. The reason it's--first of all,remember,this is a series of menu items. The person doesn't have to pick glazing to comply with the facade. And what we don't want is a bunch of people putting picture frames with,you know,black glass or mirrors in it,saying,hey, look at all my windows. And the urban design and the Community Character Plan really stress this,is that the ability to look into buildings is very important.Look at our--on the corner,all of our pharmacies,you'll see a lot of glass, most of it high because of wall space. None of those people wanted to put windows in,but that was them having to deal with this. And as a community,we drive by and we see lights,we see activity in the window. The window's important for a lot of reasons. One of them isn't to be picture frame black glass. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: What's an applied window? MR. SCHIFFER: Picture frame with black glass glued to the wall,applied to the wall. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You bet. We'll go to 24 on overhead doors. This one I certainly have some Page 27 of 49 • February 4, 2016 questions. Does anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Under your rewrite,you're looking at a reduction in the amount of overhead door theoretically,I think,because you're reducing it to a height and not a percentage. Is that an accurate statement,Jeremy,from my reading of this? MR.FRANTZ: I'm not sure I understood you correctly. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,previously you had to have 90 percent of the overhead door height covered so you couldn't see it to be an overhead door. Now they're saying,basically,you measure six feet up from the center line of the adjacent road. MR.FRANTZ: For the wall,for the screen wall. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.FRANTZ: Yeah,correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that means more of the door could--there's not a percentage of the door. I mean,more of it could actually be seen. MR.FRANTZ: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't mind the exception they put in,but I'm not sure it's better to see more overhead doors. I could see us have a proliferation of storage units,and I'm not sure that would make it appear well. Was there an exception to that? MS.CILEK: Yes. I'd like to look at D.7.A just to remind myself about that. So we're not allowing them on loading docks or receiving areas.Perhaps we could include the storage facilities as well. The intent behind this exception is to allow them to be used for such uses as restaurants,fire stations, that type of--that type of use,and to allow to see into it. But you bring up storage units,and that might be something we can look at as well. MR.FRANTZ: And I think we can keep in mind also that there's a specific section for self-storage buildings as well that addresses windows and overhead doors to keep that in mind. MS.CILEK: That's correct. And we did spend a lot of time on that section as well,so we can go over the proposed changes there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And a couple of the language tweaks the 7.A,the new 7.A language, required screening. It says,adequate screening,and then under the new language,then it starts the next sentence, sufficient screening. What's the difference between adequate and sufficient screening? MR.FRANTZ: I think either one of those terms should be used consistently. MS.CILEK: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. So make it one or the other,right? And if you're going to use them, though,how do we know what that is? Is it what is defined as the 6-foot measurement then? MR. FRANTZ: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So I guess from this board's perspective,do we want to see a minimum height of six feet measured from the center line of the road,or do we want to see a minimum height to cover up 90 percent of the door as the standard? I think that's what this boils down to. And I don't know why we would want to see more of an overhead door. Is there a reason why anybody would--I mean,maybe the architects could explain to us what the advantage is to see more of an overhead door. MR.FRANTZ: Sure. MR. COSTA: On this particular instance,most overhead doors are--if they're facing a roadway, you're in a vehicle,or if you're a pedestrian on the sidewalk in front of a building,a 6-foot blockade or screening element would block the door almost in its entirety. The only time you're really seeing it is from a distance or if you're elevated within,you know,a higher vehicle. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: See,wouldn't you be,then,assuming that the overhead door is of a standard 8-foot height? MR.COSTA: It's more based on a visual angle instead of just looking at it,an elevation which you would never see in real life. It's a controlled view based on the screening element,based on either a vehicular or a pedestrian walking past or moving past the building. Page 28 of 49 February 4, 2016 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Would this be something that you would need in something other--what kind of applications? This would be commercial applications most likely--well,storage facility could be one,but there's gasoline stations and things like that. Is that how you were thinking this--how does this apply? Where--I'm trying to figure out--I'm trying to figure out why the objection--why there's an objection,because I can't figure out why it would apply in a manner that anybody would care. MR.COSTA: In some instances there's the new car washes that are coming--that are being built in the area that are glass,and those are up during the day because of the use of that building. So we're restricting those buildings because they have overhead doors that are closed after hours and,therefore, limiting the view of the building and the use of the building. So it's restricting that client or the developer on using that--trying to draw in customers or users for that space. That was one of the instances. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,that's the kind of application I was trying to understand. MR. COSTA: And then the other case is that if you're blocking 90 percent of that space,you're almost screening the entire frontage of the site.And so you're going down where we're trying to create a pedestrian community. You have a building that's green completely,or 90 percent,at the street with adjacent buildings,and then you get into the fact,you know,looking at the other elements. Why should you mask the building because it's screened? And transitional elements and implied(sic)windows and-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,I appreciate.That helps. Anybody else have anything on Page 24? I mean,I don't have an issue with the changes they're suggesting at this point then,based on what we've just heard. Does anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,24 will be as written with--you're going to change--you're going to clean up the word"sufficient"and"adequate"then? MR.FRANTZ: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That takes us to Page 25,actually,the middle of Page 25. There's two relocated sections, 8.A and 8.B, so those shouldn't be an issue. They've just being relocated. Then we get down to the new 8 on the end of--bottom of Page 25,and it continues 25 and 26. Jeremy,you want to--that's additional standards for outparcels. Let's first see if we have any questions. Anybody have any questions on the standards for outparcels,No. 8? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't have any. So I think 8A,B,C,D look like they'll--they're fine, which takes us down to Page 27,No. 9,roof treatments. And that goes on for a couple of pages as--well, that goes on one page,to Page 28. And I didn't--again,I didn't have any issues with roof treatments. Anybody else? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Doesn't this relate back to the massing portion of the document where we were addressing smaller buildings,and now this is rewritten to include 10,000 square feet? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I think that helps the argument that they were saying was part of their complication for when you get down to 4,000 square feet and smaller. In this one they're saying that the roof treatments,basically,the changes are 10,000 and greater. I believe it's larger than 10,000 square feet. So,I mean,I think that coincides with their presentation and discussion on having the,I'll say, complicatedness,difficulty in the smaller building massing. But it's a transitional element,not a massing element; is that fair? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Jeremy? MR.FRANTZ: You're asking about this particular-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. This is more of a transition element than a massing element. It helps to reduce the appearance of massing. But in the end it's a transition element. It's a roof edge. It's not a--it's not really-- MR.FRANTZ: Yeah. I think, if I understand your question,I don't believe there's any depth to--required for the change. It's just a roof-line change. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't have any issues with it. Page 29 of 49 February 4, 2016 Charlette, is there something that--anything specific? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Well,when this comes back--well,in looking at this diagram here, the illustrations would remain. It just seemed that the square footage was different than the square footage that we had before for any of our standards. Maybe it was-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: --because they tried to make the others 10,000 square feet,too,and we changed them back. Go ahead. MS.CILEK: Yeah. If I may,what we'll do is we'll note the provisions that are changing from a for instance, 5,000 to a 10,000,and share what all those different provisions are when we come back and address the 4,000-square-foot concept so you can see which provisions are being changed to accommodate the difficulty with architecturally meeting these standards for small buildings. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. Thanks. That will be great. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That will take us to the bottom of Page 28. We start with No. 10,and it's awning-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Wait. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Can we go back to--it's 26 and it goes onto 27. They want to take out the interconnection. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. Twenty-six? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Why would you want to take out the vehicular and pedestrian interconnection between-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're on Page 26. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: --outparcels? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Can you-- COMMISSIONER ROMAN: 26 C. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: 26 C,at the bottom, and it continues onto 27. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: It's in the notes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I thought it was addressed in other sections of the LDC. That's what my note says. I would have made that as a result of some conversations I had. If that's wrong, it would be certainly good to know. MR. FRANTZ: That's what's indicated in the narrative. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. That's why. It's covered elsewhere. It's a requirement under our pathways or one of the other sections of the code. MR.FRANTZ: This is another section that is addressed in Dover-Kohl if you'd like to go over that as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it's not consistent with Dover-Kohl. MR.FRANTZ: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right,which is--but if it's addressed elsewhere in the code,wouldn't that then bring it back into compliance? MS. CILEK: We can take a look at those code provisions where it is addressed elsewhere and share those with you, if that-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,I mean, it wouldn't necessarily mean it's not consistent with Dover-Kohl because it's struck from the 5.05.08. It just means it's not there and it's somewhere else. It would still be consistent then if it's elsewhere,which is what I had thought the notes indicated. MS.CILEK: Right. Why don't we provide those sections to you so that you can do a comparison between what's being removed here and elsewhere in the code. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Does that works,Karen? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yep. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's go back to Page 28 and 29 where we're talking about awning standards. I mean,it wasn't a lot of change. I didn't have any issues with that. Does anybody else have any issues with No. 10? It's on Page 28 and 29. Page 30 of 49 February 4, 2016 (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If not,then we'll go to No. 11,which is your entry and customer service treatment. I didn't--I have no questions.Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then we go to Page 30. By the way,where we have no questions or concerns,Caroline,that means we're not objecting to the changes made by the committee. MS.CILEK: Understood. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Page 30 we have a section titled--it starts with design standards for specific building uses. It's No. E. And this does address some specifics for the storage units and windows. Anybody have any issues with Page 30? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then that'll take us to Page 31. And this one, I probably need to understand some of the committee's thoughts on this. I read the narrative. It says,the committee proposed 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. And it crossed out No.3,which was your mercantile section. How did it get in there in the first place if it wasn't--if it's thought now to be not applicable? I mean, isn't the same committee that's here wrote parts of it or were involved in the original design standards? MR. SCHIFFER: I could be more helpful on how it got in there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. MR. SCHIFFER: Remember our mixed use standards in the Bayshore when we were looking at urban design kind of following after the community character plan, it was determined that ground floor mercantile units should have a tall ceiling so that when people look in they really see a more traditional store set up. That's how it got in. The committee--and the committee decisions are made by a vote;maybe not all unanimous. The committee wanted to remove that because there were circumstances where you could design a good mercantile building without having the 16-foot tall ceiling visible. Some of the arguments against it are,you know,what you're looking at is a florescent light grid, much like we have here,so there's really nothing that you're gaining up high. It's not like the old days with a tin ceiling. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't have a problem with it. I was just curious as to why it was there in the first place. I thought there must have been some reason to put it there,and now you guys say no. I don't-- MR. SCHIFFER: I think if you look at Bayshore in the mixed use you'll find that. When we did Ave Maria,Mark,I think that's kind of what their ground floor requirements are too. So it was trending at the time. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know,you just reminded me of something I need to,again,suggest as something we ought to look at. Nowhere in here did I fmd provisions where communities such as Ave Maria that are large,internal to themselves,where they couldn't have their own set of architectural standards. We don't seem to allow them to do their own architectural review. We require it to be done through the county. I'm wondering if there's any latitude ever considered for that by your group. MR. SCHIFFER: We do have one up in facades,or when we were discussing about applicability. It does not apply to facades within a shopping center.This is kind of what I call the Waterside,you know, amendment,that there are large portions of Waterside that is not visible from the street or an adjoining area. It's up in the applicability we do state that these requirements aren't required if you can't see it from a public road or a residential site. It's--you have to page back,but it's there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,but in the case of Ave Maria,it's all--their roads are public going through there from--at least I thought they were.And their town center,for example,where they've got the Publix,their Publix went through a lot of effort to have to have primary facades on multiple sides where it was subject--it was really whatever the town wanted. It's their own community. Page 31 of 49 February 4, 2016 I was wondering if there's a possibility to consider letting some of these communities that are internal have some latitude to not--to do their own architectural standards. MR. SCHIFFER: Well,wasn't that a mistake in the PUD because the PUD-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: SRA,but yeah. MR. SCHIFFER: You and I sat side by side on that--had a lot of standards for construction and everything. So,you know,whenever I heard about that--and I'm not intimate with that Publix but,you know,it always seemed to me like why wasn't that covered in the PUD? Alls they'd have to do is just take out the standards like some PUDs try to do. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,the Walmart in north Immokalee basically did that. Caroline? MS.CILEK: Thank you. Most recently when the SRA came through for an LDC amendment,they included in their changes to allow for SRAs to be able to do their own architectural standards as well as landscaping standards, so-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MS.CILEK: --I believe that your concern would be covered by those most recent changes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Mark? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: It's a long time ago,but,Mike,I thought Ave Maria had their own architectural standards. MR. SCHIFFER: Me,too. MR.BOSI: They have 5.05.08 as their basis,but then they have modifications that are suggested in specific areas. But for the whole part,they are applicable--5.05.08 is applicable except for where they've exempted themselves or provided deviations. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Oh,okay. That's probably--it's been 10 years. That's probably what I'm thinking of. MR.BOSI: And the next SRA that is coming through basically has a component of 5.05.08 which you'll adhere to,but they are proposing a low country-style architectural,so there's a lot of deviations that--or alternatives that will be proposed that this board will be reviewing within the coming months. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. Thanks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay,thank you. Well, if there's no other questions on Page 31 in the middle,Page 31 on the bottom we start some design feature rewrites for the hotel/motel side of things. I don't know if anybody has any questions on those. I don't have any. I didn't see anything wrong with that. (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Page 32 on the bottom we talk about warehouse and distribution. Previously,the--this was written for addressing facades and facades facing residential streets for warehousing and distribution,and it was modified to require facing residential zoning districts within 150 feet of the property line. (Andrew Solis is leaving the boardroom for the remainder of the meeting.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just--how did that 150--why does that 150 feet become significant? Why was it chosen;do we know? I mean,if you're-- 150 feet isn't narrower than most of our roads. So if you're on one side of 41 and you've got a warehouse district on the other side, it can look like--it doesn't have to have the facade capabilities,and it's--I'm not sure how that protects the public's view. MR.DISNEY: Hi. Dalas Disney again. I can talk generally about the 150 feet and how we got there. Some projects with the prior 300-foot separation were being penalized unnecessarily. And I advanced a project that I did, St.John Neumann High School physical education building and a concession stand across the football field just within the 300 feet, and that had to apply because the opposite side of the football field on the--on the roadway side faced residential. Now,we cut that back to--after much discussion,to 150 feet,and we carried through with the 150 feet as a consistency as the 300 had been. Page 32 of 49 February 4, 2016 So in this instance,the--where are we on your book here? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. This is warehousing and distribution. So St.John Neumann. MR. DISNEY: Warehousing--well,that's how we got to the 150 feet and trying to maintain that consistency. What we looked at in warehousing districts,J&C,up and down Livingston,which really became the backs--it was originally the backside of the industrial park,then Livingston comes through and it becomes an arterial or collector. Three hundred feet put us deep into that center for--in that warehousing district,and off of arterial buildings were being picked up by this, and large costs were being--were being spent on buildings that, frankly,were back in the industrial park,and that just did not seem to--we wanted to catch those. So the 150 catches the front tier along the arterials,that which is highly visible on well-trafficked roads,and we felt--we feel that that is perfectly adequate to screen those types of buildings. The buildings on those frontages would comply and would be caught by this 150 feet. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So let's take the industrial park right up the street on Airport Road. If you've got the industrial park on the east side of Airport Road and you've got residential on the west side,this wouldn't--you'd have no requirement for variation of massing because Airport Road is 250 feet wide. Is that-- MR.DISNEY: Well,there's no--and there's no residential across the street. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Not on that one. I'm trying to think of what locations. I mean,we've got residential further up,but-- MR.DISNEY: Livingston is your better example,perhaps,because the-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. We have Briarwood on one side,and we have the industrial park on the other,same industrial park,just on the opposite side. MR.DISNEY: That's correct. So those buildings fronting Livingston within 150 feet will comply. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But it says within 150 feet of the property line. The property line's going to be outside the right-of-way,which means you won't get to the residential because of the width of the right-of-way. MR.DISNEY: Well,let's see. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Your four-lane roads are generally 250 feet wide. MR.DISNEY: I'm going from recollection now,but there was discussion relative to wetland areas and buffer areas. We were going from that--we got to the property line to exclude some of those areas. I'm not sure that I've got--I've got the recollection correct here. Maybe I'll get some assistance here. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.COSTA: Again,the 150 feet is from the property line. Because it's on a collector or arterial road,it would be picked up. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Meaning? MR.COSTA: That the warehouse district,since it fronts Livingston Road, it would be the property line of that parcel to the building line. So if they built that warehouse within that distance,it would be picked up,and it would have to go through 5.05.08. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's say you're going to build the--there's a UPS-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yep,there is. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --receiving area on the west side of Livingston Road,and its property line goes up to the right-of-way-- MR.DISNEY: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --I believe, is 200 feet or more,and then you hit Briarwood,and Briarwood is a residential community. So by the way this is worded,variation massing applies only to primary facades and to facades facing residential zoning districts within 150 feet of the property line. So basically it wouldn't apply on the east side of that--it wouldn't apply on the Livingston Road corridor. MR.COSTA: It would be picked up as the--towards the front section, it would be applied then. Page 33 of 49 February 4, 2016 This is more or less if the residential is directly behind in a case where,I guess it's Trade Center Way backs up to the residential portion where we have some of those elements there where we're--that was one of the-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So your intent is not to not do it in a situation like Briarwood in the industrial park. Your intent is it should meet those requirements. So all I would suggest to staff,then, is that we take that intent and get it better written into this section of the code so it's clearer because,to me,I can't see--I can't see how Briarwood--how this particular circumstance fits with the exception of 150 feet in here. MR.COSTA: Well, in the case of Briarwood,we would be picked up because Livingston Road is an arterial road, so we would be picked up because of that,not necessarily the residential. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,which creates an internal conflict to the code between that section and this one. MS.CILEK: Well, if I may,the table does an excellent job of walking us through the proposed changes,but there are other provisions in 5.05.08 that are not included on the table. So to give everyone a better picture of this warehousing and distribution section,I'd request that you look at Page 49 of your--the regular amendment format,and that way you can see where this falls. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So just tell me,from the writing and the complete picture, is his comment that Briarwood would trigger the facades on those buildings so that we don't have the situation that wipes out that requirement? Just-- MS.CILEK: I don't know if I-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I haven't--I can't--I mean,I haven't brought all that paperwork. MS.CILEK: It's probably too deep of a question for me at the moment. I know that-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. When we come back,can you explain-- MS.CILEK: Sure. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Can you take a look at this one and try to clarify it? MS.CILEK: Yes,but there are more provisions related to warehousing and more exceptions for these structures that are listed on Page 49. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And that may take care of it fine. And if it does,I don't need to belabor the point. We'll just catch it when we come back and do it as a cleanup issue. Yes? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I had another question,because I was looking at Figure 13,and-- MS.ASHTON-CICKO: The way this is written is only a primary facade would require-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: --would meet the requirement,yeah. MS.CILEK: And,furthermore,on Page 49 of the regular amendment,the primary facade standards are modified for warehousing. It's not the primary facades standards for the rest of the--subject to 5.05.08. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right,yeah. I know that. Go ahead,Charlette. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah. I was looking at Figure 13. And in those examples,there's not an arterial road there. And earlier in our discussion--I don't know if that's a different section. I don't think it is. Yeah,I guess I'm in 7. I'm jumping ahead. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,you're in Figure 13 on Page 34 is where you're at,right? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Right,right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: And our discussion was using arterial roads such as Briarwood in the industrial park. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And here we're using the back door-- COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Property line,yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: And I am not sure 150 feet is the right answer here. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But I think what Caroline's saying is that in the case of example Figure 13, on the backside of that building,because it's within 150 feet of a single-family zoned area,you wouldn't need to put in a primary facade. MS.CILEK: The primary facade is required,but it is limited. It is different than the primary facade Page 34 of 49 February 4,2016 we were talking about earlier. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But let me back up then. Maybe we've gone into a tangent here that I didn't expect. In the example in 13,why would we want a primary facade on the back of that building? MS.CILEK: The way the code is written today is because that is facing residential. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But it's backyard to backyard. MS.CILEK: The way the code is written today is that it is facing residential and they are subject to 5.05.08. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Did these guys fix that,or are they still liking that as an idea? MS. CILEK: They are limiting it to--if it's--if that single-family home was within 150 feet of the property line of the industrial. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Right now the code applies no matter how-- MS.CILEK: Correct. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: --large the distance is. MS.CILEK: Yes. The term is "facing." CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But I thought primary facades were primary because they were facing a roadway. So how did we get a primary facade in the backyard of an industrial building with a backyard of a residential? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Caroline said-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,maybe this needs a bigger fix than we've anticipated. MR.COSTA: Well,a primary facade in most cases consider all three sides of a building, though--in most cases. I know it's called secondary,but it's still-- MS.CILEK: It also may be that it's primary facade,and then it says,and two facades facing the residential zoning district. There are other requirements for the regular facades. So perhaps not a primary, but just the regular design treatments for-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you take a closer look at this and try to-- MS.CILEK: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --come back with a better explanation? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: It may go to your"limited"comment before Caroline,the limited, when you said there would be limited treatment. MS.CILEK: Right. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah,thank you. MS. CILEK: Yes. Under that section there is limited design standards for primary facades as well as regular building design facades,and that just may need to be clarified in this section. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the next one's on Page 33, Section 7,and it's industrial and factory buildings. I had no questions on most of it with the exception of C,and we're back to the 150 feet again. And it goes back to 13. I'm just trying to figure out what we need these standards for in the backside of a building when we have a buffer requirement,and the buffer requirement should do all it's supposed to do to ensure the compatibility,and that includes putting enough--then in this particular case,commercial against residential, it would be a more substantial buffer. We're not supposed to see--the buffer's supposed to ensure compatibility. We're not supposed to see most the building anyway, so why are we so worried about the facades? MR. SCHIFFER: And remember,this is just a variation in massing part of the code. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR. SCHIFFER: And what that is is nobody particularly wanted a big,blank wall on the back of a residential thing. So this requires some ins and outs, some ups and downs just to take--you know,the wall is still a massive element. It's just the massings are broken up on it so it's just--you know, it's not huge. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: And the other thing is,depending on what's adjacent in terms of the industrial product,your landscape buffer may or may not-- it may take 20 years to get to the point where it would soften that in terms of the massing. MR. SCHIFFER: Or they could have a wall with setbacks very close. And,other than make a big movie screen, it's not desirable. Page 35 of 49 February 4,2016 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,I don't have any other questions on that section. MS.CILEK: Yeah. We'll take a look at it.And I actually do believe I misspoke because Brad is right,this is about the variation and massing element. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MS. CILEK: They're just talking about the different facades in there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Not the transition as much as variation in massing. There's transition elements and variation in massing elements. MS.CILEK: Yeah,that section that we're looking at. So we'll take a look at it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That brings us down to Page 34. Anybody have any questions on Page 34? It's a change to project standards. (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then that continues on the top of Page 35. Anybody have any questions through the middle of Page 35,which is site design standards? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I had a question regarding F.l.a at the bottom of Page 35. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep. That's the next piece we're going to,and I-- COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,that's fine. We're finishing up through--to site design standards. Okay. Let's get on site design standards,and we have--I think Charlette's got the first question. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah,I was questioning whether--why we wanted to remove the term"shaded"regarding the shading of these areas. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's the same question I had,Charlette. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Uh-oh. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: You two. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're in trouble now. MR.FRANTZ: The explanation provided in the narrative was related to defining the term "shaded" and how that is actually provided. I can let them speak. MR. SCHIFFER: It was solely that it's not a predictable word. I mean,the success of the code,at least designers think that there's a word,and when you achieve that word,you achieve compliance. "Shaded," nobody could figure out what that really meant. So it was kind of pulled out. I mean-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Why don't we figure out a way to define it here in this section of the code so we can have something,right--and you're,I guess I'll say,for lack of a better word--you're fair skinned. I am. I know I have continuous problems because of my life in the sun. And we should discourage the removal of shading. We should encourage more types of shading,but maybe it's time we took a look at defining it instead of removing it. MR. SCHIFFER: And then,you know, if it was with landscape,what did that mean? Percentage? And trellis,what did that mean? Size? And,you know,these are spots along a walkway. We don't want that to become a huge burden for everybody. But you're right,I mean,I would--well,in my case,I'd probably want it air conditioned,too. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But,you know,I've got a lot of people who have talked about sidewalks, and they've become a hot issue lately. And there's a lot of thought going into the fact that people don't use sidewalks as much is because they're sitting out there in the blistering sun. And if we had more shading, more people might use them. So instead of taking this out,maybe we ought to try to capitalize on it and provide a way that we can define shading that would only(sic)benefit here,but where else in the code it might benefit. MR. SCHIFFER: Good. And remember, shading's moving around all day. You know,what's shaded at 10 a.m. is not shaded at two,you know,p.m. So you know,it becomes kind of a nightmare. If somebody could come up with a good shaded term,I don't think anybody on the committee would have a concern about putting it in but--unless it's an extremely expensive thing that you're putting every 100, 150 feet down the sidewalk. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,for this application,which is your planters and--I mean,outside areas,we ought to take a look, Caroline, instead of removing that term,to make it something we could define Page 36 of 49 February 4, 2016 a little easier. MS.CILEK: I took the note down. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Other than that,on Page 35,are there any other comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't think there are. Then let's move to Page 36. The first part,the top of it,I didn't see any issues with the site sculptures or water fountains,but on No. 2,I don't follow the reasoning here. And,basically, if you have more parking spaces than you need,which means you have more asphalt than you need, it's penalizing those smaller projects because they have to put more landscaping in because that's what's required when you do 20 percent more,and 20 percent of 10 is a lot different than 20 percent of 100,but then your landscaping would be 80 percent less,because you'd only put landscape in consistent with the 20 percent of 10,not consistent with the 20 percent of 100. So how is this a problem? Isn't it a ratio of--I mean,as you increase asphalt,you increase the need for landscaping based on this. If you only increase the asphalt based on the number of spaces you start with, your ratio of increased landscaping ought to remain the same,too. So why is this--why is this a problem? Do we know?Unless-- MS.CILEK: We can let the committee speak, if they'd like. First,at least. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SCHIFFER: Brad Schiffer again. And,remember,there were engineers on this committee, civil engineers, so... CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,that doesn't help us any. MR. SCHIFFER: So this may not have come from design-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Engineers don't make good architects. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Carefully now. MR. SCHIFFER: In the code currently there is a requirement that if you start to exceed the size of your parking lot you have to upgrade the landscaping. And I think historically the legacy of it is that nobody wanted somebody to build a huge parking lot way in excess of what's required or what's scaled and not have it landscaped adequately,so--and I think it was pretty well pushed,Dalas,by the engineers that they didn't see the reason why the landscaping should be anything exceptional for this and,thus,crossed it out. MS. CILEK: If I may,Jeremy and I have chatted about this provision as well,and perhaps we could work with the community to find a balance in looking at a threshold for when the extra landscaping would start. I know perhaps for smaller parking lots, if you're then providing a little bit extra,you get triggered into it. Perhaps a threshold would be helpful,and so-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,why don't we see if the statement's true. Because here's what it says. The committee determined that current language punished smaller parking lots by requiring much more landscaping. How can that be when a smaller parking lot goes from 10 to 12 spaces to get the 20 percent,and a parking lot with 100 goes to 120?You're still--you're talking 20 more spaces in one instance and two in the other. So what they're saying is,the smaller--the two is required to have much more landscaping than the other. That doesn't make--that's not even--that doesn't make sense. How did we get to that conclusion? Because if--you're going to be required to do the landscaping on the ratio of number of spaces or asphalt square footage that you've increased,not necessarily--so I'm just wondering how that statement's even true. Could someone look into that and get back with us next time? MR. SCHIFFER: And it would depend on the layout of parking lot. I mean,adding two spaces, what kind of trouble could that cause? Well,maybe it could cause an extra tree planting in the ratio of tree planting in the parking size. But let's--we'll get back to you with a civil engineer's response. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Have you been-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,no. This--yeah,okay. Well,that takes us to Page 37,which is a discussion that parking for projects shall be designed to adhere to the following standards,and we've got a whole list of issues. I need--Jeremy,can you provide some clarification on what's going on with this? Page 37 of 49 February 4, 2016 MR.FRANTZ: I'm sorry. Could you-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This is,I believe,where they're trying to put the parking lots in front of the buildings or-- instead of to the rear where Dover-Kohl and other instances that we've had come before us try to put them in the rear,not the front. Is that what this is trying to do? MR.FRANTZ: Correct. And as stated before,the Dover-Kohl wants buildings at the street line and for parking lots to be behind. And I'll let them speak to their motivations, so there's some,you know, difference in the way that they organized the site. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SCHIFFER: Remember,this will be the third edition of the landscape. The second edition was already done. The first edition,I understand--I wasn't around--but the legacy was that Sports Authority got everybody excited,and look at how small it is today. Imagine getting excited over Sports Authority. But--because all the parking was in front. They took the site,pushed the building back in the corner,and put all the parking where everybody could see all the parking. Well,the original version of this had that,and we carried it forward. And I agree that it really doesn't make sense. I mean,there were a lot of people that would argue from a mercantile standpoint that they want people to see parking.But that's why it was there,from the rumors I've heard, so... CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But instead of taking it and trashing the whole thing,why don't we look at some kind of balance between what's in the front and what's in the back. I think seeing some parking lot on the front isn't bad,but look at--look at that mall going by the arena. You go north,and you hit Corkscrew Road. And there's a big mall there. I forgot what it's called. MR. BOSI: Miromar? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Miromar Mall. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Miromar Outlet. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You drive--I drive by there a lot,and in the front they have a section of their parking lot. I mean,that's a huge mall.But the amount of parking that they have is phenomenal behind the buildings. So they've got a little bit of a balance. Maybe too much in the front but,still,they've got some in the front,and it doesn't look bad. They've got landscaped islands and things like that. So why don't we look at a situation that has more balance than just taking it out? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mark,have you ever been to Miromar? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've been to that one next to the arena. Is that Miromar? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah. I mean,you can't get a parking place,I don't care where you park there. People leave because they cannot find a parking place. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Huh. COMMISSIONER EBERT: As crazy as it is. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've never had a problem parking there,but I just thought it was--that was the example I was thinking of. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah. Then have you been to Trader Joe's? That is an absolute nightmare. I mean,the police should sit there because-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Trader Joe's is a grocery store,right? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Have you been to Home Depot? Pine Ridge and Airport Road? Okay. That's just as bad. MR. SCHIFFER: There was an example that was given to us as a problem this has caused,and that's,you know the shopping center right across Airport,crosses Immokalee,Fernandez the Bull's in there? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. MR. SCHIFFER: There's a lot of parking behind it,and there's a strip of parking in the front. So when it was built--and I've been told that they made them put the parking behind it because of this section of the code. And when you go there,the parking out in the front's jammed. I knew that,went around back. Nobody in the parking lot. So,you know,hiding the parking behind the building may not be the best thing for the community either. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: There's parking back there? Page 38 of 49 February 4, 2016 MR. SCHIFFER: See. Yes. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Oh. I'll have to look next time. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I agree with you. MR. SCHIFFER: There's a lot of parking back there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I do,too. I just think there's-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I think more parking in the front is better for the consumer,for the-- MR. SCHIFFER: And make that look good. What Mark's saying is, look,there's a whole bunch of parking. And,again,just look at the history.You know, Sports Authority to us today is a small building,and that is not a big parking lot by what we've seen since then. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But,see,to avoid someone who'd want to come in,and say the--what's that Miromar,did you call it? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Say Miromar took their entire field of parking and put their buildings in a horseshoe shape around the parking lot and put the whole thing out front,that would have been bigger than a football field. It would have looked hideous. So there needs to be a balance. And striking the whole thing out may not be the way to get there. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: That's not a good example because they have multiple tenants-- MR. SCHIFFER: Multiple-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: --and has to do with walking distances. I mean,there's so many factors into it. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: There's plenty of landscaping. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just out of curiosity.If-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Then if you put the parking behind the building,does it get the same illumination? Does it get the same landscaping qualities? Would the ladies be worried in the evening parking behind the buildings where there isn't enough visibility? I mean,there's so much to it. There's no sense in tinkering with it. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Brad,you used Sports Authority as an example a couple of times,but you've got to remember across the street from that was Toys R Us. MR. SCHIFFER: Right. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And it was the fact that the two of them went in right there. And Toys R Us to me looked--you know, it fronts right on--there's no parking in front of it. It looks much worse than Sports Authority. MR. SCHIFFER: And that was-- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And if they're listening,you know,I don't want to get sued, but-- MR. SCHIFFER: But that was an example of putting a blank wall right on the property line right on an arterial road. That was--a lot of these regulations came in response to that,too. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Plus it's a square box,and it's right up against the pedestrian walkway. So the mass thing,you feel like you're being towered by this big-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: But the Toys R Us should fall under the category of an outparcel of a shopping center. It should have the same architect feature. It should have so many other things that will tie it into the shopping center. But the wall right at the property line on Pine Ridge Road is not--on Airport Road is not-- MR. SCHIFFER: And those two buildings we mentioned caused Version 1,which started to bring those things in. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: And this is Version 3,did you say? MR. SCHIFFER: This will be three. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know,to follow up on a comment Brad made about the shopping center where Fernando the Bull is up across from Immokalee Road and how they were required to put some parking behind the facility,how did we end up with Tamiami Crossings the way it's laid out? That's a brand Page 39 of 49 February 4, 2016 new project going in,and the entire parking field's facing 41 and 951. There's nothing behind it but preserve. MS.CILEK: I'm not familiar with that project,but I know Ferndez(sic)the Bull shopping center. I actually live right near there. There is actually--there are offices and other uses behind there that you access with the other parking lot. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ah,gotcha. That may have been the difference then. Okay. Let's move on to Page--well,I think Page 37, if the committee could take a look at it just to see if there's some way to balance between front and back instead of--so we don't end up with 100 percent in front,that might be--help. On Page 38 we've got building pedestrian pathways,new language on the left-hand side.Anybody have any issues? MS.CILEK: And there is a bit of pathways on Page 37 as well at the bottom. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're right. Just out of curiosity,on Page 38,the committee left in the word"shaded" under G,which I thought was interesting since it was such a problem elsewhere. So maybe when we look at the way to describe "shaded,"we could figure it out in relationship to all of these applications. Okay. If there's no questions or comments, let's move on to Page 39. It starts with the full section, No.4 up on top, service function areas.And it says the--under the far right,the analysis,currently this section requires all visual and acoustics impacts to be screened and fully contained. The committee determined acoustic impacts are impossible to fully contain and propose removing the requirement to screen acoustic impacts. Under the No.4.a,purpose and intent,to diminish the visual and acoustic impact of service functions. That's the new language. I'm kind of curious how that meets the intent of the committee. It doesn't look like they changed it,because that's the same language in A before. So what is it--what happened here that-- MR.FRANTZ: The change to the term "acoustic" is in the old Section 3.b. So the purpose and intent retains that acoustic language,but B is lost. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But if your purpose and intent is addressing it and you're not explaining how you're addressing it,is that--should we just take it out of both sections if that's-- MR.FRANTZ: If I remember correctly,I believe the issue in that case was with the term "fully contained." And so I think that the purpose and intent of screening acoustic--or diminishing acoustic impacts,I think--I won't speak for them,but I believe they're comfortable with that.It's the way that it's phrased in B. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: "Fully contained." Well,that helps. Thank you. Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Could I--yeah. Can we go back,Page 38. Mike and I did talk yesterday with pathways and stuff,and they've crossed that out. And,Mike,can you get up and address this, please. MR. SAWYER: Again,for the record,Mike Sawyer,Transportation Planning. We read this particular section of the code,and we understand that,at least from the appearance,it looks like the intent is to reduce the number of sidewalk connections to a single location on a project instead of one at each of the access points to the projects. I can tell you that from a transportation standpoint,we would certainly prefer to have the retention of all access points having a sidewalk connection. If you simply look at most developments,such as,you know, most of the shopping centers that we've got,they are going to have multiple access points,but most of those are going to be out more along the perimeter of the project itself,more at the corners. Not at the major corners of intersections,certainly,because we do have access management which says that you need to be a certain distance from those major intersections. I can tell you that day in and day out we are constantly being requested to look at this particular area or that particular area throughout the county as far as needing sidewalks. We are doing what we can as far as increasing the amount of sidewalks throughout the county. And we've got a lot of catching up to do to do that,and we've got limited budgets,but we're doing what we can to do those. We've got them all on a priority Page 40 of 49 February 4, 2016 list. The idea that we would reduce sidewalks and sidewalk connections,I don't feel that it really is consistent with our other activity trying to get as many pedestrian connections made throughout the county. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mike,could you look at the language that's being proposed and tell us exactly what part of it you are concerned about? Because it says,the continuous building perimeter path interconnecting all public entrances and exits of a building is required. For the purposes of this section, employee,service or delivery entrances or emergency-exit-onlys are excluded. If parking area is proposed along the building facade within 15 feet from a building wall,the pedestrian pathway shall be provided along the full length of the road;parking spaces facing building. Which part of that is what you're addressing? MR. SAWYER: It's actually just the portion just before that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,then you're--okay. MR. SAWYER: Sony. It's actually-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Can you show us where? MR. SAWYER: I think it's at the bottom of Page 37. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thirty-seven,okay. MR. SAWYER: And it's true,ADA,as far as I'm--my knowledge base is,ADA requires one access point to be provided for each development;whereas,our code is more stringent and requires to have one at each access point. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But if you've got to provide a continuous building perimeter path interconnecting all public entrances and exits of the building,how is that not really getting you where you need to be in 2.c,the one that's been struck? MR. SAWYER: We're looking at two different--two different cases. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SAWYER: What you're doing in one is you're looking at the accesses into the overall development itself. So if you've got,you know,whatever type of development that you've got,whether you've got one access point to a major road or two or three,that's principally what I'm talking about currently; whereas,the second provision,E, is looking at the--you know,the building perimeter sidewalks themselves. And I can certainly talk about that,too, if you want to. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,I understand. I see your point. Thank you. MR. SAWYER: Okay. You know,just for what it's worth as far as the pedestrian walkways or pathways around the buildings themselves,perhaps there could be a consideration that if a building does, in fact,have a paved area and they've got accesses,you know--you know, ingress/egress,and those locations, that probably could be just marked off and--you know,with paint,and everybody would be just fine. It would certainly be safe. Something of that nature might be possible as well. I don't--I will tell you right now I'm not as familiar as I should be with this particular section of the code when it comes to the architectural code. I know that the provision has been there,and it has been required. But just as a suggestion,that might be a possibility. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That piece that's been struck has two different issues;pedestrian pathway connections must be provided from the building to the adjacent road pathways at a ratio of one for each vehicular entrance to the project. Then the second part says,drive aisles leading to the main entrances must have at least a walkway on one side of the drive aisle. Okay. If it's a drive aisle,wouldn't that require--wouldn't that then fall under our sidewalk code? MR. SAWYER: Not necessarily,because our pathways and the sidewalks actually go to right-of-ways,and those may not necessarily be designated right-of-ways or actual roads. We tend to look at internal access points as just that,internal roads or internal accesses through the development itself. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SAWYER: It's a way of having just one path or one sidewalk on one side where you don't have a designated or platted right-of-way. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I mean,I understand. I think it's a good point. Brad,did you have something you want to add? Page 41 of 49 February 4, 2016 MR. SCHIFFER: Just quick. And, again,this was the civil engineering issues. What they were concerned about is the requirement that every place they bring an access drive in,they had to have sidewalks on it. And there were a lot of examples shown to us where maybe that isn't the best place to put the sidewalk. Maybe a little bit further over straight into a main entrance is better. But they're being held,because of this, to put the sidewalk on the side of the access drive. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But see,to get to Diane's concern--which I'm glad she brought us back to this page--if there is a need to do it in a different manner,which is more practical,why don't we just change this to meet that need instead of striking it altogether? It goes back to,maybe you guys could take a second look and come back with a suggestion that improves the situation. Even though it deletes this exact language, it gives us a better outcome. MR. SCHIFFER: We can do that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SCHIFFER: And the other one was there are a lot of doors on buildings that don't necessarily cause traffic. For example,I could put an exit door,I can discharge on the grass,so why am I being held to have to have a sidewalk connecting to heaven knows where? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think you put that exception in under e.i. MR. SCHIFFER: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR. SCHIFFER: So that was the other thing we wanted to cover. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If you'd relook at the one Diane's brought up, I think that'd be advantageous,and then under the Section E and G on Page 38,anybody have any other issues? If not,we can move--we're past that. We're already on 4. We talked about the acoustics. That takes us to the bottom of Page 39, drive-through facility standards. And that's another one that I've--Page 39,and it continues on 40. I don't know why we would want to reduce that for small structures. They're still drive-throughs. And I just don't know what's to gain by that. I think the picture examples of what occurred up in Cape Coral show us a good alternative of what could happen. So I'm--I don't see the need to make the change. Anybody else have anything? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I don't either. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You neither? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: (Shakes head.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So I think that one doesn't work for us,Jeremy. And on the bottom of Page 40 and the top of Page 41,we have lighting issues that they've recommended changes for,and then on the bottom--very bottom of Page 40 is water management and buffer areas. Anybody have any issues with those? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't. But Brad's got an issue with something. MR. SCHIFFER: Just on the drive-through. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. MR. SCHIFFER: I mean,personally I'm kind of with you. If you don't have a limitation for floor area,you have a bunch of Orange Julius'sitting in the parking lot. But what about the 5,000 feet? What it's saying is you're allowed more. Do we not want to encourage smaller spaces? For example,you get the Dunkin Donuts in the same mall with the--or the same strip building with the Starbucks and stuff.Is the 5,000--the 1,500 okay? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I think what you'd end up having is a PUD or some other commercial component where they've got a whole pile of small drive-throughs,and I'm not sure that was the intention. Maybe by 5,000 square feet you'd be forced to use up more valuable commercial space,and you would then limit--minimize the amount of drive-throughs you'd have. MR. SCHIFFER: But this could be for a conventionally zoned site. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,straight zoning. Page 42 of 49 February 4, 2016 MR. SCHIFFER: Yeah. And they could be using that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. MR. SCHIFFER: And if you saw what the impact fees on a drive-through are,I think they're 150 thou. I think I would encourage them for the county. Anyway, is the 5,000 a heartburn,or is it--the prior one,I'm kind of with you on that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,the prior one's the one that bothers me. I can't see that thousand being struck. I never really--the 5,000 seems pretty arbitrary. I mean,does anybody have a reason that number was selected? MR. SCHIFFER: In code writing,every number is arbitrary, so... CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I mean,removing the 5,000 doesn't bother me. MR. SCHIFFER: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not there. Anybody else? MR.FRANTZ: I could just point out,that provision is specific to multi-tenant buildings, so there's a lot of other site issues that are going to constrain a site from having a multitude of drive-throughs. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,that gets us to the bottom of Page--oh,we already talked--there's no issues there with anybody on Page 40 and 41? If not-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Nope. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,I guess that actually got us through all of the architectural-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Boy,by one minute. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: With a minute to spare. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,we're not done yet.I've got to talk to the court reporter here in a second about a quickie discussion on our balance of our agenda. But first,I kind of want to wrap it up as,we finished our comments. If the committee wouldn't mind taking a look at our comments and,after you've heard it today,meet one more time and come back with any solutions to seed our comments if you think some of them have--you know,carry some weight, and that way we can hopefully find more compromise on the handful that we're in disagreement on,and when it goes to the Board it would be a lot simpler task to get it through the Board than having to open it all up and go piece by piece. Okay. Jeremy,do you have any-- MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Mr. Chair,would you like to continue this item to another date? Because we did readvertise for today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. We probably should continue it to when the committee--how about--how much time can we continue it to,or can we continue indefinitely? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I'd only continue it for a month. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's continue it to the first meeting next month. MR.BOSI: March 4th. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Which is--pardon me? MR.BOSI: March 4th. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: March 4th. Is there a motion to continue to March 4th? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By Mr.Assaad. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Diane. Discussion? MR.BOSI: It's March 3rd,I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: March 3rd. Motion maker and second accept the change? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wafaa? COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Okay. All those in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. Page 43 of 49 February 4, 2016 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: (Absent.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The motion carries five--yeah,there's five of us left. Oh,Charlette was here. She must have stepped out. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: She just stepped out. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. 5-0. With that,we'll move on to the rest of our agenda. Jeremy and Caroline,thank you so very much for all the hard work you've done. Jeremy, it's an exceptional job,so we appreciate it. It made us--it got us through it today in a reasonable amount of time,so thank you. And for the committee and Brad,you guys,thanks for attending and helping us through this today. We sure appreciate all your time. And with that we will--let me open up and get into the rest of the agenda. We have no old business listed,but we do have two items under new business. The first one I'd asked to add a discussion for staff involvement in--the man cave project is the simple way of saying it. As we all know,that was a very difficult project to get through not only this board but its process in front of the Board of County Commissioners. And a lot of difficulty stemmed on the fact that there wasn't a clear definition in the code on where such a use should go. In fact,a lot of the concern was,how did it get to this location in the first place,and that was one of those judgment calls that staff had to make through analysis,and that's how it happened. But it didn't turn out very well in the end for the applicant,and after all that time and it didn't happen, the possibility of a storage facility such as that coming to Collier County may be real,and I would suggest that instead of waiting for it to happen again and come through as a decision that has to be battled about as we go forward,could we look at--I would like to direct staff,but it would take this board to do it,to take a look at doing an LDC amendment to incorporate luxury vehicle storage,or whatever you want to call it--and that's another thing,we never did come up with a name--and classify it into a use category that Collier County could say applies to certain zoning districts,and then we would have a comparable/compatible ability with it,we'll have other abilities with it to look at the older PUDs that have certain zoning districts in them. That would--that would make it easier in the future to handle this kind of an issue. Mike? MR.BOSI: I will just point out that during that--the Auto Suites discussion,I was asked by Commissioner Taylor to make a comparison between Auto Suites being proposed and the Vault. The Vault is a facility in the City of Naples. It's at the city--the airport property. And the characteristics of that facility was they--you store your cars in their facility. They maintain it. They clean it. They do all the things that would keep the upkeep of the car,then they bring that from that one individual spot that it's assigned,and then brings it out,and you visit your car and get to utilize it. And I was asked to provide a comparison between that and what was being proposed at Auto Suites, individual ownership of units for cars parking or storage,whatever the term you wanted to utilize. So that's one of the things I think we may have to do is there have to be some distinction within that characteristic of ownership. And I guess maybe the clarification,are you looking for the--you know,how we would classify the proposal that was proposed within Briarwood? Because I think the Vault was something that was more clearly an industrial use,and I think the one at Briarwood was--kind of the foot was in both of those doors. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Repeatedly through the Briarwood experience at all levels,we kept hearing, well,we don't know how to deal with this. We don't have this in Collier County. It's a hybrid use. It's this. I agree,it is. What I'm suggesting is,take the parameters of what we learned from Briarwood--which was not only the example of Briarwood,but we pulled up examples from all over the country--and see what that Page 44 of 49 February 4,2016 should--there's no SIC code. There's no NAICS code for that. Classify it as some kind of use,and then find the zoning districts that it should adhere to by right,and then from that point we would have something as a sound basis to go forward. I would hate to see us have another attempt like we had and go through years of effort and end up the way it was. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah, it's sad. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tom? MR.EASTMAN: Mr.Chairman,as well,I think with the project,the man cave project,there was an element of club or fraternal organization. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.EASTMAN: And spelling out those parameters may be a good idea as well,because I know there were certain members of the community that found this as a stretch to be called a club when they saw it more as an industrial storage use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Absolutely. And that's-- MR.EASTMAN: So maybe this club aspect could be further defined as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that when you have the use as a club in a storage facility, it becomes a hybrid use that's now classified to fit somewhere,and it will just make our jobs easier going forward trying to understand how the zoning applies. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: It's also like memberships, like a condominium. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. It was-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I think the classification that existed in Briarwood was fraternal clubs,private clubs. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think it said private clubs,yeah. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: And the question was,how did the automobile storage facility get to be interpreted as a private fraternal or private club.And if the emphasis is on the word"private club,"then anything could be done anywhere. You could make private clubs of anything. And-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That just emphasizes the need for clarification on it. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,does staff understand that direction? MS. CILEK: Yes,thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And then the second thing up under new business was the brief explanation of how often and the frequencies we're allowed to do continuances,and I think this is more of a County Attorney's discussion or response. And before we go,Terri,we just wanted to finish this up. Are you okay for a little bit?Okay. Because normally we'd have a break by now,and I appreciate it. Heidi? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: The continuances are governed by an old Board of County Commissioner resolution that allows for continuance,and it's been interpreted that it can go,you know,up to about a month at a time as long as you continue to continue it to a date certain. Now,there's going to be a point where the continuances are then continued to a point that could be deemed as unreasonable. So we would continue it for a certain period of time,but then we would not continue it. And I don't really have a date that would be unreasonable that I can give you,because that's not been defined. But that's how we're proceeding with the continuances to date-certains. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Heidi,I have a question for you then. It has to do with advertising also. You can only go so-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: No. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: It has to do with the advertisement. That's why we're continuing it to a date certain,and we're making sure that these things are posted and provided in the agendas so that the public can follow it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And this was Wafaa's agenda item. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Yeah. If you continue it to a date certain,then you don't have to Page 45 of 49 February 4, 2016 readvertise. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Yes. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Okay. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Yeah. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: But the question and the annoyance in my mind is that you can continue for a date certain,and then you continue for another date certain so many times,that it gets to be a joke. If you're not ready to come before the planning board,why are you scheduled before the planning board in the first instance? So I find that unacceptable practice. I find that to be a little bit unprofessional. I find it to be very annoying to have an item continued then continued then continued it given the amount of time that we put,or I put--and I'm the least among our group--that I spend in reviewing the applications and trying to read and get acquainted only to come here or get an email the day before telling me it's been continued. Well,why did I waste my weekend reading a big stack of paper for somebody to tell me it's continued? So my suggestion is that the number of continuances should be limited to a specific number for a legitimate reason and there may be a fee associated with it,severe or significant application fee that compensates staff and the county for the time that we put on behalf of anybody,any petitioner. They can take their application and re-file. So this is my personal view about it. And I'm very sorry that I feel so strongly about it-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: No,Wafaa,I-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: --but it's really annoying. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Wafaa,I agree with you. On a couple of them,you read it,but it's continued. And by the time it comes back,and usually they have changes,you have to read it all over again, because it is--you know, so many things have come in between,and so I see your point there. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: There has to be also maybe a cutoff date. If we know that we have a meeting on the 4th,then there's no further correspondence at least a week or two weeks or something in advance. This last-minute email,these last-minute attachments,I mean, it's too much work for you guys and for us as well. It only confuses me,and I don't think that's fair for us or for them. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There are some things that need to be considered,and number one is the staff report isn't issued for a week--until a week before we have our hearing. Once the staff report is issued and the public gets to read it,there is opportunity for additional input, and we should allow the public to have their input. So the emails and correspondence and documentation that comes in is coming in in response to the documents that were just released explaining their staffs recommendations and reports. I think it's our duty to have to accept and review that. Now,what we accept for evidence at our hearings is a little different. We've put a stop to having voluminous information we can't read on the fly. But at the same time,when Planning Commission members get a packet a week before and we read them--I read mine over the weekends--a lot of us will come in Monday or Tuesday and find issues that may have been missed or not as completely thought about as we may have reviewed them,which then get back to the applicant through staff,and the applicant says,oh,well,if that's their issue, I need to readjust my application to accommodate that. That,then,calls for a possibility of a continuance. Now,the one that continued today,Abaco,they have an incomplete application. It was scheduled incomplete. They're trying to complete it. Now there's a disagreement over the manner in which they want to complete it before they come before this board. Well,at the maximum time, if they disagree--if they can get a continuance and give us a better product,that has been the philosophy under which we've tried to apply. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Alternatively,we can decide that we're not going to accept the continuance,and we're going to make a decision based on the facts as we know them today,and we can say, move along. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,but then you're sending something to the Board of County Page 46 of 49 February 4, 2016 Commissioners that is going to cause more problems at their end than at ours. So if anybody has to vet something and clean it up,this is what this board's supposed to do. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If we send something to the Board that's half baked but it finishes getting cooked before they get it but we haven't seen it,then that makes it much more difficult for the Board of County Commissioners to handle it because they've got to spend a lot more time on it,and their schedule's a lot busier than ours. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I totally agree. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Tom? MR.EASTMAN: I think it's important to focus on whether the application is complete and also focus on the source and reason for the continuance.To have a hard rule against continuances may not be our best path,especially if it's a case where the application is complete and this board--and frequently--and I've seen Mr. Strain do this repeatedly where the developer has a complete application but there's community upheaval,and he wants the developer to go back to those community folks and meet with them and try to sort things out,and in those instances the continuance has really helped us get a better project. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Oh,I understand. MR.EASTMAN: I don't know that the developer should be faulted for that in those instances. So I think there should be some type of flexibility where if the continuance is generated by this board and the application is complete,then that should not be a strike against them in terms of their limited number. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: I think we all agree about that. I think we--the idea is that you become helpful to the petitioner and we're going to afford them the opportunity and the fair consideration of their application. So there's no doubt that we want to be helpful and accommodating,and we want to move things along. But just to continue it for another two weeks,for another two weeks,for another two weeks with no apparent legitimate--I shouldn't say legitimate--you know,not an acceptable reason, is not-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: In other words,continuing it for a month. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,and I think the frustration part is that we're--we've been encouraged to continue things on a two-week basis where I had tried this morning to suggest an indefinite continuance so it wouldn't have to be done again. Pelican Marsh was 1,065 pages. I read that three times because of three continuances. We cannot--we cannot keep that information readily in our minds between every two weeks unless we reread it. It's a real pain to have to do that. And I think,by Mr.Assaad highlighting this today and staff present--and,Mike,you're the director of that department. I would strongly suggest we try to work to minimize these continuances before we have to ask the Board to put something into play that strongly tries to restrict them. MR.BOSI: And we most certainly appreciate the time that you guys give is uncompensated and is given as volunteer,and those burdens that these continuances do place upon you is an additional constraint upon that time that's given. It's--our staff is in a precarious situation in which we provide customer service to the development community,a development community that always has the time ticking on them,and they always want things sooner that were later. And they want to take the risk of pushing things and scheduling items before the Board while some information is still maybe being gathered. We try to be--we try to be flexible,but we also try to understand that we don't want to bring an application that we know is going to be continued,and we try to convey that message. We will reiterate to our applicant community this discussion that the Board had in saying that we only want to be able to get you to the Planning Commission if you're ready to get there. So we'll continue to work with the development community and try to work with our individual planners,especially within our zoning staff,to make sure that if we're--if we're ready to send that advertising notice out to the Naples Daily News that we're ready,that we're ready and secure that we're going to have the information that the Planning Commission needs,because we understand that it is your time,and your time is being duplicated,and sometimes more than that in terms of--over the same information that's being Page 47 of 49 February 4, 2016 continued. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I appreciate that,Mike,and I--the projects that come forward that need supplemental information that should be included in order for us to evaluate them, it all needs to be in the original packet. If it isn't,then--that's what causes some continuances. Abaco is a prime example. It's being continued for documents that should have been done way before they were scheduled for hearing,and they weren't, so... COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I just wanted to say one thing. It just seems that they're more frequent.You know,I haven't been on the board as long as some members of this Planning Commission,but it seems that recently there have been more continuances than I've seen in the years that I've been on this Planning Commission, so it's something different. MR.BOSI: And that relates--that relates to our earlier conversation about where we're at within the economic cycle. That's a direct relationship to that. There's more pressure for more time and more--the product to be put into the ground earlier,and there's just a lot of pressure on all sides within the development equation. But it doesn't--that doesn't justify trampling or not being respectful to the time that you guys provide. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I could attribute what you're saying to additional items on your agenda to hear,but I can't agree totally with why they'd all be continued. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I mean,there's been a lot of reasons. And I think,especially for Wafaa's position,he comes on the board,and no sooner is he getting here and everything gets continued constantly. So we've had a higher frequently later of multiple continuances for the same project than I've seen before,and I've been here quite a few years. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: We can think about it,and if staff can come up with some suggested ideas to how to control it or better handle it,then we can talk about it on another day. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: So we're going to continue this discussion? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: No,no. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yes, let's-- COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: We just brought it up today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There's no members of the public here for public comment, so we will move to adjournment. Is there an adjournment--recommendation to adjourn? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I make a motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Second it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Stan. All in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And we're out of here.Thank you-all. ******* There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:19 p.m. Page 48 of 49 February 4, 2016 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 49 of 49 AGENDA ITEM 9-A Coil er County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING SERVICES - ZONING DIVISION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: MARCH 3, 2016 SUBJECT: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REZONE (PUDZ) - PL20150000204; ABACO CLUB OWNER Mary Wagner 2730 S Ocean Boulevard Palm Beach, FL 233480 AGENT: APPLICANT (CONTRACT PURCHASER): Alexis Crespo, AICP Rock Development Group Waldrop Engineering,P.A. c/o Chris Konal,Blake Doganiero 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, #305 535 Hercules Boulevard, Suite 201B Bonita Springs, FL 34103 Clearwater, FL 33764 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is asking the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) to consider an amendment to Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for the project to be known as the Abaco Club RPUD, to allow construction of a maximum of 104 residential dwelling units on 15.9+/-acres. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at the southwest corner of Immokalee Road and Woodcrest Drive in Section 26, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (location map on page 2, proposed PUD Master Plan on page 3, and aerial/boundary map on page 7). PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 1 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC ILL Y z K Bg in 0 ae i i i �g do 0- .0. A \ < .■ • ■ e i ■ ■ i(I�i I i[ I ilk Ijl 1111 1'(1 1 111 ry:Of an 1::;Iii!: ,:Il;::Z iihiiht ii�';i;ili;1411 li ra (7 Ili:ii=!ilaii1:t :.,i .::.:il:oi'ti;i inn l i 1.1 —•. x . . ■ e S::i::.i;i1 11�i i:,i il��ljl3�j;:;pm;�r;:::::�:o':� 1.1 �a i fiEiiliilii:51011;1161ii:111fi¢iIEil 0i11 ffi•linil 1.1 11.1 x z 1!-IT 000 � Iiiiiiowl!iiimmilimimiligiiiiiii001$111 I:. ELI p cv Qcaaoaoaozo a gvseeeeeeeeaa a i i ! � _ N 211 1 g 1 MO (01. 4. t. 1,1 I ©pVGOG 0 e,� 1, 141 a i s i ? i 1 sg �ee�sEse �voo; j J a MS WIN p sm 0. a Z „ . a le 0 . O I i= Ill O. . M I /1 • g .r •., . .., . , , ., , 1. I 1 CL 1 il .. 1 i 1 2 MidPkioI lit 1� .... . 1 togp„,,, ii!14 11 � toa � o CCOMSWIft 11 irir 11 & i . . �� x !ia�1 u � � "1iR .161 . g Imemo.wool PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 2 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC ••" -Ju LISIHX3 J77'HOII70"Ii.LS3MFil.f105 30 S31I1NfII^IIX03'Itl3N:11,43113 _317J ry-- IIW33N19N3 Qf1d21 Hf1ZD ODVHV z .7.7-=-1.7..-- .1' i i i _1 1 / 0 o(9 IR * T2 m z —A. . w®Z o� � >- z $ Q wyG N m ' '1od ao N K M m ' N O in 1: C m .- CO Wm0IMMOKALEE ROAD LL a . 6 z 4 t � i _4 ' alut- - J W -o y .- w ---.._/,' LJ' = k IIL��\ \ ce i �� W 17 r ,, 2a 0>Pia 5- 1 Ir \ 1 \s).__\ a30 43 1-f ,.1%=26 226t 13* 2 w r, 5 I If I a I W w o'cIa yim" ,6 03 I \ I ,. I / w z oZ ailw O z`off \ I \� z i W w Z 0_l I it ,iI I : $111 0 , w6_1 aXpre! d Jw- _ W ra6'aPjo �t at'�'— / I I NEI LL 0 w%u LLQ O a 0.-,=go-r- = I / \/ -\ t7 /_ �= 0 VNyyyZyUCQw7zp<0010. O�z I) \ I 11 \.. _- r.'0'„ w N N tW/1 111 i•W Z I j Q ig 1- _ II w 73 j i i_i_ II -1 \ \ iii;'. ... 3 5 ii.-41V6Wa0FJ w e' r i- N— II II' N\ �` zN 6 e � — * * �� l 1 1 ow 1 r m I: \� T U5 LL o(9 Ui: 1-44.1 14/ / .., 06 1 . . , .. i!li'L-7- \:'' . 0 -11 ri e tu2 w wel_ • W pa o: of as V __ V Z I p V o3alr�aa Q p $W J Odna ON 1°�W (n W W S WZ W 7IWYJ ,. .• . ..,. - - onaa:JNINOZ p iw la l co F 1JRi1SIQSnS 7VIIN301S3>9 Nv9 ifl -. ( p a s pz w 5 NIn05 SLL Z Z 4I \ LL N e LL I fa - W w ww 11. IL O O tia m ABACO CLUB PUD MASTER PLAN PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 3 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The proposed PUD is comprised of two parcels totaling 15.9 acres. The 11.76 acre parcel to the east, fronting Immokalee Road and Woodcrest Drive, is an undeveloped and wooded site owned by Mary Wagner with a zoning designation of Agriculture (A). The parcel to the west, fronting Immokalee Road,is 5.3 acres and is subject to a drainage easement in favor of the County and contains storm water retention for Immokalee Road with a zoning designation of(A). Both parcels have a common property line with Bent Creek Preserve PUD (see aerial/boundary map on page 7). The subject property is designated Urban (Urban—Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub- district), and is within the Residential Density Band around the Immokalee Road/Collier Boulevard Mixed Use Activity Center, as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan(GMP). The applicant is eligible for 111 units or 7 units per acre. The applicant is requesting approval of a Residential Planned Unit Development on 15.9 acres to allow for the development of a multi-family and/or townhouse community with associated accessory uses. The applicant is requesting a density of 6.5 units per acre equating to 104 dwelling units. The proposed structures will not exceed 45 feet in actual height. Vehicle access to the development is along Woodcrest Drive with a pedestrian/bicycle connection proposed along the southwest side of the site, connecting Abaco Club PUD to Bent Creek Preserve PUD. In addition to principal structures proposed,the applicant is proposing the following accessory uses: 1. Customary accessory uses and structures including carports, garages, and utility buildings. 2. Temporary sales trailers and model units. 3. Essential services, including interim and permanent utility and maintenance facilities. 4. Water management facilities. 5. Walls, berms and signs. 6. Passive open space uses and structures, including, but not limited to landscaped areas, gazebos, park benches, and walking trails. Any other accessory use and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, or Hearing Examiner, pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 4 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC • Furthermore,the following development standards are proposed: is i J TABLE I RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS"} PERMITTED USES AND Townhouses Multi-Family Recreation STANDARDS Dwellings Min. Lot Area 1,600 S.F. N/A N/A Min. Lot Width 16' N/A N/A Min. Lot Depth 100' N/A N/A t SETBACKS 3 20' x Front}2} 20' 15' i Side 5'/0' 10' 10' I f Rear(Principal)(4) 10'from Perimeter Buffer 10'from Perimeter Buffer 10'from Perimeter Buffer 3 or 0'from LME or 0'from LME or 0'from LME i I Rear(Accessory)(4) 0'from Perimeter Buffer 0'from Perimeter Buffer 0'from Perimeter Buffer 1 or LME or IME or LME or Bulkhead j Min. Distance Between Principal Structures(3} 10'/0' 20' 10' I Maximum Height 45' 45' 45' Actual Zoned 35' 35' 35' Minimum Floor Area Per 1,000 S.F. 1,000 S.F. N/A Unit (1) All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. (2) Front setback is measured from back of curb or edge of pavement if not curbed, for private roads.The minimum 15'front setback may be reduced to 10'where the unit has a recessed or side-entry garage. Front-loading garages shall be setback a minimum of 23 feet from the edge of sidewalk for private roads. (3) The minimum distance between buildings may be reduced to 0' where attached garages are provided. (4) No structures may be located within the county drainage easement shown on the PUD master plan. PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 5 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC fi 1 The applicant is also requesting the following deviations from the LDC: 1. Deviation from LDC Section 4.05.04.G regarding multi-family dwellings, which allows parking spaces for recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent of the normal requirements where a majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities, to allow the parking spaces for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent of the normal requirements for the entire development. 2. Deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.2, which permits a maximum wall height of six (6) feet in residential zoning districts, to allow for a maximum wall height of eighteen (18) feet along the Immokalee Road frontage, and a maximum wall height of twelve (12) feet along Woodcrest Drive. 3. Deviation from LDC Section 5.04.04.B.3.e, which provides that a temporary use permit for a model home (occupied or unoccupied) and sales center shall be issued initially for a period of three (3) years. The requested deviation is to allow the model homes and sales center to remain in use up to five (5)years without requiring a conditional use permit. 4. Deviation from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height, to allow a temporary sign or banner up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and a maximum of 8 feet in height, subject to approval under temporary sign permit procedures in the LDC. The temporary sign or banner shall be limited to 90 days per calendar year. This deviation will remain valid until 90% of the units are sold. At such time, the deviation will be void. 5. Deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5, which requires on-premise directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of roadway, to allow for on-premise direction signage to be setback a minimum of 5 feet from private, internal roadways within the PUD. This deviation does not apply to property adjacent to public roadways. 6. Deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6.b, which permits two (2) ground or wall signs per entrance to the development with a combined sign area of 64 square feet, to allow for two (2) ground or wall signs at the project entrance with a combined sign area of 80 square feet. 7. Deviation from LDC Section 3.05.07.H.1.f.i, which limits satisfying native vegetation off-site to less than one(1)acre,to allow for 1.22 acres of native vegetation to be satisfied off-site. 8. Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.O1.J, which prohibits dead-end streets, to allow two (2) dead-end access ways and two (2) dead-end hammerheads within the RPUD. 9. Deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02.C, which requires a Type "B" buffer where multi-family uses are proposed adjacent to single-family residential uses,to omit the buffer along the western property line, and a portion of the southern property line where the existing stormwater pond abuts the Bent Creek Preserve PUD, as shown on the PUD master plan. PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 6 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: (Subject property—6.5 units per acre) North: Immokalee Road, golf course/mixed residential development Heritage Bay PUD with a density of 1.3 units per acre. West: Mixed residential development(in process) Bent Creek Preserve PUD with a density of 3.25 units per acre. South: Mixed residential development (in process) Bent Creek Preserve PUD with a density of 3.25 units per acre. East: Woodcrest Drive, LaMorada golf course/mixed residential development(in process) with a density of 1.47 units per acre. „ ,,,,_.t..,_ - - II- IT;;, r - fi r• Ni IiLtvr.iN/ l'' ; 11 II' 17= ' • � 1;4., InMu isho `' DEVELOPMENT Heritage Bay PUD ik, \ 1^';i r, , - .. r • z —_� FFF .•••••.,I f.NTj(f EFI< . r se�1 lr os w�na t.o sig ■ Cate�jry DEVELOPMENT ■ ass lupl' LaMorada '' )� • Mixed Residential/golf ..tet •..` , DEVELOPMENT VOBent Creek Preserve PUD c,t .4,0 ' # 1 • ,D 14 1 1-43 r f'i hlAIip tJi�F b -.- ii) 1 4 i 1g110.01e4 1"' F16 iiitiiiiiig CIO ,c," '., PROPOSED ,.Irrsl»r '., Abaco Club PUD •• Aerial Photo/PUD Boundary (subject site depiction is approximate) PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 7 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The subject property is designated Urban (Urban — Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district), and is within the Residential Density Band around the Immokalee Road/Collier Boulevard Mixed Use Activity Center, as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). Relevant to this petition,this Sub-district permits residential development(variety of unit types) at a base density of four (4) dwelling units per gross acre (DU/A), recreation and open space uses, and essential services uses. This project, which is relying on the Residential Density Band density bonus in the FLUE, is proposing 104 DUs, recreation and open space uses, and essential services. Density calculation and explanation is shown below. 15.9 acres X 7 DU/A= 111.3 DUs --> 111 DUs Base Density 4 DU/A(15.9 ac. X 4 DU/A=63.6 DUs) Residential Density Band Density Bonus 3 DU/A (15.9 ac. X 3 DU/A=47.7 DUs) Sum: 111.3 111 DUs eligible;proposed density is 104 DUs or 6.54 DU/A(104 DUs/15.9 ac.) In order to promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following FLUE policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects,where applicable. Each policy is followed by staff analysis in[bold text]. Policy 5.4 New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to,the surrounding land uses as set forth in the Land Development Code. (Comprehensive Planning leaves this determination to Zoning Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety. However, staff would note that in reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses/densities on the subject site, the compatibility analysis might include a review of both the subject proposal and surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location, traffic generation/attraction, etc.)] Policy 7.1 The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. (The PUD Master Plan does not depict direct access to Immokalee Road, an arterial road as identified within the Transportation Element. However, access is provided to Woodcrest Drive, a local public road, which connects to Immokalee Road The applicant indicates direct access to Immokalee Road is not permitted.) Policy 7.2 The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. (The PUD Master Plan depicts a loop road) Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. (The PUD Master Plan does not depict vehicular interconnections with abutting properties to the west or south and it does not appear possible to do so. The abutting Bent Creek Preserve contains platted lots for single family dwelling units along the western border and PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 8 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC most of the southern border; the remainder of the southern border is platted as an "Open Area" tract with access easement and drainage easement (Tract 0A2, Bent Creek Preserve Phase 1A). Exhibit F, #2B, indicates the developer will provide "a bicycle/pedestrian interconnection to the Bent Creek Preserve PUD to the south as shown on the PUD Master Plan" labeled as "future interconnection.") Policy 7.4 The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. (The PUD allows for multi-family and townhouse development; provides for open space and recreation areas; the required preservation area will be provided off site, consistent with the Land Development Code (LDC). CONCLUSION: Based upon the above analysis, staff determines that the proposed PUD rezone may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element(CCME). A minimum of 1.22 acres of native vegetation are required to be retained for the PUD. The native vegetation will be provided off-site. Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP)using the 2014 and 2015 Annual Update and Inventory Reports(AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states, "The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning periocl unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved, A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2%of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2%of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 9 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3%of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project's significant impacts on all roadways. " The proposed rezoning to allow a maximum of 104 multi-family units (residential condo/townhouse) on the subject property will generate approximately 38 PM peak hour, peak direction trips on the immediately adjacent roadway link,Immokalee Road(CR 846). Immokalee Road from Collier Boulevard to Wilson Boulevard is a six-lane divided facility, with a current service volume of 3,300 trips and a remaining capacity of approximately 1,200 trips, and currently operating at LOS "C," as identified in the • 2014 AUIR. Based on the 2014 AUIR, the subject roadway link has sufficient capacity to accommodate the project within the 5-year planning period. Staff also reviewed the project using the 2015 AUIR and also determined there is adequate capacity on Immokalee Road to accommodate the project within the 5- year period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Subsection 10.02.08.F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal bases to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the bases for their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support its action on the rezoning or amendment request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading"Zoning Services Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document to address environmental concerns. A deviation from an environmental standard is being requested. The applicant is proposing to satisfy the entire(1.22 acre)preserve requirement off site. Pursuant to Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances, this project requires review by the Environmental Advisory Council(EAC). Landscape Review: Staff has reviewed the PUD document and Master Plan and recommends approval with the stipulation that Deviation 9 be denied. Staff is under the opinion that a Type B buffer can be created on the Abaco Club side of the pond creating a transitional break between the existing single- family residential (Bent Creek) and the proposed multi-family (Abaco Club). The LDC allows for a clustered Type B buffer that allows for views of the water. Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document and Master Plan for right-of-way and access issues as well as roadway capacity, and recommends approval subject to the Developer/owner commitments as provided in the PUD ordinance. PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 10 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC Zoning Services Review: FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses and intensity on the subject site, the compatibility analysis included a review of the subject proposal comparing it to surrounding or nearby properties as to allow use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location. While the project does allow for higher densitythan adjacent surrounding developments, the proposed project does offer compatibility of buildings, structure heights, and open space similar in nature to other surrounding approved residential projects. Fronting both Immokalee Road and Woodcrest Drive, and having existing development around all four (4) sides of the proposed PUD boundary, Staff believes this use is reasonable and complementary to the surrounding land uses. Deviation Discussion: The petitioner is seeking nine (9) deviations. The petitioner has provided justification in support of the deviations. Deviations are a normal derivative of the PUD zoning process following the purpose and intent of the PUD zoning district as set forth in LDC Section 2.03.06 which says in part: It is further the purpose and intent of these PUD regulations to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design, and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership or control. PUDs . . . . may depart from the strict application of setback height, and minimum lot requirements of conventional zoning districts while maintaining minimum standards by which flexibility may be accomplished, and while protecting the public interest. . . Staff has analyzed the deviation requests and has provided the analyses and recommendations below. Deviation 1: Deviation from LDC Section 4.05.04.G regarding multi-family dwellings, which allows parking spaces for recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent of the normal requirements where a majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities, to allow the parking spaces for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent of the normal requirements for the entire development. Justification: The proposed amenity site is oriented away from the perimeter of the property to ensure compatibility with Bent Creek PUD. As such, the amenity is not within 300 feet of most of the proposed residential units. However, the majority of units are within 500 feet of the recreational facilities, or 1/10`x' of a mile, which is generally accepted as "within walking distance". Additionally, due to the relatively small size of the site, clustered development footprint, and internal sidewalk system, the development has been designed to encourage pedestrian access to the proposed recreational area. Additional areas for guest/visitor parking have been provided for in the master plan, thereby mitigating the need for additional parking at the amenity site. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect in this deviation. The project is relatively small,proposing one (1) looped road with adjoining sidewalk Staff encourages less impervious PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 11 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC It area in support of other modes of transportation within the development. Zoning Review Staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation. Deviation 2: Deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.2, which permits a maximum wall height of six (6) feet in residential zoning districts, to allow for a maximum wall height of eighteen (18) feet along the Immokalee Road frontage, and a maximum wall height of twelve (12) feet along Woodcrest Drive. Justification: The proposed wall height will mitigate the noise impact from traffic traveling down Immokalee Road and Woodcrest Drive, and appropriately screen the site from the adjacent residential development. The proposed deviation will allow for additional visual screening between the proposed uses and the surrounding roadways, while ensuring a quality design aesthetic via screening of the wall by required perimeter plantings. A gate will be provided in the perimeter wall where the pedestrian interconnection is proposed to the Bent Creek PUD to the south to ensure appropriate access between the communities. This deviation is consistent with the wall deviation approved for the Bent Creek PUD, and will thereby provide for design consistency with the neighboring development. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved Staff agrees that the deviation is necessary, adding additional buffering between the proposed project and other adjacent projects. Staff also agrees that the larger wall will reduce road noise from Immokalee Road and Woodcrest Drive, making the project more viable. The Zoning Review Staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation Deviation 3: Deviation from LDC Section 5.04,04.B.3.e,which provides that a temporary use permit for a model home (occupied or unoccupied) and sales center shall be issued initially for a period of three (3) years. The requested deviation is to allow the model homes and sales center to remain in use up to five(5) years without requiring a conditional use. Justification: The developer requests the ability to maintain model units and a sales center for an extended period of time without having to go through periodic Conditional Use permitting. The proposed timeframe is reasonable based upon the number of proposed units, and introduction of a new multi-family community in this portion of the County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning Review believes the applicant's justification is reasonable and staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation. Deviation 4: Deviation from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height, to allow a temporary sign or banner up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and a maximum of 8 feet in height, subject to approval under temporary sign permit procedures in the LDC. The temporary sign or banner shall be limited to 90 days per calendar year. This deviation will remain valid until 90 percent of the units are sold. At such time,the deviation will be void. Justification: The requested deviation will allow for a banner sign announcing the project's grand opening and/or available unit sales, at a scale that has been previously approved for other residential PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 12 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC 1 communities within Collier County. The deviation will provide additional signage area to assist in marketing efforts,while protecting view sheds from Woodcrest Drive and Immokalee Road. The sign will be temporary in nature, and will undergo the requisite temporary sign permit process in accordance with Section 5.04.06 of the LDC. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved Zoning Review believes the applicant's justification is reasonable and staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation. Deviation 5: Deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5,which requires on-premise directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of roadway, to allow for on-premise direction signage to be setback a minimum of 5 feet from private, internal roadways within the PUD. This deviation does not apply to property adjacent to public roadways. Justification: The proposed deviation will allow for the development of appropriate directional signage internal to the RPUD, which is integral to way finding in multi-family developments such as this. A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the community, thereby ensuring a cohesive appearance and increased aesthetic appeal. Furthermore, this deviation is typical of many of the master-planned developments throughout Collier County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is j approved. Zoning Review believes the applicant's justification is reasonable and staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation. Deviation 6: Deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6.b, which permits two (2) ground or wall signs per entrance to the development with a combined sign area of 64 square feet, to allow for two (2) ground or wall signs at the project entrance with a combined sign area of 80 square feet. Justification: The proposed deviation will allow for additional design flexibility and ensure visibility of the community from adjacent roadways. This deviation request is typical of similar master planned residential communities throughout Collier County. The proposed signage will undergo the requisite permitting prior to construction. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved Zoning Review believes the applicant's justification is reasonable and staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation. Deviation 7: Deviation from LDC Section 3.05.07.1.1.£i, which limits satisfying native vegetation off- site to less than one(1)acre, to allow for 1.22 acres of native vegetation to be satisfied off-site. Justification: The Property is an ideal location to utilize the off-site mitigation provisions set forth in LDC Section 3.05.07.1.1f for several reasons. The site is an infill, high-density development within the Urban-designated portion of the county and within the density bands of an activity center. Maximizing the project's density will result in a compact and contiguous growth pattern in an ideal location for new development based upon the available infrastructure and services available to accommodate population PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 13 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC 1 growth. Additionally, the native vegetation on-site is lower quality vegetation with a relatively high percentage of exotic infestation. Furthermore, the existing on-site native vegetation does not border any off-site preserves on adjacent properties or flowways that would result in a contiguous network of habitat. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Environmental Review believes the applicant's justification is reasonable and staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation. Deviation 8: Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.01.J, which prohibits dead-end streets, to allow two (2) dead-end accessways and two (2)dead-end hammerheads within the RPUD. Justification: The proposed street design is a result of the revised PUD master plan that avoids relocation of the existing stormwater management pond for the benefit of the adjacent property owner and Collier County. The Applicant originally planned to relocate the existing pond to the central portion of the site. This design would allow for lake views from all proposed dwelling units, while providing for the stormwater management needs of the project and the County roadway in accordance with the Judgement. This design also accommodated a single, loop road around the development that did not require dead-end streets. For a variety of reasons, applicant re-designed the project to maintain the lake in its present location. This redesign has resulted in the clustering of development and associated roadways in the eastern portion of the site, and eliminated the ability to loop the roadway. In order to accommodate the density permitted by the Growth Management Plan, the resulting design contains two (2) dead-end accessways and two (2) hammerheads. From a design and public safety standpoint, the maximum length of the proposed dead-end streets (without hammerheads) are less than 150 feet, in compliance with local fire code, and will service a maximum of 4 dwelling units on each segment(a relatively small number of units). The hammerheads will comply with all LDC design standards and allow for fire truck access and turnaround in accordance with the LDC. Therefore, the proposed hammerhead design is in compliance with state and local fire safety standards. For these reasons,the requested deviation will not negatively impact public health, safety or welfare. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning Review believes the applicant's justification is reasonable and staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation. Deviation 9: Deviation from LDC Section 4,06.02.C, which requires a Type "B" buffer where multi- family uses are proposed adjacent to single-family residential uses, to omit the buffer along the western property line, and a portion of the southern property line where the existing stormwater pond abuts the Bent Creek Preserve PUD, as shown on the PUD master plan. PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 14 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC 1 IF Justification: This deviation is at the request of the adjacent property owner and developer of the Bent Creek Preserve RPUD. Omission of this buffer requirement will allow for the adjacent single-family 1 homes in Bent Creek to enjoy views of the on-site stormwater management pond constructed by the County. The proposed two-story multi-family or "coach home" dwellings in the Abaco Club project will be both complimentary to and compatible with the development pattern within Bent Creek Preserve, thereby negating the need for the buffer. Additionally, the proposed multi-family units will be separated from the Bent Creek Preserve units by a distance of more than 200 feet in most locations, thereby providing sufficient separation for compatibility purposes. Lastly, the developer of Bent Creek Preserve RPUD sought approval of a maintenance agreement to omit their development's buffering requirement along this shared property line, which is further evidence of the appropriateness of this request. Enclosed please find correspondence from the representative of Bent Creek Preserve, John Mirabile, indicating his support for this deviation request. a Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff is under the opinion that a Type B buffer should be required I on the Abaco Club side of the pond, creating a transitional break between the existing single-family residential (Bent Creek Preserve PUD) and the proposed multi-family (Abaco Club). Staff does not agree that two-story multi-family or "coach home" dwellings in the Abaco Club project will be complimentary with Bent Creek's single-family development. Section 4.06.02 C. 2 of the LDC specifically states "When a Type B buffer is located within a residential PUD and adjacent to a lake, the required plant materials may be clustered to provide views. Clustered tree plantings shall not exceed 60 feet between clusters and the clustered hedge plantings can be provided as a double row of shrubs that are a minimum of 30 inches in height." The LDC acknowledges that water views are important and allows for a clustered Type B buffer for this very purpose. Landscape Review staff believes the applicant's justification is not reasonable and staff recommends Denial of this deviation. FINDINGS OF FACT: LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below. (Staffs responses to these criteria are provided in bold,non-italicized font): PUD Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria" (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in bold font): 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the lana surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 15 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and believes the uses and property development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The commitments made by the applicant and staff's recommended stipulations should provide adequate assurances that the proposed change should not adversely affect living conditions in the area. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. Additionally,the development will be required to gain platting and/or site development approval. Both processes will ensure that appropriate stipulations for the provision of and continuing operation and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion and the zoning analysis of this staff report. Based on those staff analyses, planning and zoning staff is of the opinion that this petition may be found consistent with the Future Land Use Element. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. Staff has provided a review of the proposed uses. Staff supports the wall deviation consistent with the Bent Creek Preserve PUD. Staff is of the opinion that the uses are compatible. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of usable open space meets code even though the applicant is asking for a deviation to remove 1.22 acres of required preserve off-site. Currently, Staff supports the deviation. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat). The applicant has committed to pay their proportionate share contribution toward the installation and maintenance of a traffic signal at the intersection of Woodcrest Drive and Immokalee Road; and, provide a fair share contribution toward the installation of a third westbound turn lane at the Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 16 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC intersection, if warranted. Finally, the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought. 7, The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as road capacity,wastewater disposal system, and potable water supplies to accommodate this project based upon the commitments made by the petitioner and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will be addressed when development approvals are sought. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The petitioner is seeking approval of eight (9) deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06.A). This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff has provided an analysis of the deviations in the Deviation Discussion portion of this staff report, and is recommending approval for all except "Deviation 9", which is asking to eliminate the required 15-foot Type B buffer abutting the single- family homes in the Bent Creek Preserve PUD. Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.08 F. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable" (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in bold font): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, &policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. The zoning analysis provides an in-depth review of the proposed amendment. Staff is of the opinion that the project as proposed is consistent with GMP FLUE Policy 5.4 requiring the project to be compatible with adjacent neighborhood development. Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed PUDZ application consistent with the Future Land Use Element. The petition can be deemed consistent with the CCME and the Transportation Element. Therefore, staff recommends that this petition be deemed consistent with the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. Staff has described the existing land use pattern in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report and discussed it at length in the zoning review analysis. Staff believes the proposed amendment is appropriate given the development restrictions included in the PUD Ordinance. PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 17 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The proposed PUD amendment would not create an isolated zoning district because the subject site is surrounded by land zoned PUD with similar approved uses. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. Staff is of the opinion that the district boundaries are logically drawn given the current property ownership boundaries. S. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed amendment is not necessary,per se; but it is being requested in compliance with the rt LDC provisions to seek such an amendment to allow the owner the opportunity to develop the land with uses other than what the existing zoning district would allow. Without this amendment, the property could be developed in compliance with the existing zoning designation of Agriculture. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. II Staff is of the opinion that the proposed amendment, with the commitments made by the applicant and the stipulation offered by staff, can been deemed consistent County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. The project includes numerous restrictions and standards that are designed to address compatibility of the project. Development in compliance with the proposed PUD amendment should not adversely impact living conditions in the area. 1 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project at this time. The project's development must also comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations and operational improvements when development approvals are sought at time of Site Development Plan (SDP) or Subdivision Platting(PPL) review. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed amendment should not create drainage or surface water problems. The developer of the project will be required to adhere to a surface water management permit from the SFWMD in conjunction with any local site development plan approvals and ultimate construction on site. PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 18 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. If this amendment petition is approved, any subsequent development would need to comply with the applicable LDC standards for development or as outlined in the PUD document. The setbacks and project buffers will help insure that light and air to adjacent areas will not be substantially reduced. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results,which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market conditions. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; If the proposed development complies with the Growth Management Plan through the proposed amendment,then that constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property could be developed within the parameters of the existing zoning designations; however, the petitioner is seeking this amendment in compliance with LDC provisions for such action. The petition can be evaluated and action taken as deemed appropriate through the public hearing process. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. The GMP is a policy statement which has evaluated the scale, density, and intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable throughout the urban-designated areas of the Collier County. Staff is of the opinion that the PUD development standards and commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood and County. PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 19 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC fi qy1 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the proposed GMPA and the LDC; and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. The proposed amendment is consistent with the GMP as it is proposed to be amended as discussed in other portions of the staff report. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require considerable site alteration. This project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site development plan or platting approval process and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained in the PUD document. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING: The applicant's agents conducted a duly noticed NIM on May 14, 2015, at Greater Naples Fire Rescue Station Headquarters(Station 73).No one from the public attended. Please see the attached NIM summary provided by the agent. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office reviewed the staff report for this petition on February 24, 2016. PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 20 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC RECOMMENDATION: T Zoning Services staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward PETITION PUDZ-PL20150000204 to the BCC with a recommendation of approval with the following condition: 1. Remove"Deviation 9"regarding a deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02 C ti (Buffer Requirements),which requires a Type "B"buffer where multi-family uses are proposed adjacent to single-family residential uses. Attachments: A: PUD Ordinance PUDZ-PL20150000204;ABACO CLUB PUD Page 21 of 22 March 3,2015 CCPC PREPARED BY: Da,DANIEL JAMES SMITH,AICP DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: it • 14. 1r RAY iii D . BELLOWS,ZONING ER DATE ZON I DIVISION MIKE BOSI,AICP,DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION APPROVED BY: S FRENCH,DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 4111) t g/ 5-- DAVID S. WILKISON,P.E. DE' •.`"TMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT d 17) ; ORDINANCE NO. 16- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURE (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE ABACO CLUB RPUD, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 104 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF IMMOKALEE ROAD AND WOODCREST DRIVE IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 15.9 +/- ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDZ-PL20150000204] WHEREAS, Rock Development Group, LLC, represented by Alexis Crespo, AICP of Waldrop Engineering,P.A.,petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 26, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,is changed from a Rural Agriculture (A) Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) for a project to be known as the Abaco Club RPUD, to allow construction of a maximum of 104 residential [15-CPS-01430/1237934/11 117 Abaco CIub RPUD—PUDZ-PL20150000204 2/9/16 _ Page 1 _..___.. _. ATTACHMENT A dwelling units, in accordance with Exhibits A through F attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. { SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,Florida, this day of ,2016. ArlEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E.BROCK,CLERK COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA By: By: ,Deputy Clerk DONNA FIALA, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Exhibit A: Permitted Uses Exhibit B: Development Standards Exhibit C: Master Plan Exhibit D: Legal Description Exhibit E: Requested Deviations from LDC Exhibit F: Developer Commitments [15-CPS-01430/1237934/1] 117 Abaco Club RPUD—PUDZ-PL20150000204 2/9/16 Page 2 AGENDA ITEM 9-B thoo Cer County ,,,,,.,,,-.4k„,---„,„.%,,,_ STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: MARCH 3,2016 SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20140001311, CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD (COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc. 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples,FL 34105 AGENTS: D. Wayne Arnold Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire Q. Grady Minor and Associates,P.A. Coleman, Yovanovich&Koester, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Naples,FL 34103 NOTE: Some of the parcels within the subject PUD have been sold to others. Other owners that are not participating in the subject rezone request are: Rani Investments LLC; White Oak Real Estate Investments of Southwest Florida, Inc.; Arthrex, Inc.; Trail Boulevard LLP; United States Postal Service; Creekside Commerce Park Property Owners Association, Inc. Please see attached letters of no objection. A letter of no objection has not been received from the United States Postal Service. REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission(CCPC)consider amending Ordinance Number 2006-50, the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD), as amended, by reducing the allowable square footage in the Industrial Commercial District by 70,000 square feet for a total of 550,000 square feet of gross floor area of industrial/commerce uses; by amending the Business District to add permitted uses from the Industrial and the General Commercial C-4 zoning districts; by amending the Business District to CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PDDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 1 of 16 R41Oi1ooPPy�s dei . o ' 0. Virt $ 9/448/0 ICI. Pl ' 1/41Plirl'ititAill .R4PRARR. ./1„ EG=Iiiigeogi 2 c8 1- ;i: .::::;a:• , 0 iiiiimiii:iiiii:.:iiiiwliiiiiiiii, ,,::::,i,:,::....... .:.:.0:::ii:7: 4,/9 g i 1( /� ROM.::••�ffit• y 9g °.i ,;,:..�E;Ef>>�;;;i:i1 t i:'i iiiiiiiiiiii i' iii :pp a 2 . � is �.::. :.:::.:::.::::i R.:. 1 �� iti, 4,...„,..„•1120,,..,„ ��i!e11.10:g!!!i:1!!! *kik Zt N oar 4 oa°°oa�o g Y 4 21 1 410 1 0 00 o aoy 4 � © . N ©OOo�v _1 . m /`s� t J CL 39405 OL ION O D _ _ . a r i I U i N0Mryo TON RC gs i DI Z - 0 OvoaN .wL 1 - � , ' CI i.A Wa 1 if IN >- •11 ii o ils ' 1 aop oNmnaaaodry !or 0 IIII MOON F:A Y 2 — ilk' Ma w 1 -t li WO LA 2 _1 111R °s�b _ r ill Am 1 } 4i x Z �. I� 7,, crook,rioni430310.00 Ilow i g .- ig 11 lig * 111 R o ' J ILP810) WELL WNLWI tu.s..4:1 �� Qg gyp }E �,�a '",� q8Ili B 133j , r-'—'1/1 Y ` 0 Xi 1 i ' '''i 4 Y 51 - $4 il 111 `� ,/ Ar=m- I !!11 1'1 `��'' L . 0 _.,, ,:,..ttz, -1, ✓� - lil ULF' oP D�SXICO 1... r. g, i . AN P ,4, NI olgi IF *it gg �, ill -- �— pig,- AZ11106,(3 ousy`� p ZO El iki, -. I .11 1, iii U 4 il. 'II 't 0 1 4 ri it : . I I Di 2 9 9 ;II I le 1 I I m i I' I W o � Ili ra ji�l _ e (sem n ® a .4 r 1 b D5 I 6 I Li n U m �8 f at 301sM 31l0 r oI MI • = U I ' ll __ a p ' / —�{ `_____-- ,Thrirtr s`--. gill ' fit; 1 ., 9 I --- ZJis aareN3,J g y c, Ill �- _I��ou� 1. ' ,rf 1 11 i 1 /\ 11../ n a a 11 111 g i) JJ1 zd , , ,4,101 0 em. � i N r I :i1 i I 111 I lz n - i Ilii -0 ° ; . ,.. ykili . 1 F ijKma0t '1b3>E Os ��Di I " 1 11 -1 a 9 9 i r e 4}I Z L°> i ? _ �'F y re i p i i tr s S 411 ! a m I as a V P if f c9 y l' LI ' 11 illiiiiiiii i I 1 I I 1 Pil li I; ail P 91 pill 4.le ,iltttliitl iiii p�n 0 a S.0 e f' r mow inamintasu anon n w ra�esaamr a ru a true >i�-� ®GrldyMlnor =.";.�y OMIT! REVISED 0/15/2016 'Walter` maw, •�`�;µ ooNarruAt wart!PLAN wr1Gr. . u.si L.wvM.w.r y� 1Y Y1� YW P. I �,7, W W • .M urr ....rww.u.r ww.....ur O W W.I W�. IWMIIIIIOY 1 increase the allowable square footage of floor area from 150,000 square feet to 200,000 square feet of office uses and from 40,000 to 60,000 square feet of retail uses; to add a sign deviation regarding the location of directory signage; and by providing an effective date. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject 105+ acre property is located in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,Florida. (Please see the Location Map on page 2 of this Staff Report.) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The Creekside PUD was originally approved in Ordinance Number 97-51, and it along with two subsequent ordinances have been repealed. The current Ordinance Number 13-23 was approved on March 12, 2015. (Please see Attachment: Ordinance Number 13-23.) The petitioner proposes the following changes: In the Industrial/Commercial(UC)District: - a reduction of industrial/commerce uses by 70,000 square feet, from 620,000 square feet to 550,000 square feet of gross floor area In the Business (B) District: - an increase of office uses by 50,000 square feet, from 150,000 square feet to 200,000 square feet of gross floor area; and - an increase of retail uses by 20,000 square feet, from 40,000 square feet to 60,000 square feet of gross floor area; And: - add a sign deviation regarding the location of directory signage. The land use square footage area changes are reflected in PUD Section III "Industrial/Commerce District" and Section IV "Business District." PUD Sections III and IV also include the following clarifying FAR(Floor Area Ratio) language: "however,the overall FAR for the PUD for IC and B District areas will not exceed .35." The following land uses have been added to PUD Section 4.3 "Permitted Uses and Structures:" [Staff clarifications are shown in brackets.] - Apparel and Accessory Stores(Groups 5611-5699) - Breweries (Group 2082) - Food Market (Group 5411) only 2 allowed within the PUD [limited to two within the PUD] - Dance and Martial Arts Studios (Group 7911 and 7999, including only gymnastics and martial arts instruction) - Eating Places [has been clarified to]not including stand alone drive-thru restaurants CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 4 of 16 - Hardware Stores (Group 5251) - Home Furniture,Furnishings and Equipment Stores(Groups 5712-5736) - Miscellaneous Food Stores(Group 5499) - Miscellaneous General Merchandise Stores(5399) - Miscellaneous Retail (Groups 5912-5949 and 5992-5999, excluding used merchandise stores, fireworks, gravestones,tombstones and monuments, ice dealers, sales barns, and swimming pools; retail) - Paint/Glass and Wallpaper(Group 5231) - Personal Services (Groups 7215, excluding self-service or coin laundries, 7221-7251, 7291 and 7299, including only clothing rental, costume rental, tanning salons and hair services) - Retail Bakeries(Group 5461) - Security and Commodity Brokers (Groups 6211-6289) The Development Standards in PUD Section 4.4.C.7.a. and PUD Section 4.4.D.a. for a hotel located on properties east of Goodlette-Frank Road on the B designated tract along Immokalee Road have been revised as follows: - the setback has decreased from 500 feet to 350 feet, and - the zoned height has increased from 50 feet to 75 feet and the actual height has increased from 60 feet to 85 feet. A new deviation has been added to PUD Section 4.5 to allow a different directory sign location than what is permissible by code. For further information, please see the Deviation Discussion section of this Staff Report. Other PUD Sections have been revised to remove language that is redundant with the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), to clarify federal and state permit responsibility. The Master Plan has been revised to show the location of the signage deviation. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Immokalee Road then (Collier's Reserve), 506± acres of mixed-use: 61.4± acres commercial, 385 residential units, .87 units per acre, zoned Collier Tract 22 PUD; and a 61± acre professional health center (North Collier Hospital) zoned Collier Health Center PUD East: Collier County Utilities Division Water Plant, zoned Industrial; a 17.74± acre commercial and medical park,zoned Southwest Professional Health Park PUD CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 5 of 16 South: Collier County Utilities Division Water Plant, zoned Industrial; and 2,104±acres of mixed- use: 80± acres commercial/industrial, 8,600 residential units, 4.26 units per acre, zoned Pelican Marsh DRI(Development of Regional Impact) West: 35.24± acre business park,zoned The Naples Daily News BPUD (Business Park Planned Unit Development) 4 , I. ,y a , SUBJECT i.e. V•4°4 ! Aihk a ` Y -! .. s.; PROPERTY « iflp '14:0: ). ''''‘ 'i ' i '4. 1 410 iI ,� `4 1 ' �� r _ 1 1 it f ��. II ,a4.� i 1�T ' =r ,� f ` .i g -tk .a 'd 1. r-mmdc?.cWY F - l r,.�.w, M Ti.� w4'} 01 . ,. , - i IL. 4 1 . I 3 •'. r a-ne.&w3 �,,y� .- '---- s e • ,1 y , -F S- 1 1 i + r it of . I 1 Al r ' 140Z " - er" ." -. ' '1 "Mil w1z �3K: �� .r+ ,ik °"carr , +� '., . x C9'Fcr Lourtig..R"1v ', 1 rt `' , k _ ; ,� AERIAL PHOTO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN(GMP) CONSISTENCY: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed PUD amendment and has found it not consistent with the FLUE (Future Land Use Element) as the overall impacts upon public facilities are exceeded in the new zoning district. For further information, please refer to the attached FLUE Consistency Review dated November 20, 2015. CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 6 of 16 i Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan(GMP)using the 2014 and 2015 Annual Update and Inventory Reports(AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: "The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element(FLUE)affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links(roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3%of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project's significant impacts on all roadways." The proposed PUD amendment on the subject property was reviewed based on the then applicable 2014 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted with the application indicates that the proposed development will generate approximately 1,878 PM peak hour trips, with 124 PM peak hour net new trips on the adjacent roadway links, as follows: Immokalee Rd (CR 846), a six-lane divided facility, with a current service volume of 3,100 trips and a remaining capacity of approximately 1,090 trips west of Goodlette and 568 remaining trips east of Goodlette, and currently operating at LOS "C" (Level of Service "C") west of Goodlette and LOS "D" east of Goodlette in the 2014 AUIR; Goodlette Frank Road, a two-lane undivided facility, with a current service volume of 1,000 trips and a remaining capacity of approximately 225 trips, and currently operating at LOS "D" in the 2014 AUIR; Airport Pulling Road, a four-lane divided facility, with a current service volume of 2,200 trips and a remaining capacity of approximately 847 trips, and currently operating at LOS "C"in the 2014 AUIR; and,North Tamiami Trail (US 41), a six-lane divided facility, with a current service volume of 3,100 trips and a remaining capacity of approximately 474 trips north of Immokalee, and 727 trips south of Immokalee, and currently operating at LOS "D" in both directions in the 2014 AUIR. Based on the 2014 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed new trips for the amended project within the 5- year planning period. Staff also reviewed the project using the 2015 AUIR Inventory Report and determined that there is adequate capacity on the road network to accommodate the project within the 5-year period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 7 of 16 Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME). Preserve requirements for the Creekside Commerce Park PUD were previously determined to include 4.1 acres of uplands and 2.9 acres of wetlands for a total of 7.0 acres of preserve required by Collier County. Preserves within the PUD have all been previously platted for a total of approximately 7.34 acres of preserve retained within the PUD. ANALYSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 10.02.13 B.5., Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Subsection 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report(referred to as"Rezone Findings"),which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the BCC, who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading"Zoning and Land Development Review Analysis."In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document to address environmental concerns. Preserves within the PUD have all been previously platted and will be unaffected by this amendment. The project does not require review by the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) since this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document and Master Plan and is recommending approval. Utility Review: The Public Utilities Department staff has reviewed this petition and the PUD is located within the CCWSD (Collier County Water and Sewer District). Adequate capacity is currently available for water and wastewater services. Therefore, staff is recommending approval. Zoning and Land Development Review: Relationship to Existing and Future Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship of the uses that would be permitted if the proposed zoning action is approved, as it relates to the requirement or limitations set forth in the FLUE of the GMP. While there is an increase of a total of 70,000 square feet of office and retail land uses in the Business District, there is a decrease of 70,000 square feet of industrial/commerce land uses in the Industrial/Commercial District. Land uses which are allowed in various zoning districts from C-1 (Commercial Professional and General Office District) thru C-5 (Heavy Commercial District) to (I) Industrial District are also being added to the Business District. (Please refer to the complete list on page 5 of this Staff CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 8 of 16 Report.) Clarifying FAR language establishing an overall FAR of.35 for the Business District and Industrial Commercial District has also been added. Zoning staff finds the proposed additional land uses and land use mix to be compatible with the existing neighborhood commercial, industrial, and institutional land uses. The proposed hotel building height increase to a zoned height of 75 feet and an actual height of 85 feet is compatible with the Collier Health Center PUD building height of 80 feet across the street on Immokalee Road. The proposed hotel building setback of 350 feet along Immokalee Road is generous compared to the Collier Health Center building setback of 30 feet across Immokalee Road and the 50-foot building setback to the east in the Southwest Professional Health Park PUD along Immokalee Road. The Development Deviations in PUD Section 4.5 have been revised to allow a different directory sign location than what is permissible by code. For further information, please see the Deviation Discussion section of this Staff Report. REZONE FINDINGS: LDC Subsection 10.02.08 F. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below: Rezone findings are designated as RZ and PUD findings are designated as PUD. (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in non-bold font): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the GMP. The Comprehensive Planning Division has indicated that the proposed PUD amendment is not consistent with all applicable elements of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan(GMP). 2. The existing land use pattern. As described in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report and discussed in the zoning review analysis, the neighborhood's existing land use pattern can be characterized as residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional lands. The commercial land uses proposed in this PUD petition should not create incompatibility issues. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The subject parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PDDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 9 of 16 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The district boundaries are logically drawn as discussed in Items 2 and 3, gz { 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed change is not necessary, per se; but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to change the areas of the Industrial Commercial District and Business District, add additional land uses and add a sign deviation to the Creekside Commerce Park CPUD. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed commercial land uses, decreased setbacks from Immokalee Road and Goodlette- Frank Road and increased building height, while creating a more intense development, are compatible with the building heights and setbacks of the hospital to the north of the subject site and with the medical offices and ALF (Adult Living Facility) to the east of the subject site. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development,or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project at this time. The project is subject to the Transportation Commitments contained in the CPUD ordinance, which includes provisions to address public safety. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed development will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore, the project is subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. If this petition were approved, any subsequent development would need to comply with the applicable LDC standards for development or as outlined in the PUD document. The reduced setback from 500 feet to 350 feet and increased zoned building height from 50 feet to 75 feet for a hotel on Tract B on the east side of Goodlette-Frank Road, should not seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PDDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 10 of 16 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. Staff is of the opinion this PUD rezone will not adversely impact property values. Staff is uncertain whether the reduction of square footage in the I/C District will negatively affect the US Postal Service parcel. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Properties around this property are already mostly developed. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the Land Development Code is that their sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore,the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. If the staff stipulation of approval is followed, then the proposed development will comply with the Growth Management Plan(GMP). The GMP constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property can be developed within existing zoning. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD amendment is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or county. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 11 of 16 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require site alteration and these sites will undergo evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance. The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by County staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and that staff has concluded that the proposed transportation impacts are increased and are not consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health,safety and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. PUD FINDINGS: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the Planning Commission shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria:" 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas,traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. The Creekside Commerce Park is an established business park which has been developed with a variety of light industrial, commercial, and office uses. The proposed commercial and industrial uses are compatible with the existing development within the Creekside Commerce Park. The project would also be required to comply with County regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Therefore,the site is suitable for the proposed development. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 12 of 16 Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office, demonstrate unified control of the property, except for the US Postal Service parcel. Additionally, the development will be required to gain platting and/or site development plan approval. These processes will ensure that appropriate stipulations for the provision of, continuing operation of, and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer. 3. Conformityof the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP. Staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on staff analyses, staff is of the opinion that this petition may not be found consistent with the Growth Management Plan. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The currently approved development, landscaping, and buffering standards were determined to be compatible with the adjacent uses and with the use mixture within the project itself when the PUD was approved. Staff believes that this amendment will not change the project's compatibility,both internally and externally, with the proposed commercial and industrial land uses along with the proposed increased building height and decreased building setback on Tract B east of Goodlette- Frank Road. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The existing open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities,both public and private. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order(SDP or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally,the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans,are sought. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. If "ability" implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, then the subject property does have the ability to support expansion. CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 13 of 16 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The petitioner is seeking one new deviation to allow for a relocation of a project entry sign in an alternative location undesignated by the LDC. The requested deviation must comply with the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06A). This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff believes that the sign deviation proposed can be supported, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulation." Please refer to the Deviation Discussion portion of the staff report below for a more extensive examination of the deviations. Deviation Discussion: The petitioner is seeking one new deviation from the requirements of the LDC. The deviation is found in PUD Section 4.5 "Development Deviations," new deviation number 2. New Deviation#2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04.F.3 "Directory Signs," which authorizes one (1) directory sign to be located at the project entrance, to permit installation of the directory sign on Immokalee Road east of Goodlette-Frank Road, not at the project entry, but rather at a location between the project entry and Goodlette-Frank Road. Petitioner's Rationale: This sign location would provide for better visibility and safer traffic movements to motorists traveling along Immokalee Road. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Planning & Zoning Review staff recommends approval, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING(NIM): The agent/applicant duly noticed and held the required NIM on March 4,2015 and held a second NIM on June 22,2015. For further information, please see Attachment: Transcripts of the Neighborhood Information Meetings. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the Staff Report for this petition on February 12,2016. CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 14 of 16 RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PUDR-PL20140001311, Creekside Commerce Park PUD to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of denial since it is inconsistent with Policy 5.1 of the Future Land Use Element. However, staff could recommend approval subject to the following stipulation: 1. The proposed amendment shall be modified so that there is no increase to the currently approved number of vehicular trips. Attachments: Attachment A: Proposed PUD Ordinance Attachment B: Ordinance Number 13-23 Attachment C: Future Land Use Element Consistency Review Attachment D: Transcripts of the Neighborhood Information Meetings(March 4,2015 and June 22, 2015) Attachment E: Letters of No Objection CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 16,2016 Page 15 of 16 PREPARED BY: i�, ACM- 4.201 NANCY G J4 1 L I?' , AICP,PLA DATE' PRINCIPA-'LANNER ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION REVIEWED BY: _______ __ 2 ' ct• 16 RAYMO V. BELL WS,ZONING MANAGER DATE ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION MIKE BOSI, AICP,DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION APPROVED BY: 41110411, cQ —it — / Lr A , :` RE ;1'7 1EPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE to S WTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT c / P1 l -' .-.--,4 ., /l6 DAVID S. W LKISON,P.E. DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD,PUDR-PL20140001311 February 9,2016 Page 16 of 16 r 1 i • 4A L ORDINANCE NO. 16- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2006-50, THE CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD), AS AMENDED, BY REDUCING THE ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THE INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BY 70,000 SQUARE FEET FOR A TOTAL OF 550,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCE USES; BY AMENDING THE BUSINESS DISTRICT TO ADD PERMITTED USES FROM THE INDUSTRIAL AND THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL C-4 ZONING DISTRICTS; BY AMENDING THE BUSINESS DISTRICT TO INCREASE THE ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF FLOOR AREA FROM 150,000 SQUARE FEET TO 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE USES AND FROM 40,000 TO 60,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL USES; BY AMENDING THE BUSINESS DISTRICT TO ALLOW GROUP HOUSING EAST OF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD AT THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD TO INCREASE THE ZONED HEIGHT TO 75 FEET AND ACTUAL HEIGHT TO 85 FEET; BY AMENDING THE BUSINESS DISTRICT TO ALLOW A HOTEL AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD AND IMMOKALEE ROAD TO REDUCE THE BUILDING SETBACK FROM IMMOKALEE ROAD TO 350 FEET; AND BY ADDING A SIGN DEVIATION REGARDING THE LOCATION OF DIRECTORY SIGNAGE; AND REVISING THE MASTER PLAN TO DEPICT THE SIGN DEVIATION FOR THE CPUD PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 106 ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on October 24, 2006, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance Number 2006-50, the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned Unit Development(the"PUD"); and WHEREAS, on March 12, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance Number 2013-23, which amended the PUD; and WHEREAS, Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich& Koester, P.A., and D. Wayne Arnold of Q. Grady Minor & Associates representing Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to amend the CPUD. [14-CPS-01397/1238915/11122 Creekside Commerce Park CPUD 1 of 2 PL20140001311 —2/12/16 Attachment A NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,that: SECTION ONE: Amendment to the CPUD Document of Ordinance No.2006-50,as amended The CPUD Document attached as Exhibit"A"to Ordinance No. 2006-50, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: See Exhibit"A",attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,Florida,this day of , 2016. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E.BROCK,CLERK COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA By: By: Deputy Clerk DONNA FIALA, Chairwoman Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A--CPUD Document I ' [14-CPS-01397/1238915/11122 Creekside Commerce Park CPUD 2 of 2 PL20140001311—2/12/16 it CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK � A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PREPARED FOR BARRON COLLIER PARTNERSHIP CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 106±Acres Located in Section 27 Township 48 South,Range 25 East Collier County,Florida PREPARED FOR: BARRON COLLIER PARTNERSHIP 2640 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34105 PREPARED BY: WILSON,MILLER,BARTON&PEEK, INC. 3200 Bailey Lane,Suite 200 Naples,Florida 34105 YOUNG,VAN ASSENDERP&VARNADOE,P.A. 801 Laurel Oak Drive,Suite 300 Naples,Florida 34101 AMENDED DECEMBER 2005 BY: Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES,P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Spring,Florida 34134 ROETZEL AND ANDRESS,L.P.A. 850 Park Shore Drive,3rd Floor Naples,Florida 34103 AMENDED MAY 2012 BY: Q.GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES,P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Spring,Florida 34134 COLEMAN,YOVANOVICH AND KOESTER,P.A. Northern Trust Bank Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North,Suite 300 Naples,FL 34103 AMENDED AUGUST 2015 BY: O.GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES.PA, 3800 Via Del Rey,Bonita Spring,Florida 34134 COLEMAN.YOVANOVICH AND KOESTER,P.A. Northern Trust Bank Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North,Suite 300.Naples,FL 34103 Words struele-thpough are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendmen! February 8, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE AND SHORT TITLE SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION,PROPERTY OWNERSHIP,& 1-1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION SECTION 11 COMMERCE PARK DEVELOPMENT 2-1 2.1 Purpose 2.2 General Description Of The Park and Proposed Land Uses 2.3 Compliance With County Ordinances 2.4 Community Development District 2.5 Land Uses 2.6 Lake Siting 2.7 Fill Storage 2.8 Use Of Right-Of-Way 2.9 Sales Office and Construction Office 2.10 Changes and Amendments To PUD Document Or PUD Master Plan 2.11 Preliminary Subdivision Plat Phasing 2.12 Open Space and Native Vegetation Retention Requirements 2.13 Surface Water Management 2.14 Environmental 2.15 Utilities 2.16 Transportation 2.17 Common Area Maintenance 2.18 Design Guidelines and Standards 2.19 Landscape Buffers,Berms,Fences and Walls 2.20 Signage 2.21 General Permitted Uses SECTION III INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCE DISTRICT 3-1 SECTION IV BUSINESS DISTRICT 4-1 SECTION V PRESERVE AREA 5-1 EXHIBIT A AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH,LOCATION MAP (WMB&P File No. RZ-255A) EXHIBIT B CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK MASTER PLAN (WMB&P File No. RZ 2558) EXHIBIT B-1 CROSS SECTIONS(ENLARGED) Words elFiltpough are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUI)Amendment i February 8, 20/6 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The purpose of this section is to express the intent of the Barron Collier Partnership, hereinafter referred to as Barron Collier or the Developer,to create a Planned Unit Development(PUD)on 1061 acres of land located in Section 27,Township 48 South,Range 25 East,Collier County,Florida. The name of this Planned Unit Development shall be Creekside Commerce Park. The development of Creekside Commerce Park will be in substantial compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as set forth in the Growth Management Plan. The development will be consistent with the policies and land development regulations adopted thereunder of the Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element and other applicable regulations for the following reasons: 1. The subject property is within the Urban Mixed Use District as identified on the Future Land Use Map which allows certain industrial and commercial uses. The Urban designation also allows support medical facilities, offices, clinics,treatment, research and rehabilitative centers and pharmacies provided they are located within 1/4 mile of the property boundary of an existing or approved hospital or medical center. 2. The existing Industrial zoning is considered consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE)as provided for by Policy 5.9 and 5.11 of the FLUE. 3. The FLUE Urban-Industrial District allows for expansion of the industrial land use provided the rezone is in the form of a PUD, the site is adjacent to existing land designated or zoned industrial the land use is compatible with adjacent land uses and the necessary infrastructure is provided or in place. Creekside Commerce Park has expanded the industrial land use accordingly. 4. The FLUE Urban-Industrial District requires the uses along the boundaries of the project to be transitional. Creekside Commerce Park has included transitional uses accordingly. 5. Creekside Commerce Park is compatible with and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the FLUE. 6. Improvements are planned to be in substantial compliance with applicable land development regulations as set forth in Objective 3 of the FLUE. 7. The development of Creekside Commerce Park will result in an efficient and economical extension of community facilities and services as required in Policies 3.1.11 and L of the FLUE. 8. Creekside Commerce Park is a master planned,deed-restricted commerce park and is planned to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code(LDC),Planned Unit Development District. 9. This master planned park will incorporate elements from the existing Industrial, Business Park and Industrial PUD sections of the LDC. Words struek4hreugh are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment ii February 8,2016 SHORT TITLE This ordinance shall be known and cited as the "CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE". 1 Words struck tlereteg, are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment iii February 8,2016 SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION,PROPERTY OWNERSHIP,AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to set forth the legal description and ownership of Creekside Commerce Park, and to describe the existing condition of the property proposed to be developed. 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that part of Section 27,Township 48 South,Range 25 East,Collier County,Florida being more particularly described as follows; COMMENCING at the northwest corner of said Section 27; thence along the north line of said Section 27 South 89°45'21"East 1869.61 feet; thence leaving said line South 00°14'39"West 125.00 feet to a point on the south right of way line of Immokalee Road(S.R.846)and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel herein described; thence along said right of way line in the following Six(6)described courses; 1)South 89°45'21"East 485.99 feet; 2) South 00°14'39"West 10.00 feet; 3)South 89°45'21"East 150.19 feet; 4)South 89°48'33"East 716.81 feet; 5)North 05°34'33"West 10.05 feet; 6)South 89°48'33"East 486.21 feet to a point on the west right of way line of Goodlette Road as recorded in Plat Book 3,page 58,Public Records of Collier County,Florida; thence along said line South 05°33'48"East 1767.02 feet; thence leaving said line South 89°20'53"West 51.18 feet; thence North 23°55'53"West 13.07 feet; thence northwesterly,30.71 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to the northeast,having a radius of 80.00 feet,through a central angle of 21°59'52"and being subtended by a chord which bears North 12°55'57"West 30.53 feet; thence North 05°00'53"West 31.56 feet; thence North 36°19'20"West 32.02 feet; thence North 56°04'35"West 35.11 feet; thence North 80°39'15"West 32.53 feet; thence North 8899'12"West 97.78 feet; thence North 86°04'40"West 45.79 feet; thence North 89°49'48"West 132.77 feet; thence North 69°40'10"West 37.23 feet; thence South 89°20'53"West 142.47 feet; thence South 84°59'26"West 24.66 feet; thence South 74°56'50"West 121.32 feet; thence South 79°49'59"West 45.93 feet; thence westerly and northwesterly,45.51 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to the northeast,having a radius of 66.00 feet,through a central angle of 39°30'16"and Words dough are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPDD Amendment 1-1 February 8,2016 being subtended by a chord which bears North 80°24'53"West 44.61 feet to a point of compound curvature; thence northwesterly,52.92 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to the southwest,having a radius of 150.00 feet,through a central angle of 20°12'57"and being subtended by a chord which bears North 70°46'13"West 52.65 feet; thence North 80°52'42"West 36.59 feet; thence westerly and southwesterly,46.18 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to the southeast,having a radius of 80.00 feet,through a central angle of 33°04'14"and being subtended by a chord which bears South 82°35'11"West 45.54 feet to a point of compound curvature; thence southwesterly and westerly,38.16 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to the northwest,having a radius of 60.00 feet,through a central angle of 36°26'19"and being subtended by a chord which bears South 84°16'14"West 37.52 feet to a point of compound curvature; thence westerly and northwesterly,68.85 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to the southwest,having a radius of 305.00 feet,through a central angle of 12°55'59"and being subtended by a chord which bears North 83°58'36"West 68.70 feet; thence South 89°33'25"West 18.36 feet; thence South 89°39'19"West 71.63 feet; thence North 89°34'56"West 36.03 feet; thence South 86°06'41"West 42.94 feet; thence South 83°44'16"West 26.23 feet; thence South 51°01'13"West 27.49 feet; thence South 33°25'50"West 19.95 feet; thence South 15°40'05"West 20.54 feet; thence South 10°54'39"West 34.64 feet; thence South 89°20'14"West 101.06 feet; thence North 10°46'06"East 101.42 feet; thence North 89°20'53"East 65.45 feet; thence North 00°39'07"West 100.64 feet; thence South 89°20'53"West 503.78 feet; thence North 00°39'07"West 27.71 feet; thence North 72°58'55"West 131.30 feet; thence North 02°08'56"West 1473.29 feet to a point on the south right of way line of said Immokalee Road(S.R. 846)and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel herein described; Containing 69.48 acres more or less; Subject to easements and restrictions of record. Bearings are assumed and based on the north line of said Section 27 being South 89°49'40"East. All that part of Section 27,Township 48 South,Range 25 East,Collier County,Florida being more particularly described as follows; Commencing at the northeast corner of said Section 27; Words s> /trough are deleted;words underlined are added. 2019 CPUD Amendment 1-2 February 8,2016 pY: { • thence along the east line of said Section 27, South 01°09'43"East 125.00 feet to a point on the south right of way line of lmmokalee Road(S.R. 846)and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel herein described; thence continue along said east line South 01°09'43"East 1189.62 feet; thence leaving said line South 89°48'50"West 677.35 feet; thence South 05°35'39"East 886.02 feet; thence South 89°48'50"West 400.00 feet to a point on the easterly right of way line of Goodlette Frank Road as Recorded in Plat Book 13,page 58,Public records of Collier County,Florida; thence along said line North 0S°35'39"West 2088.10 feet to a point of the south right of way line of said Immokalee Road(S.R. 846); thence along said line South 89°49'40"East 1168.55 feet; thence continue along said line South 89°12'58"East 1.85 feet to the POINT OF • BEGINNING of the parcel herein described; Containing 38.9 acres more or less; Subject to easements and restrictions of record. Bearings are assumed and based on the north line of said Section 27 being South 89°46'26"East. LESS A PORTION OF TRACTS "R" AND "L1" CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST-UNIT ONE AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 29 AT PAGES 57 THROUGH 58 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGIN AT THE NORTHWESTERLYMOST CORNER OF TRACT"R"(CREEKSIDE WAY) CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST-UNIT ONE AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 29 AT PAGES 57 THROUGH 58 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE RUN SOUTH 89°45'00"EAST,ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY OF IMMOKALEE ROAD FOR A DISTANCE OF 249.45 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 00°25'51" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 107.22 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 60°02'56" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 117.20 FEET;THENCE RUN SOUTH 82°32'14" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 119.17 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF TRACT"LI"OF SAID CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST-UNIT ONE, ALSO BEING THE WES LINE OF LOT 3 OF SAID CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST-UNIT ONE; THENCE RUN SOUTH 00°0739" EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 111.93 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID TRACT "R?'; THENCE RUN NORTH 89°58'01" WEST,ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A DISTANCE OF 456.64 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID TRACT "R"; THENCE RUN NORTH 02°19'57" WEST, ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A DISTANCE OF 294.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 2.32 ACRES,MORE OR LESS. Words struelr-through are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPUD Amendment 1-3 February 8,2016 13 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The subject property is currently under the equitable ownership or control of Barron Collier Partnership, or its assigns, whose address is 2640 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34105. 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY A. The project site is located in Section 27,Township 48 South, Range 25 East,and is generally bordered on the west by Agriculturally zoned and developed property;on the north, across Immokalee Road by office and medical (North Collier Hospital) PUD zoned and developed property; on the east by Medical Office Park currently under development,County Park and County Wastewater Treatment Facility;and on the south by PUD and County Wastewater Treatment Facility. The location of the site is shown on Exhibit A Aerial Photograph,Location Map. B. The zoning classification of the subject property at the time of PUD application is I (Industrial)and A(Agricultural). C. Elevations within the site are approximately 7.5 to 9 feet-NGVD. Per FEMA Firm Map Panels No. 1200670193D,dated June 3, 1986,the Creekside Commerce Park property is located within Zones "AE-11" of the FEMA flood insurance rate. Topographic mapping is shown on Exhibit G. D. The soil types on the site generally include Riviera limestone substratum,Copeland fine sand,Pineda fine sand, Immokalee fine sand, Myakka fine sand,Basinger fine sand, Riveria fine sand, Ft. Drum and Malabar fine sand, and Satellite fine sand. Soil Conservation Service mapping of soil types is shown on Exhibit D. E. Prior to development, vegetation on the site primarily consists of active croplands and small amounts of pine flatwoods. An isolated wetland system is located along the south side of Immokalee Road west of Goodlette-Frank Road. This wetland consists primarily of Brazilian pepper that surrounds a small willow area. The wetland on the east side of Goodlette-Frank Road consists primarily of cabbage palms. A portion of the historic water course within this wetland has been channelized. Brazilian pepper has infested the northern part of this wetland. A detailed vegetation mapping is shown on Exhibit C. F. The project site is located within the Pine Ridge Canal and West Branch Cocohatchee River sub-basins,as depicted within the Collier County Drainage Atlas (July, 1995). The Conceptual Stormwater Management Master Plan is shown on Exhibit H. Words trough are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 1-4 February 8,2016 13 DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT Creekside Commerce Park does not meet the minimum thresholds for a Development of Regional Impact(DRI),pursuant to Chapter 380.06,Florida Statutes, 1997,in that it is at or below 80%of all numerical thresholds in the guidelines and standards set forth therein. Wordy struele4hrough are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 1-5 February 8,2016 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to generally describe the plan of development for Creekside Commerce Park (park), and to identify relationships to applicable County ordinances,policies,and procedures. 2.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PARK AND PROPOSED LAND USES A. Creekside Commerce Park will consist of predominately industrial, warehouse, wholesale, financial institutions,business and office uses,with limited amounts of retail uses. Creekside Commerce Park shall establish project-wide guidelines and standards to ensure a high and consistent level of quality for proposed features and facilities. B. The Master Plan is illustrated graphically on Exhibit B(WMB&P,Inc.File No. RZ- 225B). A Land Use Summary indicating approximate land use acreages is shown on the plan. The location, size, and configuration of individual tracts shall be determined at the time of Preliminary Subdivision Plat approval with minor adjustments at the time of Final Plat approval,in accordance with Section 3.2.7.2.of the Collier County Land Development Code(LDC). 23 COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ORDINANCES A. Regulations for development of Creekside Commerce Park shall be in accordance with the contents of this PUD Ordinance,and to the extent they are not inconsistent with this PUD Ordinance, applicable sections of the LDC and Collier County Growth Management Plan which are in effect at the time of issuance of any development order. Where this PUD Ordinance does not provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the specific section of the LDC that is otherwise applicable shall apply to which said regulations relate. B. Unless otherwise defined herein,or as necessarily implied by context,the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the LDC in effect at the time of development order application. C. Development permitted by the approval of this PUD will be subject to the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance,Division 3.15 of the LDC. D. All conditions imposed herein or as represented on the Creekside Commerce Park Master Plan are part of the regulations which govern the manner in which the land may be developed. Words struck-through are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CHID Amendment 2-1 February 8,2016 • E. The Site Development Plans Division of the LDC (Article 3, Division 3.3) shall apply to Creekside Commerce Park,except where an exemption is set forth herein or otherwise granted pursuant to LDC Section 3.3.4. F. The Developer shall submit to the County an annual PUD monitoring report in accordance with LDC Section 2.7.3.6. 2.4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT A. The Developer may elect to establish a Community Development District (CDD) pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, 1997, to provide and maintain infrastructure and community facilities needed to serve the park. A CDD would constitute a timely, efficient, effective, responsive and economic way to ensure the provision of facilities and infrastructure for the proposed development. Such infrastructure as may be constructed, managed and financed by the CDD shall be subject to, and shall not be inconsistent with, the Collier County Growth Management Plan and all applicable ordinances dealing with planning and permitting of Creekside Commerce Park. B. The land area is amenable to infrastructure provision by a district that has the powers set forth in the charter of a Community Development District under Section 190.006 through 190.041,Florida Statutes.Such a district is a legitimate alternative available both to the County and to the landowner for the timely and sustained provision of quality infrastructure under the terms and conditions of County development approval. 2.5 LAND USES A. The location of land uses are shown on the PUD Master Plan, Exhibit B. Changes and variations in building tracts, location and acreage of these uses shall be permitted at preliminary subdivision plat approval, preliminary site development plan approval and fmal site development plan approval to accommodate utilities, topography, vegetation, and other site and market conditions, subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5.of the Collier County LDC. The specific location and size of individual tracts and the assignment of square footage or units shall be determined at the time of site development plan approval. B. Roads and other infrastructure may be either public, private or a combination of public and private, depending on location, design and purpose. The request for a road to be public shall be made by the Developer at the time of final subdivision plat approval. The Developer or its assignees shall be responsible for maintaining the roads, streets, drainage, common areas,water and sewer improvements where such systems are not dedicated to the County. Standards for roads shall be in compliance with the applicable provisions of the County Code regulating subdivisions, unless otherwise approved during subdivision approval. The Developer reserves the right Words ugh are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-2 February 8,2016 to request substitutions to Code design standards in accordance with Section 3.2,7.2. of the LDC. { 2.6 LAKE SITING A. As depicted on the PUD Master Plan,lakes have been preliminary sited. The goal of this Master Plan is to achieve and overall aesthetic character for the park, to permit optimum use of the land, and to increase the efficiency of the water management network. Fill material from lakes is planned to be utilized within the park; however, excess fill material may be utilized off-site. The volume of material to be removed shall be limited to ten percent of the calculated excavation volume to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards. If the applicant wishes to take more off-site, a commercial excavation permit will be required. Final lake area determination shall be in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District stormwater criteria and Section 3.5.7.of the LDC. 1. Setbacks: Excavations shall be located so that the control elevation shall adhere to the following minimum setback requirements, subject to approval of County staff at time of final construction plan approval: a) Twenty feet (20') from right-of-way of internal roads. The roads will be designed to (AASHTO) road standards and shall incorporate such factors as road alignment, travel speed, bank slope,road cross sections,and need for barriers. b) Forty feet (40') from Immokalee Road or Goodlette-Frank Road rights-of-way. Perimeter property lines will have a setback of twenty feet(20'). The roads will be designed to (AASHTO)road standards and shall incorporate such factors as road alignment, travel speed,bank slope,road cross sections and need for barriers. 2.7 FILL STORAGE A. Fill storage is generally permitted as a principal use throughout the Creekside Commerce Park PUD. Fill material generated from properties owned or leased by the Developer may be transported and stockpiled within areas which have been disturbed. Prior to stockpiling in these locations, the Developer shall notify the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator per Section 3.2.8.3.6.of the LDC. The following standards shall apply: 1. Stockpile maximum height: Thirty-five feet(355 2. Fill storage areas in excess of five feet(5')in height shall be separated from developed areas by fencing, excavated water bodies or other physical barriers if the side slope of the stockpile is steeper than 4 to 1 (i.e.3 to 1). Words struelf4hPeugIi are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-3 February 8,2016 a) Soil erosion control shall be provided in accordance with LDC Division 3.7. 2.8 USE OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY Utilization of lands within all park rights-of-way for landscaping, decorative entrance ways, and signage shall be allowed subject to review and administrative approval by the Developer and the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator for engineering and safety considerations during the development review process. 2.9 SALES OFFICE AND CONSTRUCTION OFFICE Sales offices, construction offices,and other uses and structures related to the promotion and sale of real estate such as,but not limited to,pavilions,parking areas,and signs,shall be permitted principal uses throughout Creekside Commerce Park. These uses may be either wet or dry facilities. These uses shall be subject to the requirements of Section 2.6.33.4., Section 3.2.6.3.6. and Division 3.3 of the LDC, with the exception that the temporary use permit shall be valid through the life of the project with no extension of the temporary use required. These uses may use septic tanks or holding tanks for waste disposal subject to permitting under F.A.C. 10D-6 and may use potable water or irrigation wells. 2.10 CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS TO PUD DOCUMENT OR PUD MASTER PLAN A. Changes and amendments may be made to this PUD Ordinance or PUD Master Plan as provided in Section 2.7.3.5. of the LDC. Minor changes and refinements as described herein may be made by the Developer in connection with any type of development or permit application required by the LDC. B. The Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator shall be authorized to approve minor changes and refinements to the Creekside Commerce Park Master Plan upon written request of the Developer or his assignee. C. The following limitations shall apply to such requests: 1) The minor change or refinement shall be consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Creekside Commerce Park PUD document. 2) The minor change or refinement shall not constitute a substantial change pursuant to Section 2.7.3.5.1.of the LDC. 3) The minor change or refinement shall be compatible with external adjacent land uses and shall not create detrimental impacts to abutting land uses, water management facilities,and conservation areas within or external to the PUD. Words struck-through are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-4 February 8, 2016 [f� D. The following shall be deemed minor changes or refinements: I) Reconfiguration of lakes,ponds,canals,or other water management facilities where such changes are consistent with the criteria of the South Florida Water Management District and Collier County. 2) Internal realignment of rights-of-ways. 3) Reconfiguration of parcels per Section 5.5 of this PUD. E. Minor changes and refinements as described above shall be reviewed by appropriate Collier County staff to ensure that said changes and refinements are otherwise in compliance with all applicable County Ordinances and regulations prior to the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator's ' consideration for approval. F. Approval by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator of a minor change or refinement may occur independently from and prior to any application for Subdivision or Site Development Plan approval, however such approval shall not constitute an authorization for development or implementation of the minor change or refinement without first obtaining all other necessary County permits and approvals. 2.11 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT PHASING Submission, review, and approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plats for the park may be accomplished in phases to correspond with the planned development of the property. 2.12 OPEN SPACE AND NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS The PUD will fully comply with all sections of the LDC and meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan relating to open space and retention of native vegetation. 2.13 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT In accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), Chapters 40E-4 and 4-E-40, this project shall be designed for a storm event of 3-day duration and 25-year return frequency. The lake originally approved as Lake L- 1,Creekside Unit I Plat, shall continue to be operated and maintained in accordance with the approved plat and approved South Florida Water Management District Permit. Words struck rough are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-5 February 8,2016 2.14 ENVIRONMENTAL Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) Rules, and shall further be subject to review and approval by Collier County Planning Services Department Environmental Review Staff. I I 2.15 UTILITIES All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time approvals are requested. 2.16 TRANSPORTATION A. The Developer shall provide appropriate left and/or right turn lanes on Immokalee Road and Goodlette-Frank Road at the main park entrances. Such turn lanes shall be in place prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy for a use that utilizes the perspective/associated entrance, B. There shall be a full access intersection at the park's southern entrance on Goodlette Frank Road. When justified by traffic warrants, this intersection shall be signalized,notwithstanding its proximity to Immokalee Road. C. Future access points to Immokalee and Goodlette-Frank Roads are those shown on the Creekside Commerce Park Master Plan. D. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided by the Developer at the park's main entrance in conjunction with the development of this entrance. E. Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 92-22,as amended. F. The Developer shall provide the appropriate easements or reserve right of way so that the southerly access road west of Goodlette Frank Road may be interconnected to the properties to the west of Creekside Commerce Park. G. The Developer shall provide a fair share contribution toward the capital cost of traffic signals at any project access when deemed warranted by Collier County. The signal shall be owned,operated and maintained by Collier County. H. The Developer agrees to complete construction of the segment of internal roadway that connects Goodlette-Frank Road to the UC parcel (herein called "southern parcel")that is west of Goodlette Road and abuts Pelican Marsh prior to the first of the following to occur: I) The issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the"southern parcel"; Words Freugh are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-6 February 8,2016 2) The issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the second business parcel to be developed west of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement; 3) Within 3 years of approval of this PUD;or 4) Within 9 months of obtaining "grant" money or other funds for construction of such infrastructure from an outside source. I. The I/C parcels west of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement and immediately north of the south road shall connect for service and employee access at the time that the south road is extended to a point that they may connect. J. The Developer agrees to provide the County with an update of the Transportation Impact Statement(TIS)at the time of submittal of a Preliminary Subdivision Plat or Site Development Plan. K. The Goodlette-Frank Road southernmost access to the UC parcel east of Goodlette-Frank Road shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access. 1 � 2.17 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Most common area maintenance will be provided by the CDD or by a Property Owner's Association (POA). The CDD or the POA, as applicable, shall be responsible for the operation, maintenance, and management of the surface water and stormwater management systems and reserves serving Creekside Commerce Park,in accordance with any applicable permits from the South Florida Water Management District. 2.18 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS A. The Collier County Planned Unit Development District is intended to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning,design and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership as set forth in the LDC,Section 2.2.20. B. Creekside Commerce Park is planned as a functionally interrelated business park under unified control. The Developer will establish community-wide guidelines and standards to ensure a high level of quality for both the common areas and the individual parcel developments. C. These guidelines will serve as a control for individual parcel development,and be referred to as The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Creekside Commerce Park. The level of quality defined in this document is directed towards the creation of an attractive business environment, and these standards are the basis for evaluation of projects submitted for review to the Property Association's Architectural and Landscaping Committee, referred to as Words s througI are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-7 February 8,2016 the ALC. The standards in this document will include criteria for site planning, architectural design,lighting,landscaping,and graphics and signage. D. The specific design guidelines will act as supplemental standards to the requirements of this Planned Unit Development Ordinance, and other County codes,but in no way supersede them. 1. Common Areas The master design of the park's entries and signage, streetscapes, and open space areas will form a harmonious framework that visually links the entire park together. This unified appearance will enhance the image of the entire community. Internal roadways will provide efficient vehicular circulation with streetscapes that create pleasant neighborhood environments. Streetscape plans will be designed to establish a hierarchy of landscape improvements appropriate in scale and character with the function of the street and adjacent land uses.Along these streetscapes a pedestrian walkway system will be established to link each project with the overall community. 2. Individual Projects A. Site Planning: Each individual parcel project will provide a visually appealing, articulated, identifiable path of entry for pedestrians and vehicles from the street to the site and from the site to the buildings themselves. The orientation of a building or structure upon a site will not only reflect the project's functional need, but will also be responsive to the individual parcel's characteristics and be sensitive to adjacent land uses and the surrounding community. B. Architectural standards: The objective of the architectural standards will be to promote the creation of an attractive, value-apparent business environment. Design elements throughout a project must be consistent with the nature of the chosen style and building materials selected. Project design should endeavor to adhere to the classical principles of design and avoid clichés, overly complex or garish motifs,while seeking to invoke a"timeless"quality. C. Lighting: The guidelines for lighting will establish a continuity of design for all lighting in the park which is consistent with the overall visual impression of the park. D. Landscaping: The purpose of landscape design guidelines within individual projects is to guide development toward harmonious and visually pleasing landscape that is cohesive with the overall master landscape plan. The Creekside landscape concept will have a naturalistic theme. Similar to the overall project's plant palette, Words sthrough are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-8 February 8,2016 individual sites will be dominated with plants that are native, xeric, or naturalized within Southwest Florida. Landscape designs will create a coherent theme which emphasizes plant material as a primary unifying element. 1. Landscape elements along public R.O.W.s will be complimentary to streetscape landscaping. Parcel entries will be designed to harmonize with adjacent streetscape landscaping,and clearly accentuate,the parcel entry. 2. Individual parking lots will be screened from the roadways as much as possible, without obscuring views of the building entrances. In addition, plant materials used around main entrances of buildings will visually cue visitors to—their location. E. Graphics/signage: The guidelines serve to provide continuity of design for all signage in the park which is consistent with the overall visual impression of the park. Parcel signage serves the identification needs of the individual tenants and user. 2.19 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS,BERMS,FENCES AND WALLS Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls are generally permitted as a principal use throughout Creekside Commerce Park. Required buffer treatments shall terminate at entrances to accommodate entrance treatments and at lakes to accommodate views into the park. The following standards shall apply: A. Landscape buffers contiguous to Immokalee Road R.O.W. will be installed at the time of subdivision improvement per construction phase and will have the following characteristics: 1) Minimum width of 20'-0",measured from the R.O.W. 2) Adjacent to Business District type uses within the Business District,trees will be native, xeric, or naturalized canopy trees, spaced at 25' on center (O.C.), planted at an initial height of 13'-14' overall (O.A.) with a 6' spread. In addition, a continuous 24"high shrub hedge shall be provided within the 20' buffer. B. Landscape buffers contiguous to Goodlette-Frank Road R.O.W. will be installed at the time of subdivision improvement per development phase and will have the following characteristics: 1) Minimum width of 20'-0",measured from the R.O.W. Words struck-through are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-9 February 8,2016 FtF py 2) Adjacent to Business District type uses within the Business and Industrial/Commerce (I/C) Districts,trees will be native, xeric, or naturalized canopy trees,spaced at 25' O.C.,planted at an initial height of 12' O.A.,with a 6' spread. At the time of individual lot improvements,hedges will be placed at parking lot edges to satisfy the requirements of LDC Section 2.4.7.4. 3) Adjacent to industrial type uses within the Industrial/Commerce District,trees will be native,xeric or naturalized canopy trees,spaced at 25' O.C.,planted at an initial height of 12' GA,with a 6' spread. Trees will be placed on a berm, 3 feet high and supplemented with a 5 foot high hedge consisting of but not limited to the following plant material: coco plum, viburnam, ficus. The intent will be to obtain 80%opacity within one year of planting for travelers on Goodlette-Frank Road. C. Landscape buffers surrounding the perimeter of the park will be installed at the time of subdivision improvement per construction phase. The buffers are referenced on Exhibit B, and proceed in a clockwise direction from the northeast corner of the project as follows: 1) The landscape buffer along the eastern most property boundary, north of the preserve area, as depicted on Exhibit B, shall consist of an Alternative "A" type buffer. Any preservation areas within this buffer may be credited toward buffering requirements. 2) The preserve area along the balance of the eastern most property boundary will serve as the buffer between uses. 3) The Developer will provide a five feet (5') wide Alternative "A"type buffer with trees planted fifty feet (50') on center between the business use and the preserve/lake area,as depicted on Exhibit B. 4) The Developer will provide a five feet (5') wide Alternative "A" type landscape buffer with trees planted fifty feet(50')on center along the eastern property boundary contiguous to the Collier County Sewage Treatment Plant. 5) The landscape buffer along the southern most property boundary, east of Goodlette-Frank Road, shall be a five feet (5') wide Alternative "A" type buffer with trees planted fifty feet(50') on center. An opaque hedge six feet (6')high will be planted to supplement the existing oak tree buffer planted by the County at the Collier County Sewage Treatment Plant. 6) The existing landscape berm/buffer from Goodlette Frank Road to the west side of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement will be supplemented as follows: a type "A"buffer along the proposed lake;and the remaining area westward of the lake will be supplemented to consist of 50 sabal palms, 8'-14' O.A. and 4 Words seek skr'ough are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-10 February 8,2016 I ' Ficus nitida 12'43' O.A.and 6'-8' wide;locations to be coordinated with the adjacent property owner. 7) The Developer will provide a ninety percent (90%) opaque landscape buffer and berm between the I/C District and the Pelican Marsh PUD from the west side of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement to the existing berm to the west, that approximates the existing Pelican Marsh berm/buffer. This buffer will be installed concurrent with any I/C construction west of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement. The buffer shall meet ninety percent (90%) opacity within one(1)year of planting. 8) The Developer will supplement with additional trees the buffer along the remaining portion of the southern property line westward to achieve a ninety percent (90%) opaque buffer. This buffer will be installed concurrent with any 1/C construction west of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement. 9) The landscape buffer between the I/C District and the adjacent Agricultural District along the southern portion of the western property line will be an Alternative"A"type buffer. 10)The landscape buffer between the R.O.W. and the adjacent Agricultural District to the west will be an Alternative"A"type buffer and be incorporated into the R.O.W. D. Maximum fence or wall height internal to the PUD: Twelve feet(12'). E. Landscape buffers,berms,fences and walls will be constructed along the perimeter of the Creekside Commerce Park PUD boundary concurrent with subdivision and site development construction phase,except where noted in this document. F. Sidewalks, water management systems, drainage structures, and utilities may be allowed in landscape buffers pursuant to review and approval of the Development Services Administrator. G. Landscape berms located within the Creekside Commerce Park PUD boundary and contiguous to a property line and/or right-of-way line may be constructed such that the toe of slope is located on the property line and/or encroaches into the right-of- way line when approved by the applicable owner or agency. 2.20 SIGNAGE A. GENERAL 1) Pursuant to Section 2.5.5.2.3.7. of the LDC,the following conditions provide for the required comprehensive sign plan for the Creekside Commerce Park Words Freugh are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-11 February 8,2016 2) Each platted parcel shall be considered a separate parcel of land. 3) Signs and decorative landscaped entrance features within a County dedicated right-of-way, shall require a right-of way permit subject to the review and approval of the County. 4) All signs shall be located so as not to cause sight line obstructions. B. PARK ENTRY SIGNS 1) Major park entry signs shall be located as depicted on Exhibit B. Each sign will not exceed 160 square feet in size on any side and signs will be no longer than 25 feet in length and 8 feet in height. 2) Minor park entry signs shall be located as depicted Exhibit B. Each minor monument sign will not exceed 100 square feet in size on any side. Minor monument signs will be no larger than 20 feet in length and r: ? feet in height. C. INTERNAL SIGNS 1) Directional or identification signs are allowed within the business park. Such signs may be used to identify the location or direction of approved uses such as sales centers, information centers, etc. individual signs may be a maximum of 4 square feet per side in size, or signs maintaining a common architectural theme may be combined to form a menu board with a maximum size of 25 square feet per side, and a maximum height of 8 feet. No building permit is required unless such signs are combined to form a menu board. 2) Grand Opening signs: The Developer or parcel owner may display an on-site grand opening sign not exceeding 32 square feet on a side, and not exceeding 64 square feet total. Banner signs shall be anchored and may be displayed on- site for a period not exceeding 14 days within the first three months that the Developer/occupant is open for business. D. USER SIGNS 1) Wall, mansard, canopy or awning signs: One wall, mansard, canopy or awning sign may be permitted for each single-occupancy facility, or for each establishment in a multiple-occupancy facility, Corner units within multiple- occupancy facilities, or multi-frontage single-occupancy facilities shall be allowed two signs, but such signs shall not be combined for the purpose of placing the combined area on one wall. However, the combined area of those signs shall not exceed the maximum allowable display area for signs by this ordinance. Words are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendnren, 2-12 February 8, 2016 a. The maximum allowable display area for signs may not be more than 15 percent of the total square footage of the visual facade of the building to which the sign will be attached and may not, in any case, exceed 200 square feet in area for any sign. 2) Monument and Pole signs: One (1) monument or pole sign is permitted for each lot or parcel for each external and internal road frontage(s). el) Internal road frontage setbacks: A minimum of fifteen feet (15') from the edge of pavement. Signs may encroach within the right-of-way subject to maintaining safe site distance triangles as per Section 2.4.4.16. of the LDC and when approved by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator and applicable utility. d-r..External road frontage setbacks: Pole signs shall be setback from any external right-of-way in accordance with the applicable section of the LDC. Monument signs may be permitted closer to the right-of-way subject to maintaining safe site distance triangles as per Section 2.4.4.16. of the LDC and when approved by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator and applicable utility. e Spot or floodlights may be permitted provided said light shines only on the signs or landscaping and is shielded from motorists and adjacent residents. #:e.Should the U.S. Postal Service purchase or lease land within Creekside Commerce Park, in addition to the user signs as permitted herein, they will be allowed one sign between Immokalee Road and the proposed lake adjacent to the west entry. E. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic signs such as street name signs, stop signs, speed limit signs, etc. may be designed to reflect a common architectural theme, in accordance with Section 3.2.8.3.19. of the LDC. 2.21 GENERAL PERMITTED USES A. Certain uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the Creekside Commerce Park PUD except in the Preserve Area. General permitted uses are those uses which generally serve the Developer and tenants of Creekside Commerce Park and are typically part of the common infrastructure. Words amuck-through are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-13 February 8, 2016 B. General Permitted Uses: 1. Essential services as set forth under LDC,Section 2.6.9.1. 2. Water management facilities and related structures. 3. Temporary sewage treatment facilities. 4. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank treatments. 5. Guardhouses,gatehouses,and access control structures. 6. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the Developer and Developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways,parking areas and related uses. 7. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.11 of this PUD. 8. Fill storage subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.7 of this PUD. Site filling and grading as set forth in Section 2.7 of this PUD. 9. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible. 10. Sidewalks may occur within County required buffers if approved by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator. 11. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein are to be in accordance with the LDC provision in effect at the time of Site Development Plan Approval. 12. Creekside Commerce Park shall be permitted to develop with a maximum of 40 percent commercial uses. Commercial uses are defined as offices, health services, medical clinics, financial institutions, fitness centers, childcare centers, restaurants and retail sales in accordance with Section 3.3. C.2. hereof. 2.22 MISCELLANEOUS A. Issuance of a development permit by a county does not in anv way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does Words 64~k-through are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPDD Amendment 2-14 February 8, 20/6 not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. B. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. Words a Through are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 2-15 February 8, 2016 SECTION III INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCE DISTRICT 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within Creekside Commerce Park designated on the Master Plan as "I/C". 3.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as"I/C"on the PUD Master Plan are intended to provide a maximum of 424/550,000 square feet of gross floor area of industrial/commerce uses on 41.6± net acres. Intermediate care(SIC Code 8052),group housing and hotel/motel uses(SIC Code 7011)are in addition to the IC gross square footage figures. The overall floor area ratio (FAR) for the IC designated areas Ret-tris\exceed .354 hewever:-iindividual parcels may be developed at a higher FAR and the FAR for hotel/motel, group housing and intermediate care facilities (SIC Code 8052) shall not exceed .6. (Refer to Section 3.5, Deviations); however, the overan . :AR for the PUD for IC and 13 __:_rict areas will not exceed .35. 33 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure,or part thereof,shall be erected,altered or used,or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: A. The permitted principal uses and structures will generally consist of light manufacturing, wholesale, warehouse, processing and packaging, laboratories and clinics, research, design and product development, business services and corporate offices and headquarters. 1. Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment(Group 3728) 2. Apparel and Other Finished Products(Groups 2311-2399) 3. Building Contractors (Groups 1521-1542),except for general contractors for mobile home repair on site, modular housing and premanufactured housing assembled on site, dry cleaning plant construction, paper pulp mill construction,and truck and automobile assembly plant construction. 4. Business Services (Groups 7311-7313, 7319, 7322, 7323, 7331-7338, 7352, 7359-7389 except for industrial truck rental and leasing; plants, live: rental and leasing; toilets, portable: rental and leasing; employment agencies, except theatrical and motion picture; labor contractors (employment agencies) model registries; labor pools; manpower pools; modeling service; dogs, rental of: for protective service; automobile recovery service; Words meek-through are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPUD Amendment 3-1 February 8,2016 1 automobile repossession service; bartering services for businesses; bondspersons; bottle exchanges; check validation service; contractors disbursement control; filling pressure containers (aerosol) with hair spray, insecticides, etc.; fine extinguishers, service of gas systems, contract conversion from manufactured to natural gas; metal slitting and shearing on a contract or fee basis produce weighing service, not connected with transportation; scrap steel cutting on a contract or fee basis; solvents recovery service on a contract or fee basis; tobacco sheeting service on a contract or fee basis) 5. Child Day Care Services(Group 8351) 6. Communications (Groups 4812-4899 not including major communications towers related to cellular phone service, radio broadcasting, television broadcasting,radar or telephone service) 7. Computer and Office Equipment(Groups 3571-3579) 8. Construction; Special Trade Contractors (Groups 1711-1799 except for boiler erection and installation contractors; drainage system installations, cesspool and septic tank contractors;fuel oil burner installation and servicing contractors;gasoline hookup contractors; sewer hookups and connection for buildings contractors; epoxy application contractors; fireproofing buildings contractors;gasoline pump installation contractors;lead burning contractors; and mobile home site setup and tie down contractors) 9. Depository and Non-Depository Institutions(Groups 6011-6163) 10. Drugs and Medicines (Groups 2833-2836, except for adrenal derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; barbituric acid and derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; cocaine and derivatives; codeine and derivatives; gland derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; mercury chlorides, U.S.P; mercury compounds, medicinal: organic and inorganic;morphine and derivatives;opium derivatives) 11. Educational Services (Groups 8249-8299 except construction equipment operation schools; truck driving schools; automobile driving instruction; survival schools;vocational counseling) 12. Electronics and Other Electrical Equipment Manufacturing (Groups 3612, 3613, 3624, 3625, 3631, 3641-3676, 3678, 3679, 3694, 3695, 3699, except for airport lighting transformers, autotransformers, electric (power transformers) distribution transformers, electric; electric furnace transformers; lighting transformers, street and airport;transformers, reactor; atom smashers(particle accelerators; electron beam metal cutting, forming, and welding machines; electron linear accelerators; electrostatic particle accelerators)) Words struck-through are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPUD Amendment 3-2 February 8,2016 13. Engineering, Accounting, Research, Management and Related Services (Groups 8711-8748 except chemical laboratories, commercial research; automobile proving and testing grounds; metallurgical testing laboratories; pollution testing, except automotive emissions testing; radiation dosimetry laboratories;seed testing laboratories;veterinary testing laboratories) 14. Fabricated Metal Products (Groups 3411-3432, 3442, 3444, 3446, 3452, 3469,3492,3495,3496,production of metal is prohibited) 15. Furniture and Fixtures Manufacturing(Groups 2511-2599) 16. Government Offices/Buildings(Groups 9111-9199, 9221, 9222,9224-9229, 9311,9451,9511-9532,9611,9631-9661) 17. Hotels/Motels (Group 7011), not to exceed a maximum of 180 rooms for the entire PUD.Only 1 Hotel/Motel is permitted within the PUD and it must be located east of Goodlette-Frank Road and subject to specific development standards and setbacks in Section 3.4. 18. Industrial and Commercial Machinery (Groups 3524, 3546, 3553-3556, 3559, 3562, 3564-3566, 3581-3599 except for bronzing and dusting machines for printing trades; foundry type for printing; presses, printing - slugs printers';ammunition and explosives loading machinery;brick making machines; cement making machinery; chemical kilns; control rod drive mechanisms for use on nuclear reactors;foundry machinery and equipment; frame straighteners, automotive (garage equipment); fur sewing machines; ginning machines, cotton; metal finishing equipment for plating, except rolling mill lines;metal pickling equipment,except rolling mill lines) 19. Leather and Leather Products(Groups 3131-3199) 20. Measuring, Analyzing, and Controlling Instruments; Photographic, Medical and Optical Goods:Watches and Clocks Manufacturing(Groups 3812-3843, 3845-3873) 21. Membership Organizations(Groups 8611-8631) 22. Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries (Groups 3911-3999 except for dressing of furs: bleaching, blending, curring, scraping, and tanning; feathers: curling, dyeing, and renovating - for the trade; fur stripping; furs dressed: bleached, curried, scraped, tanned, and dyed; pelts: scraping, curring,tanning,bleaching and dyeing;plumes,feather;tear gas devices and equipment;veils made of hair) 23. Motion Picture Production(Groups 7812-7819) 24. Motor Freight Transportation(Groups 4214,4215) Words et rough are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPUD Amendment 3-3 February 8,2016 25. Packing and Crating(Group 4783) 26. Paper and Allied Products(Groups 2652-2657,2673-2679) 27. Personal Services(Groups 7213,7216,7219,7221) 28. Physical Fitness Facilities(Group 7991) 29. Plastic Materials and Synthetics(Groups 2833,2834) 30. Printing,Publishing and Allied Industries(Groups 2711-2791) 31. Professional Offices: including but not limited to, Travel Agencies (Group 4724); Insurance Agencies(Group 6411); Insurance Carriers(Groups 6311- 6399);Real Estate(Groups 6512,6514,6517,6519,6531,6541,6552,) 32. Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastic Products(Groups 3021,3085,3086,3088, 3089) 33. Transportation Equipment (Group 3732, except for boats, fiberglass: building and repairing; boats: motorboats, sailboats,rowboats, and canoes- building and repairing; houseboats, building and repairing; motorboats, inboard and outboard:building and repairing) 34. United States Postal Service(Group 4311) 35. Warehousing and Storage (Group 4225, 4226, 5014 except oil and gas storage,petroleum and chemical bulk stations and automobile dead storage) only one (1) self-storage use allowed to be located adjacent to the Collier County Sewage Treatment Plant 36. Wholesale Trade-Durable Goods (Groups 5021-5031, 5043-5049, 5063- 5074, 5078, 5091, 5092, 5094-5099 except for fencing, wood-wholesale; lumber: rough, dressed, and finished-wholesale; batteries, except automotive-wholesale; storage batteries, industrial-wholesale; unit substations-wholesale; boilers, power: industrial-wholesale; boilers, steam and hot water heating-wholesale; burners, fuel oil and distillate oil- wholesale;oil burners-wholesale) 37. Wholesale Trade-Nondurable Goods(Groups 5111-5143, 5145, 5147-5149, 5192, 5199 except for cats-wholesale; charcoal-wholesale; dogs-wholesale; fish, tropical-wholesale; furs, dressed-wholesale; greases, animal and vegetable-wholesale;ice,manufactured or natural-wholesale, leather and cut stock-wholesale; linseed oil-wholesale; oils, except cooking: animal and vegetable-wholesale; oilseed cake and meal-wholesale; rubber, crude- wholesale; sawdust-wholesale; vegetable cake and meal-wholesale; wigs- wholesale;worms-wholesale) Words otruele-through are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPDD Amendment 3-4 February 8,2016 38. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose statement of the District and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this District. B. Restricted Principal Uses The following medical related uses must be located within a 1/4 mile radius of the hospital property boundary. 1. Group housing for the elderly limited to Assisted living facilities, independent living units,skilled nursing units and continuing care retirement communities. A maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be permitted for the uses listed in Sections 3.3.8.1, 33.B.2,4.3.8.1 and 4.3.B.3. These uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road. 2. Health Services, medical clinics and offices (Groups 8011-8049, 8052), a maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be permitted for the uses listed in Sections 3.3.B.1,3.3.3.2,4.3.B.1 and 4.3.3.3. SIC Code 8052 land uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road. 3. Medical Laboratories and research and Rehabilitative Centers(Groups 8071- 8092,8099) 4. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose statement of the District and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this District. C. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted in this district. 2. Retail and wholesale sales and/or display areas as accessory to the principal use,not to exceed an area greater than forty percent(40%)of the gross floor area of the permitted principal use. D. Operational Requirements for Group Housing Group housing uses described in Section 3.2.3.1 shall provide the following services and/or be subject to the following operational standards: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older. 2. There shall be on-site dining for the residents. Words SONOIE-threugh are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPUD Amendment 3-5 February 8,2016 3. Group transportation services shall be provided for residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services may be provided for the residents' individualized needs including but not limited to medical office visits. 4. There shall be an on-site manager/activities coordinator to assist residents with their individual needs.The manager/coordinator shall also be responsible for arranging trips to off-site events as well as planning for lectures, movies, music and other entertainment for the residents at the on-site clubhouse. 5. A wellness center shall be provided on-site. Exercise and other fitness programs shall be provided for the residents. 6. Each unit shall be equipped to notify emergency service providers in the event of medical or other emergency. 7. Each unit shall be designed to accommodate residents with physical impairments (handicaps) as required by the applicable building codes and federal law and regulation. 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Minimum Lot Area: 20,000 S.F. B. Minimum Lot Width: 100 FT. C. Minimum Yard Requirements: 1. Front Yard, adjacent to Immokalee Road or Goodlette-Frank Road: Fifty feet(50'). For parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road, see additional setback requirements in Section 3.4.C.7.a. 2. Front Yard,Internal: Thirty feet(30') 3. Side Yard: Ten feet(10') Five feet(5')to internal property line along Pine Ridge canal drainage easement and FP&L easement 4. Waterfront: Zero feet (0')to bulkhead or rip-rap at top of bank, otherwise twenty feet(20') 5. Rear Yard:Twenty-five feet(25') 6. Minimum Building Setback from Perimeter Boundary of PUD: Fifty feet (50') Words otruek-through are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 3-6 February 8,2016 7. Minimum Building Setback from Existing Goodlette-Frank Road Right-of- Way East of Goodlette-Frank Road: a) Goodlette-Frank Road: Minimum of fifty feet (50'), except as provided as follows: i) For group housing for elderly and intermediate care use: (a) If the zoned height of any structure exceeds 50 feet, the minimum setback is 75 feet plus for any portion of a building exceeding fifty feet in zoned height an increased setback at a 1:2 ratio(i.e., for one vertical foot of height, setback is increased by two horizontal feet)for that portion of the building over 50 feet of height. ii) For hotel/motel use: (a) Minimum setback of 75 feet regardless of height plus for any portion of a building exceeding fifty feet in zoned height an increased setback at a 1:2 ratio (i.e., for one vertical foot of height, setback is increased by two horizontal feet) for that portion of the building over 50 feet of height. D. Maximum Height (Zoned): For parcels west of Goodlette-Frank Road: thirty-five feet(35'), including silos, storage tanks, elevator towers, satellite dishes, antennas, etc. For parcels east of Goodlette-Frank Road: the Hotel, group housing for the elderly,and the intermediate care facility shall have a zoned height seventy-five feet (75'),actual height eight-five feet(85'). All other uses permitted east of Goodlette- Frank Road pursuant to Section III shall have a zoned height of fifty feet(50')and an actual height of sixty feet(60'). E. Outside storage or display shall be permitted and shall be screened from all internal and external public roadways with a fence or landscaping equivalent or combination thereof. Said fence, wall or landscaped screen shall be opaque in design. All manufacturing operations and equipment, including accessory process equipment such as compressors and air handlers shall be contained in an enclosed structure. F. All industrial building sides visible from roadways internal or external to the park shall have the appearance of a concrete material, such as, but not limited to, block, brick, tilt up concrete panels, stucco on lathe systems, etc. Corrugated steel sides visible from said roadways are prohibited; as well as exposed metal siding on any building west of Goodlette Frank Road. Words.#reek-throes are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 3-7 February 8,2016 ry G. Business District type uses located within the 1/C District along Goodlette-Frank Road will meet the Collier County Architectural Guidelines in Division 2.8. of the LDC. H. Industrial type uses abutting Goodlette-Frank Road shall meet the requirements of Section 2.19.B.3 hereof,alternatively,said uses shall have the option of utilizing the landscaped buffer applicable to business uses fronting Goodlette-Frank Road, provided the portion of the building facing Goodlette-Frank Road meets the following Architectural Guideline Sections of the LDC, therefore satisfying the 1 intent of the building design section of the Architectural Guidelines in the opinion of the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator: 1. Section 2.8.3.5.1.,Purpose and Intent 2. Section 2.8.3.5.4.,Facade Standard 3. Section 2.8,3.5.6.,Project Standards 4. Section 2.8.3.5.7.,Detail Features except for 2.8.3.5.7.2. 5. Section 2.8.3.5.12. 1. Loading Areas:Buildings west of the Pine Ridge canal and adjacent to the Pelican Marsh boundary shall orient loading docks to the north,east or west. J. Noise: Uses within the I/C District shall not exceed 65 dBA between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and 60 dBA after 10 p.m. to 6:59 a.m. and all of Sundays, as measured at the property boundary of the land use from which the sound emanates. K. Odor: No business shall cause or allow the emission of odorous air from any single source such as to result in odors which are detectable outside the parcel boundaries. Best practical treatment,maintenance,and control currently available shall be utilized in order to maintain the lowest possible emission of odorous air. L. Lighting: Lighting shall be located so that no light is aimed directly toward a property designated residential if lighting is located within 200 feet of residential property. Light fixtures within parking areas shall not exceed 25 feet in height. M. Emissions: All sources of air emissions shall comply with rules set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency(Code of Federal Regulations,Title 40)and the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 17-2). No person shall operate a regulated source of air emissions without a valid operation permit issued by the Department of Environmental Regulation. Words through are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 3-8 February 8,2016 3.5 DEVELOPMENT DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.1 which establishes a .45 floor area ratio (FAR) for group housing uses, to permit an FAR of.6 for group housing uses, including the intermediate care facilities. 3.6 LANDSCAPE BUFFER RESTRICTIONS The use of bald cypress trees to meet the landscape buffer requirements in section 2.19.B.2.and B.3 are prohibited . I Words owektitrough are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPUD Amendment 3-9 February 8,2016 SECTION IV BUSINESS DISTRICT 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within Creekside Commerce Park designated on the Master Plan as "B". 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as "B"on the PUD Master Plan are intended to provide a maximum of 4-W260,000 square feet of floor area, including approximately 44 200,000 square feet of office uses and 4960,000 square feet of retail uses on 19.1±net acres. Intermediate care facilities (SIC Code 8052), group housing and hotel/motel uses (SIC Code 7011) are in addition to the B District gross square footage figures. The overall floor area ratio (FAR) for the B designated areas a etmay exceed .35A;4ievcver individual parcels may be developed at a higher FAR and the FAR for hotel/motel, group housing and intermediate care facilities (SIC Code 8052) shall not exceed .6. (Refer to Section 4.5, Deviations) however a overall FAR for the Pt id B District areas wil not exceed 4 4.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure,or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used,or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: Apparel and Accessory Stores(Groups 5611-56991 Breweries(Group 2082) Building Contractors(Groups 1521-1542), except for general contractors for mobile home repair on site, modular housing and premanufactured housing assembled on site, dry cleaning plant construction, paper pulp mill construction,and truck and automobile assembly plant construction. 2- Business Services (Groups 7311-7313, 7319, 7322, 7323, 7331-7338, 7352, 7359-7389 except for industrial truck rental and leasing; plants, live: rental and leasing; toilets, portable: rental and leasing; employment agencies, except theatrical and motion picture; labor contractors (employment agencies) model registries; labor pools; manpower pools; modeling service; dogs, rental of: for protective service; automobile recovery service; automobile repossession service; bartering services for businesses; bondspersons; bottle exchanges; check validation service; contractors disbursement control; filling pressure containers (aerosol) with hair spray, Words struelk-through are deleted; words underlined are added. 201.1 CPDD Amendment 4-1 February 8,20/6 insecticides, etc.; fire extinguishers, service of gas systems, contract conversion from manufactured to natural gas; metal slitting and shearing on a contract or fee basis produce weighing service, not connected with transportation; scrap steel cutting on a contract or fee basis; solvents recovery service on a contract or fee basis; tobacco sheeting service on a contract or fee basis) 5. Child Day Care Services(Group 8351) 4:6. _ Convenience Store, food market (Group 5411) only two (2)allowed within the PID and Gasoline Filling Station (Group 5541) only one (1) allowed within the PUD. 7. Communications (Groups 4812-4899), not including major communication towers related to cellular phone service, radio broadcasting, television broadcasting,radar or telephone service. 3:8. Dance and Martial Arts Studios (Groups 7911 an 7999. including only gymnastics and martial arts instruction) . Depository and Non-Depository Institutions (Groups 6011-6163) including automatic teller machines q7 1 0. Drugs and Medicines (Groups 2833-2836 except for adrenal derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; barbituric acid and derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; cocaine and derivatives; codeine and derivatives; gland derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; mercury chlorides, U.S.P; mercury compounds, medicinal: organic and inorganic;morphine and derivatives;opium derivatives) &l1. Eating Places (Group 5812) not including ; drive- thru restaurants 9d2. Educational Services (Groups 8249-8299 except construction equipment operation schools; truck driving schools; automobile driving instruction; survival schools;vocational counseling) 49713. Engineering, Accounting, Research, Management and Related Services (Groups 8711-8748 except chemical laboratories, commercial research; automobile proving and testing grounds; metallurgical testing laboratories; pollution testing, except automotive emissions testing; radiation dosimetry laboratories; seed testing laboratories;veterinary testing laboratories) 4. Government Offices/Buildings (Groups 9111-9199, 9221, 9222, 9224-9229, 9311,9451,9511-9532,9611,9631-9661) 15. Hardware Stores(Group 52511 Words struekk-throuegh are deleted; words underlined are added. 2014 CPU!)Amendment 4-2 February 8. 2016 4-1-:16. Home Furniture, Furnishings and Equipment Stores(Groups 5712-5736) 17. Hotels / Motels (Group 7011); not to exceed a maximum of 180 rooms for the entire PUD. Only 1 hotel/motel is permitted within the PUD and it must be located east of Goodlette-Frank Road and subject to additional building development standards and setbacks identified in Section 4.4. S. lrliscellaneous Food Stores(Group 5499) 9. Miscellaneous General Merchandise Stores(Group 5399) 20. Miscellaneous Retail (Groups 5912-5949 and 5992-5999. excluding used merchandise stores, fireworks, gravestones, tombstones and monuments, ice dealers,sales barns,and swimming pools:retail) 21. Paint/Glass and Wallpaper(Group 5231) 44:22. Personal Services (Groups 7215, excluding self-service or coin laundries, 7221-7251, 7291 and 7299. including only clothing rental. costume rental, tanning salons and hair services) 423. Professional Offices: Travel Agencies (Group 4724); Insurance Agencies (Group 6411); Insurance Carriers (Groups 6311-6399); Real Estate (Groups 6512-6515, 6517, 6519, 6531, 6541, 6552, 6553); Holding and Other Investment Offices(Groups 6712-6799);Attorneys(Group 8111) 24. Physical Fitness Facilities(Group 7991) 25. Retail Bakeries(Group 5461) 44726, Security and Commodity Brokers(Groups 6211-6289) 4-5727. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose statement of the District and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this District. B. Restricted Principal Uses The following medical related uses must be located within 1/4 mile radius of the hospital property boundary. I. Group housing for the elderly limited to assisted living facilities, independent living units,skilled nursing units and continuing care retirement communities. A maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be permitted for the uses listed in Sections 3.3.B.1, 3.3.13.2, 4.3.13.1 and 4.3.B.3. These uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road. Words sttruelrgh are deleted; words underlined are added. 2014 CPUI)Amendment 4-3 February 8.2016 2. Drug Stores and Proprietary Stores (Group 5912) only one (1) drug store allowed. 3. Health Services, Medical Clinics and Offices (Groups 8011-8049, 8052), a maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be permitted for the uses listed in Sections 3.3.B.1, 33.B.2,4.3.B.1 and 4.3.B.3. SIC Code 8052 land uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road 4. Medical Laboratories and research and Rehabilitative Centers(Groups 8071- 8099) 5. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose statement of the District and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this District. C. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted in this district. 2. Retail and wholesale sales and/or display areas as accessory to the principal use,not to exceed an area greater than forty percent(40%)of the gross floor area of the permitted principal use. D. Operational Requirements for Group Housing Group housing uses described in Section 4.2.B.1 shall provide the following services and/or be subject to the following operational standards: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older. 2. There shall be on-site dining for the residents. 3. Group transportation services shall be provided for residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services may be provided for the residents' individualized needs including but not limited to medical office visits. 4. There shall be an on-site manager/activities coordinator to assist residents with their individual needs. The manager/coordinator shall also be responsible for arranging trips to off-site events as well as planning for lectures, movies, music and other entertainment for the residents at the on-site clubhouse. 5. A wellness center shall be provided on-site. Exercise and other fitness programs shall be provided for the residents. Words Hugh are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPDD Amendment 4-4 February 8,2016 I ' ti 6. Each unit shall be equipped to notify emergency service providers in the event of medical or other emergency. 7. Each unit shall be designed to accommodate residents with physical impairments (handicaps) as required by the applicable building codes and federal law and regulation. 4.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Minimum Lot Area: 20,000 S.F. B. Minimum Lot Width: 100 FT. C. Minimum Yard Requirements: 1. Front Yard,Immokalee and Goodlette-Frank Roads: Fifty feet(50') � fI 2. Front Yard,Internal Roads: Thirty feet(30') 3. Side Yard: Ten feet(10') Five feet (5')to internal property line along the Pine Ridge canal drainage easement and FP&L easement 4. Waterfront: Zero feet(0')to bulkhead or rip-rap at top of bank, otherwise twenty feet(20') 5. Rear Yard:Twenty-five feet(25') 6. Minimum Building Setback from Perimeter Boundary of PUD for Properties West of Goodlette-Frank Road: a) Fifty feet(50')for buildings up to thirty five feet(35')in height. b) Three additional feet(3') for every one foot of building height over thirty five feet(35')adjoining residential districts. 7. For Properties East of Goodlette-Frank Road: Minimum Building Setback from Perimeter Boundary of PUD and from Public Roadways: a) Immokalee Road:Minimum of fifty feet(50')plus for any portion of a building exceeding a zoned height of fifty feet(50'),that portion of the building shall have its building setback increased at a 1:3 ratio (i.e. one (1') vertical foot of height for every three (3') horizontal feet);or Words.trash-through are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPUD Amendment 4-5 February 8,2016 For any portion of a hotel that may be constructed on the B designated tract at the southeast corner of Goodlette-Frank Road and Immokalee Road, a minimum <e hundred foot )building setback from Immokalee Road. b) Goodlette-Frank Road: Minimum of fifty feet (50') and for any portion of a building exceeding a zoned height of fifty feet(50'),that portion of the building shall have the setback increased at a 1:2 ratio (i.e. one (I') vertical foot of height for every two (2') horizontal feet);or For any portion of a hotel on the B designated tract on the southeast corner of Immokalee Road and Goodlette-Frank Road, the minimum setback from Goodlette-Frank Road shall be seventy-five (75') regardless of height. D. Maximum Height(Zoned): For parcels west of Goodlette-Frank Road, three stories over parking to a maximum of fifty feet (50') except that no structure shall be greater than thirty-five feet (35'), on property west of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement. For Properties East of Goodlette-Frank Road: a) The group housing for the elderly and intermediate care facilities constructed on the B designated tract located at the southeast quadrant of the Goodlette- Frank Road and lmmokalee Road intersection shall have a zoned height of sixty feet(60')and an actual height of seventy feet(70'), except that a hotel building or structure associated with this use may not exceed a zoned height of fifty-szvem, hive feet (`'';'' ) and an actual height of sib-eighty live (60'85'). b) The group housing for the elderly and intermediate care facilities constructed on the easternmost B designated tract adjacent to Immokalee Road,as shown on the Master Plan, shall have a zoned height of sixty feet(60')and an actual height of seventy feet(70'). c) All other uses permitted pursuant to Section IV shall be limited to a maximum zoned height of fifty(50')and an actual height of sixty(60'). E. Commercial design guidelines for facilities in the Business District shall be subject to the provisions of Division 2.8. Architectural and Site Design Standards and Site Design Standards for commercial buildings and projects. F. Outside storage or display shall be permitted and shall be screened from all internal and external public roadways with a fence at least seven feet in height above ground Words smutsk-throtegh are deleted;words underlined are added. 2014 CPDD Amendment 4-6 February 8,2016 level, or landscaping equivalent or combination thereof. Said fence, wall or landscaped screen shall be opaque in design. 4.5 DEVELOPMENT DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.I which establishes a .45 floor area ratio (FAR) for group housing uses, to permit an FAR of .6 for group housing uses, including the intermediate care facility. 2. Deviation from LDC Section 5.06.04.F.3 Directory signs, which authorizes one (1)directory sign to be located at the project entrance,to permit installation of the directory sign on Immokalee Road east of Goodlette-Frank Road. not at the project entry. but rather at a location between the project entry and Goodlette- Frank Road. 4.6 LANDSCAPE BUFFER RESTRICTIONS The use of bald cypress trees to meet the landscape buffer requirements in section 2.19.A.2 and B.2 are prohibited. Words 5^-ek-through are deleted; words underlined are added. 20/4 CPDD Amendment 4-7 February 8, 2016 SECTION V PRESERVE AREA 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for the area within Creekside Commerce Park, designated on the Master Plan, as Preserve Area. 5.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as Preserve Area on the Master Plan are designed to accommodate natural systems existing or created as preserves and limited water management uses and functions. 5.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used,or land or water used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Permitted n_,:±?c' -tis-Uses and Structures I. Boardwalks and nature trails(excluding asphalt paved trails). 2. Water management =a e . 3. Any other preserve and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses,permitted in accordance with the LDC and which the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZAIor Hearing Examiner ` - . determines to be compatible in the Preserve Area. 5.4 PRESERVE DISTRICT PRESERVATION EASEMENT A non-exclusive preservation easement or tract is required by LDC Section 3.2.8.4.7.3. for preservation lands included in the Preserve Area. The Developer, its successor or assign shall be responsible for the control and maintenance of lands within the Preserve Area. Exact location/boundary of the Preserve Area will be determined during the development permitting process with the South Florida Water Management District, Army Corps of Engineers,and Collier County. Words sowelf-threugh are deleted; words underlined are added. 201.1 CPUD Amendment 5-1 February 8. 2016 5.5 PRESERVE AREA ADJUSTMENTS The proposed native vegetation retention areas, depicted on the Creekside Commerce Park Master Plan, are intended for meeting the native vegetation requirements of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County LDC. Adjustments may be made to the location of the preservations areas at the time of preliminary plat or site developmentplan approval. If adjustments are needed, per the Collier County LDC the Developer will have the option to increase the preservation in another area, enhance and preserve another area, or provide increased native landscape per the Collier County LDC. The proposed preservation areas, including 2.9 acres of wetlands and 4.1 acres of uplands, depicted on the Creekside Commerce Park master plan, are areas where the native vegetation requirements may be met as set forth in the Collier County LDC. Words uek-through are deleted;words underlined are added 2014 CPUDAmendment 5-2 February 8,2016 1 I I 6 �. aai ; Pi p 1 ' ii11 D 1°a „ , , ,...... 1iiii �--- z 1 if0 0...,:ti , IN �a A 1I[I ' LOIS f ; O 1 r 11, 0 11 1 I ilt� • erurr I. ' L s t � :FtH ' ILI) } . I [I 0 i Ik 1++ �. ..r�M+• i i a I 1 )j g. ,, Ill I "1 „ ,__ Mi i) ,---) (14 -- C,........ ...-- "n' -". ..:::___;:...---,---;----___L------______ '', (--- 4 nr"----- 4i. 5, 4 D II itlyi Li\ ,. lisii /f'i I Cill • ea W,>, ' i 9 as sii I .. ;ii if - ki. ,,. kLi) 2 . , .i 4 bill . „ di,\, N. III41 Ifa !1Flli'I1ii1 j !� 1 IP i t o {{ i s m yy f ;i' I I 1 1 '111111 1 �s ... . ,. ,:. I I 81IIJQIH i Iiiiiiiiiti E t li I; 41, p ,iii ,•• litlitfihili i ...14 1iJ . ,mr amassm — �•••. =MN alma POO aim • REVISED OYI7s12018 ' ems : bra t '•�" "� ex... �.»..1.'y�.' .y ,.r. W mwartwi NT Ipt ruw EXHIBIT B1 CROSS SECTIONS (ENLARGED) • NITERMAL PARCEL PARKEIO RTNNET LIGHT .-. M[DOE CANOPY TREE CANOPY TREE PARCEL ENTRANCE NOMaEMT NW WALK MM WTI MIAL PARCEL PAWING ,Nom.J M�uc tI ' wii'A• :': . - O TYPICAL STREET CROSS SECTION NIA INTERNAL PARCEL PARKINS WELT NtIR CANOPY TREE CANOPY TINE PARCEL ENTRANCE MONER6KT —IEIEMALK • IIEIfi PAIRIRY o PARCEL i Ai IL..... ,tea ' ' +Y 12' I is it it `yp[_ fit RAIN O TYPICAL STRUT CROSS SEC11011 N.YA I I - IWINE NTERNAL PARCEL PA MONO STREET MKTCANOPY TINE -�-CANOPY TREE F7---/ rPARCEL ENTRANCE MONNEIEMT f MREWALK r u► —WEOW INTERNAL PARCEL PAIKRIO IL....... ,A SPX- MAW MC- a• -Itb.w- -_ O TYPICAL STREET CROSS SECTION LETS } �"AORDINANCE NO. 13- 23 -y AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2006-50, THE CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD), AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING SECTION III, INDUSTRIAL/ COMMERCE DISTRICT, TO INCLUDE HOTEL, MOTEL, SENIOR HOUSING INCLUDING INDEPENDENT LIVING,ASSISTED LIVING, SKILLED NURSING, CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AND INTERMEDIATE CARE FACILITIES AS ADDITIONAL USES, ESTABLISHING A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF .6 FOR THE ADDITIONAL USES, AND REVISING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR PARCELS EAST OF GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD TO 75 FEET ZONED HEIGHT AND 85 FEET ACTUAL HEIGHT; BY AMENDING SECTION IV, BUSINESS DISTRICT, TO INCLUDE HOTEL, MOTEL, SENIOR HOUSING INCLUDING INDEPENDENT LIVING, ASSISTED LIVING, SKILLED NURSING, CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AND INTERMEDIATE CARE FACILITIES AS ADDITIONAL USES, ESTABLISHING A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF .6 FOR THE ADDITIONAL USES, AND REVISING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR PARCELS EAST OF GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD TO 75 FEET ZONED HEIGHT AND 85 FEET ACTUAL HEIGHT FOR THE CPUD PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 105 ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on October 24, 2006, the Board of County Commission �aprived Ordinance Number 2006-50, the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial P1ed ninitf Development(the"PUD");and oom V o WHEREAS, Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich& IS er,r1.A. and D. Wayne Arnold of Q. Grady Minor & Associates representing Creekside WbAIncnd n Creekside East, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to amend the CPUD to allow for additional uses and to increase the floor area ratio of the aforementioned real property. } NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Creekside Commerce Center PUD 1 of 2 PUDA-PL20120000111—Rev.3/12/13 Attachment B 1 I f SECTION ONE: Amendment to Section III,Industrial/Commercial District of the CPUD 1 Document of Ordinance No.2006-50 ' Section III, Industrial/Commercial District of Collier County Ordinance No. 2006-50 is hereby amended to read as follows: See Exhibit"A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION TWO: Amendment to Section IV, Business District of the CPUD Document of Ordinance No.2006-50 Section N, Business District of Collier County Ordinance No. 2006-50 is hereby is i amended to read as follows: i o See Exhibit"B",attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION THREE: r This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. k d PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County 1 Commissioners of Collier County,Florida,this 12:thday of March,2013. f fi ATTEST: BOARD ! 0 Y CO i ISSIONERS s DWIGHT•E ) OeIc,CLERK COLL ' 1 1 F O' 'A ,tip ",a .IS. • ; ,.... ',,X - csC, , 4 , _-- By: , ,'�^}:;�.,,�.I,, Deputy Clerk GEOR IA A. HILLER,ESQ. Attest as to CililU(iii . Chairwoman $ign3t11re,Qr►ly„' Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: i Ott JTQ ) i eidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A—Section III,Industrial/Commerce District Exhibit B—Section IV, Business District This ordinance filed with the 1 cr tory of tote's ffice the i CP\12-CPS-01179181day of.„___��, c90(,51 and dgemer}jr acknow1e of that Creekside Commerce Center PUD 2 of 2 fill rec ved this o( . ay PUDA-PL20120000111 —Rev.3/12/13 of .Z" �• i Deputy CMrk i i Exhibit A i SECTION III INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCE DISTRICT 3.1 PURPOSE i The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for , areas within Creekside Commerce Park designated on the Master Plan as "UC". t 3.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as"UC"on the PUD Master Plan are intended to provide a maximum of 620,000 square feet of gross floor area of industrial/commerce uses on 41.6± net acres. Intermediate care(SIC Code 8052).group housing and hotel/motel uses(SIC Code 7011) 1 are in addition to the IC gross square footage figures. The overall floor area ratio(FAR) for thejQ designated ' areas shall not exceed .35; however, individual parcels may be developed at a higher FAR and the FAR for hotel/motel. group housing and intermediate care facilities (SIC Code 8052) shall not exceed .6. (Refer to Section 3.5. Deviations) 1 i 3.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES 1 No building or structure,or part thereof,shall be erected,altered or used,or land used, in whole or part,for other than the following: t A. The permitted principal uses and structures will generally consist of light manufacturing, wholesale, warehouse, processing and packaging, laboratories and clinics, research, design and product development, business services and corporate offices and headquarters. Q I. Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment(Group 3728) 1 I 2. Apparel and Other Finished Products(Groups 2311-2399) 3. Building Contractors(Groups 1521-1542),except for general contractors for mobile home repair on site, modular housing and premanufactured housing I assembled on site, dry cleaning plant construction, paper pulp mill construction,and truck and automobile assembly plant construction. 4. Business Services(Groups 7311-7313, 7319, 7322, 7323, 7331-7338, 7352, 7359-7389 except for industrial truck rental and leasing; plants, live: rental i and leasing; toilets, portable: rental and leasing; employment agencies, except theatrical and motion picture; labor contractors (employment 1 agencies) model registries; labor pools; manpower pools; modeling service; dogs, rental of: for protective service; automobile recovery service; automobile repossession service; bartering services for businesses; i 1 Amended PUD(revisionl BCC Approval 3-I2-2013).doc 3-1 March 12,2013 J1 S ' f 1 t ' bondspersons; bottle exchanges; check validation service; contractors disbursement control; filling pressure containers (aerosol) with hair spray, insecticides, etc.; fire extinguishers, service of gas systems, contract conversion from manufactured to natural gas; metal slitting and shearing on a contract or fee basis produce weighing service, not connected with transportation; scrap steel cutting on a contract or fee basis; solvents recovery service on a contract or fee basis; tobacco sheeting service on a contract or fee basis) 5. Child Day Care Services(Group 8351) 6. Communications (Groups 4812-4899 not including major communications towers related to cellular phone service, radio broadcasting, television broadcasting,radar or telephone service) 7. Computer and Office Equipment(Groups 3571-3579) 8. Construction; Special Trade Contractors (Groups 1711-1799 except for boiler erection and installation contractors; drainage system installations, cesspool and septic tank contractors;fuel oil burner installation and servicing contractors; gasoline hookup contractors; sewer hookups and connection for buildings contractors; epoxy application contractors; fireproofing buildings contractors;gasoline pump installation contractors; lead burning contractors; and mobile home site setup and tie down contractors) 9. Depository and Non-Depository Institutions(Groups 6011-6163) 10. Drugs and Medicines (Groups 2833-2836, except for adrenal derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; barbituric acid and derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; cocaine and derivatives; codeine and derivatives; gland derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; mercury chlorides, U.S.P; mercury compounds, medicinal: organic and inorganic;morphine and derivatives;opium derivatives) 11. Educational Services (Groups 8249-8299 except construction equipment operation schools; truck driving schools; automobile driving instruction; survival schools;vocational counseling) 12. Electronics and Other Electrical Equipment Manufacturing (Groups 3612, 3613, 3624, 3625, 3631, 3641-3676, 3678, 3679, 3694, 3695, 3699, except for airport lighting transformers, autotransformers, electric (power transformers) distribution transformers, electric; electric furnace transformers; lighting transformers, street and airport; transformers, reactor, atom smashers (particle accelerators; electron beam metal cutting, forming, and welding machines; electron linear accelerators; electrostatic particle accelerators)) • i Amended PUD(revision I BCC Approval 3.12-2013).doc 3-2 March 12,2013 13. Engineering, Accounting, Research, Management and Related Services (Groups 8711-8748 except chemical laboratories, commercial research; automobile proving and testing grounds; metallurgical testing laboratories; pollution testing, except automotive emissions testing; radiation dosimetry laboratories;seed testing laboratories;veterinary testing laboratories) 14. Fabricated Metal Products (Groups 3411-3432, 3442, 3444, 3446, 3452, 3469,3492,3495,3496,production of metal is prohibited) 15. Furniture and Fixtures Manufacturing(Groups 2511-2599) 16. Government Offices/Buildings(Groups 9111-9199, 9221, 9222, 9224-9229, 9311,9451,9511-9532,9611,9631-9661)_ 46:17. Hotels /Motels (Group 7011). not to exceed a maximum of 180 rooms for the entire PUD.Only 1 Hotel/Motel is permitted within the PUD and it must be located east of Goodlette-Frank Road and subject t9 specific development standards and setbacks in Section 3.4. 444 jndust ial and Commercial Machinery (Groups 3524, 3546, 3553-3556, 3559, 3562, 3564-3566, 3581-3599 except for bronzing and dusting machines for printing trades; foundry type for printing; presses, printing - slugs printers';ammunition and explosives loading machinery;brick making machines; cement making machinery; chemical kilns; control rod drive mechanisms for use on nuclear reactors; foundry machinery and equipment; frame straighteners, automotive (garage equipment); fur sewing machines; ginning machines, cotton; metal finishing equipment for plating, except rolling mill lines;metal pickling equipment,except rolling mill lines) -I-8;19. Leather and Leather Products(Groups 3131-3199) 49-.20. Measuring, Analyzing, and Controlling Instruments; Photographic, Medical and Optical Goods: Watches and Clocks Manufacturing(Groups 3812-3843, 3845-3873) 20r21. Membership Organizations(Groups 8611-8631) 2.1-22. Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries (Groups 3911-3999 except for dressing of furs: bleaching, blending, curring, scraping, and tanning; feathers: curling, dyeing, and renovating - for the trade; fur stripping; furs dressed: bleached, curried, scraped, tanned, and dyed; pelts: scraping, cuffing,tanning, bleaching and dyeing;plumes, feather;tear gas devices and equipment;veils made of hair) 22:23. Motion Picture Production(Groups 7812-7819) 23:24. Motor Freight Transportation(Groups 4214,4215) Amended PUB(revision l BCC Approval 3-12.2013).doc 3-3 March 12,2013 34:25. Packing and Crating(Group 4783) 2-5: _Paper and Allied Products(Groups 2652-2657,2673-2679) 3&:27. Personal Services(Groups 7213,7216,7219,7221) 2-7:28. Physical Fitness Facilities(Group 7991) 28:29. Plastic Materials and Synthetics(Groups 2833,2834) 99:30_Printing,Publishing and Allied Industries(Groups 2711-2791) 3031. Professional Offices: including but not limited to, Travel Agencies (Group 4724); Insurance Agencies(Group 6411); Insurance Carriers(Groups 6311- 6399); Real Estate(Groups 6512,6514,6517,6519,6531,6541,6552,) 34-3Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastic Products(Groups 3021,3085,3086,3088, 3089) 323J Transportation Equipment (Group 3732, except for boats, fiberglass: building and repairing; boats: motorboats, sailboats, rowboats, and canoes - building and repairing; houseboats, building and repairing; motorboats, inboard and outboard:building and repairing) 33:34. United States Postal Service(Group 4311) 34:35. Warehousing and Storage (Group 4225, 4226, 5014 except oil and gas storage,petroleum and chemical bulk stations and automobile dead storage) only one (1) self-storage use allowed to be located adjacent to the Collier County Sewage Treatment Plant. 33:36. Wholesale Trade-Durable Goods (Groups 5021-5031, 5043-5049, 5063- 5074, 5078, 5091, 5092, 5094-5099 except for fencing, wood-wholesale; lumber: rough, dressed, and finished-wholesale; batteries, except automotive-wholesale; storage batteries, industrial-wholesale; unit substations-wholesale; boilers, power: industrial-wholesale; boilers, steam and hot water heating-wholesale; burners, fuel oil and distillate oil- wholesale;oil burners-wholesale) 36-37. Wholesale Trade-Nondurable Goods (Groups 5111-5143, 5145, 5147-5149, 5192, 5199 except for cats-wholesale; charcoal-wholesale; dogs-wholesale; fish, tropical-wholesale; furs, dressed-wholesale; greases, animal and vegetable-wholesale; ice,manufactured or natural-wholesale, leather and cut stock-wholesale; linseed oil-wholesale; oils, except cooking: animal and vegetable-wholesale; oilseed cake and meal-wholesale; rubber, crude- wholesale; sawdust-wholesale; vegetable cake and meal-wholesale; wigs- wholesale;worms-wholesale) Amended PUD(revision)BCC Approval 3-12.2013).doc 3-4 March 12,2013 338. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing i. uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose statement of the District and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this District. B. Restricted Principal Uses The following medical related uses must be located within a 1/4 mile radius of the hospital property boundary. 1. Group housing for the elderly limited to Assisted living facilities, independent living units.skilled nursing units and continuing care retirement communities. A maximlup of 400 aggregate beds shall be permitted for tije uses listed in Sections 3.3.B.1. 3.3.B.2.4.3.B.1 and 43.B.3. These uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Load. 4:2. Health Services, medical clinics and offices (Groups 8011-8049. 8052),A maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be permitted for the uses listed in Sections 3.3.B,1.3.3.B.2.4.3.B.1 and 4,3.B.3. SIC Code 8052 land uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road, 2:3. Medical Laboratories and research and Rehabilitative Centers(Groups 8071- 8092,8099) 374. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose statement of the District and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this District. C. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted in this district. 2. Retail and wholesale sales and/or display areas as accessory to the principal use,not to exceed an area greater than forty percent(40%)of the gross floor area of the permitted principal use. D. Operational Requirements for Group Housing Group housing uses described in Section 3.2.B,1 shall provide the following services and/or be subject to the following operational standards: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older. 2. There shall be on-site dining for the residents. Amended PUD(rev isianl BCC Approval3-12-2013).dac 3-5 March 12,2013 3, Group transportation services shall be provided for residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services may be provided for the residents' individualized needs including but not_limited to medical office visits. 4. There shall be an on-site manager/activities coordinator to assist residents with their individual needs.The manager/coordinator shall also be responsible for arranging trips to off-site events as well as planning for lectures. movies. music and other entertainment for the residents at the on-site clubhouse. 5. A wellness center shall be provided on-site. Exercise and other fitness proarams shall be provided for the residents, 6, Each unit shall be equipped to notify emergency service providers in the event of medical or other emergency. 7. Each unit shall be designed to accommodate residents with physical impairments (handicaps) as required by the applicable building codes and federal law and regulation. 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Minimum Lot Area: 20,000 S.F. B. Minimum Lot Width: 100 FT. C. Minimum Yard Requirements: 1. Front Yard, adjacent to Immokalee Road or Goodlette-Frank Road: Fifty feet(50'). For parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road, see additional setback requirements in Section 3.4.C.7.a. 2. Front Yard, Internal: Thirty feet(30') 3. Side Yard: Ten feet(10') Five feet(5')to internal property line along Pine Ridge canal drainage easement and FP&L easement 4. Waterfront: Zero feet (0') to bulkhead or rip-rap at top of bank, otherwise twenty feet(20') 5. Rear Yard:Twenty-five feet(25') 6. Minimum Building Setback from Perimeter Boundary of PUD: Fifty feet (S0') Amended PUD(revision!BCC Approval 3-12-2013).doc 3-6 March 12,2011 II 7. Minimum Building Setback from Existing Goodlette-Frank Road Right-of- Way East pf Goodlette-Frank Road: a) Goodlette-Frank Road: Minimum of fifty feet (50'1 except as provided as follows: i) For group housing for elderly and intermediate care use: (a) If the zoned height of any structure exceeds 50 feet the minimum setback is 75 feet plus for any portion pf a building exceeding fifty feet in zoned height an increased setback at a 1:2 ratio(i.e.. for one vertical foot of height. setback is increased by two horizontal feet) for that portion of the building over 50 feet of height, ii) For hotel/motel use: (a) Minimum setback of 75 feet regardless of height plus for any portion of a building exceeding fifty feet in zoned height an increased setback at a 1:2 ratio (i.e.. for one vertical foot of height, setback is increased by two horizontal feet) for that portion of the building over 50 feet of height. D. Maximum Height (Zoned): For parcels west of Goodlette-Frank Road: tThirty-ff Five tpeet (35'), including silos, storage tanks, elevator towers, satellite dishes, antennas, etc. For parcels east of Goodlette-Frank Road: the Hotel. group housing for the elderly,and the intermediate care facility shall have a zoned height seventy- five feet (75'). actual height eight-five feet (85'). All other uses permitted east of Goodlette-Frank Road pursuant to Section III shall have a zoned height of fifty feet (50')and an actual height of sixty feet4¢0'), E. Outside storage or display shall be permitted and shall be screened from all internal and external public roadways with a fence or landscaping equivalent or combination thereof. Said fence, wall or landscaped screen shall be opaque in design. All manufacturing operations and equipment, including accessory process equipment such as compressors and air handlers shall be contained in an enclosed structure. F. All industrial building sides visible from roadways internal or external to the park shall have the appearance of a concrete material, such as, but not limited to, block, brick, tilt up concrete panels, stucco on lathe systems, etc. Corrugated steel sides visible from said roadways are prohibited; as well as exposed metal siding on any building west of Goodlette Frank Road. Amended PUD(revision)BCC Approval 3-12.2013).doc 3-7 March 12,2013 G. Business District type uses located within the I/C District along Goodlette-Frank Road will meet the Collier County Architectural Guidelines in Division 2.8. of the LDC. H. Industrial type uses abutting Goodlette-Frank Road shall meet the requirements of Section 2.19.B.3 hereof,alternatively, said uses shall have the option of utilizing the landscaped buffer applicable to business uses fronting Goodlette-Frank Road, provided the portion of the building facing Goodlette-Frank Road meets the following Architectural Guideline Sections of the LDC, therefore satisfying the intent of the building design section of the Architectural Guidelines in the opinion of the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator 1. Section 2.8.3.5.1.,Purpose and Intent 2. Section 2.8.3.5.4.,Facade Standard 3. Section 2.8.3.5.6., Project Standards 4. Section 2.8.3.5.7.,Detail Features except for 2.8.3.5.7.2. 5. Section 2.8.3.5.12. 1 Loading Areas: Buildings west of the Pine Ridge canal and adjacent to the Pelican Marsh boundary shall orient loading docks to the north,east or west. J. Noise: Uses within the I/C District shall not exceed 65 dBA between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and 60 dBA after 10 p.m. to 6:59 a.m. and all of Sundays, as measured at the property boundary of the land use from which the sound emanates. K. Odor: No business shall cause or allow the emission of odorous air from any single source such as to result in odors which are detectable outside the parcel boundaries. Best practical treatment,maintenance,and control currently available shall be utilized in order to maintain the lowest possible emission of odorous air. L. Lighting: Lighting shall be located so that no light is aimed directly toward a property designated residential if lighting is located within 200 feet of residential property. Light fixtures within parking areas shall not exceed 25 feet in height. M. Emissions: All sources of air emissions shall comply with rules set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency(Code of Federal Regulations,Title 40)and the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 17-2). No person shall operate a regulated source of air emissions without a valid operation permit issued by the Department of Environmental Regulation. Amended PUD(revision]BCC Approval 3-12-2013),doc 3-8 March 12.2013 3.5 DEVELOPMENT DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.1 which establishes a .45 floor area ratio (FAR) for group housing used. to permit an FAR of .6 for group housing uses, including the intermediate care facilities, 3.6 LANDSCAPE BUFFER RESTRICTIONS The use of bald cypress trees to meet the landscape buffer requirements in section 2.19.8.2,and B.3 are prohibited f]jf Amended PUD(revisionl BCC Approval 3-1I-2013).doc 3-9 March 12,2013 I Exhibit B 111 1 I SECTION IV 1 BUSINESS DISTRICT I i 4.1 PURPOSE t The purpose of this section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within Creekside Commerce Park designated on the Master Plan as "B". 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION g• T Areas designated as "B"on the PUD Master Plan are intended to provide a maximum of 190,000 square feet of floor area, including approximately 150,000 square feet of office uses and 40,000 square feet of retail uses on 19.1±net acres. Intermediate care facilities (SIC Code 8052).group housing and hotel/motel uses(SIC Code 7011)are in addition to the B District gross square footage figures, The overall floor area ratio.(FAR) for the$ designated busiftess4an4vsesareas shall not exceed .35: however. individual Parcels may be developed at a higher FAR and the FAR for hotel/motel, group housing and intermediate care facilities (SIC Code 8052) shall not exceed .6. (Refer to Section 4.5, Deviations) i i 43 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES t 1 No building or structure,or part thereof, shall be erected,altered or used, or land used, in t whole or part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: 1 1. Building Contractors(Groups 1521-1542),except for general contractors for mobile home repair on site, modular housing and premanufactured housing I assembled on site, dry cleaning plant construction, paper pulp mill construction,and truck and automobile assembly plant construction. 2. Business Services (Groups 7311-7313, 7319, 7322, 7323, 7331-7338, 7352, 7359-7389 except for industrial truck rental and leasing; plants, live: rental t and leasing; toilets, portable: rental and leasing; employment agencies, except theatrical and motion picture; labor contractors (employment agencies) model registries; labor pools; manpower pools; modeling service; 1 dogs, rental of: for protective service; automobile recovery service; g automobile repossession service; bartering services for businesses; bondspersons; bottle exchanges; check validation service; contractors disbursement control; filling pressure containers (aerosol) with hair spray, insecticides, etc.; fire extinguishers, service of gas systems, contract conversion from manufactured to natural gas; metal slitting and shearing on a contract or fee basis produce weighing service, not connected with 1 transportation; scrap steel cutting on a contract or fee basis; solvents Amended PUD{revision]BCC Approval 3-12-2013).doc 4-1 March 12,2013 1 i I recovery service on a contract or fee basis; tobacco sheeting service on a i. contract or fee basis) . 3. Child Day Care Services(Group 8351) 4. Convenience Store(Group 5411)and Gasoline Filling Station(Group 5541) only one(1)allowed. 5. Communications (Groups 4812-4899), not including major communication towers related to cellular phone service, radio broadcasting, television broadcasting,radar or telephone service. 6. Depository and Non-Depository Institutions (Groups 6011-6163) including automatic teller machines 7. Drugs and Medicines (Groups 2833-2836 except for adrenal derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; barbituric acid and derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; cocaine and derivatives; codeine and derivatives; gland derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; mercury chlorides, U.S.P; mercury compounds, medicinal: organic and inorganic;morphine and derivatives;opium derivatives) 8. Eating Places (Group 5812) not including fast food and drive-thru restaurants 9. Educational Services (Groups 8249-8299 except construction equipment operation schools; truck driving schools; automobile driving instruction; survival schools;vocational counseling) 10, Engineering, Accounting, Research, Management and Related Services (Groups 8711-8748 except chemical laboratories, commercial research; automobile proving and testing grounds; metallurgical testing laboratories; pollution testing, except automotive emissions testing; radiation dosimetry laboratories;seed testing laboratories;veterinary testing laboratories) 11 Government Offices/Buildings(Groups 9111-9199, 9221, 9222,9224-9229, 9311,9451,9511-9532,9611,9631-9661) 4.1-12. Hotels / Motels (Group 7011): not to exceed a maximum of 180 rooms for the entire PUD. Only 1 hotel/motel is permitted within the PUD and it must be located east of Goodlette-Frank Road and subject to additional building development standards and setbacks identified in Section 4.4. 4-2:13. Professional Offices: Travel Agencies (Group 4724); Insurance Agencies (Group 6411); Insurance Carriers (Groups 6311-6399); Real Estate(Groups 6512-6515, 6517, 6519, 6531, 6541, 6552, 6553); Holding and Other Investment Offices(Groups 6712-6799);Attorneys(Group 8111) -1. 14=. Physical Fitness Facilities(Group 7991) Amended PUD(revision)HCC Approval 3-12-2013).doc 4-2 March 12,2013 1 44:15. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose statement of the District and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this District. T B. Restricted Principal Uses The following medical related uses must be located within 1/4 mile radius of the hospital property boundary. 1. Group housing for the ek erly limited to gssisted living facilities, independent living units, skilled nursing units and continuing care rejirement; communities. A maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be permitted for the uses listed in Sections 3.3,13,1, 3.3.B.2. 4.3.13.1 and 43.B.3. These uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road. 4:2, Drug Stores and Proprietary Stores (Group 5912) only one (1) drug store allowed. 1:3. Health Services, Medical Clinics and Offices (Groups 8011-8049. 8050, tt maximum of 400 aggregate }mss shall be permitted for the uses listed in Sections 3.3.B.1. 3.3.13.2.4.3.13.1 and 4.3.133, SIC Code 8052 land uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road, 14, Medical Laboratories and research and Rehabilitative Centers(Groups 8071- 8099) 475. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose statement of the District and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this District. C. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted in this district. 2. Retail and wholesale sales and/or display areas as accessory to the principal use,not to exceed an area greater than forty percent(40%)of the gross floor area of the permitted principal use. D. Operational Requirements for Group Housing Group housing uses described in Section 4.2.8.1 shall provide the following services and/or be subject to the following operational standards: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older, Amended PUD(revision!BCC Approval 3-12-2013).doc 4-3 March 12,2013 2. There shall be on-site dining for the residents. 3. Group transportation services shall be provided for residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services may be provided for the residents' individualized needs including but not limited to medical office visits. 4. There shall be an on-site manager/activities coordinator to assist residents with their individual needs. The manager/coordinator shall also be responsible for arrangigg trips to off-site events as well as planning for lectures. movies. music and other entertainment for the residents at the 9n-site clubhouse. 5. A wellness center shall be provided on-site. Exercise and other fitness programs shall be provided for the residents. 6. Each unit shall be equipped to notify emergency service providers in the event of medical or other emergency. 7. Each unit shall be designed to accommodate residents with Dhvsical impairments (handicaps) as required by the applicable building codes pnd federal law and regulation. 4.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Minimum Lot Area: 20,000 S.F. B. Minimum Lot Width: 100 FT. C. Minimum Yard Requirements: 1. Front Yard,Immokalee and Goodlette-Frank Roads: Fifty feet(50) 2. Front Yard,Internal Roads: Thirty feet(30') 3. Side Yard: Ten feet(10') Five feet (5') to internal property line along the Pine Ridge canal drainage easement and FP&L easement 4. Waterfront: Zero feet (0') to bulkhead or rip-rap at top of bank, otherwise twenty feet(20') 5. Rear Yard:Twenty-five feet(25') Amended PUD(revision] BCC Approval 3-12-2013).doc 4-4 March 12,2013 Ii 6. Minimum Building Setback from Perimeter Boundary of PUD for Properties West of Goodlette-Frank Road: a) Fifty feet(50')for buildings up to thirty five feet(35')in height. b) Three additional feet(3') for every one foot of building height over thirty five feet(35')adjoining residential districts. d 7. For Properties East pf Goodlette-Frank Road: Minimum Building Setback from Perimeter Boundary of PUD and from Public Roadways: a) Immokalee Road:Minimum of fifty feet(50')plus for any portion of a building exceeding a zoned height of fifty feet(50').that portion of the building shall have its building setback increased at a 1:3 ratio (i.e, one (1') vertical foot of height for every three (3') horizontal feet):or For any portion of a hotel that may be constructed on the B designated tract at the southeast corner of Goodlette-Frank Road and Immokalee Road. a minimum five hundred foot (500') building setback from ImmokaIee Road. b) Goodlette-Frank Road: Minimum of fifty feet (50') and for any portion of a building exceeding a zoned height of fifty feet(50').that portion of the building shall have the setback increased at a 1:2 ratio (i.e. one j1') vertical foot of height for every two (2') horizontal feet):or For any portion of a hotel on the B designated tract on the southeast corner of Immokalee Road and Goodlette-Frank Road.the minimum setback from Goodlette-Frank Road shall be seventy-five (75') regardless of height. D. Maximum Height (Zoned): For parcels west of Goodlette-Frank Road. tThree stories over parking to a maximum of fifty feet(50') except that no structure shall be greater than thirty- five feet(35'),on property west of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement. For Properties East of Goodlette-Frank Road: a) The group housing for the elderly and intermediate care facilities constructed on the B designated tract located at the southeast quadrant of the Gooilette- Frank Road and Immokalee Road intersection shall have a zoned height of sixty feet(60')and an actual height of seventy feet(70').except that a hotel building or structure associated with this use may not exceed a zoned height of fifty feet(50')and an actual height of sixty(60'). Amended PUD(revision!BCC Approval 3-12-2013).doe 4-5 Manch 12,2013 b) The group housing for the elderly and intermediate care facilities constructed on the easternmost B designated tract adjacent to Immokalee Road.as shown on the Master Plan.shall have a zoned height of sixty feet(60')and an actual height of seventy feet(70'). c) All other uses permitted pursuant to Section IV shall be limited to a maximum zoned height of fifty(50')and an actual height of sixty(60'). E. Commercial design guidelines for facilities in the Business District shall be subject to the provisions of Division 2.8. Architectural and Site Design Standards and Site Design Standards for commercial buildings and projects. F. Outside storage or display shall be permitted and shall be screened from all internal and external public roadways with a fence at least seven feet in height above ground level, or landscaping equivalent or combination thereof. Said fence, wall or landscaped screen shall be opaque in design. 4.5 DEVELOPMENT DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.04 al which establishes a .45 floor area ratio (FAR) for group housing uses, to permit an FAB. of.6 for group housing uses, including the intermediate care facility. 4.6 LANDSCAPE BUI4 1.:R RESTRICTIONS The use of bald cypress trees to meet the landscape buffer requirements in section 2.19.A.2 and B.2 are prohibited. 31p Amended PUD(revision!BCC Approval 3.12-2013).doc 4-6 March 12,2013 STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of: ORDINANCE 2013-23 which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners , on the 12th day of March, 2013 , during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 18th day of March, 2013 . DWIGHT E. BROCK Clerk of Courts arm Clerk Ex-officio to. Board o ' County Commiggio;ieip By: Teresa Ca nddf.J ''�,.... Deputy Clerk 1 1 2 3 4 5 TRANSCRIPT OF THE 6 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING 7 FOR CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD 8 June 22, 2015 9 10 11 12 13 Appearances: 2 14 WAYNE ARNOLD RICHARD YOVANOVICH, ESQ. 15 FRANCESCA PASSIDOMO NANCY GUNDLACH 16 DAVID GENSON SHARON UMPENHOUR 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Attachment D ( 2 1 MR. ARNOLD: Well, good evening, everybody. 2 I'm Wayne Arnold with Grady Minor and this is € ,I 3 Sharon Umpenhour from our office, and she'll be , 4 recording the neighborhood information meeting. 5 And this is for Creekside Commerce Park and the PUD 6 amendments that we're contemplating to the ( 7 document. 8 With us tonight, we have David Genson from 9 Barron Collier Companies, we have Rich Yovanovich 10 and Francesca Passidomo from the Coleman, 11 Yovanovich, Koester law firm. 12 And this is Nancy Gundlach. If you don't know 13 her, Nancy is with Collier County and she's the 14 principal planner that's handling this zoning case. 15 So thank you. 16 This is our second neighborhood information 17 meeting. We needed to make some additional 18 proposed changes than were in the original 19 neighborhood information notice. 20 We've reached out separately previously to 21 Colliers Reserve since you were largely the 22 represented group at the first NIM. So I'll go 23 through some of those changes. It will be 24 redundant for you all, but (indiscernible) will, 25 you know, let you understand what we're proposing 3 1 to do. 2 This is sort of the east side master plan for 3 Creekside, and that's really the largest master 4 plan change that we're proposing. The area that's 5 currently located east of Goodlette, south of 6 Immokalee Road has a configuration with about a 7 six-acre business designated parcel on Immokalee 8 Road. We have preserve and a water management lake 9 to the south. That's -- you can see on the aerial 10 photograph, that's this area that we're looking at. 11 One of the proposed changes, that we're trying 12 to reconfigure the lake and preserve to expand the 13 business tract to make it about eight acres, plus 14 or minus, and with that we're also proposing to do 15 mitigation offsite for a portion of the preserve 16 area that we have, which is located in this area. 17 So we're working with staff on that offsite 18 preservation requirement. And, of course, the 19 master plan change with regard to that. 20 We're also proposing to increase the business 21 district square footage by about 70,000 square 22 feet. We're proposing a simultaneous decrease in 23 the industrial designated areas. IC on that master 24 plan by 70,000 square feet. 25 We're changing the uses in the business 4 1 district to allow a small brewery which you all 2 heard about before. I don't know that it's truly a 3 brewery, but it would be more like a -- what do you 4 call it, David, like a tap room? 5 MR. GENSON: Tap room, uh-huh. 6 MR. ARNOLD: And we have a maximum square 7 footage of 3,000 square feet that we would propose 8 for that area. 1 9 We're also proposing to change the reference 10 to the fast food that's in there. There's 11 currently a prohibition on fast food restaurants 12 and we talked to the Colliers Reserve folks about 13 this. We'd strike the -- and say that no 14 freestanding fast food restaurants would be 15 allowed, but the strip center that's under 16 construction right now will have an end unit that 17 would like to have a drive-through window and it's 18 very likely the county staff will call that a fast 19 food restaurant, so we want to make provisions for 20 it to be inline drive-through and fast food. So I 21 think, you know, we're talking about it potentially 22 being a coffee shop and I don't know if that deal 23 is inked or not, but if not, they certainly want 24 the opportunity to have a drive-through window in 25 that location. Y 5 1 1 We also are proposing to change the setback � I 2 for the hotel that's located or allowed to be 3 located into the V or the IC area. Currently, 4 there's a reference in there that it has to be 5 (indiscernible) 500 feet from Immokalee Road, and 6 there was some other language that required it to 7 be tiered from Goodlette-Frank Road. 8 In this case, I think we're going to need to 9 ask for, it's not anything that's been resubmitted 10 to the county yet, but we'll be asking for, we 11 think, a 350-foot setback from Immokalee Road for 12 the hotel structure that would be located there. 13 And we've reaffirmed that that hotel can be 75 feet 14 of zoned height up to 85 feet of actual building 15 height. It's consistent with other references, but 16 we wanted to make sure that that was part of the 17 documentation for your consideration. 18 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: How does that 19 compare to the hospital? 20 MR. ARNOLD: We were just describing that -- 21 discussing that before the meeting started, and I 22 think, if my recollection serves me, the hospital, 23 the total height is about 110 feet for the hospital 24 building. I think the parking garage is 25 approaching that number, but I'm not certain on the II 6 1 number, but I think, you know, certainly the 75 and 2 85 feet had been discussed previously, and then we 3 had the setback provision that we're attempting to 4 modify for that. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: 75 feet is about the 6 height of the Naples Daily News. 7 MR. ARNOLD: Correct. Yeah. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. Which might 9 be 85, actual, but 75 -- 10 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, and I think even though 11 this -- 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. 13 MR. ARNOLD: -- this, what I would call a 14 bubble plan, doesn't really depict the location of 15 the hospital, I mean, obviously, there's the 16 assisted living facility that's under construction, 17 you have the strip retail center that's under 18 construction. So the hotel would be located south 19 of those structures. So you're going to get some 20 shielding from the -- is the assisted living two 21 story? 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Two stories. 23 MR. ARNOLD: Two story, right, and then your 24 retail strip center will be a single-story 25 building. 7 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. 2 MR. ARNOLD: So we're contemplating those 3 changes. 4 Another change that we need to make after p6 5 doing some calculations of square footages, there's 6 right now a restriction that there's a .35 FAR 7 applicable to the IC designated. There's one, same 8 35 -- .35 FAR applicable to the B business 9 district. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I understand that 11 creek. 12 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. And I would be happy to 13 explain it a little bit more, but we would like to 14 simply do away with the designation between the B 15 and the IC and create one .35 FAR across the 16 entirety of the PUD. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What is FAR? 18 MR. ARNOLD: FAR is floor area ratio. And the • 19 county doesn't commonly use it other than for 20 senior housing at the moment. There are some 21 provisions for hotels to have a floor area ratio. 22 But, essentially, it's the amount of building area 23 to acreage of the project. And what they simply do 24 is you take the square footage of the property and 25 divide it by the square footage of the building and 8 1 that's your floor area ratio, so. 2 So we're -- it's -- right now, the PUD has 3 been approved for .35 in both. I think that, just 4 given some of the numbers, the way they're working 5 with some of the proposed expansions. At Arthrex, 6 we're going to blend the lines a little bit and we 7 want the ability to have the .35 apply across the 8 entirety of the project. 9 Is that a fair description, Rich, of how we 10 think we're going to make that work? 11 MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. Plus, with adding more 12 square footage for the business use throws that .35 13 a little out of kilter, the business part's floor 14 area ratio. So it still keeps the entirety of the 15 project at .35. It just doesn't limit you to a .35 16 business park uses and a .35 of IC or for 17 industrial uses. 18 MR. ARNOLD: And keep in mind we have the 19 maximum square footages, which other than the 20 70,000 square feet that I described, the increase 21 and decrease that we're proposing, there are still 22 going to be square footage limitations for the 23 entirety of the project that will be there. So 24 it's not like we gain a windfall. It's just going 25 to be an easier way for us to calculate and carry 9 1 forward the number for the project. 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) . 3 MR. ARNOLD: So did I capture all the changes? • 4 MR. YOVANOVICH: That was it. 5 MR. ARNOLD: And some of you have an updated 6 aerial photograph. I apologize. I didn't print 7 out a fresh one, but it shows the construction, at ) 8 least, of the extended care hospital on the portion 9 of the property. It's the curved building that you 10 see. And then, of course, the other things you see 11 that are under construction. 12 Nancy, did I leave out anything? I didn't 13 really talk about process. Let me tell you where 14 we are in the process. 15 We've gone through the sufficiency review. We 16 have not resubmitted to the county to show them the 17 change to the FAR nor to the setback for the hotel 18 use. Those are things that we'll need to submit to 19 them. They will continue to review it. 20 Our next step and the next time you would get 21 notice would be for the Collier County Planning 22 Commission hearing. And that's likely, at this 23 point, to be, the best case, probably August. I 24 think probably best case. And then after the 25 planning commission, they will make a A 10 1 recommendation on the project and that would go to 2 the Board of County Commissioners. And they're on 3 break, essentially, after tomorrow -- well, they 4 have one more meeting in July, but they will be on 5 break until early September, so the earliest we 6 would be on their agenda is going to be sometime in 7 September. I think the first agenda, I think, is 8 probably already filling up, so my guess is we 9 won't make it on the first agenda in September, but 10 best case, maybe the second meeting in September. 11 MR. WARBERT: Excuse me. 12 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. 13 MR. WARBERT: My name is Art Warbert 14 (phonetic) and I'm a resident of Colliers, but I'm 15 also a resident of Remington Reserve. 16 MR. ARNOLD: Oh, okay. 17 MR. WARBERT: And on the board here at 18 Remington. 19 This is more of a curiosity question. In that 20 property, there was a certain amount for preserve, 21 right? 22 MR. ARNOLD: Correct. 23 MR. WARBERT: And did you just shrink it? 24 MR. ARNOLD: We're proposing to go offsite to 25 mitigate it. y b, 11 1 MR. WARBERT: That was the word I don't 2 understand. What do you mean, offsite? Is it 3 Mississippi or where is it? 4 MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think the county is going 5 to require that it's in Collier County. We just 6 haven't identified the specific location yet for 7 the location of the relocated preserve. I mean, 8 the area we're talking about is back here by the 9 treatment plant and the mini storage. It really, 10 from a functional standpoint, doesn't have a lot of 11 wildlife habitat benefit. It's not the greatest 12 quality. 13 So from the Collier's business standpoint, it 14 makes more sense for them to try to make it a 15 functional part of their business park or business 16 campus, if you will, than to provide a couple of 17 acres on site for the preservation. 18 MR. WARBERT: So that where that's going to go 19 (indiscernible) . 20 MR. ARNOLD: We don't know yet. Colliers, 21 obviously, have a significant amount of land 22 holdings in the county. So I think there's ample 23 opportunity for them to identify a place that would 24 be appropriate. I just don't think we've gotten 25 there with staff yet. 12 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: A couple of things. 2 One is you might just identify what buildings are 3 going where there. I mean, not on -- maybe not so 4 much this one, but the other one. You showed us 5 before because -- 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. 7 MR. ARNOLD: That one? 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, yeah. I mean, 9 the -- 10 MR. ARNOLD: Well, you have (indiscernible) . 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah, I did. And -- 12 MR. ARNOLD: This is all the conceptual zoning 13 stuff. I think when we met with you separately, 14 David had a plan that actually showed physical 15 building footprints for what they're proposing 16 longer term here. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. 18 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, just so the 19 hotel, though, is -- is -- is sort of in the -- 20 it's in back of the two-story dementia care center. II 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. But then 23 there's going to be another building that will be 24 south of the hotel. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. So what we're 4 i 4 13 1 looking at is you have the memory care facility 1 2 here. 1 E 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. { 4 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The hotel would be 5 here. And then here we are looking at a skilled 1 6 nursing facility that is being done in conjunction 7 with the long-term acute care hospital. And that 8 was primarily the reason that we sited it there is F i 9 the proximity to the hospital. jl 10 In addition to the retail center that you see 11 under construction right now, we also have plans 12 for a three-story office building that would be 13 along Goodlette-Frank Road. So as Wayne was 14 pointing out, the views of the hotel are very 15 diminished with everything else that's going on 16 around it. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I -- one other 18 thing, and that really -- that's actually one 19 question, but it's three parts. And that is the 20 plans relative to particularly landscaping. I 21 mean, landscaping, lighting and signage is relevant 22 and it's particularly relevant, I think, because, 23 in all fairness, Creekside did a nice job west of 24 Goodlette and always has. I mean, even when the 25 gas station went in, you know, you got live oaks 1 I 1 1 14 1 all the way along there and shrubbery and we would 2 hope that there's a consistency that extends down 1 3 Immokalee and down Goodlette. 1 r 4 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes, definitely. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. 6 MR. ARNOLD: Can I interrupt? 1 T 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. d 8 MR. ARNOLD: You mentioned one thing that I 9 think is important, and I forgot to mention is one 1 g 10 of the deviations that we're also seeking. And I 1 11 don't have the details on the sign, but the 12 shopping center that's under construction, we're 13 going to be asking for a deviation. i 14 The code right now allows it to have a typical 15 directory-type sign for a shopping center, but it 16 says it can only be at the entrance and I think 17 Barron Collier is interested in having it somewhere 18 either mid site between Creekside -- I'm sorry -- i 1 19 Creekside Boulevard and Goodlette-Frank Road. I 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. 1 21 MR. ARNOLD: So I just wanted to mention that. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Between Goodlette 1 23 and Immokalee? 1 1 24 MR. ARNOLD: Rather than just having it at the 9 25 entrance. a s Y 1 15 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Between -- between 2 Creekside Boulevard and Goodlette. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But on Immokalee? 4 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But on Immokalee. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: On Immokalee, yes. 6 MR. ARNOLD: And I forgot to mention, anybody 7 who wants a copy, I think you all probably do at 8 Colliers Reserve, but if you want a copy of 9 anything that we're proposing so you can see all 10 the tract edits, the uses. I think we went over 11 all the proposed uses with you. The brewery was 12 kind of the curve ball that we threw in, but the 13 other uses were typical strip center stuff for 14 business park. 15 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Back on the sign 16 just for a little bit. Sort of how much larger 17 will the sign be than what is -- 18 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Code. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Code, yeah. 20 MR. ARNOLD: I don't think we're asking for -- 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We're not asking for 22 a deviation on the dimensional standards of it. 23 It's more -- it's the placement of it. 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Oh, okay. I got 25 you. Okay. 16 1 1 The other thing would be is, if there's going 2 to be a coffee -- I don't know anything about -- 3 about how the cars are going to go. A comment I 4 would make is this intersection gets busier and } i 5 busier. If you get a drive-through that might be 6 hypothetically a Starbucks, you know, that 7 generates a lot of traffic, you know, for anybody 8 that goes over to the McDonald's over by Walmart, 9 you'll see that, you know, a lot of the time of 10 day, cars are literally sort of coming out that 11 parking lot trying to get in through the 12 drive-through. 13 MR. ARNOLD: I think, keep in mind, the 14 restriction that we're imposing isn't so -- we 15 don't want a McDonald's, and that wasn't the intent 16 of the restriction. We think -- the restriction, 17 initially, was so that you couldn't have 18 McDonald's, Burger King, Kentucky Fried Chicken, 19 the whole host of those. I know you're sensitive 20 to that being at your front door. 21 This really would modify the restriction so we 22 could not have a freestanding fast food which is 23 going to rule out, I think, the gamut of most of 24 the things we typically associate with fast food. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah, and I 17 ` h 1 appreciate that. But that wasn't really my point. 2 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: My point was 4 actually more the traffic flow and the amount of 5 traffic if it's a -- if it's a transaction place 6 like a Starbucks that generates a lot of traffic, 7 because, you know, that's a -- that's a busy 8 intersection, but it's going to become a lot 9 busier, particularly when we all know that the fi E ' 10 county wants to make Goodlette-Frank, you know, a 11 four-lane road coming up through Pelican Marsh. ij 12 MR. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. it 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You know, and that's 14 going to happen. And so, you know, it -- we're not 15 traffic experts. That's not our point. You know, 16 it's just that that's going to add a lot more 17 traffic if it's -- if it's a -- if it's a Starbucks 18 kind of place than it is if it's a nail salon. 19 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. 21 MR. ARNOLD: No, understood. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And so the traffic 23 flow and how that works needs to -- you know, is 24 important. 25 MR. ARNOLD: And I think we talked to you a 18 ga¢7 1 little bit about that. I mean, there's going to be 2 a right in, right out access point that serves the 3 center on Goodlette-Frank Road, and then there 4 would be access at Creekside Boulevard, which is a 5 directional left, right? 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Directional 7 (indiscernible) . I � 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Sort of hitchhiking 9 on Jim's -- when you get a plan approved, and I 10 know nothing about it, do you have to approve where si 11 there's going to be stoplights? Is that part of 12 the plan? 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Typically, yes. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Can you tell me 15 where there's going to be stoplights added from 16 where they are now? 17 MR. ARNOLD: There's proposed to have one at 18 the entrance that will go up the road that always 19 goes -- is it Creekside Way? 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Creekside Boulevard. 21 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, Creekside Boulevard that 22 extends all the way to US 41, the signal recently 23 went up in front of the Granada Shoppes. 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is that the only one 25 that's planned in this plan? 19 1 MR. ARNOLD: Well, there was another one 2 that's already in place that's at Goodlette and 3 then you have one at the other entrance that you 4 all use_ 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But the only new one 6 is the -- 3 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The east side -- 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) is 9 right there. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: This one -- 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- would eventually 13 come in once it's -- once it meets (indiscernible) . 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah, I understand. 15 MR. ARNOLD: Anything else? 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So back to the 17 landscaping, my last question. 18 You know, so any comment about the 19 landscaping? 20 MR. ARNOLD: Well, there's standards in the 21 PUD right now that have landscaping standards for 22 Immokalee Road that I think you all have been 23 through. That's -- nothing is changing with regard 24 to that. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. Well, and I 20 1 knew that it had to meet standards. It was just, 2 you know, our hope that it would be similar to what 3 you've done on the west side. 4 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The pallet will be 5 similar as to what's been done on the west side, 6 but just keep in mind that, on the west side, you 7 know that's to -- it had a 15-year head start, so 8 that the, you know, the maturity of the vegetation 9 is -- there's going to be a disparity there until 10 such time -- 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Oh, I know that. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- that it can catch 13 up, but, yes, I mean we plan on making it have a 14 similar theme between the two areas. 15 MR. ARNOLD: Anything else? Did I leave 16 anything out? I captured all those, but 17 (indiscernible) do it again. 18 (Multiple simultaneous speakers.) 19 MR. ARNOLD: We'll keep in mind, too, that we 20 already have a dialogue with the folks at Colliers 21 Reserve, but, you know, there's every chance that 22 there's going to be some more give and take with 23 staff as we continue through the process. 24 So like I said, you know, we've got contact 25 information for you. We'll be happy to get you 21 1 changes as we resubmit to the county or they 2 request changes. They (indiscernible) . I don't 3 know. Nancy just hasn't had the benefit of seeing 4 some of this on paper yet, so. 5 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: When do you think 6 it will be in? 7 MR. ARNOLD: Soon. 8 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: It sounds like 9 it's up to David. 10 MR. GENSON: Yeah. I mean, I think we'll be 11 ready to resubmit here within the week. 12 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Cool. 13 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, we need -- we need to work 14 on some of the FAR language just to make sure we're 15 covered and gets it where we want it to be. 16 MR. GENSON: And there was one comment from 17 the county attorney that we're just getting 18 addressed. 19 MR. ARNOLD: Oh, right. I forgot about that. 20 They wanted authorization from Arthrex with regard 21 to the change. So we're working on getting that 22 letter from Arthrex. We had to contact the postal 23 service as well, but they were in no -- no response 24 from them. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Oh, really? 22 1 MR. ARNOLD: We maybe haven't received their 2 mail. I don't know. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: They use FedEx. 4 MR. ARNOLD: Anyway, anything else from 5 anybody? 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You had made comment 7 when we met earlier about the west side. That's 8 all bought up by Arthrex now; is that correct? 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Close to it. 10 They've -- they've closed on the Royal Palm Bank 11 and the Polaris building and will be buying the 12 medical offices and the vacant land down here. So 13 they will own basically all of this. They already 14 own that and then they obviously have their complex 15 down here. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. So they're 17 buying the large vacant piece of property right 18 here? 19 UNIDENTIFIED.MALE VOICE: That's correct. 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. 21 MR. ARNOLD: All right. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yep. 23 MR. ARNOLD: Anything else? Did I forget 24 anything? No? Rich, you were taking notes back 25 there. Get all the proposed changes? 1 23 1 MR. YOVANOVICH: You got all the highlights. 2 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. Good. 3 Well, you know how to reach us. So feel free 4 to contact us if you have any other questions. 5 Like I said, we'll certainly keep you in the loop 6 and keep the dialogue going. 7 Thanks. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thank you, Wayne. 9 MR. ARNOLD: Are we closed? Adjourned? 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Adjourned. 11 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. Thank you all. 12 (Recording concluded.) 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 1 STATE OF FLORIDA 1 2 COUNTY OF COLLIER 3 4 I, Joyce B. Howell, do hereby certify that: 5 1. The foregoing pages numbered 1 through 23 6 contain a full, true and correct transcript of 7 proceedings in the above-entitled matter, transcribed 8 by me to the best of my knowledge and ability from a 9 digital audio recording. 10 2. I am not counsel for, related to, or 11 employed by any of the parties in the above-entitled 12 cause. 13 3. I am not financially or otherwise 14 interested in the outcome of this case. 15 16 SIGNED AND CERTIFIED: 17 18 19 20 Date: June 29, 2015 21 22 23 24 25 1 1 2 3 4 5 TRANSCRIPT OF THE 6 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING 7 FOR CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD 8 March 4, 2015 9 5:30 p.m 10 11 12 13 Appearances: 14 WAYNE ARNOLD RICHARD YQVANOVICH, ESQ. 15 TIMOTHY HALL NANCY GUNDLACH 16 SUE FAULKER DAVID GENSON 17 F 18 19 i 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 1 MR. ARNOLD: All right. Good evening, 2 everybody. I'm Wayne Arnold with GradyMinor, and 3 this is Sharon Umpenhour, who you received your 4 neighborhood information meeting notice letter 5 from, and we're recording the meeting as we're 6 required to by the county. 7 David Genson, who most of you have met before, 8 with Barron Collier Companies, Rich Yovanovich, 9 land use lawyer you guys know. 10 And in the back of the room is Tim Hall. He's 11 our environmental consultant, in case anybody had 12 any questions about the environmental changes we 13 were making. 14 Nancy Gundlach is the staff planner 15 coordinating the zoning amendment. And behind her 16 is Sue Faulker, who is with now the comprehensive 17 planning group, and she's kind of monitoring. 18 She's moved over from the MOP into long-range 19 planning, so she's seeing what we do. 20 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) . 21 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, so -- so you all got notice 22 we're revising again the Creekside PUD. We're 23 proposing amendments to it. 24 And, generally, what we're doing is expanding 25 the business district uses by 70,000 square feet. 3 1 We're making a reduction in the industrial square 2 footage by 70,000 square feet and the business 3 district uses get broken up an additional 20,000 4 square feet of retail and another 50,000 square 5 feet of office. 6 So we've also -- I think, to the Collier's 7 Reserve folks, we've provided the list of uses 8 that's the most current that we sent you last week, 9 Nancy, that has the list of proposed uses, and 10 generally what we were trying to do, there's a site 11 development plan pending in Collier County right 12 now for a retail center at the corner of 13 Goodlette-Frank Road and Immokalee Road, and the 14 idea is to allow that to become more of a true 15 retail center and put uses in it that you would 16 commonly find in a lot of other retail centers. 17 When this was originally drafted and approved 18 back in the county, the uses were thought, really, 19 were going to be more medical/retail oriented, and 20 I think the idea here is to put more uses that are 21 more commonly found in strip centers. 22 One of the uses, and I'll point out that we 23 added to the list, was a brewery, which is not a 24 traditional C4 use, but the idea that the Barron 25 Collier folks have is to put in a small craft beer 4 1 facility in which you could taste and, I guess, 2 potentially buy craft beers that are manufactured 3 in that small space. 4 We don't have a limitation in the version of 5 the document that was sent to you, but Mr. Genson 6 assures me that we will limit the size of that 7 facility to 2,000 square feet. 8 So that will be a change that we'll make, 9 Nancy, and get to you, and any other changes that 10 may come about, we'll certainly consider and make 11 those. 12 What we're also proposing to do affects the 13 master concept plan. The plan that's currently 14 approved for Creekside looks like this, okay? And 15 what we're really talking about changing all lies 16 east of Goodlette-Frank Road. And what we're -- 17 you can see the lake that was on the aerial that's 18 been constructed back in this triangular-shaped 19 lake down in here. And this is all preserve 20 adjacent to it. 21 What we're proposing to do is modify that so 22 that the lake gets reclaimed in part, reshaped, the 23 preserve gets smaller and the business tract 24 extends south behind what's being built -- is that 25 (indiscernible) assisted living? I'm not sure how 5 1 you refer to it. 2 But so it would -- 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It's down at the 4 corner, right? 5 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. It's at our far eastern 6 corner. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. 8 MR. ARNOLD: So I'll just try to hold those 9 next to each other. You can see the business tract 10 extends. And in doing so, we're reshaping the 11 preserve and lake, and in doing the reshaping of 12 the preserve, it doesn't really impact you 13 directly, but the county has a minimum requirement 14 for retaining vegetation on site. We're proposing 15 to go offsite with about two acres of our preserve. 16 And so that's really the bulk of the master 17 plan change. We've updated the acreages to reflect 18 the changed business tract acreages and the 19 vegetation, both the wetland and upland areas, 20 rectifying those acreages with the new plan. 21 And that's kind of the genesis of what we're 22 trying to do. I mean, you all have the benefit of 23 -- are you from Collier's Reserve too? 24 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Yes. 25 MR. ARNOLD: You are? So all of you have had P a 1 6 1 the benefit at least of seeing the detailed list, 2 and that's good. 3 So, you know, if anybody has any specific 4 questions, we can certainly talk about them. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So everything is 6 right across the street from our entrance. Nothing 7 changes there? fi 8 MR. ARNOLD; Well, I mean, technically, not 9 with this proposal, but I will tell you that with 10 the B district changes that are proposed, they're 11 not specific to only the eastern tract. So, 12 theoretically, that business tract could get some 13 of these other uses. I don't think the Polaris 14 office building is likely to put in a hardware 15 store in the bottom floor, but, technically, the 16 way this is structured, it applies throughout the B 17 district, all of these uses. 18 So we've asked for those uses, deviation 19 related to the offsite preserve and then the 20 revised master plan. 21 Yes, sir? 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) 23 preserve (indiscernible) . 24 MR. ARNOLD: Where is it going to be located? 25 I don't think we know for sure yet. Tim Hall, our 7 1 environmental consultant with Terrell Hall, has 2 looked at some other parcels for the county. 3 Barron Collier is doing the rezoning for a project 4 out in Immokalee that also will require some 5 offsite mitigation. So we're looking at some 6 parcels that would satisfy the requirements for 7 this two-acre offsite preserve and the preserve 8 requirements for that parcel as well, but today we 9 haven't identified a specific location. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is that typical 11 (indiscernible) ? 12 MR. ARNOLD: Well, it's only fairly recent 13 that you've been allowed to go offsite for 14 preserves at the county. So it's kind of new. I 15 haven't had any experience where we've had to ' 16 identify the exact location. � 1 17 Rich, you may have. I don't -- it 18 MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. it 19 MR. ARNOLD: I don't know. But I'm not aware 20 of any where we've had to identify up front where 21 we're doing the offsite mitigation. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) 23 preserve would be out east of our (indiscernible) . 24 MR. ARNOLD: Well, and that's, technically, a 25 possibility. I mean, that's where the larger green I 8 1 spaces are. From the -- I can't speak for the 2 county environmental person, but when you look at 3 this, once you develop all this, and we've got this 4 little strip of preserve left, its functional value 5 for wildlife or the environment are pretty limited 6 when you see it sandwiched between a wastewater 7 plant and the park that's got its improvements and 8 then, you know, the business uses. So you've got 9 two acres of area that really doesn't satisfy a 10 whole lot. 11 So we would look to have it in an area that is 12 more contiguous to more open space or other 13 preserve lands. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Where's the filling 15 station? 16 MR. ARNOLD: This is the 7-Eleven here. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. So there will 18 be something going in beside that? 19 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. I think that was purchased 20 by a local doctor (indiscernible) . 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Like mostly medical? 22 MR. ARNOLD: He is a -- the doctor, the 23 person, I think, is a plastic surgeon, if I'm not 24 mistaken. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. 9 1 MR. ARNOLD: But I mean, it doesn't mean he 2 couldn't sell it. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. 4 MR. ARNOLD: But a plastic surgeon did buy it 5 (indiscernible) interest in building on it. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: That's where the 7 tire store was going to be. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. Plastic 9 surgeon (indiscernible) . 10 MR. ARNOLD: Exactly. Presto-chango, tire 11 store (indiscernible) plastic surgeon. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: That might be 13 compatible. 14 But how about the food market? When you 15 talked about the -- the use of the food -- 16 MR. ARNOLD: Oh, yeah, I should explain that, 17 too. Under the -- under eating places, for 18 instance, we want to take out the reference to the 19 -- we added a reference to standalone and it says, 20 and drive-through. 21 And we put in there -- we talk about 22 standalone, because as part of David's, you know, 23 retail center, there's an opportunity to have a 24 pickup window for a -- we'll call it a doughnut 25 shop that might want to locate as an end-cap unit 10 1 in the shopping center portion of this. 2 So, in order to make sure that the county 3 doesn't want to consider that to be a fast food 4 restaurant, we're trying to caveat this so that -- 5 when this was originally done, I think the intent 6 was to keep out the McDonald's, Burger Kings, KFCs, 7 and things like that, but the world has evolved a 8 little with these and the Dunkin Donuts and the 9 Starbucks of the world, where the other uses used 10 to not have a pickup window, currently do. So 11 we're trying to clarify that. 12 And part of that clarification is the county 13 doesn't really classify a doughnut shop as a { 14 restaurant. A coffee shop is a restaurant. A 15 doughnut shop is a retail bakery. And, you know, 16 that's because the county uses the standard 17 industrial classification rule that was written in 18 19 something that preceded the internet and most of 19 the other uses we find. So we use this fine book 20 that the county still references, called the 21 Standard Industrial Classification Manual, written 22 by our federal government back in the '60s. 23 So there's no reference to internet or 24 computers in here unless you're working at NASA, 25 so. 11 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you're -- when 2 you're asking for another permitted use of a retail 3 bakery, that's what you're considering as like a 4 doughnut shop or something of that nature? 5 MR. ARNOLD: Correct. Yep. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Does Starbucks come 7 under that or not? 8 MR. ARNOLD: Starbucks actually comes under 9 the eating places that are already approved. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The eating places? 11 MR. ARNOLD: I mean, it's odd, just the 12 semantics of the way they're referred to in our 13 codes, but that's where we are. I mean, in a lot 14 of other jurisdictions, they have more generic 15 terms to refer to these. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The drive-in window 17 has the same impact on (indiscernible) traffic 18 flow, probably, right (indiscernible) Collier 19 County? 20 MR. ARNOLD: Well, the good news is, for them, 21 in designing a retail center with a pickup window 22 on one end, they can deal appropriately with the 23 stacking and the ingress and egress, and knowing 24 that it's not going to be a standalone facility as 25 an outparcel right on the corner, we hope, gives g 12 1 you some comfort that this is just another 2 functional part of this shopping center. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Normal traffic would 4 increase, probably? 5 MR. ARNOLD: Well, I mean, I think the 6 traffic, you know, we've done the traffic analysis 7 and -- 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Did it have an 9 impact on the traffic? 10 MR. ARNOLD: No. I mean, from the county's 11 standpoint, a shopping center includes such a wide 12 gamut of uses, and the traffic analysis that was 13 done doesn't have any problems with functional 14 capacity of the roads, et cetera. 15 I think you're going to see some big benefits 16 once the light is fully functional, and David, you 17 may (indiscernible) . I know the mast heads have 18 all been installed, the one at Creekside. I think 19 they're planning, by the end of April, to have it 20 (indiscernible) after season. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is that on Creekside 22 Boulevard? 23 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. 24 Anything else? 25 Are you going to yell at us? (Indiscernible) . 13 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We'd like to. We, 2 from Collier's Reserve, essentially, we bought 3 property from your -- from your same company. 4 MR. ARNOLD: Right. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Cousins. 6 MR. ARNOLD: Cousins, yeah. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Cousins. yi 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, yeah, it could 9 be cousins. 10 MR. ARNOLD: Family. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But I'm sure that 12 you all had in mind when we bought in there, and it 13 was kind of peaceful out here, that you were going 14 to pack us up with all this trash later on. I 15 mean, this wasn't something you just dreamed up 16yesterday. It's - probably 15, 20 years - 17 MR. ARNOLD: Well, things have evolved a lot. 18 You know, when I was at Collier County government, 19 working there, this was going to be a regional mall 20 and proposals had been submitted to make this a 21 large regional mall, and that went away in favor of 22 the business park that you see now, which I think 23 has turned out to be a really beautiful park. It's 24 well landscaped and it's matured now over time and 25 I think the uses we're trying to do here are just 14 1 complementary to everything that happens in this 2 area. 3 I know that, from a retail standpoint and a 4 dining standpoint, I think that there's an 5 underservice in this sort of west of Airport Road 6 market, and I think David, you know, you guys know 7 the math and the numbers, but I think that, you 8 know, you feel like there's more retail 9 opportunities that can certainly make it right 10 here. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Who are you planning 12 on serving with all of this stuff? People from 13 Collier's Reserve and Imperial and folks like that? 14 MR. ARNOLD: Hopefully -- I mean, hopefully, 15 you, too. But I mean, when you look at the 16 employment that Arthrex has there on a daily basis, 17 I mean, you've got a ready supply who are, you 18 know, need a dry cleaner, need a restaurant, need, 19 you know, all the stuff to do, and hardware store 20 and whatever the case may be. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But all the 22 entrances and exits will be inside? 23 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. As -- you see the road 24 alignment that's been constructed in front of the 25 hospital and goes all the way now through to ( 15 gyp 1 Immokalee Road. This is our master plan. That's 2 this road. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And it doesn't 4 change. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: No. 6 MR. ARNOLD: There's no other access point 7 that's shown -- 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: A right in, right 9 out. 10 MR. ARNOLD: A right in, right out that's 11 probably in this area that's been on the master 12 plan up here for a long, long time, yeah. That's 13 the only (indiscernible) . 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. 15 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Do you still have 16 plans to build a hotel in that area? 17 MR. ARNOLD: Well, I mean, I think the -- I 18 guess, technically, yes, it's still on the table, 19 but the reality is, I think the hospital kind of 20 took over the opportunity for a hotel. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. I mean, the 22 reality is the -- the only remaining location for 23 the hotel use would be back here in this corner. 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Overlooking the 25 septic? 16 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I thought the hotel 3 was limited to the area where the long-term care 4 facility is being built -- 5 MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think -- 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- from my 7 recollection. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The site plan that 9 Barron Collier has pending for the retail center is 10 at the corner, right? 11 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, it's for the corner parcel. 12 So I think when you (indiscernible) that, this, 13 that, there's -- 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I think he's asking, 15 was it limited just to where the hospital is. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Oh. 17 MR. ARNOLD: I thought it was all of tract E, 18 but we had some certain setbacks from Immokalee 19 Road. 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You could take a 21 certain portion of -- 22 MR. ARNOLD: Correct. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- of the other 24 tract for the hotel and since the hospital -- I 25 mean, the long-term care facility is now -- I don't 17 1 think you'll have any room for it. 2 MR. ARNOLD: No. I don't think we will either 3 unless -- a 4 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I think it will 5 (indiscernible) to have a hotel. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) . 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I would think so. 9 MR. ARNOLD: Right. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But the building 11 looks like nice. They're doing a nice job. And I 12 did see in the plans that we don't -- we're not 13 going to have any bald cypress trees. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah, and -- 15 MR. ARNOLD: I don't know. I'm not going to 16 speak to exactly what vegetation is (indiscernible) 17 or not, but, you know, the practical effect is we 18 have to ask for a deviation to go offsite with the 19 preservation. That's what we're proposing to do. 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But all those 21 preserve areas, wilderness area, the one that you 22 see by your entrance and the one that's located at 23 -- behind the lake off of Goodlette stay the same 24 and (indiscernible) . 25 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. ( 18 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is the green space 1 2 going to be a drainage area there? What did you 3 call that area back there? 4 MR. ARNOLD: Which area? I'm sorry. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Where the pond was. 6 MR. ARNOLD: Where this pond was? 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. 8 MR. ARNOLD: The lake gets reshaped -- 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It's still going to 10 be there. ' 11 MR. ARNOLD: -- from the triangular shape into 12 more of a rectangular shaped lake. 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So there is going to 14 be a pond? 15 MR. ARNOLD: Oh, yes. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you've got some 17 set aside (indiscernible) drainage (indiscernible)? 18 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. Anything else? I 19 Nancy? We don't have hearing dates yet. I I ' 20 mean, this process just -- been through this 21 before, but, you know, we've submitted an 22 application. 23 We're in the sufficiency stage. We're 24 required to hold a neighborhood information meeting 25 before we can go to the Planning Commission. 19 1 We've responded to staff's sufficiency 2 comments. We haven't heard back from them to know 3 whether or not we're good to go, they need more 4 changes. So we don't have a hearing date yet. 5 My best guess tells me that we're 60 days out 6 from the hearing, I would think. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is that with Mr. 8 Strain? 9 MR. ARNOLD: Well, no, I think this would be 10 the full Planning Commission and the Board of 11 County Commissioners. We don't qualify for the 12 hearing examiner because we're adding square 13 footage, essentially, and we're changing open 14 space. 15 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: And uses. 16 MR. ARNOLD: Oh, yeah, and uses, right. Thank 17 you. 18 So, no, we don't qualify just to go to the 19 hearing examiner. So you'll get another notice for 20 the Planning Commission. The zoning signs will get 21 posted on the property when we have that date 22 established and you all know how to get in touch 23 with us. I mean, we'll make sure you have all the 24 latest documents. 25 Sharon, I know, sent -- I forget the 20 1 gentleman's name that you provided information to, 2 but we'll be happy to send, you know, once we get 3 closer to hearing, whatever that information is. 4 Anything else? 5 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Whenever you have 6 the information, you can also ask me, too. 7 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, I'm sure Nancy has got 8 cards or can give you her e-mail. 9 Anything else? 10 Adjourned? 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thank you. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thank you. 13 MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. Appreciate it. 14 (Proceedings concluded.) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 g9 S 21 1 STATE OF FLORIDA 2 COUNTY OF COLLIER 3 4 I, Joyce B. Howell, do hereby certify that: 5 1. The foregoing pages numbered 1 through 20 6 contain a full, true and correct transcript of 7 proceedings in the above-entitled matter, transcribed 8 by me to the best of my knowledge and ability from a 9 digital audio recording. 10 2. I am not counsel for, related to, or 11 employed by any of the parties in the above-entitled 12 cause. 13 3. I am not financially or otherwise 14 interested in the outcome of this case. 15 16 SIGNED AND CERTIFIED: 17 18 Date: March 9, 2015 Joyce B. Howell 19 0 20 21 22 23 24 25 GundlachNancy From: AshtonHeidi Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 1:20 PM To: GundlachNancy Subject: FW: Creekside Commerce Park PUD Attachments: White Oaks_Assignment and Limitation of Density Rights.pdf; Rani InvestmentsAssignment and Limitation of Density Rights.pdf; Bayshore Memory Care Assignment and Limitation of Density Rights.pdf; US Attorney Florida 03-26-2015.pdf; US Attorney General 03-26-2015 L.pdf; Artherx Letter 11-13-2015.pdf; Certified Mail Receipts.pdf Nancy, As you requested, attached are the owner consent documents and the letters to the US Attorney General. The United States Postal Service parcel is located in the I/C District,and we have not received a consent from them. Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY 3299 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 800 Naples, FL 34112 (239)252-8400 From: Dianna Quintanilla [mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com] Sent: Friday,January 15, 2016 11:48 AM To: AshtonHeidi Cc: 'David Genson'; 'Wayne Arnold (WArnold@gradyminor.com)'; GundlachNancy Subject: Creekside Commerce Park PUD Good morning, Please see the attached letter regarding Creekside Commerce Park PUD—Ownership Consent with relevant attachments. Thank you. Dianna Quintani&i COLEMAN Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich,Esq. YOVi N OV 1 C H Coleman Yovanovich& Koester,P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North,Suite 300 KU E STE R Naples,Florida 34103 (239)435-3535 (239)435-1218(t) This message is intended 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,or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution or copy of this communication Is strictly prohibited.if you have received this communication in error,please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message to us at the above email address.Thank you. 1 Attachment E INSTR 4961950 OR 5021 PG 2418 RECORDED 3/31/2014 1:29 PM PAGES 5 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA REC $44.00 i 1 , 1 i This instrument prepared by: Matthew L.Grabinski,Esq. COLEMAN,YOVANOVICH &KOESTER,P.A. 4001 Tamlami Trail N.,#300 Naples,Florida 34103 i After recording return to: 1 Collier Insurance Agency Attn:Brad Stockham 2600 Golden Gate Pkwy. Naples,FL 34105 t 239-403-6869 1 ASSIGNMENT AND LIMITATION OF DENSITY RIGHTS I a [includes reverter for unused development .• . . , cap on foor-to-air ratio for the Property) R C0 THIS ASSIGNMENT ANI iv, 0`' • • ' V Y RIGHTS (this "Assignment") is made this�� day of March,20 ✓ 4' - 'EEKSIDE EA i%` ,a Florida corporation("Assignor") and White Oaks Real Estate . ents of Southwest Flo ,a, I C, a Florida limited liability company("Assignee"). '�� 1 WHEREAS,on or a.• , ,•• -rt s ='i, ,i'`. d .onveying to Assignee the real 1 property described in Exhibit hed he (t , \� :rt. H WHEREAS, Assign. • ires to assign to A�. r. : d ,` _, ee desires to assume from z Assignor,the right to develop g,. to(but no more the I v - .uare feet of commercial space ) which may include up to(but not i,'- . )fifty(50)beds fa"ti y .-'t of a long term care facility,AND (ii)up to an additional 29,492 gross ui eet of medical office-.Ae r.. measured by Collier County);and WHEREAS, Assignee agrees ; lc dei..1-44 nt subject to the automatic forfeiture t provisions and other terms and conditions set NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00), the exchange of mutual promises, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby t. f acknowledged,Assignor and Assignee hereby agree as follows: 1 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated in their 1 entirety in this Agreement. s 2. Density Assienment. Assignor hereby transfers,grants,conveys,and assigns to Assignee, as of this date and as an appurtenance to the Property,the right to develop up(i)up to(but no more than) 57,095 gross square feet of commercial space which may include up to(but not more than)fifty(50)beds for the operation of a Iong term care facility but specifically excludes medical office space,AND(ii) up to an additional 29,492 gross square feet of medical office space(as measured by Collier County)subject to the 1 following: 1 (A)Any portion of the commercial space,allocation of fifty(50)beds,and/or medical office space that is not developed (by the construction of a commercial building) as determined by Assignor(and as measured by Collier County)as of the date that a certificate of occupancy is I issued by Collier County for the initial building constructed on the Property(the"Forfeiture ASSIGNMENT AND LIMITATION OF DENSITY RIGHTS 1 OR 5021 PG 2419 • . Date"), shall be deemed automatically forfeited by Assignee and such commercial space, medical office space,and hospital beds shall automatically revert to Assignor. (B)Assignor shall have the right to record a supplement to this Assignment,at any time after the Forfeiture Date,for the purpose of evidencing the portion of the commercial space,allocation }. of fifty(50)beds,and/or medical office space forfeited(if at all)by Assignee pursuant to sub- paragraph 2(A),above. 1 3. Effect of Assignment; Maximum FAR for Property. By Accepting this Assignment, Assignee agrees that Assignee shall develop no more than(i)up to(but no more than)57,095 gross square feet of commercial space which may include up to(but not more than)fifty(50)beds for the operation of a long term care facility but specifically excludes medical office space,AND(ii)up to an additional 29,492 gross square feet of medical office space(as measured by Collier County)on the Property.This Assignment shall also constitute a direction to any governmental or private entity as to the commercial space assigned i hereunder(including the retail use rights that are subject to automatic forfeiture hereunder)and all such parties are hereby authorized and directed t. ••. :.. comply with any written request, notice or demand made by Assignee with respect • ' �` -• it- :l space. 13v accepting this assignment, l Assignee also agrees(for itself and siii ? tle)tha " •' . ea ratio(FAR)for the Property shall not.at any time,exceed.46.unle •t,4 calls approved by As L, • .'n writing(which written approval must include a specific referenc o • Assignment). I 4. Acceptance. As • -.4w r- ' •.f y, ereby accepts the foregoing assignment of density rights, bje • r o,• .• t,r a io hereof. i 5. No 'e resen :Q?„ ,t•-••''' . -r. . Ass'_, n A .de solely for the purpose of l assigning (and limiting) the .cv,•pment density of th=,t'ro•• the applicable Planned Unit Development Ordinance, and not be deemed a -'i- to •4. ,•r warranty by Assignor thatt PAssignee's proposed developmeProperty(in a mann • to Assignee)may actually occur as intended by Assignee.Assignee: 'y ges that various.; d governmental permits,conditions and approvals must be obtained by A 'and expense)prior to Assignee� x! ) gnbeing able to conduct horizontal and/or verticall r•it I, : ' Tfrat the Property. 6. Successors and Assigns. This Assignment shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing,this Assignment shall be deemed a covenant running with title to the Property. 7 Miscellaneous. This Assignment shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of Florida. Executed counterpart copies of the original of this Assignment shall be treated as if the original were so executed and shall bind the executing party with the same force and effect as the original. 8. Recording. This Assignment shall be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,Assignor and Assignee have caused this instrument to be executed as of the day and year first above written. , {signatures on following pages) ASSIGNMENT AND LIMITATION OF DENSITY RIGHTS 2 • 1 i OR 5021 PG 2420 a 1 t t 1 1 WITNE SES: ASSIGNOR: l /� j l Creekside East,Inc., 1 %A „i A a Florida co••o.. Print Name: i „:Mil... .' 1 1 1:x—, By: A Print Name: 1= - .-, vii t tG.ir,cti+-. Do re- .Baird,V e President i 3 1 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me,this dg of March,2014 by Douglas E. Baird,as Vice President of Creekside East,Inc.,a Florida corporation,on behalf of said corporation. He(✓( is personally known to me or ( ) has ,. . . _ as evidence of identification. / 1 (SEAL) """w MARY E.• r.0 I.Au Ii�2..:*i1..i .i i.1*1 1*1 ' . --• ' . •'''' NO WiliL IC 0, •• ,fA Ex res.:, •• r woe7f"T t (Type or Print) n C 0 j) % ilnEPires: H � � A.Gp OAr, IRS i EIEC 1 I i i 1 i I 1 t iI i 1 1 i I ASSIGNMENT AND LIMITATION OF DENSITY RIGHTS 3 OR 5021 PG 2421 • ASSIGNEE: Witnesses: White Oaks Real Estate Investments of Southwest Florida,LLC, a Florida limited liability company .• ame: j 71l Print Name: tick] t1..I.n/) �14 Title: w.i.tt -- C)9___A_Cle..1- Lk--a,. A al -.- . Print Name: �'1 ra..& ' (I °n ip- 6c COt jai, c STATE OF r*/SSdOA/ COUNTY OF e.APN 6;.en A!•d The foregoing ins acCIdIFfOV. ,_, 2 7 of March, 2014 by GJ/Lx.///// /K ,as the Man:' r of • Real Estate Investments of Southwest Florida, LLC, a Fl. , 'mited liability corn.:. . b• y •f the company. He/she is (✓) personally known to me or( ) ,• • . educed CJ as evidence of identification. 0..p 71/E jR C (SEAL) NOTAR �C 9 11 / RODNEY J.KYR Name: e)sw AT ‘1' r7"16Vg N (Type or Print) C9mmissioned for Cape Gkardeau My Commission Expires: >4A'GN /.5;. 0/5 My Commission E au4es:March 15 201 Commission NcmDer 114 �5 ASSIGNMENT AND LIMITATION OF DENSITY RIGHTS 4 *** OR 5021 PG 2422 *** EXHIBIT"A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY ALL THAT PART OF TRACT "5", CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK EAST, PLAT BOOK 54, PAGES 84 THROUGH 87, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING A PART OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 27, SOUTH 01'09'43" EAST 696.85 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 88'50'17" WEST 559.33 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF CREEKSIDE BOULEVARD EAST AS DEPICTED ON THE PLAT OF SAID CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK EAST AND THE POINT OF BOULEVARD BEGINNING; EAST THENCE s. " ' �,w� J+•LINECOF SAID CONTINUE ALONG CREEKSIDE THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID 43; J+ IDE BOULUL��i',=• AST 126.74 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULA- �+ 1 - CONCAVE NOR ' ' 'T HAVING A RADIUS OF 86.00 FEET THROUGH A E ' LE OF 84'2. '05 AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH B- RS SO- + WES 11 .57 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY N S • ' iEVARD EAST; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHER ' �� B•ULEVARD EAST SOUTH 84'26'05" WEST 428.1 ! ' 0 t • ' ONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID CREEK' :t - k`T; : .- .'-T T ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENTIAL C O�+ ' CURVE CON►-,VE 0'��*��• -T HAVING A RADIII3 OF 25.00 FEET THR• li' A CENTRAL 4.. E • �.' 9'58'17" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORi CH BEARS NO- . -7 '48" WEST 35.35 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAS INE OF GOODL• RANK ROAD (130' RIGHT OF WAY) ; THENCE ALONG 47- - 'TERLY + = GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD (130' RIGHT OF WAY) NORT' ' • ti + w 351.51 FEET; THENCE EAST 565.33 FEET TO THE POINT OF . ^.,, `' .. CONTAINING 4.36 ACRES MORE OR LESS. ASSIGNMENT AND LIMITATION OF DENSITY RIGHTS 5 This instrument prepared by: INSTR 5016161 OR 5065 PG 790 Matthew L•.:Graliinski,Esq. , RECORDED 8/6!2014 5:02 PM PAGES 5 �• . • COLEMAN,YOVANOVICH DIGHT E.I3ROCK,CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT •&'KOESTER;F.A. , , COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA '400I Ta_miami Trail N.,•#300 - . RFC$44.00 •Naples,Florida 34103 After recording return to: Collier:Insurance"Agency,:LLC'' • - Attn:,Brad Stockham : -2600 Golden Gate.Pkwy.• ' Naples;Florida'34105 . • ASSIGNMENT•AND LIMITATION OF DENSITY RIGHTS . [providing•for'automatic reversion of unused density rights] • THIS, ASSIGNMENT.. AND LIMITATION - OF' DENSITY RIGHTS (this 'q.' - • . "Assignment") .is-made this.5"'. day of August, 2014,.by Creekside East, Inc., a Florida • - -corporation ('`Assignor") in'favor.of Bayshore.Naples Memory Care, LLC,.a Florida limited . liabili'• .com an ("Assignee"). • WITNESSETH THAT: • ,WHEREAS;.on or.about'the date hereof, Assignor is selling to Assignee, and Assignee .. . • is purchasing and acquiring from Assignor, the real property described in Exhibit"A", attached • :hereto(the"Property");and WHEREAS, Assignor desires to assign to Assignee, arid Assignee desires to assume . ' • from Assignor,the right to.develop'52,747 square feet of air conditioned space and 1,096 square • . feet o€outside space.for a total'Of 53,843 square feet of space, subject to the terms and conditions ', .-hereof: • . . NOW THEREFORE, in.'consideration of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00), the exchange of • mutual promises,and other good-and'valuable consideration,the receipt arid sufficiency of which '' 'is hereby'acknowledged,Assignor and Assignee hereby agree as follows: ' • 1. . ' Recitals:. The.above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated in r••'; . ':their entirety in this Agreement. • 2. "Density Assignment. Assignor hereby transfers, grants, conveys, and assigns to• • ' . • Assignee, as;of this:date and as an appurtenance to the Property, the right to develop 52,747 • • . square•feet of air conditioned space and 1,,096 square•feet of outside space for a total.of 53,843 _ .square,feet-of•space (the•:"Density.Rights"). Assignor acknowledges that Assignee intends to • •develop-an assisted living facility,containing at least seventy (70) beds, and.the.Density Rights .• • assigned.hereby are intended 16•permit such intended use of the Property,'subject to Assignee 'obtaining all;other necessary approvals. • . 3: : Effect of Assignment;•Unused Density Rights. By Accepting this Assignment, . '" Assignee agrees that'Assignee shall.develop 52;747 square feet.of air conditioned.space and • , 1,096 square.feet of outside space•for a total of 53,843 square-feet of space on the Property, 5495281v3 ' .. Pagel of 5 • • which'will contain at least seventy(70)beds. This Assignment shall also constitute a direction to • any..governmental or private entity as to the number of square feet assigned hereunder and all such parties are hereby authorized and directed to. rely upon and comply with any written • request,-notice or demand made-by Assignee with-respect to such assigned space. Upon the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by Collier County after the construction of the initial • building on the Property, any unused Density Rights (as determined by the final building plans • •reviewed and approved by Collier County)shall automatically revert to Assignor. Assignor shall have the right to record a notice in the Collier County public records (which notice shall include a legal description of the Property as well as the recording information for this Assignment) for • the purpose'of placing Assignee and Assignee's successor's in title on notice as to amount of unused'Density Rights (if any) that have automatically reverted to Assignor pursuant to the • express terms hereof. 4. Acceptance. Assignee, as the owner of the Property, hereby accepts the foregoing assignment.of Density.Rights, subject to the terms, conditions and limitations hereof, • including the automatic reversionary interest in the unused Density Rights, as set forth in • Paragraph 3;above. 5. .No Representation 'No Warranty. This Assignment is made..solely for the purpose of assigning(and'limiting)the development density of the Property under the applicable • . Planned Unit Development Ordinance,and shall not be deemed a representation nor warranty by • Assignor that Assignee's proposed development of the Property (in a manner acceptable to • Assignee) may actually occur as intended by Assignee. Assignee acknowledges that various • privateand governmental permits, conditions and approvals must be obtained by Assignee(and at Assignee's risk arid expense)prior to Assignee being able to conduct horizontal and/or vertical developmentactivities at the Property. • 6. Covenant Running with the Land. The Density Rights assigned hereby shall be • appurtenant to and run with title to the Property, whether or not separately conveyed, and the automatic reversionary interest in the unused Density Rights; as set forth in Paragraph 3, above shall also•encumber and run.with,title to the Property. Assignor may assign its rights to enforce the covenants and automatic reversionary interest in the unused Density Rights, asset forth'in Paragraph,3, above, to any person or entity-owning land within five hundred (500)•feet of the Property,•and/or to any property owners association or condominium association established under any declaration that either encumbers the Property, or encumbers any property within five • hundred(500):feet of the Property. • 7 Miscellaneous. This Assignment shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State,of Florida..Venue for any proceeding to enforce any of the rights or obligations hereunder.shall be in Collier County, Florida, and the prevailing party in any litigation shall be • • entitled'to recover attorneys' fees and costs from the non-prevailing party. 8. ' Recording. This Assignment shall be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. (Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank-Signatures Begin on Next Page) • • • • Pagel 2 of 5 I 1. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor and Assignee have caused this instrument to be executed as of the day and year first above written. 1 1 ASSIGNOR: 1 . Creekside EaLa t £t By: ; k Print Name: '�aviceN C. stoc,(ca�,., Print N .,• •s nL ._ -, � Title: V 1 0G PP 5 tDo•rr t O�KL �� • Print Name: /—``�"" e04 Ac LerjeTY1 t [CORPORATE SEAL] k. Dated: -2s-fy 1 s STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER 1 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this a,...day of July,2014,by Qtr, as Hite, t ide c of Creekside East,Inc.,a Florida co oration,on behalf of the corporation,who is personally known to me or who has produced,�, as identification. 44t-Pt. 4441114 gtvmda g G David Flowel! Notary Public / 1 ;l 'f _CaMtinssioxs FftZ079s Print Name:Arlin twirl `t 1 ,, oc�:MAY m,2010 My Commission Expires:/ o1, Zol8 i tioNomm� n m. 1st FLORIDA NOTA A LLB I E 1 1 1 E 1 • . i I i Page 3 of 5 • i : . .' • ' .•. . _. . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . •. . -• . . . . I. . . • • . • . • . . . , • • . . ..:.,,• . . ASSIGNEE: . • ., .. • • Bayshore Naples Memory Care,LLC, • • • a Florida limited liability company : 1 ,. . • I 'ir.' •... '". •••: '' • . ' c x_• .. •,,...16' 1) ' ' By: Ae.;.1 . • . • - ' '.:- Print'Name: NAVN‘ciy, .. lb'- • , Thilo D.Best,its Manager 41 : • 1 . • ,' :, . • . ;i•-•:.''... ' .. - .• ,Print NOnei'' It-e; t - .( (inr&A•f•••// Dated: Amer CI ?clic( i V • :i ,.,•. .. . ...... . i L. • • 1. .. . . ....• . STATE OF. elIC. (fia..." ., - • . ) • . ,,, , . • s. . . . .: COUNTY OF WA .120(6:. ) .:...... ' •••• _•• )ss i • • . • $ . .•• i .. ••... •-• • - i , . • The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before. me, this (.,07? . of 1 ,2014.'by..THILO.D. BEST as Manager of Bayshore Naples Memory Care, I . ..• -,' • ' - , . •LLC, a Florida limitedfLV ift•company,,pkbehalf of the company, who.is ( ),personally i :• n..-• . •• . known to me or'( ' ) has produced of•ts -Lt cenvL: as •evidence -of 1 !:,.. ;:• : • identification. • , -. -•••. •. ,. .. I . • ' .. . . (SEAL) s-- •I ', •' .'i:17. fAOICAROGERSr. .. • . -7„...--'-_..,2.- *. *PIPES:Ocliter.2:2014 •.• ' .- '..' ' if .r . e I *V- • - ! i •.. ';' • • ..- -.0domassiotaao1m94 :NOT' ' ,•' J ', - - • • ., .. , . • . 1 • r• —!, sandedDruacerovigundavntes Name: • • - . . .' . • 6 • . , ... ..-. • (Type . . t) 4 . • , . I. • . ' •.•,. . , • My Commission Expires: . •.• 1 . . . . . . . . . i. .. .. .. • 1 .. _,• • . ' 1 • 1 • i •. , • • • • ' , ' . - 1 • . . . .,. 1 • . 1 . • !, piges 4 of 5 - I '' - - • '' ... . . • 1 i • • • EXHIBIT"A" : • ' LEGAL DES( IPTION OF THE PROPERTY • .` PARCEL•'1; Unit 1, Creekside East Land.Condominium, a Commercial Land Condominium • • according to the Declaration of Condominium_thereof recorded in Official Records Book 5057, - 'page 2811 of the Public,Records'of Collier County, Florida; together with its undivided share in . ' • the common elements: • PARCEL 2:Non-exclusive easements for.the benefit of Parcel 1 as created by Declaration of Covenants,Conditions and'Restrictions and Reservation of Easements for Creekside Commerce ••'' ' Park' recorded in•O.R..B'ook 4998 Page 3936,Public'Records.of Collier County,Florida. PARCEL 3:Non-exclusive.easements for the benefit of Parcel 1 as created•by Declaration of • •,,Condominium of Creekside.East'L;and.Condominium recorded in Official Records'Book 5057, , • • .page 2811 of the Public Records Of Collier County, Florida. • • • . • _ 3 • • • yyykd • • • • k[F i1 • . •• • • • • Pike 5 of 5 • • ElGradyMinor Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects March 26, 2015 A. Lee Bentley, Ill (via certified mail) US Attorney for Middle District of Florida 400 North Tampa Street,Suite 3200 Tampa, FL 33602 RE: Creekside Commerce Park CPUD Amendment,Collier County, Florida Dear Mr. Bentley: This letter is being sent on behalf of our client, Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc.to notify you of a PUD amendment to the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned Development. Enclosed is a letter previously sent to all adjacent property owners, which lists the proposed changes. Please notify Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney, Office of the County Attorney, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800, Naples, FL 34112, (239) 252- 8400 or me within 30 days of receipt of this letter if you have questions or concerns. Sincerely, r r D. Wayne Arnold,AICP Enclosures Cc: David Genson, Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc., 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34105 Richard D.Yovanovich, Esq.,Coleman,Yovanovich and Koester, P.A., Northern Trust Bank Building, 4001 Tamiami Trail North,Suite 300, Naples, FL 34103 GradyMinor File Q.Grady Minor&Associates,P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs,FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com A4 GradyMinor Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects February 13,2015 RE: Neighborhood Information Meeting PUDA-PL20140001311,Creekside Commerce Park PUD Dear Sir or Madam: A formal application has been submitted to Collier County, seeking approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment, by Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc., represented by D. Wayne Arnold,AICP of Q.Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. and Richard D.Yovanovich, Esq.of Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A.,for the following described property: The subject property is comprised of approximately 106±acres, located on the Southwest and Southeast quadrant of Immokalee Road and Goodlette-Frank Road in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East,Collier County, Florida. Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc. is asking the County to approve this application, which proposes to add commercial land uses for which there has been expressed interest by service providers. The amount of retail commercial in the Business District of the PUD is proposed to be increased by 70,000 square feet and the amount of Industrial in the Industrial/Commerce District of the PUD is proposed to be decreased by 70,000 square feet.The uses added are allowable uses in the C-2, C-3, and C-4 Zoning Districts. These uses are compatible with the existing uses and tenants of the Creekside Commerce Park. The uses are also compatible and complementary to nearby land uses. The PUD amendment also proposes to modify the PUD and conceptual PUD Master Plan by modifying the location and amount of preserve and lake area on-site and increasing the Business District acreage to accommodate existing and proposed users within Creekside Commerce Park. Other project acreages may be modified as necessary to accommodate the proposed changes. A portion of the project's preserve area is proposed to be located off-site. You are invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting hosted by the applicant to inform nearby property owners, neighbors and the general public of the proposed PUD amendment for the subject property. The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes only, it is not a public hearing, and will be held on Wednesday, March 4, 2015, 5:30 pm at the Veterans Community Park, Room A, 1895 Veterans Park Dr.,Naples, FL 34109. If you have questions or comments, they can be directed by e-mail, phone, fax or mail to: sumpenhour@gradyminor.com, phone 239-947-1144, fax 239-947-0375, Q. Grady Minor and Associates,P.A.,3800 Via Del Rey,Bonita Springs,Florida 34134. Sincerely, Sharon Umpenhour Senior Planning Technician Q. Grady Minor&Associates,P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs,FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com g I U , MADEIRA 1=1 C ir- -�� NORTH 23 COWERNAPLES 24 re22 HEALTH MEDICAL ZZ TRACT COWER CENTER J HEALTH PROJECT WILLOUGHBY O PAR GARDENS 5 (DRi) VETERAN'S LO CAT I 0 NZ NAPLES-IMMOKALEE PARK Z i ROAD (C.R.846) /COMMONS GRANADA ':_ ,2,4•:"--.4.0741, .. ., , J � T o� SHOPPCS Lh :'_614I j):.i SURREY CENTER 4 ]T:7 ` PLACE yIMMOKALE REGENT VAN'S CONVALESCENT g CENTER PARKi , 7 DAINEWS Y %- CPQ NORTHSIDE 4 - MEDICAL(S) M asi II 27 a 'S 26 d in. '-# u+ STONEBRIDGE v. IZ 25 $Z PELICAN •j CRESCENT ' MARSH (DRI) u' Z ESTATES Project Location Map CI GradyMinor Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects March 26, 2015 Mr. Eric H. Holder,Jr. (via certified mail) US Attorney General US Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20530-0001 RE: Creekside Commerce Park CPUD Amendment,Collier County,Florida Dear Mr. Holder: This letter is being sent on behalf of our client, Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc. to notify you of a PUD amendment to the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned Development. Enclosed is a letter previously sent to all adjacent property owners, which lists the proposed changes. Please notify Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney, Office of the County Attorney, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800, Naples, FL 34112, (239) 252- 8400 or me within 30 days of receipt of this letter if you have questions or concerns. Sincerely, D.Wayne Arnold,AICP Enclosures Cc: David Genson, Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc., 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34105 Richard D.Yovanovich, Esq.,Coleman,Yovanovich and Koester, P.A., Northern Trust Bank Building, 4001 Tamiami Trail North,Suite 300,Naples, FL 34103 GradyMinor File Q. Grady Minor&Associates,P.A. Ph.239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs,FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com Ea GradyMinor Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects February 13,2015 RE: Neighborhood Information Meeting PUDA-PL20140001311, Creekside Commerce Park PUD Dear Sir or Madam: A formal application has been submitted to Collier County, seeking approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment, by Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc., represented by D. Wayne Arnold,AICP of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq.of Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A.,for the following described property: The subject property is comprised of approximately 106±acres, located on the Southwest and Southeast quadrant of Immokalee Road and Goodlette-Frank Road in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. Creekside West, Inc. and Creekside East, Inc. is asking the County to approve this application, which proposes to add commercial land uses for which there has been expressed interest by service providers. The amount of retail commercial in the Business District of the PUD is proposed to be increased by 70,000 square feet and the amount of Industrial in the Industrial/Commerce District of the PUD is proposed to be decreased by 70,000 square feet.The uses added are allowable uses in the C-2, C-3, and C-4 Zoning Districts. These uses are compatible with the existing uses and tenants of the Creekside Commerce Park. The uses are also compatible and complementary to nearby land uses. The PUD amendment also proposes to modify the PUD and conceptual PUD Master Plan by modifying the location and amount of preserve and lake area on-site and increasing the Business District acreage to accommodate existing and proposed users within Creekside Commerce Park. Other project acreages may be modified as necessary to accommodate the proposed changes. A portion of the project's preserve area is proposed to be located off-site. You are invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting hosted by the applicant to inform nearby property owners, neighbors and the general public of the proposed PUD amendment for the subject property. The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes only, it is not a public hearing, and will be held on Wednesday, March 4, 2015, 5:30 pm at the Veterans Community Park, Room A, 1895 Veterans Park Dr., Naples, FL 34109. If you have questions or comments, they can be directed by e-mail, phone, fax or mail to: sumpenhour@gradyminor.com, phone 239-947-1144, fax 239-947-0375, Q. Grady Minor and Associates,P.A.,3800 Via Del Rey,Bonita Springs,Florida 34134. Sincerely, Sharon Umpenhour Senior Planning Technician Q. Grady Minor&Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs,FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com L I 1 1 1 1 T I V U MADEIRA L� 4_,9---r1 , NORTH 23 NAPLES 24 22 HTT MEDICAL COWER CENTER / SW PROF. WILLOUGHBY TRACT HEALTH P R Q J E CT GARDENS g (DRI) PAR VETERAN'S LOCATION — NAPLES-IMMOKALEE PARK ROAD (C.R.848) r..---COMMONS ••4,.,.-- GREEN pp GRANA,A '«- , . :� TREE oC I SHOPP s- .11.4f l'‘I 4 . SURREY CENTER ,V [-IT: PLACE z MOK RO' REGENT -AN'S CONVALESCENT 3 CENTER PARK 7 ' 1 NAPLES NORTHSIDE .• DAILY NEWS RCE TEKR MEDICAL(S) 1 _i ill 27 � 26 d �' 1 -- STONESRIDGE V. 25 § 1 0� 4 2. PELICAN CRESCENT MARSH : LAKE (DRI) ` I. ESTATES — i Project Location Map , -• -- SENDER- COMPLE 1E THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SEC I/ON ON DELIVER( • Complete Items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired. - eAd ,-.--91 0 Agent Ili Print your name and address on the reverse X .- 0 Addressee so that we can return the card to you. All" B. Receivedjo - =.Nerse) C.Date of ii livery • Attach this card to the back of the nnailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 7 f•-eLt.... s. ,14r..- 1 M f — D. Is delivery addres different 1•m item 1? LA Yes 1. Article Addressed to: If YF-S,enter delivery address below: 0 No 00• 1) I 1 1 US Pk-r-rcyg.N.w.)1 4C6 I•l:rivywict`.3N-, ;942.ri 3. Service lYpe -13(Denified Mar 0 Priority Mail Express' PinelOC) I a. 534:10,; • .Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise 13 Insured Mail 0 Collect on Delivery 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2. Article Number r service lobe° 7013 3020 0000 94'?7 4403 (Transfefrom PS Form 3811,July 2013 Domestic Return Receipt U.S. Postal Service CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT [1:11 (Domestic Mail Only:No Insurance Coverage Provided) 2- Fpr cieliven„ InfOr nation visit our website at,sr,vy usp,cum 1 I,t il ii N' 11 tr_, 1.) li 11 ____ I N Postage $ rr (..ettilleti Fee 0 Postmsuk 0 Behan Receipt Fee Here 0 (Endorsement Required) 0 IIMI Restricted Delivery Fee •A IFreioreereent Required) a ...7 ru EDWel Postage ,, Fees rimrfm . m m Nnt To L . EE, 0,-1 ireet:Apt . .. .,... ..........._.,......—.. r- or P0 BOlf No. eta% My,Mare,ZIP • al II ilLeil 6 ... ....- r, urn o 1,iAt t.j.,-.•-I 1 • • U.S. Postal Service • CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT a) r, (Domestic Mail Only,No insurance Coverage Provided) I- For delivery Information vu.,t cur website at V4704 w,ps corn . ''' f7 kru" e ,PI, !' 4`, '• 1 t'/, F: , I,- 1..,): ii i1 ‘'. . ,,' i :. .-, .,,, ,..., _.. N . - PnVags Er ori/tied Fes 0 Postmark 0 Denim Receipt Fee 0 (Endorsement Required) Here • CI Restricted Delivery Fee ci (Endorsomeril Required) rU _ APP41111 I 0 tole;1,ostege&Fees M .oat o 13-7-5 sotwal:4,41\11, f_tithiw N. ,7437,x 1:...,.-, ,,,I; 5-n ic.n„,,, -si, 1 ,,,,. SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COAIPLETt THIS SEC1ION ON DELIVERY • Complete Items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired. 0 Agent E Print your name and address on the reverse X 0 Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Pr rated Name) C.Date of Delivery • Attach this card to the back of the mallpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: D. Is delivery a.•i-.i diffe nt from item 1? CI Yes If YES,enter de&very, dnaas below: 0 No €gIc. 140t-PEQp.hz: HA'? • UST TOR Type t aJ�. ' Lhi L IT n 1�1le'T a ServiceICert fieri CerNtised Mahe ®Priority Mall Express"' 0 Registered €,Return Receipt for Memlandiae 0 Insured Mali 0 Collect on Derive!), EtuCo7O111 4. Restricted Delivery?(edra Fee) O Yes 2. Article Number 7013 3020 0000 9477 4410 (Transfer from service label) • PS Form 3811,July 2013 Domestic Return Receipt • • I _ , • • • This instrument prepared by: • Matthew L Grabinski,Esq. • • COLEMAN,YOVANOVICH py • 8c KOESiER,F.A. O • 4001 Tamiami Trail N.,#300 • Naples,Florida 34103 • After recording return to: Collier Insurance;Agency • : •Attn:Brad Stockham 2600 Golden Gate Pkwy. Naples;FL 34105 239-403-6869 ASS_IGMVWNT AND LIMITATION OF DENSITY RIGHTS THIS ASSIGNMENT AND.LIMITATION OF DENSITY RIGHTS (this "Assignment") is • made this 30Th day of I)aacember,2013,by CREEKSIDE WEST,INC.,a Florida corporation( "Assignor")•and Rani Investments,LLC,a Florida limited liability company("Assignee"). WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS,on or about the date hereof,Assignor is selling and conveying to Assignee the real • property described in Exhibit"A",attached hereto(the"Property");and • WHEREAS, Assignor desires to assign to Assignee, and Assignee desires to assume from Assignor,the right to develop up to Fifteen Thousand(15,000)square feet of commercial office space on the Property(which may include medical use,as permitted tinder the applicable zoning ordinance),subject 'to the terms and conditions hereof;and WHEREAS, Assignor has also agreed to assign to Assignee the right to use the Property for • • providing overnight facilities for,ambulatory surgery patients.(as an accessory use associated with a Restricted Principal Use,as identified in the applicable PUD ordinance),subject to a maximum of five(S) beds for such accessory use);and WHEREAS,.Assignor has also agreed to assign to Assignee(as a sub-component of the 15,000 • • square feet of development density evidenced and assigned hereby)the right to use up to 5,000 of the•15,000 square feet of maximum commercial density as retail use,subject to automatic forfeiture,as hereafter set +. forth, and Assignee agrees to accept such limited retail use rights subject to the automatic forfeiture provisions set forth herein • NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of TEN DOLLARS 010.00), the exchange of mutual • promises, and other good and.valuable consideration, the receipt'and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged,Assignor and Assignee hereby agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated in their • • entirety in this Agreement. 2. Density Assignment (including up to 5 bedsl: Contingent Retail Sub-Component. , Assignor hereby transfers,grants,conveys,and assigns to Assignee,.as of this date and as an:appurtenance to the Property,the right to develop up to Fifteen Thousand(15,000)square feet Of commercial office space on the Property all or any portion;of which may from time to time be utilized for general office or.medical • 1 use,including the right to use the Property for providing overnight facilities for ambulatory surgery patients (as an accessory use associated with a Restricted Principal Use, as identified in the applicable PUD ordinance,subject to the condition that at no time shall there be more than five(5)beds for overnight use on the Property). In addition,and subject 10 the terms hereafter set forth,Assignor also grants to Assignee the right(but not the obligation)to develop the Property(as a sub-component of the 15,000 total square feet permitted hereby)with up to Five Thousand Square Feet(5,000)of retail space(the"Optional Retail Sub-Component"),subject to the following conditions: (A)At no time shall the Property be developed with more than Fifteen Thousand(15,000) square feet of commercial space,in the aggregate,regardless of the exact permitted use of such space(for example,if the Property has a retail use component that comprises 3,000 square feet of space, then the remaining portions of the Property can only be developed with up to 12,000 square feet of additional office space). (B)Any portion of the Optional Retail Sub-Component that is not developed (by the construction of a commercial building)and in actual use(as evidenced by occupational licenses,actual use,and as determined by Collier County in conjunction with its on- going monitoring of the respective PUD)on the date that is three(3)years after the date that this Assignment is recorded in the Collier County Public Records (the "Forfeiture Date"),shall be deemed automatically forfeited by Assignee and such retail use rights shall automatically revert to Assignor. However,the forfeiture of all or any portion of the Optional Retail Sub-Component shall not affect the ability of Assignee to nevertheless develop and use the Property with up to 15,000 square feet of office space. •• [For example:if on the Forfeiture Date,the Property has been improved with a 10,000 square foot building, and 4,000 square feet of such building are in actual retail use, then the remaining portion of the Optional Retail Sub-Component(1,000 square feet) shall be deemed automatically forfeited and shall automatically revert to Assignor. Nevertheless,Assignee would thereafter still have the right to develop an additional 5,000 square feet of space on the Property,but at no time after the Forfeiture Date shall the Property be developed with more than 4,000 square feet of retail space;the balance must be used for commercial office space(which may include medical offices)]. (C)Assignor shall have the right to record a supplement to this Assignment,at any time after the Forfeiture Date, for the purpose of evidencing the portion of the Optional Retail Sub-Component forfeited(if at all)by Assignee pursuant to sub-paragraph 2(8), above. 3. Effect of Assignment: Maximum FAR for Property. By Accepting this Assignment, Assignee agrees that Assignee shall develop no more than Fifteen Thousand (15,000) square feet of commercial office space on the Property(which may include medical use as permitted under the applicable zoning ordinance,but shall be limited as to retail use,pursuant to Paragraphs 2,above).This Assignment shall also constitute a direction to any governmental or private entity as to the commercial space assigned hereunder(including the retail use rights that are subject to automatic forfeiture hereunder)and all such parties are hereby authorized and directed to rely upon and comply with any written request, notice or demand made by Assignee with respect to such assigned commercial space. By accepting this assignment, Assignee also agrees(for itself and successors in title)that the floor area ratio(FAR)for the Property shall not,at any time,exceed.35. 4. Acceptance. Assignee, as the owner of the Property, hereby accepts the foregoing 2 ; } • i i' i assi ent of density grin rights,subject to the terms,.conditions and limitations hereof. 5. No Representation No Warranty, This Assignment is made solely for the purpose of - • • assigning (and limiting) the development density of the Property under the applicable Planned Unit Development"Ordinance, and,shall not be deemed a representation nor warranty .by Assignor that Assignee's proposed development of the Property(in a manner acceptable to Assignee)may actually occur • • •:•as intended by Assignee.Assignee acknowledges that various private and governmental permits,conditions i • and approvals must be obtained by Assignee(and at Assignee's risk and expense)prior to Assignee being able to conduct horizontal and/or vertical development activities at the Property. 1 x 6. - . Successors and Assieds. This Assignment shall inure to the benefit of and be binding • upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Without limiting the generality of the • foregoing,this Assignment shall be deemed a covenant running with title to the Property. 7 • Miscellaneous. This Assignment shall be governed by and construed under the laws of -•the Stateof Florida.:Executed counterpart copies of the original of this Assignment shall be treated as if • the original were so executed and shall bind the executing party with the same force and*effect as the original. 8. Recording. This Assignment shall be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. • IN WITNESS WHEREOF,Assignor and Assignee have caused this instrument to be executed as F of the day and year first above written. WITNESSES: ASSIGNOR: 414441.46,#(4- a Florida ce West,Inc., a Florida corporation Print Nar e:e:;��•fe410Y Fir E E. S70c101•401 4d1111ey: / i 's Print Name: kj ci 1pc I( Print Name: ' *.+j ,fir •, p Title: 2.9 • STATE OF FLORIDA . COUNTY OF COLLIER /} The foregoing instrument w aclmow edged before me, this .I6}"1 of December, 2013 by Nfa�keit e0 4z. . , as V*Ice, es1.ky, of Creekside West, Inc., a Florida corporation, on behalfJof said .corporation. He is•( )X,) personally known to me or ( ) has produced as evidence of identification. (SEAL) 4.......,... 10 4-41-Litig) NOTARY ' •1:•LIC • • Name: arn.e 1il kk/kLaP PAMELA MARTIN WALKUPi (Type or Print) commission#EE 126 My Commission Expires: 3 —�S— l o/!p -7.-i_ - Expires March 2$,2048 3 . . ., . ,. C. • • . - • • '. . .. .. .. • . . ., . . . . . .. • - • ... . . . . . • ,.. • . .• - • . . . • • ' i , . I .. . . . . ASSIGNEE: • • . . . •. .- •Witnesses: Rani lineatmeab;.1• 4c., . ' .. (as to all 3 signatures) a Florida limited liability cornp• I • • . . • . . . • ' • • - ' ' • .4BY:41•""efrA4t.2441"4") " 464111(11...r Print Name: .470.,,iy:/i).-4,69/4014.2) Di. •, ! L ?:, • ,Managing Member • . .. 4f..41; rdiud-4 BY: . 1-4144 ' Print Name: &IOLA ei Sc Oinkal Agarwal,.Mariaging-Meratrel , • . • By: • A •"----7 Angelina Onkel' lit:, , ,Managing Member STATE OFNIC• .MCACA ) )ss. COUNTY OF C...CAMe...Q. ) • • ... The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me,this 3:541:14 December,2013 by Anurag Agarwal,OrnIcarAgerwal.and Angelina pinker Agarwal,as the Managing Members of Rini Investments, . • ' ' .• . -LW;3,Florida limitedliability company,on liehalf,of.dr calliper*. They are( )personally•known to me or(14 have produced ft- - riNle . Lig c:1..n. - ' as evidence of identification. (SEAL) Name: • (TYPe Or Print) • 1 Ley%&IRIS:M.4E i.rEE01112,5944 My Commitsion Expires: -, -......... ! Expites.July1,2014 . . 7,--t., -'load nrierleah burs kliqUalg. . • • • . • .. . • ' 4 . . . . ". • . . . . € • • • • • • EXHIBIT"A" , • LEGAL.DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY • • .•• • LOT•3,CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST-UNIT ONE AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 29, PAGES 57-58'OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COWER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS.THOSE ' LANDS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3662,PAGES 1812-1815;-AND LESS THE EASTERLY 32.84 FEET OF SAID LOT 3, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGIN•AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3 OF CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST- UNIT�ONE AS.RECORDED IN•PLAT BOOK 29, PAGES 57 58 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF •. COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA; • • THENCE RUN ALONG THE WEST LINE•OF SAID LOT 3 NORTH 00 DEGREES 07 MINUTES 39 SECONDS WEST;FOR A DISTANCE OF 287.18 FEET TO THEi.SOU'IHWEST CORNER OF THOSE •• . ." LANDS DESCRIBED' IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3662, PAGE 1 812 OF SAID PUBLIC ' RECORDS; • " THENCE RUN ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LANDS•SOUTH 89 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 00 • • SECONDS EAST,FOR A DISTANCE OF 1935 FEET; • • THENCE RUN SOUTH 00 DEGREES.15 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST,FOR A DISTANCE OF 5.00 FEE'S TO A'FONT'ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE RUN ALONG SAID:NORTH LINE FOR THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES AND DISTANCES: 1. SOUTH 89 DEGREES-45 MINUTES PO SECONDS EAST;FOR A DISTANCE OF 150.19 FEET; 2. THENCE RUN SOUTH,89 DEGREES 48 MINUTES 16. SECONDS EAST, FOR A DISTANCE OF 34.29 FEET; • . THENCE RUN SOUTH 00 DEGREES 07 MINUTES.39 SECONDS EAST, FOR A DISTANCE OF ' • . 281.44 FEET TO A POINT ON,THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3; • THENCE RUN ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH. DEGREES 58 MINUTES 01 SECONDS WEST,FOR A DISTANCE OF 203.79 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 1.32 ACRES,MORE OR LESS. • 5 ••. 1Arthrk . ....•November 13, 2015 Nancy Gundlach,AICP, RLA Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples,Florida 34104 RE: Creekside Commerce Park CPUD Amendment Dear Ms. Gundlach: Arthrex has met with the Developer of Creekside Commerce Park CPUD regarding the proposed amendments to the CPUD. Arthrex supports the increase in retail square footage by 70,000 square feet. In addition,Arthrex consents to the reduction of 70,000 square feet from the industrial/commerce district within the CPUD. Please accept this letter as Arthrex's letter of no objection to the proposed changes to the PUD. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, 1°'49cjAt4T David Bumpous Director of Operations Enclosure Arthrex Inc.•1370 Creekside Boulevard•Naples.Florida 34108-1945.1l1:800-933-7001 or 239-643-5553•Fax:239-591-6980•website;wwwauthrexcum NV/asssrn lrnr.7anoD «wn+nn ...w ++wn.i'.~':.�.wnw, —M, .�gaM GLOZP301L0 U3SIA32I Ad .YYYd 7JttIRf0,710KTLW .6.2.- --••'• m�e r,i. ---- mwISAWSs moat . $ r s a , u -W Y = -_— -6'l' ` \� ' !:1,., We Q ` mep N N • W 11 - ). �- _��. OI ` s fi i ---- -- T' OR€ " N E `� o 3 j It 1 i� 3 ,I : u e N V ; . m o ' ai . I 11 1�� , a ppis o N i .°.. n m � B I I1 ® d 1 a u Z u` 1 m aN 5 I y{ 1 I V • :6- 14 yy 1 1 I a �.,. f g . J i s S J 0 -. !g Co a r_.r :°. m J Z a Gt7 iJ i 1❑ I.:. CREEKBIDE BLVD E is fJ ; a II U ma ,. / s i fIii a1 1111!: • p( ' I ip 714 !...4 .13,, S 1 0. 1 ... If 111 If t ill I I \ /t. ❑ti '' ......"".. owl xxvea st++ODoO J 1 •••• .... J i 1. . y ,9 . ......... . , .di!! . :ii L. . ..,,, iTi 7i I 0 1 1 t I VII et/ 1 ,I. 4 4 4 S CaEEKSIDE 81REE7. -- - - —__ I t p 0 .moi _ �� fff ;��--10-H-12123,. =- 1 1 i am I . li.CREEKSIDE TR.' - a la o. i am C,.�J x, - 1 I 1 1 • eI i I ,L,L. --- -- a < I--. I I I j Il I i::,:': 12 '9 .:)::. r; .:... 0 , 1,1 -.x. .. . <1 :, 1,. ...... ..-.A.. : 0 ) hi ,a ••[3 2 ARTFIRE%BOULEVARD i I I UUUUUU — —T —[—— -- 101 111 I oti N i Te) [ 11 1 1 1 • 1 Nola , 6 BARRON COLLIER COMPANIES January 18, 2016 . Nancy Gundlach,AICP, RLA, Principal Planner Collier County Government Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples Florida 34104 Re: Creekside Commerce Park CPUD Amendment Dear Ms. Gundlach: Trail Boulevard, LLLP is an affiliate of the developer of Creekside Commerce Park CPUD. As such,Trail Boulevard, LLLP supports the increase in retail square footage by 70,000 square feet. In addition,Trail Boulevard, LLLP consents to the reduction of 70,000 square feet from the Industrial/Commerce District within the CPUD. Please accept this as Trail Boulevard, LLLP's letter of no objection to the proposed changes to the CPUD. Please contact me at(239) 262-2600 if you have questions. Sincerely, L Brian Goguen,a hief Operating Officer of .Barron Collier Management,LLC as Authorized Agent of Trail Boulevard, LLLP cc: David Genson,PE,Barron Collier Companies Wayne Arnold,AICP,Grady Minor Rich Yovanovich,Coleman,Yovanovich&Koester,PA Heidi Ashton-Cicko,Office of the County Attorney's Office 2600 Golden Gate Parkway,Naples,Florida 34105 www.barroncollier.com 239.262.2600 AGENDA ITEM 9-C ckcot ' STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING SERVICES—ZONING DIVISION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: MARCH 3,2016 RE: RZ-PL20150000901: GOODLAND REZONE Applicant: Agents: James Inglis John Podczerwinsky,Fred Hood 300 International Parkway Davidson Engineering, Suite 201 Sunrise,FL 33325 Naples,FL 34104 Owner: Pelican Point at Goodland, LLC REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is petitioning the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) to consider an application amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a general commercial with a Goodland Zoning Overlay(C-4-GZO) zoning district to a Village Residential with a Goodland Zoning Overlay (VR-GZO) zoning district for the project known as Goodland Rezone; providing for repeal of Resolution No. 93-549, a conditional use for boat storage and sales and by providing an effective date. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located in Block "Y", Goodland Isles subdivision in Section 18, Township 52 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, at the east end of Palm Avenue. (See location map on the following page.) RZ-PL20150000901—Goodland Rezone Page 1 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing z W o r 55o g • )3* 4139N #'' 4 © til- miCL #11:1 Callarl%0 litil d IRS < \ ' e,e ©U ao Iii11 ID Ain lila v o a.. O0pD �'„mg II! `lul IL 4 MOON2 Ini1oo- ,o °1 9appa % N i ` c 4c 1 o0 iii 441 13 pa ABU ika 8It ©©,' OP �' .0 ©�`t 44' $ tom: ;"OL7 p a Lr leQ,ilar N MS El lAM / 7 u1 lib, oZ 9 '_ �O C r H 1 1 It -a F- a o` c7 i 41:44 ,� a • * ' z7 .. , .05 - z • O i AL ,_0:040IF" WON I•FJA7111 ` � O / 0: )Il * 3 ,J/ J cet ' 4- 11PP7 "P r RZ-PL20150000901-Goodland Rezone Page 2 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property,consisting of 1.70±acres,has a zoning designation of General Commercial District (C-4), with a maximum building height of 75 feet. This zone allows for uses that attract large segments of population and diverse types of commercial activity. The previous use was a waste treatment facility for Coon Key Fishing Village Condominiums south of the property. The waste treatment facility is no longer in use. However an easement still remains along the front of the property. On November 23, 1993, a Conditional Use was granted for "Boat Sales and Storage" on the property. This property is also part of the Goodland Zoning Overlay District (GZO), which is intended to provide regulation and direction under which the growth and development of Goodland can occur with assurance that the tropical fishing village and small town environment of Goodland is protected and preserved, and that development and/or redevelopment reflect the unique residential and commercial characteristics of the community. This application does not intend on amending this overlay and the conditional use for boat sales and storage would be repealed. The applicant, a residential homeowner near this property, would like to rezone the underlying zone to Village Residential (VR), which allows for less intense uses of single-family and multi- family dwellings,duplexes,mobile homes,family care facilities,and educational plants. VR uses also allow for building heights not to exceed 35 feet. However, the GZO allows for building heights up to 45 feet, but no more than 2 levels for single-family and mobile home dwellings. Minimum setbacks are: -20 feet front yard for single-family dwellings and mobile-homes, with a rear yard setback of 20 feet along the water. -35 feet front yard for duplex and multi family dwellings, with a rear yard setback of 30 feet along the water. -Side yard setbacks, when the property abuts the water, is 10 feet for single family and mobile home dwellings, and 15 feet for duplexes and multi family dwellings. All lots would have water frontage at the rear of the parcels, and street frontage along a proposed Viewpoint Pass Road, connecting to Palm Avenue. Landscape buffers would be required per the Land Development Code(LDC). SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING(Subject Property-General Commercial C-4) North: Water frontage (canal)with mobile,multi-family, and single-family homes across the canal with a zoning designation of VR(Density SF/MH=7.26, DP= 8.71,MF=14.52 per acre). East: Water frontage(Gulf/Mangroves),Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern Overlay Zone(ACSC/ST). RZ-PL20150000901—Goodland Rezone Page 3 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing South: Non-conforming multi-family use with a zoning designation of C-4-GZO (Coon Key Pass Fishing Village). West: Single-family and mobile homes with a zoning designation of VR(Density SF/MH=7.26, DP=8.71, MF=14.52 per acre). Palm Avenue. 1-)1,, ..i,'.,1 II�+t `:� -.Int �_Y a 'DONNA+FI/1LA N1 �n q;c,�A VsE _ •i232 MINN 4161 r414 _- •. 4 LJ ,410 4064 '402 234 r 1 .+.nii n c` ! 503 >F1G () °1 236 F..: /1,14r 4. 237 �s ` t 529 X527„1 52.5 4523 41111111•271° _ 0 1 501 40 i 517 c7 507 ' t � C.a c o'� uu t'A V E iiiii"`'``"....�. .mow. 00 1 ..F P i ,.. 1: • 532 530 ,� �.}. �`�, Alli �v, 528 5��5 4, 520, 518; to 51 `5r 50;001 iirri 5 50 iv y 502 ' ,: • ,:ilii is 1 t . X.. +ri, Nor ic15t'18 1 52 641 '639637 635` � wi ,r 629 627 625 623 621. d61,7 ' �" Oldiii 631 ` WI P..,a I tm�A`,V,F < .x Y gt Qa` II C X640 [3-8 636 634 x� ,.J c . ` 632' 628 626-111 624 . 620 6� „..LX1 , ), 604 C 604 ♦ - • uA Unit:BLDGy1 .1/C �t_xc:i, I;�i • ACSCIST 4. ^ \ b04 *c * •-.*• •o• • } +` G Unit:B'DG 4 s f S 19 Zomng i T*52 - CON-ACSCIST l�iii. R:=27 i k ippk 6'' tI 1 Location Map—property depictions are approximate RZ-PL20150000901—Goodland Rezone Page 4 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is located within the Urban designated area (Urban Coastal Fringe Sub-district), and is within the Coastal High Hazard Area(CHHA)— all as identified on the County-wide Future Land Use Map. In order to facilitate hurricane evacuation and to protect environmentally sensitive areas, residential densities within the Urban Coastal Fringe Sub-district shall not exceed a maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre, except as allowed in the Density Rating System to exceed 4 dwelling units per acre (DU/A) through provision of Affordable Housing and Transfers of Development Rights. This project does not propose either of those two exceptions. Because the project lies within the CHHA, one dwelling unit per gross acre shall be subtracted from the eligible base density of four dwelling units per acre. The subject site is zoned commercial and identified on the Future Land Use Map series as "consistent by policy," so it is eligible for the Conversion of Commercial Zoning density bonus up to the density cap of 4 DU/A. See density calculation below: 4 DU/A Base density -1 DU/A CHHA reduction +1 DU/A Conversion of Commercial Zoning bonus 4 DU/A maximum eligible density or 7 DUs(4 DU/A x 1.7 acres=6.8 DUs or 7 DUs) The CHHA Overlay reads, in relevant part, as follows: "Policy 12.2.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) defines the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA). The CHHA boundary is generally depicted on the Future Land Use Map and is more precisely shown in the Future Land Use Map series; all lands lying seaward of that boundary are within the CHHA. New rezones to permit mobile home development shall not be allowed within the CHHA." The purpose and intent of the Village Residential district (VR) is to provide lands where a mixture of residential uses may exist. Additionally, uses are located and designed to maintain a village residential character which is generally low profile,relatively small building footprints as is the current appearance of Goodland and Copeland. The Goodland Zoning Overlay District (GZO) is intended to provide regulation and direction under which the growth and development of Goodland can occur with assurance that the tropical fishing village and small town environment of Goodland is protected and preserved, and that development and/or redevelopment reflect the unique residential and commercial characteristics of the community. The maximum density permissible in the VR zoning district is guided, in part, by the Density Rating System contained in the FLUE—with the Goodland Zoning Overlay district allowing the density in the underlying VR district. The VR district provides for a range of densities and housing types, including mobile homes. LDC standards allow a maximum density of 7.26 DU/A for single-family residences or mobile homes; 8.71 DU/A for duplexes; and 14.52 DU/A for multi-family residences. According to rezone petition Attachment B, the petitioner is proposing development of single-family residences only(first, fourth, sixth and seventh pages), and there would be either five DUs (2.94 DU/A) or six DUs (3.53 DU/A)—six DUs is stated on first page, five DUs is stated on fourth and sixth pages as well as depicted on the conceptual site plan. In order to be found consistent with RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 5 of 15 March 3, 2016 CCPC Hearing the FLUE, the density limitation of 4 DU/A, and prohibition of mobile home development, must be a conditions of rezone approval. Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Policy 5.4 requires new developments to be compatible with the surrounding land area (Comprehensive Planning leaves this determination to the Zoning Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety). In order to promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following FLUE policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects,where applicable. Each policy is followed by staff analysis in bold text. Objective 7: In an effort to support the Dover, Kohl & Partners publication, Toward Better Places: The Community Character Plan for Collier County, Florida, promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects,where applicable. Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [The relatively small subject site fronts a local street only so this Policy does not apply.] Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [Given the property size, location, and land use proposed, conformance with this Policy is not feasible.] Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. [The relatively small subject site is proposed to develop with lots fronting an existing local street to the west and backing the shoreline along two waterways to the north and east. Adjacent lots (to the south) are already developed. Providing an interconnection to the south is not feasible.] Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities, and a range of housing prices and types. [No deviations are requested to open space or sidewalk requirements, so open space and sidewalks must be provided per the LDC. Given the size and land use proposed, the remainder of these development attributes would not apply.] Conclusion: Based upon the above analysis, the proposed rezone may be deemed consistent with the FLUE subject to the following conditions: RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 6 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing 1. Mobile home development is prohibited. 2. The maximum allowable density is 4 dwelling units per acre-typically denoted in the ordinance as"VR(4)". Transportation Element: The project is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan,which states, "The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2%of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2%of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3%of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project's significant impacts on all roadways." The proposed development will generate a projected +/- 13 AM peak hour and +/- 7 PM, peak direction trips on the adjacent local roadway,Palm Street. Additionally the TIS indicates that the development is approximately 7.69 miles from the nearest concurrency link which is US 41. As such the impacts from the proposed development are limited and in combination with the agent's choice to calculate the trip generation based on net new trips without consideration of the currently allowed Commercial C-4 uses, results in a TIS calculation that in actuality overstates the traffic impacts for this proposed rezone. Staff reviewed the TIS provided and confirmed that the 2014 AUIR evaluation remains valid when using the current 2015 AUIR service volumes. Therefore, staff finds that the proposed project does not significantly impact adjacent roadway links, there is sufficient capacity to accommodate this Rezone request within the 5-year transportation planning period and the petition is consistent with the applicable policies of the transportation element. RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 7 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions such as this proposed amendment. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. A finding of consistency with the FLUE and FLUM designations is a portion of the overall finding that is required, and staff believes the petition is consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan as discussed above. The proposed amendment is consistent with the GMP Transportation Element as I , previously discussed. Environmental staff also recommends that the petition be found consistent with the CCME. Therefore, Zoning Services staff recommends that the petition be found consistent with the goals, objective and policies of the overall GMP if the conditions recommended by staff are adopted as part of any approval. ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 10.03.05.I, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report(referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support its action on the amendment request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading"Zoning Services Analysis."In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition to address environmental concerns. This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council Board (EAC) review since the project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Soil testing in accordance with LDC Section 3.08.00 A.4.d.ii is not required. The former sewer lift station on site is not considered a generator of hazardous products or hazardous wastes pursuant to this section of the LDC. Transportation Review: Transportation Department staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and is recommending approval. Staff notes that primary access for the development will be from Palm Street. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the project at this time. In addition, the development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations and operational improvements when development approvals are sought at time of Site Development Plan (SDP) or Subdivision Platting(PPL)review. Zoning Services Review: As noted previously, because this petition is seeking a rezone to a "conventional" zoning district, i.e., not a PUD, there is no site plan associated with it but a conceptual drawing on the property being split into four separate lots with one lot being an RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 8 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing 1 1 access to Palm Avenue. FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses on the subject site, the compatibility analysis might include a review of both the subject proposal and surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location, traffic generation/attraction, etc. There has to be a balance between the adjacent existing uses and what is allowable by the GMP. LDC Section 2.03.03.D described the current C-4 zoning as follows: General Commercial District(C-4). The general commercial district(C-4) is intended to provide for those types of land uses that attract large segments of the population at the same time by virtue of scale, coupled with the type of activity. The purpose and intent of the C-4 district is to provide the opportunity for the most diverse types of commercial activities delivering goods and services, including entertainment and recreational attractions, at a larger scale than the C-1 through C-3 districts. As such, all of the uses permitted in the C-1 through C-3 districts are also permitted in the C-4 district. The outside storage of merchandise and equipment is prohibited, except to the extent that it is associated with the commercial activity conducted on-site such as, but not limited to, automobile sales, marine vessels, and the renting and leasing of equipment. Activity centers are suitable locations for the uses permitted by the C-4 district because most activity centers are located at the intersection of arterial roads. Therefore the uses in the C-4 district can most be sustained by the transportation network of major roads. The C-4 district is permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for uses and the goals, objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in a district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. To contrast, LDC Section 2.03.02.F described the proposed Village Residential zoning as follows: Village Residential District (VR). The purpose and intent of the village residential district (VR) is to provide lands where a mixture of residential uses may exist. Additionally, uses are located and designed to maintain a village residential character which is generally low profile, relatively small building footprints as is the current appearance of Goodland. The maximum density permissible in the VR district and the urban mixed use land use designation shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in the VR district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system, except as permitted by policies contained in the future land use element,or as designated on the Immokalee future land use map of the GMP. The chart below compares the site development criteria of the existing C-4 zoning district and the proposed VR-Single Family zoning district using the more relaxed Goodland Zoning Overlay District development standards. RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 9 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing Excerpts from LDC Site Design Standards Tables for Most Waterfront Principal Uses (LDC Section 4.02.01.A) Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Lot Area Building Zoning District Setback Setback Setback (square Lot Width Height feet) Maximum C-4 50%of BH 50% BH 50% BH 10,000 100 75 <25 feet <15 feet < 15 feet VR Single Family 10 10 20 4,275 sf. 45 45 All numbers shown are the required minimum amounts All numbers shown are in feet unless otherwise noted BH = building height s=equal to but not less than The table and its footnotes show the rezoning to the VR zoning district will significantly reduce the possible impact on adjacent land. If a 75 foot tall structure were constructed in the currently zoned C-4 zoning district, the character as it relates to the adjacent mobile, single-family, and multi-family homes would be diminished due to the lack of a transition zone between the commercial and the residential use properties. Although the property to the south is zoned C-4, the use is a non-conforming (Coon Key Pass Fishing Village) single story - multi-family structure on piers with parking below. The LDC would require a transitional fifteen (15) foot Type B buffer between the VR and C-4 zones. The site also required a waiver from the Archaeological Survey and Assessment Board which was heard on January 20th. Recommendations were made for on-site monitoring during all excavation of material. FINDINGS OF FACT: Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.03.05.1. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable" (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in bold font): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives &policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. The zoning analysis provides an in-depth review of the proposed project. Staff is of the opinion that the project as proposed is consistent with GMP FLUE Policy 5.4 requiring the project to be compatible with neighborhood development. Staff recommends that this petition be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. The petition can also be deemed consistent with the CCME and the Transportation Element of the GMP. Therefore, staff recommends that this petition be deemed consistent with the overall GMP. RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 10 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing 2. The existing land use pattern. Staff has described the existing land use pattern in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report and discussed it at length in the zoning review analysis. Since a majority of the properties in Goodland are zoned residential (VR, RSF -4), staff believes the proposed rezone is appropriate given the existing land use pattern, and development restrictions of the LDC. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. As noted in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" and the zoning review analysis portions of this report there is abutting VR zoned lands thus approval of this rezone would not create an isolated district. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. Staff is of the opinion that the district boundaries will be logically drawn given the current property ownership boundaries. This parcel mirrors the depth of the non-conforming(C-4) use parcel to the south. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed rezone is not necessary,per se; but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek the rezone to allow the owner the opportunity to develop the land with uses other than what the existing zoning district would allow. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed rezone can be deemed consistent with the County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Development in compliance with the applicable LDC requirements should not adversely impact living conditions in the area. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. Transportation staff has reviewed the petition and believes the petition can be deemed consistent with the Transportation Element of the GMP. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed rezone should not create drainage or surface water problems. The developer of any uses will be required to adhere to a surface water management permit from the SFWMD in conjunction with any local site development plan approvals and ultimate RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 11 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing construction on site. 4. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; If this petition is approved, any subsequent development would need to comply with the applicable LDC standards for development. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results,which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however, zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market conditions. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; The proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; The proposed rezone complies with the Growth Management Plan,which is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; The subject property could be developed within the parameters of the existing zoning designations; however, the petitioner is seeking this rezone in compliance with LDC provisions for such action. The petition can be evaluated and action taken as deemed appropriate through the public hearing process. Staff believes, with the proposed conditions, the rezone meets the intent of the VR zoning district, and further, believes the public interest will be maintained. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County; The parcel has been vacant for some time and once was a waste processing utility for residential structure to the south. Access to the site is through an established residential neighborhood. The proposed rezone is only a continuance of this established neighborhood. The GMP is a policy statement which has evaluated the scale, density and intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable throughout the urban-designated areas of Collier County. Staff is of the opinion that the development standards of the LDC will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the community. RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 12 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. The proposed rezone is consistent with the GMP as discussed in other portions of the staff report. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classfcation. Additional development anticipated by the rezone would not require considerable site alteration. This project will undergo an extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site development plan or platting approval process and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended This petition has been reviewed by County staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted. Further review of this issue will occur when platting or site development approvals are sought. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING(NIM): The NIM meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on November 9, 2015 at 5:00 pm at the Marco Island Library (See NIM notes attachment B). Those attending were Collier County Principal Planner Daniel J. Smith; and, representatives of the petitioner and the petitioner's agents. Seven(7)interested citizens attended with questions regarding: 1. Size (square feet), type, and height of proposed structures. 2. Setbacks from the water and the road. 3. Number of lots proposed. 4. Size of the canal to the north and if boat docks are proposed. 5. The Conditional Use for"boat sales and storage." 6. The possible developer building the homes. RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 13 of 15 March 3, 2016 CCPC Hearing COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for this petition on January 27, 2016. RECOMMENDATION: Zoning Division staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition RZ-PL20150000901 to the BCC with a recommendation of approval with the following stipulations: 1. Mobile home development is prohibited. Although mobile homes are allowed in VR zones, "new" mobile homes are prohibited because new rezones to permit mobile home development are not allowed within the "Coastal High Hazard Area" per the Growth Management Plan. 2. The maximum allowable density is 4 dwelling units per acre-typically denoted in the ordinance as "VR(4)". 3. Archaeological monitoring on site by a Registered or Certified Professional Archaeologist shall be required during any excavation activity per the Historical/Archaeolical Preservation Board. Attachments: A: Ordinance B: NIM Summary RZ-PL20150000901—Goodland Rezone Page 14 of 15 March 3,2016 CCPC Hearing PREPARED BY: C.) r, ,fLO i , )14, DANIEL JAMES SITH,AICP DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: • Z9, /6 RAYMO erV. BELLOWS,ZONING MANAGER DATE ZONIN(7 DIVISION MIKE BOSI, AICP,DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION APPROVED BY: 40111. Aiiillow- d "•-•-zaillio" .2. /////4 P ES FRENCH,DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Q./ X111(c),-� z X1 /1 DAVID S. WILKISON, P.E. DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT RZ-PL20150000901 —Goodland Rezone Page 15 of 15 February 16,2016 CCPC Hearing Revised: 1/29/16 ORDINANCE NO. 15- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A GENERAL COMMERCIAL WITH A GOODLAND ZONING OVERLAY (C-4-GZO) ZONING DISTRICT TO A VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL WITH A GOODLAND ZONING OVERLAY (VR-GZO) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS GOODLAND REZONE LOCATED IN BLOCK "Y", GOODLAND ISLES SUBDIVISION IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 52 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 1.70± ACRES; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF RESOLUTION NO, 93-549, A CONDITIONAL USE FOR BOAT STORAGE AND SALES AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [RZ-PL20150000901] WHEREAS, Fred Hood, AICP of Davidson Engineering, Inc. representing James Inglis petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described property. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA that: 1 SECTION ONE: Zoning Classification. The zoning classification of the real property more particularly described in Exhibit A, located in Section 18, Township 52 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida is changed from a C-4-GZO zoning district to a VR-GZO zoning district for a 1.70+ acre project to be known as Goodland Rezone, subject to the conditions shown in Exhibit B. Exhibits A and B are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: Repeal of Resolution No. 93-549 Resolution No. 93-549 is hereby repealed. Attachment A [15-CPS-01460/1202407/1]5 Goodland—RZ,-PL20150000901 1 of 2 8/14/15 SECTION THREE: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,Florida,this day of , 2015. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: By: Deputy Clerk TIM NANCE, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County attorney Attachment: Exhibit A—Legal Description Exhibit B—Conditions of Approval g3 [15-CPS-01460/1202407/1j5 Goodland—RZ-PL20150000901 2 of 2 8/14/15 1 DE DAVI DSON ENGINEERING, 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 F:(239)434.6084 www.davidsonengineering.com _w MEMORANDUM November 20,2015 TO: Dan Smith,Collier County Growth Management,Zoning Division FROM: Jessica Harrelson,Project Coordinator RE: Goodland Rezone PL20150000901 A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Monday, November 9th, 2015 at the Marco Island Library. The meeting started at 5:00 pm. The following individuals associated with the review and presentation of the project were present: • John Podczerwinsky,Davidson Engineering, Inc. • Dan Smith,Collier County John Podczerwinsky started the meeting by giving the reading the following presentation and took questions: ***Please note that the presentation begins about eight(8)minutes into the audio recording. *** • Good evening. My name is John Podczerwinsky with Davidson Engineering. I am the land development consultant assisting Coastal Engineering, and representing the applicant Mr. Inglis in the Zoning amendment application. • Per the land development code,tonight's meeting will be recorded.At the end of my presentation I will be happy to answer any questions you may have about the project. • Dan Smith with Collier County Growth Management Services is also in attendance tonight and is the reviewing planner for Collier County. • REGARDING the possibility of an informal "pre-meeting" at the Goodland Civic Association prior to the meeting on Marco-we have elected NOT to hold a separate meeting at the Goodland Civic Association offices because it is the intent of a Neighborhood Information Meeting for all interested parties to be heard equally,without any bias or special treatment. This is the meeting time and location that we were able to schedule, and get approved by the County, within a reasonable timeframe. Page 1 of 8 Attachment B r,. P RPioN • Although it is regrettable that we did not hold the meeting on Goodland,we have decided not to change the location because we wish to avoid ANY appearance of trying to keep things off the official meeting record. • Likewise,regarding the meeting notifications: We sent out letters to everyone on the mailing list that was provided by the County-a total of 68 letters(all within 500 ft of the subject property). • Not all "Goodlanders" are subject for notification of the Rezone, as not all properties are within 500'of the intended rezone. ABOUT THE PROJECT • Size and Location: o The project location is situated near the East end of Palm Avenue on Goodland is 1.68 acres in size, lying within the "Urban Coastal Fringe"designation of the County's Future Land Use Map,and also within the CHHA. o The existing zoning is "C4 — GZO" (General Commercial District - Goodland Zoning Overlay), and the zoning map indicates there is an approved Conditional Use, CU 93-12, which has expired. o The property owner(s) have chosen to pursue a VR-GZO (Village Residential- Goodland Zoning Overlay) zoning designation, which will effectively remove the potential for commercial uses on this property. o Allowable density of up to 4 dwelling units per acre(typical is 4 du/ac. CHHA limits to 3 du/ac, but conversion to residential from commercial allows a bonus unit, bring the limit back up to 4) o It will also allow the property to be subdivided(platted) with up to seven lots, but our understanding is that the property owner(s)have chosen to pursue less. o The subject property is bordered on its northern and eastern boundaries by waterways and residential properties,all within the"VR-GZO"zoning district. o It is bounded to the South by the"Coon Key Pass Fishing Village Condo" and beyond lies Walkers Coon Key Marina,both of which are in the current"C-4 GZO"zoning district. • Purpose of the Rezone: o We are seeking to "down zone" the property to better reflect the desire of the land owner(s),limiting this property to residential uses. • Project Details: o Currently, the property can be developed under C-4 uses, with some additional allowances provided by the Goodland Zoning Overlay such as"Clam Nurseries"and some other on-site storage uses. LDC 2.03.07.J o More intense uses currently allowed under C-4 zoning include(See LDC 2.03.03): • Marinas (except canal operation, cargo salvaging, ship dismantling, lighterage, marine salvaging,marine wrecking,and steamship leasing) • jLightering (also called lighterage) is the process of transferring cargo between vessels of different sizes, usually between a barge and a bulker Page 2of8 ) DE N PR9 or oil tanker. Lightering is undertaken to reduce a vessel's draft in order to enter port facilities which cannot accept very large ocean-going vessels.) • Retail uses • Hotels and motels • Gasoline service stations with service/repair • Automotive services • Outdoor amusement and recreation services, such as fishing piers, houseboat rental, pleasure boat rental,operation of party fishing boats,and canoe rentals o The aforementioned uses will be vacated. o The remaining property rights will be limited to(up to)seven units o The maximum height permitted for building on-site is limited to 30 feet zoned height above finished grade. (in this case,measured from the FEMA elevation) • Access(Traffic): o The project, when finished, will use the existing driveway access to Palm Avenue, and access to individual lots within the property will be via a shared(private)access easement. Peak hour traffic is expected to be equivalent to the number of homes that are built, based on national averages. • Wrap Up:in summary o The proposed use will be less intensive than what is currently allowed on this parcel,and will eliminate many of the current possibilities that could occur on this site. o The proposed number of units has not been defined, but is expected to be three or four units,not likely the maximum of seven. o The maximum height on structures remains at 30 feet zoned height. o The project will not be open to the public. o No new vehicular access points are being requested. QUESTIONS: 1. When you say 30',do you mean above the land? What we would look at,3'above the land? Response: This would mean above FEMA Flood Elevation for the site. Neighborhood FEMA numbers have been found at around 12.3',existing ground looks to be around 3'above mean sea level. 2. That would be about 35'above the ground level? Response: Audience member stated: "About 11 feet of dirt and then 30'above that. 44'High." Davidson Engineering replied: It could,but it's unlikely that this would be built up that high with dirt, speaking from a site development standpoint, because the elevation would be a pretty 'good size' change from 1-2',it would require retaining walls. The existing landowner is not determining that,this is just a zoning action,so it's not[determining]the type of home that's going to be built there,just what's going to be possible. Page 3 of 8 DE One of the last points here is the access point. The access point will be right off the end of Palm Avenue. 1 [John points to access easement at the terminus of Palm Avenue]You'll notice a strip here that runs north-South, which will be a private access road to the three parcels. The County and the "city"of Goodland will not have any responsibility for that roadway. We feel the proposed use will be less intense than the existing use,feel that it's going to eliminate a lot of the possibilities for commercial uses there,we recommend this to the owner in order to achieve what he's going for in the development of this as a residential property. We told you about the maximum number of units that we think could be built there. We told you about what is roughly,conceptually shown, 3. What were the restrictions/how many people did you have to notify in Goodland? Response: 500', turned out to be 68 different residences we had to notify. 4. When you say a unit,what do you mean? Are you talking a single family home unit? Response: The question came up before the meeting. DE reads the definition verbatim from the County LOC[code read to audience] 5. Have you ever visited Mr. Inglis' home on Goodland? Response: No I have not. 6. Is Mr.Inglis'home considered a single family home? Response: 1 wouldn't know that. This meeting's not about that home,it's about 613 Palm Ave. 7. Can you have more than one family in your unit? Response: As far as I know,you cannot. It is not intended to be zoned that way. 8. A unit is 15,000 square feet? Response: The square footage 1 was talking about was just the lot area. 9. I'm confused then, I thought you said 3-4 units and 15,000 square feet per unit? Response: What 1 mean by that is 'by platted lot'. 10. What's proposed here (referring to map, lines, and directions of lines) is basically a platted subdivision,and each lot is approximately 15,000 square feet,each lot? Response: Each lot is approximately 15,000 square feet. That's just the lot itself, not the size of the house. 11. That's assuming you have three different lots? Page 4 of 8 DE A Response: Yes. Yes. Or you could put 4. 12. Or you could put seven up there? Response: Here's what we looked at-when you split it into seven pieces,you have to look at special provisions-like reduced setbacks. Nothing like that is being proposed at this time...that's going to be 45'tall. At the zoned height,yes. It's unlikely that it will be,I think Mr.Inglis is probably looking to make sure that he can ensure those uses. [To Mr. Inglis]That's your intent here, isn't it? Response: Mr.Inglis: My intent is to not have a marina,docks that extend 180'out into Coon Key Pass,swimming pools, and hoo-ha. My intent is to just to have it a residential environment. All that other stuff is dependent on the developer, the land owner,I just want to get the change from commercial to residential, and I'd like to sell it. If I break even i'Il be happy. Beyond that, it's whatever the laws and rules are,and we'll have to follow them. 13. Now there's a canal between Palm&coconut,a lot of us have our boats in there. And so,coming out of the canal,we get into the Big Marco River. Is there anything that's going to be done at the entry way to the canal? Is there going to be anything done there? Is it going to obstruct boat traffic? It's really narrow right now. Response: As a result of the zoning change,i can't relate anything back to the zoning change. The zoning change is by itself. If there are dock rights that are there today, they would remain unchanged, with one key exception. They would not be commercial. It cannot be a marina. 14. But the building that's planned, I assume cannot carry out an obstruction to marine traffic going out of that canal? Response: It would be no different than the State requirements for everybody else along that canal, to occupy more than a certain percentage of the canal, they have to stay within the State limits and remain,like other single family units on this canal. There's no change to that,proposed. So whatever the rights for a dock along that frontage would be today. If they have a right to a dock today, then,that right would not change as part of this rezone action. If there are no riparian rights in there,for a dock to be installed,then those would remain unchanged as well. We haven't investigated whether or not there is a possibility, through the zoning, to install a dock. 15. Audience—It would be nice to know that. Well especially since the opening is maybe 20'wide, I can't foresee how you could, mess around with that distance. I mean,that would be a real 'no- no' as far as I'm concerned. [Different audience member]-I think the two of you answered the question, but I want to make sure-Jim I believe said it-The last sentence or two of the original letter it says'conditional use for boat sales and storage by providing an effective date.' Are you saying that you make the change in the village,and that part's going to go away?Or is that saying, you're going to have rights to it? Your last sentence,in the very first paragraph,says'a conditional use for boat storage and sales by providing an effective date.' Response: Our understanding is that the Conditional Use is expired. Page 5of8 DC PAVRAPA 16. What's the motivation for you guys? What's the reason for the change? Is it Jim's great personality and love that he doesn't want Goodland to change? Or he doesn't want to look at it himself? Or,I don't mean to be disrespectful- Response: [Mr. Inglis]I can answer,you're fine. It's very simple, I can answer. Right now, it is zoned commercial, and the person that owned the property wanted to put a marina in,and 1 spent a lot of time and money trying to stop them,going to Tallahassee,speaking to the County,hired a specialist... 17. Are you talking Binkowski? Response: [Mr. Inglis]Yes. When we first came to Goodland and got involved with that, Connie and Ed Fullmer asked me to take a look at that. Whatever happened, happened. 18. Audience—Right.We got it. But to clarify it- Response: [Mr. Inglis] My intention is to, across from my house , I want to look at it to be residential. That's it. So, once it's residential, whatever the rules that apply to residential, the people who buy the lots will have to follow them. I'm not going to build a house there,I just want to make that change,and go fishing. 19. Would you pursue this route if we didn't have the zoning overlay? If you did not have the zoning overlay to help you would you pursue- Response: The zoning overlay itself doesn't have anything to do with this. 20. Oh yes it does. You could build up to 5' within other people's property- it has everything to do with this. Response: Actually, the commercial zoning is what is prohibiting the residential uses on the property. There are[inaudible]residential uses that cannot exist within commercial zoning. 21. Could you give me some idea if you know, maybe you don't know, maybe someone else would know,what's the height-to give some perspective of what heights mean because 42 feet doesn't mean a whole lot to me other than I don't want to fall that far, is that two stories? Is that two stories over cars? Or is it three stories over cars? Give me some idea what that means. Response: Here's what that means. As most of you know, most of Goodland has an AE-10 FEMA elevation,you'll see on your flood elevation certificates,and you'll notice that it's give or take a 12 foot elevation. FEMA flood elevation so that you're not considered a hazard-structure that's in a hazardous zone. Basically what that means is that the finish floor elevation for each structure has to be above, or at, the base flood elevation. I don't know exactly what the base flood elevation for 613 Palm is going to be at this point, but we can certainly take a look at that. On Google Earth this property is general between 1 and 3 feet elevation. So,the finished floor elevation,no matter what, would have to be,the permanent structure,and would have to be roughly 7 or 8 feet above the ground level? Pretty typical for Goodland where a lot of people have stilt homes. Page 6 of 8 DC 22. Audience—Again,that's a problem,what you just said,that's not a true [inaudible]. Their base, their foundation has to be above the FEMA flood level. You're going to build, now let's try and keep this factual,If you're going to be able to build above after you've raised the soil which you're saying is 10 to 11 feet. So it'll be 40' higher,on top, if we were able to build it max,you'd be 40' above where the land is right now. I know this because I own,I don't own,in my base,my concrete foundation, is at 12 feet above mean sea level,which is the FEMA code. Jim,could I ask you how tall your house is-just trying to get some idea of what 42 feet means. Would it be like I asked originally,would it be sort of like a carport and then two living dwellings above it? I'm just getting some idea of...I think like a carport, and then two stories above that. So basically three stories. That's what I just wanted to know was what does 42 feet mean, it means three stories. Response: Yeah, there are a few different definitions in the Land Development Code about individual roof height. it depends on the type of roof you use, as well. Whether you use a peak rood, or a parapet roof,there are different ways of measuring roof height. 23. The owner's intention is, not to really go and build houses right now, it's to just get changed to residential? Response: [Mr.Inglis]You see all thepossible uses a commercial roe could have. I wouldn't P 9 ] property rtY want any of those as my neighbor. That's all I want to do. Everything else is, I want to change it to residential,and the same as everything else in Goodland,whatever people have to do,and they need to follow the rules. I'm out. 24. So what happens after you sell the lot is up to the guy who owns the lot. Response: [Mr. Inglis]He'll have to follow the rules like everyone else. [DE]-I'll tell you guy's this, too. And Jim,forgive me if I'm going too far.... We've also had some discussions about what we're giving up,here. We're not, as the planning and engineering firm, we're not really an advocate of limiting rights through any zoning. The reason why is because they're very difficult to change,very expensive to change in the future. Should you have something where you may be, you know, 6" above your zoned roof height, it's difficult to change those things. You'll have to go through a variance process,a very extensive public hearing process,and sometimes you'll see that those sort of things aren't in the best interest of the buyer or the seller. Some of the initial discussions that we've had about additional restrictions on the property was that if Jim chooses to have deed restriction, it's on his own. Again, it's his discretion as the landowner. 25. He would like to be able to change the zone so that he can break it into 3 separate lots, up top 7 separate lots,and then sell those lots individually to different people. Am I correct? Response: Yes. 26. If the project moves forward,will there be other public meetings? Response: Yes, the Planning Commission and BCC meeting. You will be notified if you are within 500 feet of the project. Page 7 of 8 1 DE 27. Is there a setback for construction from the water? Response: Yes there-20 feet for rear and front. 28. Where can I find the Goodland Zoning Overlay? Response: Dan Smith gives out"colliergov.net"and hands out business cards. 29. Will there be 3 separate parcels? Response: There could be. This process needs to be approved first. Dan Smith talks about possible hearing dates(months). The meeting was adjourned at approximately 5:50p.m. } End of memo. Page 8 of 8